I have a theory about the finances supporting the e85 project in Newark and the ethanol industry in general. My theory is that this is a boondoggle designed to produce a feel-good product that can be supported only by government - meaning tax money - and not by the marketplace.
A little peek at what probably is a monumental tax-giveaway came this morning at the Advocate web site, where it was reported that E85 would be the benefactor of an Ohio ethanol tax credit of $217,509 for seven years (meaning I think, that much for each of the seven years, but we'll see).
We've read so much about tax credits cloaked as free money that the real implications of them seem to escape us. When tax credits are given to a business, then tax penalties are levied on everyone else. It's that simple.
Tax credits, unlike what governments would like us to remember, are not free. They are expenditures of tax money - by governments - for tax-privileged businesses.
Stay tuned.
Showing posts with label siva. Show all posts
Showing posts with label siva. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 1, 2007
Sunday, April 1, 2007
E85 - find out and give us the facts, or forget it
Two articles published today (4/1/07) by the Fayetteville NC Observer attempt to spotlight the value and risks of having an ethanol plant built in Fayetteville by C. Sivasankaran, the Indian investor who has been called a “serial entrepreneur.”
Coincidentally, today is when the Newark Gannett unequivocally endorsed C. Sivasankaran's plan to build such a plant here.
The differences in approach between the paper in Fayetteville and the paper in Newark are simply amazing in their depth and approach.
Bruce Bain, the industry-hunting Newark mayor, might himself have dictated the Advocate editorial. Meanwhile, the reporters in North Carolina attempted legitimate research, the likes of which Newark hasn't seen in many years. Those reporters have asked questions that need to be directed toward government officials of Newark.
First among those questions should be: How much do you know about the financial stability of E85, its backer, and of his long-term intentions?
Second would be: Exactly how much is it going to cost 1) Newark taxpayers; 2) Ohio taxpayers; 3) federal taxpayers? In exchange for our tax money, what are we going to receive? Not just blah-blah-blah-maybe-50-jobs or whatever. What "jobs?" Exactly how many and exactly what technical and educational qualifications must they have, and how much are they going to pay these people, and exactly how much tax-return will that bring? Any public office-holders who intend to allow this project to go forward should have these numbers. And any legitimate factory planner should be able to provide them.
The tally of Newark's costs must include all such items as road, street, water, sewage upgrades - and maintenance. And if they're already in place, exactly how much did they cost? They must include local tax incentives (which the Advocate says do not exist, but let's check anyway). They must include grants from all levels of government, and they must include all ethanol-production incentives from the feds and maybe state.
So what are these numbers, exactly? Exactly what are we buying and how much is it going to cost and how much is it going to take to maintain? Then tell us what exactly - in writing - how much are taxpayers of Newark going to receive in exchange?
If city council members, Mayor Bain, the Board of Licking County Commissioners, and promoters from E85 (which consists of "a small crew of professionals working out of their homes," according to one of the Observer's articles) - if these folks can't answer these questions, then government's position on E85's proposal ought to be clear: Let's forget it.
Links to the two articles from the Fayetteville (NC) Observer:
E85’s finances giving some reason to doubt
Serial entrepreneur’ is the money behind E85
Link to the Advocate endorsement:
Ethanol plant would be a benefit
Coincidentally, today is when the Newark Gannett unequivocally endorsed C. Sivasankaran's plan to build such a plant here.
The differences in approach between the paper in Fayetteville and the paper in Newark are simply amazing in their depth and approach.
Bruce Bain, the industry-hunting Newark mayor, might himself have dictated the Advocate editorial. Meanwhile, the reporters in North Carolina attempted legitimate research, the likes of which Newark hasn't seen in many years. Those reporters have asked questions that need to be directed toward government officials of Newark.
First among those questions should be: How much do you know about the financial stability of E85, its backer, and of his long-term intentions?
Second would be: Exactly how much is it going to cost 1) Newark taxpayers; 2) Ohio taxpayers; 3) federal taxpayers? In exchange for our tax money, what are we going to receive? Not just blah-blah-blah-maybe-50-jobs or whatever. What "jobs?" Exactly how many and exactly what technical and educational qualifications must they have, and how much are they going to pay these people, and exactly how much tax-return will that bring? Any public office-holders who intend to allow this project to go forward should have these numbers. And any legitimate factory planner should be able to provide them.
The tally of Newark's costs must include all such items as road, street, water, sewage upgrades - and maintenance. And if they're already in place, exactly how much did they cost? They must include local tax incentives (which the Advocate says do not exist, but let's check anyway). They must include grants from all levels of government, and they must include all ethanol-production incentives from the feds and maybe state.
So what are these numbers, exactly? Exactly what are we buying and how much is it going to cost and how much is it going to take to maintain? Then tell us what exactly - in writing - how much are taxpayers of Newark going to receive in exchange?
If city council members, Mayor Bain, the Board of Licking County Commissioners, and promoters from E85 (which consists of "a small crew of professionals working out of their homes," according to one of the Observer's articles) - if these folks can't answer these questions, then government's position on E85's proposal ought to be clear: Let's forget it.
Links to the two articles from the Fayetteville (NC) Observer:
E85’s finances giving some reason to doubt
Serial entrepreneur’ is the money behind E85
Link to the Advocate endorsement:
Ethanol plant would be a benefit
Friday, March 30, 2007
If you want to make a difference, get off your butt
The concerns of people opposing the construction of an ethanol plant in Newark have been well-publicized. Folks came together in an organization they called CLEAN (search this blog for "CLEAN" and/or "ethanol") and asked questions that should concern everyone on that end of town, everyone who sympathizes with those folks, and everyone who thinks an ethanol plant is a worthless addition to this city.
The question is: will anyone get off their butt and talk back to city government?
Opponents were given some first-rate coat-tails to grab when Eme Lybarger visited for a public meeting recently. Representing the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, http://www.celdf.org/ she met with a relatively small and wet-rag group, judging by her reaction. She admitted that community response to the meeting left her pessimistic about the will of the community to fight off developers of the plant, or words to that effect.
To me, it's incredibly unfair that people should have to spend money and time to fight off an enterprise so silly and worthless as an ethanol plant - which is no more than another government-financed solution to a non-problem - one that makes no economic sense whatever, one being showcased as a way to "solve" an energy problem that doesn't exist by driving up corn prices AND most likely gasoline prices too - all of which will benefit ... who?
Mostly an investor from India who is the prime mover of E85, the ethanol company building these plants in various U.S. locations.
If, eventually, market forces determine that ethanol is indeed based on political flimflam, who will pay to have Newark's ethanol plant dismantled and cleaned up? Why, that would be the same taxpayers who cleaned up after the old refinery in Heath.
All that aside, the fact that the neighbors don't want this thing ought to be the measure by which it is judged by the city and all others. Representatives of the people - the mayor, the council, and all government regulators - ought not to have any conflicts about where their allegiance lies.
But they do. Politics is politics and money is money.
The people of Newark need to get off their collective butt and start doing more about their collective future.
Citizens are in charge here if, and only if, they will stand up and say so. To do that is to have the battle won.
People who want to make a difference need to read THE PRICE OF FREEDOM and then go make a difference.
The question is: will anyone get off their butt and talk back to city government?
Opponents were given some first-rate coat-tails to grab when Eme Lybarger visited for a public meeting recently. Representing the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, http://www.celdf.org/ she met with a relatively small and wet-rag group, judging by her reaction. She admitted that community response to the meeting left her pessimistic about the will of the community to fight off developers of the plant, or words to that effect.
To me, it's incredibly unfair that people should have to spend money and time to fight off an enterprise so silly and worthless as an ethanol plant - which is no more than another government-financed solution to a non-problem - one that makes no economic sense whatever, one being showcased as a way to "solve" an energy problem that doesn't exist by driving up corn prices AND most likely gasoline prices too - all of which will benefit ... who?
Mostly an investor from India who is the prime mover of E85, the ethanol company building these plants in various U.S. locations.
