RINs or Renewable Identification Numbers are the Bridge during the transition to biofuels which allow the infrastructure to be built.. It allows those who would face exorbinate costs to be able to comply by buying Credits.. or RIN's from someone else who is blending MORE than required.

As the Infrastructure gets built and we are well on our way.. RINs should go away and the Refiners should JUST BLEND the ACTUAL ETHANOL at the REQUIRED LEVEL.

No manipulation of RIN's just DO IT!!

Scott Pruitt's EPA has subverted the RFS Law by granting hardship waivers to Companies who DO NOT QUALIFY for Waivers.. Which is A PROBLEM.

.. which needs to get ADDRESSED

He has granted enough Waivers now that Domestic Blended Ethanol usage is falling below Year ago levels for the FIRST TIME since the RFS was started.. and this WHILE Petroleum prices climb..   "Talk about the WRONG STUFF."

So Pruitt's Actions are COSTING AMERICAN CONSUMERS $$$.. Subverting the RFS LAW.. and setting US Energy policy backwards.

He Needs to go.

Next we need to talk about where we are headed.. Richard made some good points below..  In response to my thread about reforming the RFS for Higher ethanol blends..


... you do make a good argument for both higher ethanol blends and increased fuel efficiency. While at first glance, poor fuel economy may seem to be to corn farmers and ethanol producers advantage, it doesn't have to be and we shouldn't encourage it. 

For example, we know that VW TDI diesel engines modified to burn high octane gasoline can produce efficiencies equivalent or even better than diesels (mid 30%) At the moment, we lucky to get 25% thermodynamic efficiency with modern gasoline engines. But they are already building high compression high octane gasoline engines using E85 getting thermodynamic efficiencies in the mid- 40% range. 

The difference between 25% efficiency and 40% efficiency is 15%. That 15% amounts to a 60% improvement in fuel economy. We currently consume about 390 million gallons of finished gasoline per day (10% of which is ethanol). Let's say we could get that extra 60% fuel economy using E30. That would mean we'd be using about 240 million gallons of which 73 million would be ethanol instead of the current 39 million or 34 million more. That's equivalent to about 12 million more bushels of corn per day or 4.4 billion per year. That's a lot but certainly not impossible given our current yields and yield trends. 

And furthermore, think of the boost to the economy if we could travel the same miles per day with 150 million fewer gallons of gasoline. At current prices, people would have $390 million more dollars to spend on other important things. And that's especially true in rural areas where transportation makes up a major component of rural expenses, just getting back & forth to work. 

E-85 was a mistake.. it's not the way to attack the Petroluem industry's Strangle hold on Liquid Fuels.

We need to come at this from an Efficiency perspective.. Higher Efficiency will sell itself which is what Higher Octane fuels along with Higher Compression fuel efficient motors will give us.

E-15, E-20, E-30 blends which have More Lower costs Ethanol give better performance and reduce our relience on Imported Crude Oil from Unstable Regions like the Middle East.. (btw any wars break out over there last night..?? haven't checked the news this morning.)  Or STRIP MINING the Tundra and ruining water resources like TAR SAND CRUDE Production up in Canada.. WOW What a mess!!

The US can have energy Security and ETHANOL is going to CONTINUE to place a GROWING ROLE in that Bright Future.


Crude Oil is moving higher as OPEC wants $100 Crude.  Rapier's other article about higher Crude Prices looks legit.. as long as the Global economy continues to grow..??  

http://www.rrapier.com/2018/04/opec-strategy-bears-fruit-as-oil-prices-break-out/

The Average American consumes.. 19 myn bbls per day / 385 myn people = 0.0494 bbls of Crude per day.

With 1.2 byn Chinamen and 1.3 byn Indians.. 2.5 byn people who want to Live like we do.. 2,500 x 0.0494 = 123 myn bbls per day of potential demand.. or about 25% MORE than the World currently produces.. Not Going to happen.. any time soon.  At that rate.. the Global Warming people might have a case even IF you could do it..??

Anyway here's how things are going for now.





Rapier's comments are probably spot on here..

Meanwhile, last week last week Bloomberg reported that Saudi Arabia (OPEC’s leading producer) has its sights set on a target of $80/bbl. This week Reuters reported that the target could be as high as $100/bbl.

Given that Saudi Aramco is the single largest producer of oil in the world — with the power to move oil prices — this target should be taken seriously. Despite the disastrous price war on shale producers, Saudi Arabia usually achieves its aims in the oil markets.

However, $100/bbl would stimulate significant investment in U.S. shale production, which backfired the last time oil prices were at that level. But this is a clear indication that Saudi Arabia isn’t going to abandon the production cuts any time soon.

As I have noted in the past, once Saudi Arabia embarks upon a strategy, it usually sticks with that strategy for an extended period of time. Especially when that strategy is having the desired impact.

$100 Crude.. vs the RFS.. I like my chances.