Supreme Court weighs whether to limit issuance of exemptions to biofuel blending requirements
Source: The Hill
Supreme Court justices on Tuesday pressed lawyers on the meaning of the word "extension" in arguments that could have major implications on whether small oil refineries need to blend a certain amount of biofuels into their products.
At issue in the case is a law that allows exemptions from the Renewable Fuel Standard for small refineries that can show economic hardship. The standard requires a certain percentage of refined gasoline and diesel to be made from biofuels like ethanol.
The case is an appeal of a lower court's decision that small refineries can only get exemptions if they have had them continuously since 2011.
In the case, the Biden administration is on the side of biofuel interest and opposing small refineries.
Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/supreme-court-weighs-whether-to-limit-issuance-of-exemptions-to-biofuel-blending-requirements/ar-BB1g6YQs?li=BBnbfcQ&ocid=hplocalnews
elleng
(130,895 posts)argued that it should mean continuous exemptions.'
LOUSY article, WHERE in the 'federal government' does he work?
csziggy
(34,136 posts)On the C-SPAN Networks:
Christopher Michel is an Assistant for the Office of the Solicitor General in the Department of Justice with two videos in the C-SPAN Video Library; the first appearance was a 2020 Judicial Proceeding. Most appearances with Clarence Thomas (2), Stephen G. Breyer (2), Brett M. Kavanaugh (2).
Appearances by Title:
c. January 1, 2020 - c. Present Assistant, Office of the Solicitor General, Department of Justice
Videos: 2
https://www.c-span.org/person/?126555
It says a lot that the first listing in a Google search is an entry from the Federalist Society: https://fedsoc.org/contributors/christopher-michel
elleng
(130,895 posts)Wondering more about the 'matter at issue,' from which administrative agency did it come.
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)It is higher in greenhouse gas emissions.
It contains less energy, which results in 10% fewer miles per gallon (for that portion of the fuel).
It absorbs water and gasoline containing it literally "goes bad" after about 6 months.
Once bad that fuel destroys small engines' fuel systems & must be disposed of as hazardous waste.
Right now those smaller refineries are the only way to get non-ethanol gas for small engines & until we replace our energy infrastructure hopefully over the next decades, they are often still very necessary.
Those corn "farmers" which are typically massive corporations btw, who lobbied to have ethanol added to fuel by mandate?
They receive massive subsidies, too.
marie999
(3,334 posts)Now can someone tell me why we must pay 20 cents a gallon more for this gas? Not a profit reason, but how does it cost refineries more to make it. It would seem to me that it would cost less to make something without adding something to it than cost more.
NullTuples
(6,017 posts)Everyone just accepts crappy gas at the pump.
It's easy enough to remove the ethanol, though I've only done it a gallon at a time for our last gas lawn mower before we went electric. I still buy the special stuff for our generator but am starting to question the wisdom. Anyway, you just perform a liquid-liquid extraction: To put it simply, add enough water to bind to the ethanol, plus a bit extra. Agitate well, let it settle overnight, remove the bottom layer. Presto! Ethanol-free gas. I'm sure I've even seen YouTube how-to videos on it, though I can't speak for any of them, the only tricky part is the separation but even just decanting off works.
hunter
(38,311 posts)We could pay farmers to restore land that has been needlessly damaged by fuel corn.