Corn Ethanol Gets Boost Under Expanded RFS
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) made an upwards revision today when releasing the expanded Renewable Fuels Standard. They gave corn-based ethanol a 21 percent advantage over conventional gasoline, more than what was originally slated. This new revision also qualifies all corn ethanol, including existing and new production, for the conventional biofuels targets in the RFS.
“While we’re pleased that the U.S. EPA recognizes corn ethanol’s distinct advantage over gasoline when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions and gratified that EPA modified ethanol’s carbon footprint calculation to more accurately reflect real-world data, we don’t believe the agency’s overall assessment of ethanol’s greenhouse gas reduction potential was good enough or accurate,” said Brian Jennings, Executive Vice President of ACE. “By continuing to apply scientifically indefensible ‘international indirect land use’ penalties to corn ethanol, these regulations seriously underestimate ethanol’s greenhouse gas benefits over oil while completely ignoring the indirect emissions associated with petroleum – for example, the military protection of world oil supplies and oil transportation routes.”
One of the complaints of indirect land use change (ILUC) theory is that it is not based on sound science or real data but simply derived using computer modeling. When ILUC theory is eliminated from the equation, corn-based ethanol’s GHG reductions are significantly higher – 61 percent according to ACE who comnissed the study, “Lifecycle Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Associated with Starch-Based Ethanol.”
Among the key findings of the report: “the scientific literature available to date shows a huge variation in estimates of carbon release from land clearing in general, on the order of 50 percent plus or minus – a huge margin of error that should not be relied upon to make policy.”
Jennings concluded, “America’s ethanol producers are committed to providing a clean, renewable fuel that supports the nation’s economy through job creation and reduces our dependence on foreign oil. The revisions in this proposed rule are a positive step by EPA, but corn-based ethanol must not be unfairly singled-out for penalty based on the indirect land use change theory.”
5 Comments
Obama Announces Steps to Boost Biofuels - Domestic Fuel
[...] industry organizations responded to the report today including the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) and Growth [...]
Aureon Kwolek
RFS-2 Still Flawed
Is anyone wondering why EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson continues to embrace junk science – even after she stated “that there are Significant Uncertainties associated with these estimates and in particular, with the estimate of indirect land use change.”
Is anyone suspicious why the EPA fast-tracked the controversial, unproven indirect land use change theory? And then allowed its author, an Attorney-Lobbyist-Biofuel Critic, and his anti-biofuel assistants, to peer review and rubber stamp their own work? In fact, most of the so-called peer reviewers were biofuel critics. They had a conflict of interest. Thus, the EPA’s peer review of the theory violated its own agency rules – Something that should be investigated.
This was Renewable Fuels Association President, Bob Dinneen’s response: “EPA has asked the foxes to guard the hen house on this issue. By adding lawyers and advocates to a scientific review panel, EPA bureaucrats have made a mockery of the Administration’s commitment to sound science. These reviews absolutely cannot be viewed as objective or unbiased. Many of these reviewers have repeatedly and openly demonstrated unabashed and politically-motivated biases against biofuels in the past, which immediately casts a long shadow of doubt over the legitimacy of EPA’s peer review process. This is a perversion of what the peer review process is supposed to achieve.”
It’s like House Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson said: Something’s fishy at the EPA. Downgrading domestic ethanol using an unproven theory – not based on scientific fact – is an act of deception – not transparency – using your tax dollars.
The environmental benefits of American Ethanol should Not be degraded by a government agency using Junk Science. RFS-2 should be based only on accurate scientific fact, not false conjectures. The benefits of biofuel should be measured accurately – Not undermined. Not underrated.
The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE), Growth Energy, and the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) should challenge the EPA to REMOVE “indirect land use change theory” from the RFS-2 rules.
Delay on E15 Waiver “Troubling” - Domestic Fuel
[...] we’ve got to keep the pressure on,” said Brian Jennings, the Executive Director of the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) during an interview with DomesticFuel during Commodity [...]
Automotive » Delay on E15 Waiver “Troubling”
[...] and we’ve got to keep the pressure on,” said Brian Jennings, the Executive Director of the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) during an interview with DomesticFuel during Commodity [...]
Ethanol free gasoline
[...] and we’ve got to keep the pressure on,” said Brian Jennings, the Executive Director of the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) during an interview with DomesticFuel during Commodity Classic. According to Jennings, Robert [...]
Comments RSS feed —