Q. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) is a federal law which has implications for Minnesota. Do you support or oppose the RFS? What is the basis for your support or opposition to the RFS?

A. I support the Renewal Fuels Standards (RFS) on the federal level and the efforts in Minnesota to go even further. The reason I support RFS is that it is good policy. It is good for the farmers who produce the corn and soybeans that are used to produce biodiesel and ethanol (and provides an additional market for them), it is good for the environment in that it reduces air pollution which may reduce health care costs (due to breathing problems like asthma) and global warming or climate change, and it is good for the consumer who benefits from lessening dependence on imported oil and the costs of that oil which is reflected in gas prices. Using ethanol and biodiesel helps keep the prices of gas in check.

Q. Minnesota law (Minn. Stat. 239.7911) calls for the increasing use of biofuels, such as ethanol, over the next 10 years. If you were in a position where you could change the law, would you maintain it as is or modify it?  Please tell us why you would either maintain the law or modify it.

A. If I am elected to the MN State House for district 22B, I would support efforts to increase the amount of biofuels in cars and trucks. Automotive engines in cars built after 2001 are able to perform on E10 and tests have shown that they can also perform well (without damage) on fuels as high as E20. I believe that increasing the amount (gradually if necessary) to those levels sooner rather than later is a great way to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, keep fuel prices in check, and help clean up the air. It also continues to provide a market for farmers who are seeing a lower price for their products.

Q. What advantages, or disadvantages, do you think biofuels present for Minnesotans? If you have identified advantages, how would you leverage them to achieve more benefits for the environment and consumers over the next two to four years? If you identified disadvantages associated with biofuels, what, if any, actions would you take to address those disadvantages?

A. I believe I noted the advantages above. I would attempt to leverage those advantages through promotion of the positives in advocating for a higher rating of bio fuels used in cars and trucks. I think that the public needs to be made more aware of the use of biomass, cellulosic, as fuel. I think that the public can be educated or made more aware that the use of corn and soybeans does not cause food prices to increase, and that there is little to no waste of the corn or soybean. I do not believe that the education component is the job of a Legislator, but I would be happy to help support the effort in my district.

The disadvantages associated with biofuels are the perception of: the effect on food prices; the use of GMO’s and neo-nics that effect pollinators and may have side effects that we are unaware of; the lack of diversity in farming—only raising corn and beans and not rotating or using cover crops and the fencepost to fencepost farming and lack of conservation practices that some farmers use. I am not sure that as a Legislator I would have any way to combat these perceptions, but I am sure that you could do that in a public way.

Q. What actions would you take, for the medium term, to make E15 the new regular fuel?

A. I would author or coauthor a bill or support an existing bill to make E-15 the prevailing fuel.

Q. Is there anything else you would like to tell us about your position on biofuels in Minnesota?

A. I support Research and Development to find more ways to reduce our dependency on fossil fuels and increasing air quality.

Come back to Blogging For Biofuels tomorrow to read what Rep. Bob Gunther, who represents district 23A, has to say about biofuels.