Yahoo Home
Hmmm... the page you're looking for isn't here. Try searching above.
- SportsYahoo Entertainment
Korie Robertson says NFL players kneeling during the national anthem felt like 'a total rejection of America'
Former "Duck Dynasty" stars Korie and Willie Robertson talked to several current and former NFL players about protests.
- U.S.In The Know
Waitress calls out pregnant customer over ‘crazy’ service demand: ‘Pregnancy is not an excuse’
What the pregnant woman was asking for simply did not exist.
- PoliticsBloomberg
A 16-Year-Old Gasoline-Ethanol Feud Gets Supreme Court Showdown
(Bloomberg) -- A long-running clash between gasoline and ethanol producers will be before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, in a case that could cost small oil refineries hundreds of millions of dollars.At issue is the ability of refineries to win exemptions from 16-year-old U.S. government mandates that they mix renewable fuels into gasoline and diesel.Under former President Donald Trump, the Environmental Protection Agency let dozens of small refineries off the hook. Though the Biden administration is set to change course, a high court ruling limiting refinery waivers would remove its discretion.Such a ruling could reverberate for years, ruling out expansive relief for refiners and potentially encouraging investment in the equipment needed to push more renewable fuels into the market.“We don’t think the Biden administration intends to give out the small refiner exemptions like the Trump administration,” said Height Capital Markets analyst Benjamin Salisbury. “But it would limit their ability to change their mind.”Under the Renewable Fuel Standard, refiners must either purchase and blend biofuels themselves or buy tradeable credits that track consumption of corn-based ethanol, soy-based biodiesel and other plant-based alternatives. Congress created an out for small refineries that face an “economic hardship” in complying, by empowering the EPA to waive those facilities from meeting the annual quotas.Refineries that win exemptions can save tens to hundreds of millions dollars annually that they would otherwise spend buying biofuel compliance credits known as renewable identification numbers, or RINs.Although the EPA initially handed out exemptions automatically, they were eventually curtailed, with fewer than two dozen refineries receiving the waivers annually during former President Barack Obama’s final years in office. Under Trump, the exemptions soared to as many as 35 refineries with waivers in 2017.Biofuel advocates challenged the surge in federal court, arguing the waivers should be reserved only for refineries that have continuously secured extensions of their initial exemptions. The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed in January 2020, finding the EPA had wrongly exempted refineries owned by HollyFrontier Corp. and CVR Energy Inc.’s Wynnewood Refining Co.The Supreme Court is now reviewing the 10th Circuit’s ruling that refineries should only be eligible if they initially received waivers and had them continually extended -- an approach under which only a few nationwide would qualify.A ruling upholding the 10th Circuit would bind the EPA’s power to grant exemptions, with implications for major biofuel producers and refiners, including Renewable Energy Group Inc., Green Plains Inc., Poet LLC and Valero Energy Corp.President Joe Biden criticized the Trump waivers on the campaign trail, and his administration argued in a brief filed with the Supreme Court that exemptions should be a temporary “bridge to compliance,” not a permanent safety valve.The impact of the court’s decision may be initially limited, because the Biden administration is expected to issue refinery waivers sparingly despite the high court’s findings. But it could matter if a new president is elected in 2024.“It will be very important if the small refiners think sometime in the future they’ll have a more friendly administration,” said James Coleman, an energy law professor at Southern Methodist University. “If the Supreme Court agrees with the 10th Circuit here, then that discretion is gone.”Ethanol and biodiesel makers argue the exemptions have undercut demand, running counter to Congress’ goal of bolstering renewable fuel production. Curtailing waivers could encourage more investments in distributing and blending plant-based fuels, they say.HollyFrontier and Wynnewood argue the 10th Circuit wrongly adopted a strained reading of federal law that could prompt the closing of some small refineries.“Congress intended small refinery exemptions to act as a critical safety valve to protect vital refining assets while meeting the obligations of the RFS,” HollyFrontier said in an emailed statement.Already, the prospect of fewer exemptions has driven up the cost of the RIN credits. RINs tracking ethanol blending have soared 823% since the 10th Circuit ruling, up from just 15.5 cents apiece on Jan. 24, 2020 to $1.43 on Monday. In the same time, RINs tracking biodiesel blending climbed from 41 cents to $1.51 each, a 268% increase.The case will likely turn on how the justices interpret just a few words in the Renewable Fuel Standard law -- specifically its provision allowing a small refinery to petition the EPA “at any time” for an “extension” of its initial, automatic exemption. Biofuel producers argue Congress intended waivers to be temporary and that the law’s use of the word “extension” inherently means refineries can only qualify if they have an existing exemption to prolong. But refiners counter Congress included the “at any time” phrase because it wanted waivers to be available when necessary.For now, legal uncertainty is casting a cloud over federal biofuel policy decisions. The EPA hasn’t decided on 46 petitions for waivers from 2019 and 2020 quotas, nor has it set blending targets for 2021.The case is HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v. Renewable Fuels Association, 20-472.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.
