The Shotgun Blog
« T-minus 18 days . . . | Main | John McCain's citizenship woes continue »
Monday, July 21, 2008
More handouts for biofuel production...
Suncor Energy is one of the biggest players in Canada’s oil sands. The company expects to produce more than half a million barrels of oil per day by 2012.
It’s a pretty serious company, but not serious enough, it would seem, to turn away government money for an ethanol plant.
The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food rolled out another $25 million in subsidies today as part of the federal government’s ecoABC biofuel initiative launched in April 2007. The money will be used to expand production at Suncor Energy’s St. Clair Ethanol Plant.
In “Conservative biofuel plan is losing popularity,” I reported that polling data shows that a surprising number of Canadians don’t support this biofuel strategy. In fact, 44 percent believe ethanol should be banned because it is “ethically wrong to use food to produce fuel.”
(It’s a sad commentary on Canadian society when people are divided on whether to ban something or make it mandatory. If there are, in fact, Canadians who believe the government should let the free market drive energy investments, their views are not reflected in the polling data I’ve seen.)
Green Party leader Elizabeth May also makes the case that the $2.2 billion Conservative biofuel strategy is nothing more than a “handout to the biofuel industry.”
So here’s my problem with today’s $25 million announcement:
1. Suncor Energy had net earnings of $2.8 billion last year. They don’t need government handouts.
2. It is hard to argue that the Conservative biofuel strategy is not a farm subsidy when the money is being handed out by The Minister of Agriculture.
3. Mandating a 5 percent national biofuel requirement for transportation fuel is a command and control approach to policy making that free market advocates should reject as a matter of principle.
4. Biofuel mandates are putting pressure on global food supply. The top seven nationally mandated biofuel targets combined will take approximately 240 million acres of farmland out of food production. That will mean higher food prices. (Source: Download agcapita_brochure_fip.pdf)
Posted by Matthew Johnston on July 21, 2008 in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e553ca6db18834
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More handouts for biofuel production...:
Comments
"The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food rolled out another $25 million in subsidies today"
No they didn't. Business actually gave the feds $25 million.
“Conservative biofuel plan is losing popularity,”
No it's not. Ipsos has biofuel popularity at 86% as of late June, a historical high.
"Green Party leader Elizabeth May also makes the case that the $2.2 billion Conservative biofuel program is nothing more than a “handout to the biofuel industry.”"
The actual figure is $2,200 and the actual quote was quotes was "I harbour feelings of lust for Stephen Harper"
"Mandating a 5% national biofuel requirement for transportation fuel is a command and control approach"
No it's not. It's a perfect example of a perfectly free market in action.
"Biofuel mandates are putting pressure on global food supply."
That's completely false. Biofuel has been well documented to have increased the global food supply by orders of magnitude.
(OK seriously, had you folks told me arguing in bad faith was this fun I'd have done it long ago! I trust I've made my point.)
Posted by: Mocker | 2008-07-21 2:27:06 PM
Should I take it from your sarcasm, then, that you actually agree with my points, Mocker?
If so, can we also agree that Harper should cut this $2.2 billion biofuel strategy from the budget?
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-07-21 4:21:35 PM
"Should I take it from your sarcasm, then, that you actually agree with my points, Mocker?"
You should infer that I find your reasoning and character to be awful to an astonishing degree and that at this point I am making fun of you, in hope that you will raise the level of your argumentation - a lot.
I can demolish this argument like I did in the last thread, but I get paid good money for that sort of thing in real life and don't have the time or inclination to do it at the moment, especially since I now realize you'll just come up with a brand new bad faith unintelligent argument tomorrow, and the next day, and the next day. So I'll pick my spots.
Posted by: Mocker | 2008-07-21 9:36:59 PM
That's completely false. Biofuel has been well documented to have increased the global food supply by orders of magnitude.
Really? I don't believe that for a second...can you qualify that?
Posted by: JC | 2008-07-21 10:03:28 PM
All of Mockers points were deliberately false, JC. It's a long story.
Posted by: Matthew Johnston | 2008-07-21 10:14:16 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.