I'm Thinkin' 't He's Drinkin' 't

Robert Zubrin did a podcast with Glenn Reynolds a while back, and I am thinking that he slipped a bit of biomass ethanol into the good Professor's drink. Glenn has since run about 754 positive blurbs about "The Zubrin Plan" to mandate that new cars sold in the US can run on gasoline or ethanol.

"You had me up until 'mandate,'" says I.

The proponents wash over the mandates with the assumption that these will replace other and worse pieces of legislation. The way Professor Mankiw sells his carbon tax as being better than cap and trade, The Zubrin Plan is always better than some other government abomination -- yet there's very little evidence our benighted 535 won't give us both. Reynolds and Zubrin claim it is better than CAFE standards and are likely right. But how bad would increased CAFE standards and mandated flex-fuel capability suck?

Zubrin defends himself from the mean old attackers at Science Magazine and the WSJ Ed Page -- and Reynolds dutifully links. Where Reynolds likes biomass ethanol, Brother Zubrin is still pretty pleased with the corn ethanol subsidies. By his math they provide a 600% ROI:

Let's start with the allegedly misbegotten incentives. The United States invests roughly $3 billion a year through a 51-cent per gallon credit to promote the production and use of renewable fuels like ethanol. The return on that investment? Taxpayers are saving approximately $6 billion that would otherwise be spent on counter-cyclical crop price supports, plus an additional $15 billion reduction in the country's petroleum import bill.

"The attacks continue." "That, not a blind and dangerous reliance on the status quo, should be our course." Defensive much? It's like watching Senator Clinton complain about getting the first question at debates.

I remain pretty excited about biomass. But I don't want to mandate solutions onto car manufacturers. Mr. Zubrin does his cause no favors with a petulant essay.

Oil and Energy Posted by jk at March 3, 2008 3:00 PM