What Others are Saying
I am writing in support of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and I hope you consider my comments when making your determination. I sell my grain to multiple ethanol plants near my farming operation, including Absolute Energy, LLC near St. Ansgar, Iowa, AlCorn Clean Fuels in Claremont, MN and Guardian Energy near Janesville, MN. Having these plants near me has helped to get a fair price for my grain day in and day out. Because of ethanol, the demand for corn has raised land values and has doubled the property tax in our area. This has helped pay for infrastructure, roads, rural medical needs, and revenue for better education in rural America. The renewable fuels demand will continue to help the younger generation stay on the farm and raise a family, and also supply very good rural American jobs. The RFS has improved the profitability of my farming operation. Before the RFS was implemented, I struggled to sell my corn at a fair price. In addition, the limited market demand also impacted the utilization of my farmland. The impact that the RFS has had on production agriculture cannot be overstated. Since its original enactment in 2005, I have witnessed firsthand the positive impact it has had on my local economy. In fact, it is directly due to the RFS that my farming operation has become so successful. We must move forward, not backward when it comes to developing alternatives to fossil fuels and foreign oil. We all know that the RFS and biofuels have created jobs that cannot be outsourced, which have helped ensure a robust rural America. Additionally, renewable fuels are better for the air we breathe and for our environment – and they are making a difference by decreasing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil. Biofuels are better for our national security, energy security and they benefit the consumer by providing them a choice and savings at the pump. This rule, as it stands is a win for oil companies and a loss for consumers and farmers. We should be investing here at home instead of sending a billion dollars a day overseas. This rule is exactly what groups like OPEC love – it shows that the U.S. is not serious about developing real alternatives to foreign oil. Over the last 40 years we have experienced price shock after price shock due to unrest and instability in the Middle-East. Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Iran, Syria – all unstable oil producing nations in a region where the slightest disruptions can have a drastic ripple effect on the supply and price of oil. Wars have been fought; trillions of dollars have been spent to protect the flow of oil, and trillions more of our wealth has been transferred to foreign nations. But most important, the precious lives of American soldiers have been lost due to our addiction to foreign oil. After years of success from the RFS, we must not move backward. We must capitalize on the current success and continue to invest in the future development and commercial scale production of next generation biofuels. A rule such as this would only halt any further innovation, investment and growth in what is already a successful and thriving industry that supports farmers, plant workers and entire rural communities. This policy is making America stronger. Our rural towns are thriving and our children are moving back to where they were raised to carry on the legacy of the family farm. They are also finding other great opportunities back home within this industry. We cannot afford to turn our backs on such a successful policy. Bottom line – this rule shows the world we are embracing the status quo of foreign oil and fossil fuels for our growing energy needs. Supporting the RFS is critical for America and the future of our energy and agriculture sectors. I thank you for your consideration.
M.P., Owatonna, Minnesota