• Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • News
  • Reviews
  • Features
  • Editorials
  • Long Term Tests
  • Video

EPA Shrinks Ethanol Mandate as Biofuels Lose Favor

Chris Haak/15 Nov, 13/2232/0
Editorials

In a giant blow to the ethanol/corn belt lobby, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed to reduce the ethanol mandate of incorporating 14 billion gallons of the biofuel into the nation’s gasoline supply.  Due to lower overall fuel consumption from a more efficient vehicle fleet since 2007, the EPA would have in effect required higher than 10% ethanol blends in gasoline for 2014, which automakers believe could cause damage to fuel system parts. The new EPA requirement is between 12.7 and 13.2 billion gallons of ethanol for 2014.

Back in 2007, as gasoline prices were poised to surge and it appeared that American was never going to be free of its imported-oil addiction, Congress mandated that certain quantities of ethanol be included in the nation’s fuel supply.  With the elimination of MTBE as a gasoline additive to cut smog due to its tendency to contaminate soil and groundwater, ethanol became the clean-air, renewable” fuel solution.

Loopholes in fuel-economy regulations made it prudent for vehicle manufacturers to build flex-fuel capability into their vehicles, even if the highest ethanol concentration the majority of the U.S. vehicle fleet can handle is E10 (10% ethanol).  Flex fuel vehicles can run ethanol concentrations up to E85 (85% ethanol, 15% gasoline), but non-FFVs are likely to experience fuel system damage when exposed to ethanol concentrations above E10.

With less gasoline being consumed each year while the ethanol content requirement is an absolute number of gallons rather than a percent of all gasoline, the EPA was faced with the choice of either endorsing higher-than-E10 blends for vehicles not designed to use that high of a concentration, or lowering the requirement so that it’s back to roughly 10 percent of the gasoline mix.

The ethanol lobby, supported by lobbyists for corn-producing states, had been pushing the EPA for an increase in the requirement, and for the widespread introduction of E15 (15% ethanol, 85% gasoline) against the better judgment of most automakers.  Why would they do this?  Follow the money, of course.  The ethanol mandates that the 2007 law required created a giant market for corn, which is the primary ingredient in most ethanol sold in the U.S.

Plus, not only did corn producers have a large built-in market for their crops, but ethanol producers also received various forms of subsidies over the years.  From 1980 to 2011, ethanol producers received $0.45 for every gallon of ethanol they produced.  Though that particular subsidy has ended, at the low end of the EPA’s 2014 ethanol production mandate, that would have cost $5.7 billion and the government has spent over $45 billion in ethanol subsidies over the past few years.  The mandate itself is a subsidy.

Aside from the wasted money in ethanol subsidies (whether they be direct or indirect subsidies), converting food to motor vehicle fuel brings a set of ethical issues to the forefront.  With hunger as a serious problem in many parts of the world, including in many places within our own backyard in the U.S., does a policy that 1) causes the inefficient destruction of corn for the creation of fuel – a process that itself is a large consumer of energy, and 2) artificially raises demand for corn, therefore raising corn prices, and making food more expensive.  For individuals and families living paycheck-to-paycheck and struggling to make ends meet, the ethanol “tax” on their food prices has surely been an unwelcome development.  If you read nutrition labels, you’re aware that many, many foods contain corn syrup as a sweetener.

With sequestration still in effect in Washington and constant budget battles, not to mention dramatically increased domestic oil production over the past few years, don’t expect there to be much political appetite for re-instating subsidies for ethanol anytime soon.  While some subsidies and government assistance probably do have a place in the development of alternatives to fossil fuels, the reduction in the ethanol mandate for 2014 is welcome news for nearly everyone  – taxpayers, automakers, gasoline producers, and consumers – except for those in the corn-growing or ethanol-production businesses.

corncorn pricesEPAethanol mandateethanol subsidiessubsidies
Cadillac Sixteen

GM Shelves Plans For Production Cadillac Sixteen,...

15 Nov, 13

NAIAS 2015 Day One Recap

15 Nov, 13

Related Posts

Long Term Tests

Long Term Wrap-Up: 2013 Toyota Sienna XLE AWD

GM Cruise
News

Honda Will Invest $2.75B in GM’s Cruise...

Rotary Engine
News

Mazda is Bringing Back the Rotary Engine

Chris Haak
Chris is FMA's Founder and Editor-in-Chief. He has a lifelong love of everything automotive, having grown up as the son of a car dealer. Chris spent the past decade writing for, managing, and eventually owning Autosavant before selling the site to pursue other interests. A married father of two sons, Chris is also in the process of indoctrinating them into the world of cars and trucks.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent Posts

  • Long Term Wrap-Up: 2013 Toyota Sienna XLE AWD
  • Honda Will Invest $2.75B in GM’s Cruise Autonomous-Vehicle Unit
  • Mazda is Bringing Back the Rotary Engine
  • Goodbye, NAFTA. Hello NAFTA 2.0 (USMCA)
  • I May Have Been the First to Put BF Goodrich KO2s on an Audi Q5

Recent Comments

  • Jon on I May Have Been the First to Put BF Goodrich KO2s on an Audi Q5
  • chrisadm on I May Have Been the First to Put BF Goodrich KO2s on an Audi Q5
  • Christopher Smith on I May Have Been the First to Put BF Goodrich KO2s on an Audi Q5
  • Christopher Smith on I May Have Been the First to Put BF Goodrich KO2s on an Audi Q5
  • Chris Haak on I May Have Been the First to Put BF Goodrich KO2s on an Audi Q5

Advert

Instagram

Archives

  • March 2020
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • April 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007

  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy