1. I do not regard myself as an "ethanol-friendly" economist. Just an economist. This gives me the chance to straighten out the record a bit.
2. My position is that the RFS is the law of the land. Congressional intent when the RFS was passed could not be clearer. It was designed to force biofuels into the transportation fuel supply. That is the law and ag should be able to expect the law to be enforced faithfully.
3. If you think the RFS is a bad law, then get Congress to change it. If you can't get Congress to change it, then learn to live with it. Undermining the law by creating backdoor waiver authorities through SREs ultimately undermines the rule of law.
4. Regardless of my personal views as stated in #1-#3, I go with the data and economics as far as understanding the implications of the RFS. Sometimes that favors the ag position sometimes the refiner position. Let the chips fall where they may is my motto.
5. I think we should do two things simultaneously right now: 1) lawfully implement the RFS consistent with the clear intent of Congress in 2007 to push biofuel volumes, and 2) have a robust debate about whether this is a good policy for the US. Zero change this will happen!
*chance*
