EPA Rules to Not Rule on E15 Waiver Petition
The deadline was met yesterday on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) ruling on the E15 waiver, or was it? The EPA, in a letter to Growth Energy, the organization that filed the E15 Waiver, also known as the Green Jobs Waiver, has ruled to not rule. According to the letter the EPA wrote, “we want to make sure we have all the necessary science to make the right decision.” The letter also stated, “our engineering assessments indicate that the “robust fuel, engine and emissions control systems on newer vehicles (likely 2001 and newer model years) will likely be able to accommodate higher ethanol blends, such as E15.”
Today, that decision is to postpone a ruling on the petition until the DOE completes a study between May- August 2010. In addition, the EPA is looking at “addressing fuel pump labeling issues” should ethanol be blended up to 15 percent in the future. It appears that the EPA won’t make a decision on this petition until the end of 2010 but that when it does, it will be positive.
In response to the letter, Growth Energy Co-Chairman Gen. Wesley Clark said, “This announcement is a strong signal that we 
are preparing to move to E15, a measure that will create 136,000 new U.S. jobs, cut greenhouse gas emissions and lessen America’s dependence on imported oil.”
Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy, noted, “The Growth Energy Green Jobs Waiver brought to light the issue of the regulatory cap on ethanol and is responsible for moving this process forward. The importance of increasing the blend is now universally understood. This expanded market opportunity is necessary to draw capital investment for cellulosic ethanol and allows the industry to comply with the Renewable Fuel Standard.”
Buis also commended the EPA for its intent to begin the labeling and public education process in anticipation for higher ethanol blends in the marketplace.
Click here to read the EPA letter and Growth Energy’s response.
Listen to the Growth Energy press conference opening statements from this morning here:
Podcast: Play in new window | Download (3.4MB)
4 Comments »
Dean Billing
The irony is that EISA 2007 has nothing to do with E10 or E15. Read the law. It is a corporate welfare act for E85. The most serious problems are not even addressed by this EPA response. The detrimental effect of E10, which will be exacerbated by E15, on the marine, aviation and small engine industry and the clear danger to public safety if the engines in portable tools crap out or don’t start because of E10. People are going to die because of this stupidity. Growth Energy and the EPA should be dealing with the problem of E85 infrastructure and getting auto manufacturers to make efficient, dedicated E85 automobiles instead of screwing around with E10 – E15 and inefficient flex-fuel vehicles. This whole charade would only delay the blending wall two or three years. The problem is not going away because the ethanol industry wants to increase blending to E15.
Gen. Wesley Clark to Speak at White House Jobs Summit - Domestic Fuel
[...] other news, Tuesday Growth Energy recieved a letter from the EPA postponing the decision to act on the Green Jobs Waiver, until mid0-2010. related topics: [...]
Gen. Wesley Clark to Speak at White House Jobs Summit
[...] other news, Tuesday Growth Energy recieved a letter from the EPA postponing the decision to act on the Green Jobs Waiver, until [...]
Dr_SFZed
Why a *waiver* for E15/E10???
A waiver allows E15 (like E10 today) to be added WITHOUT TESTING. Why do this? If E15 (or E10 for that matter) were REALLY going to help us decease our oil use, wy not test it to make sure?
Our cars here in Oregon show that E10 hurts MPG by 12%-17%. So even if Ethanol took NO effort to make, it would still be bad to use as an additive. The Ethanol proponents keep quoting E85 MPG and forcing us to interpolate to E10 – why not just test it? Why the “waiver”???
I think we’d find that E10 (and E15) change the burn rate for gas molecules – because of the mismatch in burn energy. This lengthens the burn and deceases piston pressure, causing the drop in MPG. Cost of testing – a few million $. Cost of E10/E15? 100 to 200 billion $s in oil and in price rises in other goods EACH YEAR if I’m right.
Comments RSS feed — TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment