Science & Technology

Rant

EPA: “It doesn’t exist” is not a valid objection

Posted 30 months ago|18 comments|1,282 views
Bio-Reactor demonstration
Written by
EPA asks for up to $6.8 million in penalties from motor fuel companies because they failed to do the impossible. The companies failed to mix non-existent type of bio-fuel into their gas and diesel. So now, they have to pay the fines for failing to produce a miracle.

The 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act required that, in 2011, motor fuel companies mix 6.6 million gallons of fuel made from wood chips into gasoline and diesel.

EPA does not care for the simple fact that even the Advanced Biofuels Association said that the state of the technology for turning biological material like wood chips straight into hydrocarbons is not yet ready for commercial introduction.

To make things worse, in a move defying reality, EPA is increasing the quota to 8.65 million gallons in 2012. Well, it looks that the administration found a sure racket and does not want to lose it if somebody actually manages to produce this kind of fuel outside laboratory.

In case you are wondering, world's first non-demonstration scale factory for producing cellulosic biofuel is still being built in Italy by Mossi & Ghisolfi Group.

Dennis V. McGinn, a member of American Council on Renewable Energy, said "From a taxpayer/consumer standpoint, it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense that we would require blenders to pay fines or fees or whatever for stuff that literally isn't available." However, EPA still requires that all fines be paid in full.

It seems that the current administration is totally divorced from reality. There is still hope that there will be no new fines instituted for failing to build a water mill in desert or failing to drive above the road surface.

No, the administration is probably not doing this intentionally. Like Napoleon Bonaparte said: "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

UPDATE - 30 months ago
US government awarded $385 million in grants to companies like "Range Fuels" that started a plant in Soperton, GA, but shut it down in January 2011 without ever having produced any fuel.

It seems that Solyndra is not an exception...
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
30 months ago: We already have the bulk of the American Armed Forces safeguarding the "Record" profits of these companies. Do you need to defend them as well?
30 months ago: No, I do not need to defend them. However, I really think that people and companies should be punished for things they are actually responsible for.

It seems crazy to punish somebody because they didn't do something impossible.

If real offenses do not get punished, "inventing" new ones will help nobody but the perpetual bureaucracy.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: Really, Slim? Did you get from the article that the author was defending the oil companies? What I see is a fine, by an over-reaching and incompetent bureaucracy, that will be passed on to the consumer in the form of higher fuel prices.

Obama said he wanted energy prices to skyrocket, and it looks like by hook or by crook.
30 months ago: Right Slim.

A liberal's idea is for a capitalist to squander all their fortune on a non-existent technology just because.

Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: Oh yeah, and I also see a government that is disobeying the Constitution. Where do they get off telling private enterprise what they have to do in innovation. I can see, to a point, telling them what they cannot do, but to tell them what they MUST do or be fined? Overstepping their authority.

What's next? Are they gonna tell us to drop 40 pounds of excess body weight in six months or face a hefty fine?
30 months ago:
"Are they gonna tell us to drop 40 pounds of excess body weight in six months or face a hefty fine? "

Well, Obamacare already forces every American to submit to government obesity measurements by 2014. The obesity-rating regulation states that every American's electronic health record must: "Calculate body mass index. Automatically calculate and display body mass index (BMI) based on a patient's height and weight."

I think that we could easily go from there to your stipulated "40 pound fine."
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: The day Americans have to submit to the pokings and proddings of the US government is the day the New Revolution will start. My BMI is mine and mine alone, and the government will have no part in it.

Interestingly, the BMI requirement is nowhere to be found in the Healthcare Reform Bill. It is sneakily tucked away in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.

Now, what does body fat have to do with economics?

Does the government think that fat people ate us into a recession?
30 months ago: Well, with NDAA ready, they can always proclaim "over the norm" people "food terrorists" and export them to Gitmo...

Total control in the hands of the President and few of his cronies is what is coming up in the future...
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: I'm thinking that when the roll call for reveille and morning calisthenics is made from the Mosque loud speakers, even die-hards like Slim will be ready to roll back Obamacare.
sunny2
sunny2
30 months ago: I would think it would be a strategic plan on the part of government on a whole.
Let's hope that our fears never come to this reality.
The people will fight back. They always have.
sunny2
sunny2
30 months ago: "Government telling private enterprises what they have to do in innovation." To quote you Box.
That is what I wrote about today referring to the pseudo creation of jobs. I am seeing this actually happen, and I am starting to wonder why they would do this. I'm starting to have suspicions. That would be another way to infiltrate our lives. Are their some countries that tell people how many children they can have? I met a young couple from England years ago who said just that. Even in this Green Industry, when you apply for a job they aren't what they appear to be. It is more about pedaling the company. I can see this happening.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: Yes we know there are some countries that regulate bearing children. (China, for the obvious one). There are a few that actually pay citizens to have more children. (Tax rebates and breaks, welfare, free food, bonuses, etc.) Russia is one that does this unabashedly, telling it like it is. http://www.slate.com/articles/business/m...
The US is a bit more clandestine about increasing its organic economic assets.

Even as the mythical green jobs are being created, millions of unemployed are being dropped from the rolls of the unemployment rate, making the unemployment numbers seem better for an incumbent president.
The Cypress Gang
The Cypress Gang
30 months ago: I wonder if AlGore has the inside trade on the EPA. Seems like a non-carbon integration tax, tax. Maybe we should just ride horses and let California produce and refine it's own standard of fuel.
30 months ago: Your article, of course, is about criticism of government. Your next article will be criticism of (zyz) and your earlier article, criticism of (zyx). Other people write of potential solutions, or mitigation of problems, while your articles write criticism of those who try. Here, you criticize something that has not worked out.
30 months ago: Yes... And?

I'm sorry but I really do not see your point. I will criticize government for almost every blunder and idiocy it commits.

Now... Sorry if you think that it makes me a bad person but I think that it only makes me a free person (still)!
sunny2
sunny2
30 months ago: What about Obama's decision on the Keystone XL pipeline which is designed to bring tar sands oil from Canada to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas. This is so that oil companies can profit by selling the oil overseas. He rejected it but the people had to fight for that decision from him.
30 months ago: Well, his royal O. didn't reject building of the pipeline. He just postponed making a decision to 2013.

In other words, he does not want to injure his re-election chances but he would also like to get some money from the Keystone XL too.
sunny2
sunny2
30 months ago: You are absolutely right.
He should of rejected it completely. He didn't do that. I don't think he would of rejected it at all if the people didn't fight for it.
He wants that election bad. I just can't trust this administration anymore. He talks a big talk until he is in office, and then everything the people need or want is secondary to him. We have experienced that in his first term. It is as if he is two people.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.