If, eventually, market forces determine that ethanol is indeed based on political flimflam, who will pay to have Newark's ethanol plant dismantled and cleaned up? Why, that would be the same taxpayers who cleaned up after the old refinery in Heath.
All that aside, the fact that the neighbors don't want this thing ought to be the measure by which it is judged by the city and all others. Representatives of the people - the mayor, the council, and all government regulators - ought not to have any conflicts about where their allegiance lies.
But they do. Politics is politics and money is money.
The people of Newark need to get off their collective butt and start doing more about their collective future.
Citizens are in charge here if, and only if, they will stand up and say so. To do that is to have the battle won.
People who want to make a difference need to read THE PRICE OF FREEDOM and then go make a difference.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Ethanol plant stink: "hopefully minimized for the most part"
In one of its essays meant to ease your mind about the proposed ethanol plant, WCLT interviewed someone they identified as "Mike Riggleman with the Ohio EPA." You know right away how this is going to turn out. Ohio EPA is the standard mouthpiece for government-approved industrial pollution.
Anyway Riggleman says: "Of course there will be emissions of criteria pollutants which are nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter and carbon monoxide."
Gee, sir, will this perhaps stink?
"They are going to be putting a lot of control equipment out there. Hopefully, the odor will be minimized greatly. We are running an odor model to make sure that as much as possible that the odor doesn't get past their property line for the most part."
Don't ya love it? Hopefully minimized as much as possible for the most part?
Anyway Riggleman says: "Of course there will be emissions of criteria pollutants which are nitrous oxide and sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, particulate matter and carbon monoxide."
Gee, sir, will this perhaps stink?
"They are going to be putting a lot of control equipment out there. Hopefully, the odor will be minimized greatly. We are running an odor model to make sure that as much as possible that the odor doesn't get past their property line for the most part."
Don't ya love it? Hopefully minimized as much as possible for the most part?
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
CLEAN news
CLEAN Coalition announced the publication of its website at www.thecleancoalition.com Check it out for news of their efforts to learn about the advantages and disadvantages that might be the result of constructing an ethanol factory in Newark. Upcoming meetings will be listed there.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Who ever heard of hacking a Tea Party?
Maybe it's an honor, maybe only paranoia, but I believe this journal was hacked twice: the first time when I posted the information about Mr. Sivasankaran, a resident of India who is an investor behind E85, Inc., the company that wants to build a factory in Newark for the production of ethanol.
The second time was when I posted new information on the same subject. The force at work, whether hacker or happenstance, wiped out my journal again, stopping short of the entry in which I quoted Mayor Bain as saying ethanol factories pollute no more than a single old car.
Titled: "We don’t have to worry about ethanol plant pollution," the entry quoted the mayor's statement to council on 1/2/07: “Keep in mind an ethanol plant today in one year’s time has pollution equal to that of a 1965 Chevrolet.” That's what the hacker left intact.
Maybe I should be flattered that anything I wrote could be so important to anyone else, if it was the work of a hacker. Wow. Maybe international intrigue right here in Newark.
The second time was when I posted new information on the same subject. The force at work, whether hacker or happenstance, wiped out my journal again, stopping short of the entry in which I quoted Mayor Bain as saying ethanol factories pollute no more than a single old car.
Titled: "We don’t have to worry about ethanol plant pollution," the entry quoted the mayor's statement to council on 1/2/07: “Keep in mind an ethanol plant today in one year’s time has pollution equal to that of a 1965 Chevrolet.” That's what the hacker left intact.
Maybe I should be flattered that anything I wrote could be so important to anyone else, if it was the work of a hacker. Wow. Maybe international intrigue right here in Newark.
Friday, January 26, 2007
Meet the man who is behind the ethanol factory
Meet Mr. Sivasankaran ...
... a resident of India, is the prime mover for E85, Inc., the company that wants to build a factory in Newark for the production of ethanol. Read about him.Read about him.
... a resident of India, is the prime mover for E85, Inc., the company that wants to build a factory in Newark for the production of ethanol. Read about him.Read about him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
