S.20.2-1: Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act (Tabled)

[Senator-elect Spark]

Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act

Section 1. Title & Definition
1. The title of this act shall be the Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act
2. The purpose of this act is provide subsidies to farmer and for infrastructure to store and dispense certain types of ethanol blended gasoline, appropriating moneys for deposit to a renewable fuel infrastructure fund.

Section 2. Ethanol Infrastructure & Funding

1. An ethanol infrastructure is to be created and stored for future use.
2. The South shall provide a regional subsidy (to be adjusted each fiscal year) to farmers in order to create ethanol fuel from corn.

Section 3. Fund Appropriation

1. The renewable fuel infrastructure program can be used to cost-share with motor fuel retailers.
2. Moneys shall be appropriated for this fund each fiscal year.

Sponsor: Spark498

Debate shall last 48 hours.

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

Heads up This should be named S.20.2-1 not S.20.3

You might want to rename the other threads too

[Senator-elect Spark]

Heads up This should be named S.20.2-1 not S.20.3

You might want to rename the other threads too

Thanks for that correction

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

You've forgotten to add (Debating) at the end of the titles of the 4 bills on the floor as of now. It is helpful to have a marker as to a bill's status.

[Senator-elect Spark]

I must note that in order to determine funding for this bill, we must utilize the services of the Comptroller General.

[reagente]

As my home state of Missouri is the second largest corn producer in the Southern Region, I enthusiastically support this bill!

[Senator-elect Spark]

Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act

Section 1. Title & Definition
1. The title of this act shall be the Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act
2. The purpose of this act is provide subsidies to farmer and for infrastructure to store and dispense certain types of ethanol blended gasoline, appropriating moneys for deposit to a renewable fuel infrastructure fund.

Section 2. Ethanol Infrastructure & Funding

1. An ethanol infrastructure is to be created and stored for future use.
2. The South shall provide a regional subsidy determined by the Comptroller General to farmers based on need in order to create ethanol fuel from corn.

Section 3. Fund Appropriation

1. The renewable fuel infrastructure program can be used to cost-share with motor fuel retailers.
2. Moneys shall be appropriated for this fund each fiscal year.

Sponsor: Spark498

Proposing an amendment. Any objections must be made within 24 hours.

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

I don't think this fits within the Paygo requirements.

[Dr. MB]

This seems like a good bill. I’ll gladly sign it.

[diptheriadan]

All I can say at the moment is that I think this bill needs to be a little more complex than it is at present. I'm not well-read on the issue of ethanol, but i'm doing my homework right now, and even the little bit i've read has raised several questions.

[Senator-elect Spark]

The CG has not responded to my inquiry. I motion for a vote.

[diptheriadan]

So after going into a bit of a rabbit hole of sorts, I think the best approach would be simple clarification. Verbal vomitus incoming.

- What exactly is the subsidy here? Is it a tax exemption? A tax credit? Something else? The "stored for later use" makes me think the Government is going to buy the stuff, so is that the subsidy? If it is, what are the rules/guidelines the government will follow when buying the stuff? The "to farmers based on need" bit implies that the farmer will be receiving the subsidy directly. The farmers don't actually make the ethanol though, so are we buying a set amount of corn(?) from them (based on need, whatever that need is idk) and then converting it into ethanol ourselves? Are we paying someone to do it or are we actual building these refineries ourselves? Or are we buying the ethanol from the companies that actually refine the stuff? Are we just paying the farmers on the idea that a set amount of their corn will be used to make ethanol? How would that even work? Can we track who they sell corn to? Or are we just creating a tax credit/tax exemption for them to use on the condition they sell corn for ethanol creation?

-What does the "the renewable fuel infrastructure program can be used to cost share with with motor fuel vehicles" mean? I can't even stream-of-conscious this one i'm so confused.

- So, the whole system for transporting and storing the stuff needs a little more depth to it. I wouldn't imagine it to be that hard since it's a pretty simple sort of idea (storing valuable resources) that i'm sure has been done before so there's probably examples. Didn't the CSA buy up cotton during the Civil War?

