Headlines



Date Published after
before
mm/dd/yyyy

Select a category

Archives
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010

December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009

December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008

December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007

December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006

December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005

December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004

Bipartisan Senate bill seeks lower tariffs on ethanol imports

The New York Times
March 19, 2009
By BEN GEMAN

Email this page

A bipartisan group of senators is seeking to lower U.S. tariffs on ethanol imports to achieve "parity" with the blender's credit, which was reduced in last year's farm bill.

The farm bill knocked the blender's credit from 51 cents per gallon to 45 cents per gallon. A new Senate measure (pdf) is aimed at knocking down the 54-cent-per-gallon import tariff and the 2.5 percent ad valorem tariff to achieve "parity" with the lowered blender's tax credit.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), one of the sponsors, said in a statement that the higher import tariff creates a barrier for sugarcane-based ethanol from Brazil, and hence gives gasoline imports a "competitive advantage."

"I believe this makes no sense -- particularly given our nation's continued addiction to oil imported from the Middle East and other hot spots, as well as the volatility of global markets for the fuels we put in our cars," she said.

The bill was introduced yesterday by Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Mel Martinez (R-Fla.).

Collins and some other backers cast the bill in environmental terms. She noted in a prepared statement that the import tariff "creates a trade barrier to ethanol produced from sources like sugarcane, which is less greenhouse gas intensive than ethanol produced from corn."

The backers also said the bill, by making ethanol imports cheaper for U.S. refiners, would in turn help lower prices at the gasoline pump.

EPA asked to stand put on 'indirect' land-use changes

Meanwhile, environmental groups are urging EPA not to retreat from its plans to weigh greenhouse gas emissions from "indirect" land-use changes linked to increased biofuels production.

At issue are upcoming EPA rules to implement the expanded renewable fuel standard, which under a 2007 law reaches 36 billion gallons of ethanol and other biofuels in the U.S. fuel supply by 2022. The 2007 law requires that biofuels have sharply lower levels of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels.

Ten environmental groups sent a letter to EPA administrator Lisa Jackson saying the rule should include measurement of emissions from indirect land-use changes -- such as new land clearing in response to use of existing cropland for fuel feedstocks -- linked to production of various types of biofuels.

Some biofuels industry officials and lawmakers have been pushing EPA not to make these calculations in the upcoming rule, arguing that the science is not advanced enough yet (E&ENews PM, March 16).

But the environmentalists' letter to EPA says this would mean assigning a "zero value" to indirect land-use change, which they say would be a harmful decision. "A zero value is equivalent to assuming that land is limitless, and that agriculture can expand infinitely without any secondary damage. This flies in the face of common sense and is not a reasonable response to technical uncertainties in the analysis," states the letter from the Wilderness Society, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Defenders of Wildlife and other groups.

"A zero value for indirect land use would send the wrong signal to the market, and would encourage ventures that increase global warming pollution and will fail once the lifecycle accounting accurately and completely addresses the impact of land use changes," it adds.

Copyright 2009 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.

For more news on energy and the environment, visit www.greenwire.com.

NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for research and educational purposes.

Email newsletters Subscribe to:
Farm Bill News
View archives
Global Food Safety Monitor
View archives

  faceboook

      
Issue directories

Global Food ChallengeGlobal Food Challenge
IATP explains the policies that have caused the food crisis and the solutions we need.

Green ChemistryGreen Chemistry
The Green Chemistry revolution is making safer products and protecting human health and the environment.

Local FoodsLocal Foods
IATP analyzes the key policy and marketplace issues driving local food systems.

NAFTANAFTA
NAFTA leaves a huge footprint on the U.S. and the world. As Washington gears up for the debate, IATP analyzes what's at stake.

WaterWater
From ethanol to privatization, water is a hot issue in trade and agriculture worldwide. Trade Observatory has document and headline collections dedicated to water issues.

IATP blogs
Think Forward
by IATP staff

Subscribe to RSS headline updates from:


Agribusiness Center

Profiles of over 90 agribusiness companies, including their products, management, corporate geneaology and profit margins.