The US Environmental Protection Agency unleashed a backlash against ethanol when it waived a limitation on selling gasoline that contains more than 10 per cent ethanol for cars with model years from 2001 through 2006.
The agency had been studying the impact of fuel that contains up to 15 per cent ethanol, known as E15, on older passenger vehicles (including cars, SUVs and light pickup trucks) after already approving its use in newer vehicles. It announced Friday that testing showed that E15 does not harm emissions control equipment. From Lisa Jackson, EPA administrator:
Whenever sound science and the law support steps to allow more home-grown fuels in America’s vehicles, this administration takes those steps.
The use of E15 will help the US meet the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which mandated an increase in the overall volume of renewable fuels into the marketplace to reach 36bn gallons in 2022. Ethanol is considered a renewable fuel because it is produced from plant products or wastes and not from fossil fuels. As you can imagine, the Renewable Fuels Association was pleased. Bob Dinneen, its president, said:
Today’s decision greenlights the use of E15 for nearly two out of every three cars on the road today and furthers proves ethanol is a safe, effective fuel choice for American drivers. EPA continues to move in the right direction with respect to increasing ethanol blends, but challenges still remain. The RFA continues to urge EPA to extend the waiver for E15 use to all cars and pickups.
But a coalition of business, environmental and public interest groups reacted angrily to the decision to allow a 50 per cent increase in the amount of ethanol permitted in gasoline for vehicles dating from 2001 to today. Here are a few of their comments. First from Robb MacKie, president and chief executive of the American Bakers Association:
EPA’s decision to increase the ethanol blend to E15 will further increase volatility in the grain markets. This could hasten the reduction in wheat acres and raise Americans’ food bills. US cropland is already stretched to its limit. Increasing the blend has the potential to further impact commodity stocks and ultimately food prices. The grain markets are currently experiencing near record volatility and prices have edged closer to the record levels of 2008.
And from Bill Wilson, president of Americans for Limited Government:
Why is the government forcing consumers to use an inefficient fuel that causes the price of food to skyrocket? Corn ethanol gets less miles per gallon, and is less efficient than gasoline. Now that more cars are ‘approved’ to use E15, according to the EPA, then we can expect the price of regular gasoline to increase to encourage use of this inefficient fuel. All subsidies and mandates to use ethanol should be repealed.
And from Scott Vinson, vice president of the National Council of Chain Restaurants:
This decision literally takes food out of the mouths of American consumers in order to increase the profits of the ethanol industry. When corn and all the food products derived from it are diverted away from the dinner table, that drives up the cost of a meal for every American family whether they are eating in a restaurant or at home. Turning corn into ethanol and burning it as fuel should not take priority over feeding families at an affordable price.
What nobody is touching on, however, is that the US produces so much ethanol that it has been exporting it. Indeed, companies that blend US ethanol with gasoline have been able to claim a tax credit even if the fuel is exported.
Raising the content of ethanol in fuels at home will at least put more of the ethanol produced in the US in this country’s vehicles. That is not to say that I believe ethanol is the right way forward for the US. But, if we are going to produce ethanol, it does seem wrongheaded that this country is giving tax credits for the production of a biofuel that is shipped abroad to lower emissions elsewhere.
