21% vat on bioufel

Lazairus

vat on 21% of biofuel , is in that another cockup by FF.

Should not Biofuel be tax Free ???

Lazairus

Does the EpA not provide conversion kit grants >>>????

karen3212

Hi could you please provide a link to this, as I would like to read about it.

thanks

CJhaughey

Cock up? I don't think so! Rather a cynical ploy to greenwash themselves.
They have allowed something like 2 million litres to be sold at a reduced VAT rate, which sounds fine but in reality is about 1/2 a weeks worth of fuel.
Re the EPA providing conversion kit grants = False.
The EPA are good for nothing, they don't even intend prosecuting people that cause serious water pollution, how could that shower even think about grant-aiding conversion kits?
The whole thing is a big joke carried out by FF at OUR expense.

Victor

Why should it be exempted?

1. Biofuels are competing with food for humans.

2. Biofuels are at best neutral, not conserving.

BendiBus

Victor wrote:

Why should it be exempted?

I think there may be an argument to exempt domestically produced biofuels from the point of view of energy security. Although it would probably be viewed as economic protectionism & we'd get our wrists slapped by Brussels or the WTO.

Capt'n Midnight

saw somewhere where it was suggested that instead of biofuel for cars the land/biomass should be used for heating oil / power generation.

SeanW

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

saw somewhere where it was suggested that instead of biofuel for cars the land/biomass should be used for heating oil / power generation.

Bad idea. Choices for transport fuel are much more limited than for electricity, based on what's practical for individuals to use on the go in any number of conditions. Also practicalities the "chicken and egg" scenario where fuel station owners need a market base to install fuel pumps for an alternative fuel, whereas users want a decent choice of fuelling stations before they switch to such alternative fuel.

Biofuels like biodiesel are in an opportune place here becasue with biodiesel you can just slide a biofuel component into petrodiesel or replace it completely with the same infrastructure and by and large the same engines to burn it in. There is also that small matter of diesel engines being 40% more fuel efficient than petroleum gasoline engines.

Biofuels will be limited by basic laws of physics (i.e. there's only so much arable land in the world to grow energy crops). So to waste precious biofuels on electricity when we should be using wind, solar, hydro and Uranium/Thorium fission with hydrogen backup or something, doesn't make a lot of sense. In fact, to my mind it doesn't make any sense at all.

Lazairus

but its stupid, it is not protectionism , its common sence , BioFuel should be exempt from tax , simple because the government ,should have 0 tax on domestic PPO because of Global Warming.

silverharp

Remember also there are alot of agricultural subsidies built into the growing of biodiesal crops, so they are subsidised to some extent

Capt'n Midnight

silverharp wrote:

Remember also there are alot of agricultural subsidies built into the growing of biodiesal crops, so they are subsidised to some extent

one german study showed that between the vat free nature of agri-diesel and other grants it took about one litre of fossil fuel to produce each litre of biodiesel when you took into account the fuel input in fertilizer transport and processing

Grudaire

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

one german study showed that between the vat free nature of agri-diesel and other grants it took about one litre of fossil fuel to produce each litre of biodiesel when you took into account the fuel input in fertilizer transport and processing

Couldn't they just simpily use biofuels to transport the fertiliser etc?

boomshackala

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

one german study showed that between the vat free nature of agri-diesel and other grants it took about one litre of fossil fuel to produce each litre of biodiesel when you took into account the fuel input in fertilizer transport and processing

There was an article in the economist lately that energy balances of up to 15 to 1 are now available

meelick

SeanW wrote:

There is also that small matter of diesel engines being 40% more fuel efficient than petroleum gasoline engines.

There's also the fact that a flex-fuel vehicle will burn 40% more fuel when running on E85 than when running on unleaded. So, with unleaded at ~115, and E85 at ~95, there's no monetary incentive to use E85, because it costs you 10% more to run on E85 than on unleaded. E85 needs to be below 85c/l to even break even with unleaded. I'm using E85 at the moment, because it' s a little bit more 'friendly' than unleaded, but if it remains 10% more expensive to use, I'm not sure I'll keep it up.

Cheers,
Dave.

10-10-20

Cliste wrote:

Couldn't they just simpily use biofuels to transport the fertiliser etc?

Well, no. Because it's a 1:1 ratio, the vehicles would effectively be using all the biofuel for themselves, creating a loop.

According to this value, biofuel is a false economy. That's why I don't believe that figure.

Grudaire

10-10-20 wrote:

Well, no. Because it's a 1:1 ratio, the vehicles would effectively be using all the biofuel for themselves, creating a loop.

According to this value, biofuel is a false economy. That's why I don't believe that figure.

Where did the 1:1 figure come from?

10-10-20

"it took about one litre of fossil fuel to produce each litre of biodiesel when you took into account the fuel input in fertilizer transport and processing"
= 1:1

Grudaire

Aye but where did that statement come from?

Lazairus

that statment came from eilish oils , they charge u 741+21 vat