The US will not end government support and protections for the ethanol industry before it is appropriate to do so and certainly not before the end of 2008, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said on Wednesday.
I'm going to quote from a report by Stephen Burns in ICIS news yesterday
(Disclosure: I work for ICIS)
"No-one in the administration is looking to end the tariff [on imports] or subsidy prematurely," Bodman told reporters.
So all the American consumers who would directly benefit from cheaper ethanol to blend with gasoline are less important to the administration than the farmers or distillers or blenders of ethanol with gasoline in the US... and the US expects Brazil to help counteract the effects of Hugo Chavez in South America in return for what exactly?
Can anyone explain US ethanol policy in a coherent way to me. There'll be a small prize for the best answer in under 50 words
Comments (1)
Simon,
I was tempted to include in my submission references to ADM, etc., but 50 words isn't much. So here's my entry (at 49 words):
"U.S. ethanol policy appears to magically solve three problems at once: reducing farm subsidies while increasing crop prices; enabling Detroit to keep building gas guzzlers and consumers to keep buying them; and substituting nasty, foreign-produced petroleum with clean, home-grown fuel. The ethanol tariff supports two out of the three."
Most adults, of course, know that magic doesn't work, even in its more nefarious manifestations.
Ron Steenblik
Research Director
Global Subsidies Initiative
Posted by Ron Steenblik | February 17, 2007 10:12 AM
Posted on February 17, 2007 10:12