08-14-07 by dugan
The clearest statement I’ve seen about the motives of opponents of innovative biofuels–from oil interests to agro-industry–comes from a speech last Friday by Loren Beard, Chrysler’s senior manager for energy planning and policy.
Of course, Chrysler’s reputation as the gas hog of the auto industry and its opposition to higher CAFE standards mean it needs a "green" flag to wave, and a strong stance in favor of diversified research and development of renewables is a good one. Still, Beard’s remarks are quite blunt for a guy representing a major corporate interest.
The Detroit-centric blog AutoBlogGreen.com has the most complete story and an audio link, but here’s another with a narrower focus on agribusiness from the Detroit Free Press.
Excerpt from AutoBlogGreen post:
Speaking at the annual Management Briefing Seminars conference, held outside Traverse City, Mich., Beard said the groups have their own interests to protect. What might be a surprise to some is the inclusion of "Big Agriculture", some environmental groups and some automakers.
The five groups are:
1. Big Oil
– Alternative Fuels eat into their market share, complicate distribution operations and may require special components and unique additives at refineries.
2. Big Agriculture
– They support feedstock-specific biofuels such as soybeans and corn and want to maintain current tax incentives that support their crops. The Renewable Fuels Association supports mid-level blends of ethanol, which will effectively kill the E85 program.
3. "Silver Bullet" Carmakers
– They believe that their technology is the only answer to improving fuel economy.
– Look to parochial interests rather than national and global interests
4. Fringe Environmental Groups
– They need "crisis" PR to attract donations
– Focus on imaginary "silver bullet" long-term technologies without respect to real world economics.
5. OPEC
– Need to support high production rates at high prices
– Use their market position to influence political positions