-What certain types of ethanol blended fuels are we going to be doing whatever with?

There are other questions I have, namely if such a subsidy is even needed or cost-effective, but this is an issue where the devil probably lies in the details, so i'll wait.

[Senator-elect Spark]

So after going into a bit of a rabbit hole of sorts, I think the best approach would be simple clarification. Verbal vomitus incoming.

- What exactly is the subsidy here? Is it a tax exemption? A tax credit? Something else? The "stored for later use" makes me think the Government is going to buy the stuff, so is that the subsidy? If it is, what are the rules/guidelines the government will follow when buying the stuff? The "to farmers based on need" bit implies that the farmer will be receiving the subsidy directly. The farmers don't actually make the ethanol though, so are we buying a set amount of corn(?) from them (based on need, whatever that need is idk) and then converting it into ethanol ourselves? Are we paying someone to do it or are we actual building these refineries ourselves? Or are we buying the ethanol from the companies that actually refine the stuff? Are we just paying the farmers on the idea that a set amount of their corn will be used to make ethanol? How would that even work? Can we track who they sell corn to? Or are we just creating a tax credit/tax exemption for them to use on the condition they sell corn for ethanol creation?

-What does the "the renewable fuel infrastructure program can be used to cost share with with motor fuel vehicles" mean? I can't even stream-of-conscious this one i'm so confused.

- So, the whole system for transporting and storing the stuff needs a little more depth to it. I wouldn't imagine it to be that hard since it's a pretty simple sort of idea (storing valuable resources) that i'm sure has been done before so there's probably examples. Didn't the CSA buy up cotton during the Civil War?

-What certain types of ethanol blended fuels are we going to be doing whatever with?

There are other questions I have, namely if such a subsidy is even needed or cost-effective, but this is an issue where the devil probably lies in the details, so i'll wait.

1) The subsidy is a tax credit to the farmers to produce corn. So the govt is paying them to produce the corn and then the ethanol is manufactured from the corn. We are using the ethanol subsidy to stimulate production of corn for farmers and to help gas companies. I suppose the ethanol can be made at existing refineries in the private sector.

2) Without delving too far into the economics, cost-sharing helps set the cost of a project. Each actor can decide on how much they will contribute to it.

3) It can simply be stored in refineries until use for the companies.

4) I suppose E10 could work. We need to ensure that the fuel will provide a substantial amount of gas mileage.

[Deep Dixieland Senator, Muad'dib (OSR MSR)]

I don't think this fits within the Paygo requirements.

The CG has not responded to my inquiry. I motion for a vote.

This seems a bit rushed if you don't actually have this bill funded. How did you contact the Comptroller?

Some issues worthy of note, ethanol has a slightly lower energy content than petrol. This means that you'll have increased fuel consumption. When compared to unleaded petrol (ULP), E10 increases fuel usage by around three percent. So E10 needs to be three percent cheaper than ULP to be cost effective for the consumer, due to the increased fuel consumption. Ethanol is also hygroscopic (absorbs water) which means if the water content is above about 0.5 percent will cause the ethanol, and the water mixed with it, to drop out of suspension and fall to the bottom of the tank (Phase Separation). This will cause poor running, or more likely a no-start situation.

Also I can attest from personal experience that e10 has a different burn rate to regular ULP. My car would have the engine phantom rev randomly. This was without me putting my foot down or anything. I would be just putting around in the car park or waiting at the lights.

[Senator-elect Spark]

I don't think this fits within the Paygo requirements.

The CG has not responded to my inquiry. I motion for a vote.

This seems a bit rushed if you don't actually have this bill funded. How did you contact the Comptroller?

Some issues worthy of note, ethanol has a slightly lower energy content than petrol. This means that you'll have increased fuel consumption. When compared to unleaded petrol (ULP), E10 increases fuel usage by around three percent. So E10 needs to be three percent cheaper than ULP to be cost effective for the consumer, due to the increased fuel consumption. Ethanol is also hygroscopic (absorbs water) which means if the water content is above about 0.5 percent will cause the ethanol, and the water mixed with it, to drop out of suspension and fall to the bottom of the tank (Phase Separation). This will cause poor running, or more likely a no-start situation.

