Hello MM Just been replying to Hakan on mileage and air-pollution.
One other point is that the business over small producers and taxes is far from clear. In my view, in the US, it hasn't been a case of enemy action by inimical interests as many think - no deliberate conspiracy by the big guys to exclude the small guys. It seems to have had more to do with a sort of bureaucratic neglect, they just weren't aware of us, and ended up not following their own rules. Now they've changed their tune, but it still needs a test case. In the one case we know of, that of Yellow Biodiesel, tax wasn't the issue, registration was. Those barriers appear to have been removed now. We've heard of a tax case, but never got any detail. That stemmed from World Energy, and there's good reason that's since emerged, right here on this list, to be sceptical of allegations made by people from World Energy that don't get substantiated. This too isn't a conspiracy, it's just ignorance and prejudice, apparently wilful - it seems they're more interested in maintaining their prejudices than in boring stuff like facts. Anyway they're just brokers. So there's a need to clear the way for small-scale, localized biofuels enterprise, but, I believe, to steer clear of the idea that there's an industry conspiracy at work here. Industry, and the bureaucracy with it, is much too inclined to behave like a bulldozer when it comes to small operations, but that's a different matter. In Britain, I don't think any biofuels production has been shut down on the basis of tax laws. Some drivers appear to have been fined for driving on untaxed fuel. People there are registering and paying their taxes, though it's a new issue for the bureaucrats, who seem most confused about it, it's quite a lot of trouble for the users, but they're not being deliberately excluded. Everywhere it seems bureaucrats and officials of whatever ilk automatically assume that individuals can't be trusted to do anything right and must be stopped, for their own good and that of society at large, whereas business and industry, on the other hand... Odd, to say the least, in light of the fact that these are supposed to be democracies, that they're supposed to be civil servants, and that we're bombarded on a daily basis with evil tidings of just how competent and trustworthy business and industry turn out to be. Not to mention bureaucrats and officials. Regards Keith >From: "Tom xxx" >Subject: Re: Netcast of Dec 5/6 CARB Workshop ? > > > > Hello again, > > We are planning to broadcast via the internet. Check with me for details >the > > week of the workshop if you have any questions related to this. Thanks. > >The upcoming CARB workshop looks like it will be netcast. We will try >to provide a link on evworld.com if possible. > >To the biofuelers: > >I am not sure this particular CARB meeting would be the appropriate >forum for a biofuel advocate to make an out-of-nowhere stance, though >it might not be inappropriate and in any case some of the CARB >meetings would be. One thing is to subscribe to their notices, and >then you can be the judge. > >Now, if anyone does present to Dr. Lloyd and others at such a meeting, >I have a few further points to suggest as you are composing your >thoughts: > >Remember that CARB's mission is *not* higher mileage nor to cure all >environmental ills, etc. It is the California *AIR* Resources Board, >and their mission seems to be centered on cleaner Air, which means >cleaner emissions. > >I don't care that this also arguably means better mileage, because >that argument has run them afoul recently of the Federales who have I >think sued them or something. California has some sort of >dispensation under Federal Law to establish emissions regulations >different than other states, but I think the Feds said that since >CARB's attempts at mandates seemed to have gone over into mileage, >this then rendered their mandate attempts illegal or something. I >don't know... very hard to follow, though obviously the Bush >administration's main goal is simply to stop mandate attempts and have >the Automakers left alone regardless. > >Also note that some of the finer points of >better-emissions-vs.-higher-mileage have also played into the hands of >GM and other auto makers who have spent their time suing CARB recently >rather than attempting to make cleaner better EVs and other cars. > >I take it for granted, by the way, for the sake of discussion, that >the ZEV mandate could in fact be done-for. The automakers and other >opponents have lobbied zealously against it and have done an effective >job. EV and other low-emission progressive-technology advocates were >clearly too anxious to declare victory, when they thought they'd >gained it. In my view, this played into the hands of the >lawer-wealthy strategists. > >One biofuel point that I think needs to be made very badly, to CARB >and others, is if we are seeing further instances of tax laws being >used as a pretext to shut down smaller-company and home production and >sales of biofuels. I am referring to the recent instances, in the >United States and Britain, of tax collectors shutting down biofuel >production on the reasoning that traditional fuel taxes were not being >paid, largely because of the home-made nature of some of the biofuel >companies, where somehow the traditional tax process was not in place. > >This stopping of biofuel efforts, it seems to me, is arguably a >construct of the established Fuel Major Companies to stop a nascent >effort to compete with them, and the more news and information and >personal annecdotes we can get out there, the more someone like CARB >can go to the Governor and make hard recommendations as to protecting >nascent biofuel efforts from suffering this problem. I do not suggest >that biofuelers deserve special treatment as against their >competition, but use of tax laws as a pretext to stifle competition is >unethical and we cannot take it for granted that it will stop unless >something is done. > >From what I understand, emissions from Biodiesel are quite good >compared to regular biodiesel emissions and the fact that biodiesel >capable vehicles are already in place is a big leg-up on a lot of the >other proposed solutions that CARB often hears. > >And, as I said before, emissions from landfill or other waste-disposal >of waste biomass might be lowered if biowaste were used to make fuel >for engines, so that is an additional way in which use of biomass >waste might arguably improve California Air quality. Hard to say. > >Lastly, as to Ethanol, I spoke a year or two go to a Cal EPA guy and I >got the impression that it was his personal professional scientific >opinion, after *much* research on behalf of California Taxpayers, that >the clean-air benefits of Ethanol as a modest mixture in gasoline were >there, but that they were, on balance, outweighed by the benefits of >RFG-without-ethanol. I am not saying that I agreed or disagreed with >him, but I am passing this on. He viewed the ethanol solution as >relatively old technology compared to what in his opinion was a >somewhat superior solution of the newest RFG formulas. > >On an up note, I saw another sign at my local Phillips 76 station, >this time touting that *all* of their stations (in Calfiornia) were >MTBE free. Their pumps don't guarantee ethanol content as a >replacement, but say that the fuel *may* contain ethanol, so I guess >otherwise they'd be RFG-with-or-without-some-other-oxygenate? Maybe >there's a third or fourth oxygen-enhancement out there? > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Biofuels list archives: >http://archive.nnytech.net/ > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. >To unsubscribe, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://webconx.green-trust.org/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