- EntertainmentBGR
Angry subscribers are canceling Netflix over a new show that was just announced
Netflix's obsession with original content has resulted in the streaming giant releasing an absolute avalanche of new programming each and every single month. In light of that, it's almost inevitable some of Netflix's programming choices will leave some subscribers disappointed and angry. Last September, for example, you might recall that Netflix was widely criticized for releasing a French film titled Cuties that some people felt overly sexualized children. More recently, some subscribers are lashing out at the streaming giant over a new show called Hype House. For those unfamiliar, Hype House is basically a collective of TikTok influencers who live together and Netflix recently inked a deal with them for an unscripted series about life in the house. The show synopsis reads: "From humble beginnings to overnight fame, these are the stories of the most popular personalities on social media as they come into their own, fall in love and tackle the next stage of their lives." https://twitter.com/netflix/status/1385277549157109760 It seems innocent enough, which of course begs the question: why are some Netflix subscribers angry about the show? Well, part of the reason is that some Hype House members have had their fair share of controversy in the past. Tony Lopez, for example, was accused of sexual assault and soliciting photos from a minor earlier this year. Notably, Lopez won't be on the show, but some Netflix subscribers are still upset because members of the Hype House famously didn't take COVID seriously and continued to party and film content even as the number of coronavirus cases across the country was surging. Compounding matters were allegations that members of the Hype House who tested positive for COVID-19 didn't disclose their positive diagnosis to others. Note the following from an Insider report this past July: One week later, on July 21, an estimated 67 influencers crowded into the Hype House, a TikTok collective of the app's A-listers. Guests included YouTubers Nikita Dragun, James Charles, Emma Chamberlain, and Tana Mongeau, along with TikTokers Charli and Dixie D'Amelio. The occasion was a birthday party for TikToker Larri Merritt (known online as Larray). According to Elijah Daniel, an LA-based creator, "a lot of influencers have been confirmed to me testing positive for COVID-19 after the influencer parties, like a LOT." Daniel tweeted about the influencer "outbeak" on July 28, adding "And they aren't saying anything & aren't warning people they came in contact with after." In light of the above, some subscribers were so incensed that they threatened to cancel their subscriptions. https://twitter.com/fullmoonyelena/status/1385281484857163781 Another Twitter, meanwhile, said she plans to boycott Netflix because it keeps investing money to make "useless humans famous." And while we can't imagine that a significant number of Netflix subscribers will cancel their accounts, there's no denying that the backlash from the show's announcement has been pronounced: https://twitter.com/03riaaaa/status/1385322292427767817 https://twitter.com/thegoddamnJets_/status/1385691255733096455 Meanwhile, an online petition to cancel Hype House has only elicited about 1,400 signatures online thus far.
- CelebrityYahoo Life
Lindsey Vonn's bikini pictures have an important message
Lindsey Vonn is living her best life.
- WorldHuffPost
Capitol Riot Suspect Who Defied Judge's Mask Order Eats Crow With Apology
Rachel Powell was ordered to wear a real mask — not one filled with holes — as a condition of her pre-trial release. A judge is now considering contempt of court.
- PoliticsSheKnows
Donald Trump's Reported Move to New Jersey This Summer Could Speak to His Next Steps
Former president Donald Trump has enjoyed the state of Florida as his home base since leaving the White House in January 2021, and much of his family has moved with him — kids Donald Jr. and Ivanka Trump have both invested in real estate in the area, and Tiffany Trump and Marla Maples have been […]
