LandReport.com » EPA http://www.landreport.com The Magazine of the American Landowner Tue, 07 Feb 2012 12:00:58 +0000 en hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 Mexico Opposes Ethanol http://www.landreport.com/2008/06/mexico-opposes-ethanol/ http://www.landreport.com/2008/06/mexico-opposes-ethanol/#comments Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:00:41 +0000 Eric OKeefe http://www.landreport.com/?p=226
As we’ve seen over the last few months, skyrocketing commodity prices are pushing land values to record levels. They are also squeezing cattlemen and other producers who rely on corn and other grains to fatten livestock and poultry. One of the loudest voices protesting this trend has been Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who petitioned the EPA to grant a 50 percent waiver on the 9 billion gallon corn-based Renewable Fuel Standard. Now another vocal opponent of ethanol has emerged: south of the border.

Mexico is clearly feeling the heat. Last week Mexico Agriculture Secretary Alberto Cardenas called for ethanol producing countries to reduce production of grains for alternative fuels. (The U.S. is the world’s leading ethanol producer with Brazil a close second.)

According to the AP, Sec. Cardenas blames ethanol for bankrupting many of his country’s cattle and poultry farmers as well as causing food prices to hit record highs. The government has responded by freezing prices on more than 150 food products.

No related posts.

]]> http://www.landreport.com/2008/06/mexico-opposes-ethanol/feed/ 2 Is the Clean Water Act Polluted? http://www.landreport.com/2007/06/is-the-clean-water-act-polluted/ http://www.landreport.com/2007/06/is-the-clean-water-act-polluted/#comments Fri, 01 Jun 2007 07:00:38 +0000 Joseph Guinto http://www.landreport.com/?p=103 You know the big mud puddle that forms on your back 40 every time it rains? The Environmental Protection Agency might want to come inspect it. At least, that’s the concern of groups that oppose a law that would rewrite the 35-year-old Clean Water Act.

BY JOSEPH GUINTO
PUBLISHED JUNE 2007

Currently the act gives the federal government regulatory authority over “navigable” interstate waterways. It’s intended to limit pollution discharges into major U.S. rivers and lakes.

But the Clean Water Act’s scope could get a lot broader. A bill backed by Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minnesota) would slice the word “navigable” out of the act. The bill’s backers say the change is crucial. For one thing, they argue that the Clean Water Act’s powers have been diminished in recent years by court rulings and other acts of Congress. They also say the word “navigable” unfairly limits the government’s powers to keep major waterways clean because non-navigable waters-think ponds and streams too small for boating traffic-may feed into navigable waters. 

That’s certainly true. Non-navigable waterways come into some form of contact with navigable waters all over the country. But how the final, rewritten Clean Water Act would read could make the difference between the feds regulating major non-navigable waters and, well, that troubling mud puddle.

Rob Robertson, vice president of governmental relations for the Nebraska Farm Bureau, is one of those worried about the puddles. “This would move the Clean Water Act beyond protecting wetlands and waterways by creating legislation that would regulate nearly every wet area in the nation, from ditches to gutters and possibly groundwater.”

Oberstar says his Clean Water Authority Restoration Act is simply intended to restore the Clean Water Act’s original intent-to give regulatory agencies the power to keep interstate waterways clean.

 

No related posts.

]]> http://www.landreport.com/2007/06/is-the-clean-water-act-polluted/feed/ 0