Also I can attest from personal experience that e10 has a different burn rate to regular ULP. My car would have the engine phantom rev randomly. This was without me putting my foot down or anything. I would be just putting around in the car park or waiting at the lights.

Contacted via PM. What would you suggest in terms of the specifics for the type of fuel?

[diptheriadan]

-snip-

1) The subsidy is a tax credit to the farmers to produce corn. So the govt is paying them to produce the corn and then the ethanol is manufactured from the corn. We are using the ethanol subsidy to stimulate production of corn for farmers and to help gas companies. I suppose the ethanol can be made at existing refineries in the private sector.

2) Without delving too far into the economics, cost-sharing helps set the cost of a project. Each actor can decide on how much they will contribute to it.

3) It can simply be stored in refineries until use for the companies.

4) I suppose E10 could work. We need to ensure that the fuel will provide a substantial amount of gas mileage.

-So what are the exact details of this tax credit? Since it's a tax credit going to farmers as opposed to ethanol producers/blenders, how's this whole thing gonna work? Are they getting x amount of money for y amount of corn sold to ethanol producers? The bill also implies that the subsidy (tax credit) will vary farm-by-farm, with it being set by the comptroller general based on 'need'. I'm not sure what is meant by need, and I'm also not sure (though i'm probably wrong) if such a program would be considered a tax credit.

-I know what cost-sharing is, I'm just not what "with motor fuel retailers" means. Does it mean us helping them pay for projects such as building a refinery and things like that?

-"It can simply be stored in refineries until use for the companies" Doesn't that kinda negate the whole storage aspect of this program. Actually, doesn't it negate the whole concept of it being a program and not just a new tax credit? If we're not storing it, and we're not building the infrastructure (physical, digital, etc) to store it, then it's basically just a tax credit and that's it.

[Senator-elect Spark]

-snip-

1) The subsidy is a tax credit to the farmers to produce corn. So the govt is paying them to produce the corn and then the ethanol is manufactured from the corn. We are using the ethanol subsidy to stimulate production of corn for farmers and to help gas companies. I suppose the ethanol can be made at existing refineries in the private sector.

2) Without delving too far into the economics, cost-sharing helps set the cost of a project. Each actor can decide on how much they will contribute to it.

3) It can simply be stored in refineries until use for the companies.

4) I suppose E10 could work. We need to ensure that the fuel will provide a substantial amount of gas mileage.

-So what are the exact details of this tax credit? Since it's a tax credit going to farmers as opposed to ethanol producers/blenders, how's this whole thing gonna work? Are they getting x amount of money for y amount of corn sold to ethanol producers? The bill also implies that the subsidy (tax credit) will vary farm-by-farm, with it being set by the comptroller general based on 'need'. I'm not sure what is meant by need, and I'm also not sure (though i'm probably wrong) if such a program would be considered a tax credit.

-I know what cost-sharing is, I'm just not what "with motor fuel retailers" means. Does it mean us helping them pay for projects such as building a refinery and things like that?

-"It can simply be stored in refineries until use for the companies" Doesn't that kinda negate the whole storage aspect of this program. Actually, doesn't it negate the whole concept of it being a program and not just a new tax credit? If we're not storing it, and we're not building the infrastructure (physical, digital, etc) to store it, then it's basically just a tax credit and that's it.

The farmers receive x amount of money to grow corn. If it is a set amount, most farms may not be receiving the assistance that they need. So each farm can get enough help.

The motor fuel retailers can bid for prices during the process. They have to buy the ethanol from the refineries.

The refineries won't be managed by the government. The government will set the tax credit and that is all.

[Senator-elect Spark]

I am open to any amendments before we bring this to a vote.

