</font><font color="blue" class="small">( ...but the truth is, States already legislate which fuels you can use.)</font>
How very true! The MTBE-oxygenated gasoline fiasco is a textbook example of legislation for the Greater Good gone horribly awry, because the regulations were put in place before all the data were in and the consequences were known. The politics and emotions outran the science to our detriment, no matter how well-meaning the legislators may have been.
</font><font color="blue" class="small">( ...the bio-fuel industry is good for America and should be a cornerstone is reducing our dependancy on foreign oil.)</font>
Assuming for argument's sake that this is true, then the free market will embrace it, the new industry will thrive and grow, and its investors, the economy, and all of us will profit from it. My only point is, that if it's as good as many people believe, it won't need legislation to force it on us and it wouldn't need to be subsidized with $3,000,000,000 of the taxpayer's cash per year to make it work. I really hope it does work, but I would feel a lot better about it if it was allowed to stand or fall strictly on its own merits.
Farmwithjunk said: </font><font color="blue" class="small">( Bio fuels will gradually become more accepted. I'd MUCH rather see them used, and the money stay with-in our borders than to pump our dollars to the middle east.)</font>
I agree, I just don't think you can legislate acceptance. If the process is efficient and profitable, then bio-fuels will penetrate the market in an "S" curve, like every other successful technology in our history.