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

So what is it exactly that you want the Comptroller General to provide here? The subsidy is based on need, so I assume it would vary from farmer to farmer. Mandating that the CG come up with the subsidy himself is just passing off the most important part of the bill to another player. Either come up with some sort of formula for the subsidy, or leave the process up to an NPC committee the way a lot of other bills do.

Of course the CG would still need to provide a broad cost analysis of the entire program for the budget, but that's different from requiring the CG to actually determine the individual subsidy itself. Unless that was the intention, and that section is just poorly worded?

[Senator-elect Spark]

So what is it exactly that you want the Comptroller General to provide here? The subsidy is based on need, so I assume it would vary from farmer to farmer. Mandating that the CG come up with the subsidy himself is just passing off the most important part of the bill to another player. Either come up with some sort of formula for the subsidy, or leave the process up to an NPC committee the way a lot of other bills do.

Of course the CG would still need to provide a broad cost analysis of the entire program for the budget, but that's different from requiring the CG to actually determine the individual subsidy itself. Unless that was the intention, and that section is just poorly worded?

Not asking for the CG to provide the amount for the subsidy. Asking for the CG to provide the ethanol production numbers in the South so that we can decide on an amount for the subsidy.

[Fmr. Representative Encke]

So what is it exactly that you want the Comptroller General to provide here? The subsidy is based on need, so I assume it would vary from farmer to farmer. Mandating that the CG come up with the subsidy himself is just passing off the most important part of the bill to another player. Either come up with some sort of formula for the subsidy, or leave the process up to an NPC committee the way a lot of other bills do.

Of course the CG would still need to provide a broad cost analysis of the entire program for the budget, but that's different from requiring the CG to actually determine the individual subsidy itself. Unless that was the intention, and that section is just poorly worded?

Not asking for the CG to provide the amount for the subsidy. Asking for the CG to provide the ethanol production numbers in the South so that we can decide on an amount for the subsidy.

"The South shall provide a regional subsidy determined by the Comptroller General" implies otherwise, so that should probably be removed from the bill, no?

[Senator-elect Spark]

Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act

Section 1. Title & Definition
1. The title of this act shall be the Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act
2. The purpose of this act is provide subsidies to farmer and for infrastructure to store and dispense certain types of ethanol blended gasoline, appropriating moneys for deposit to a renewable fuel infrastructure fund.

Section 2. Ethanol Infrastructure & Funding

1. An ethanol infrastructure is to be created and stored for future use.
2. The South shall provide a regional subsidy (to be adjusted each fiscal year) to farmers in order to create ethanol fuel from corn.

Section 3. Fund Appropriation

1. The renewable fuel infrastructure program can be used to cost-share with motor fuel retailers.
2. Moneys shall be appropriated for this fund each fiscal year.

Sponsor: Spark498

Motion to remove the amendment. Delegates have 24 hours to object.

[Senator-elect Spark]

Amendment is adopted. I now hereby request the CG’s evaluation so that we can debate the subsidy amount.

[Senator-elect Spark]

As the CG has not yet determined the production in the South, I am proposing the following addition to the bill. The above figure was retrieved from the average cost of growing corn per acre on farms. I move to amend the bill. Objections shall be heard within the 24 hours period.

Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act

Section 1. Title & Definition
1. The title of this act shall be the Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act
2. The purpose of this act is provide subsidies to farmer and for infrastructure to store and dispense certain types of ethanol blended gasoline, appropriating moneys for deposit to a renewable fuel infrastructure fund.

Section 2. Ethanol Infrastructure & Funding

1. An ethanol infrastructure is to be created and stored for future use.
2. The South shall provide a regional subsidy of $28,380 (to be adjusted for inflation each fiscal year) to farmers in order to create ethanol fuel from corn.

Section 3. Fund Appropriation

1. The renewable fuel infrastructure program can be used to cost-share with motor fuel retailers.
2. Moneys shall be appropriated for this fund each fiscal year.

[tmthforu94]

I would suggest doing a block grant to the Department of Agriculture for the subsidy that can then be distributed based on need, rather than allocating a certain $ amount for each farmer.