What people are saying
WASHINGTON – The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) today responded to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) release of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Renewable Volume Obligations (RVO) for 2017 with the following statement from AFPM President Chet Thompson:
“While we appreciate the difficulty of the task before EPA, the agency’s decision to increase the 2017 RFS volumes is completely detached from market realities and confirms once again that Congress must take immediate action to remedy this broken program. A decade has passed since promulgation of the program and the cellulosic biofuels industry still has not delivered on its promise of commercially viable fuels. Despite this reality, EPA unfortunately finalized a RFS volume requirement that looks to force more biofuel in the fuel supply than consumers want or infrastructure can handle. Refiners should not have the responsibility to force consumers to use products they either don’t want or that are incompatible with their cars, boats, and motor equipment.”
“The current federal Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) has failed over the past 10 years to deliver on its stated objectives, relying far too heavily on high environmental-impact corn ethanol as a mandated fuel source. That’s the key finding of a new study prepared by University of Tennessee professor Dr. Daniel De La Torre Ugarte. The report is released in advance of EPA’s recently announced plan to increase corn ethanol mandates for 2017.”
“The next president should push to eliminate the country’s ethanol fuel mandate. … But as with so many federal initiatives, there were unintended consequences. So many, in fact, that the ethanol mandate has accomplished precisely the opposite of its stated goals. … [T]he ethanol mandate has created higher fuel and food prices for American consumers. Thanks, Washington. … As for the environmental benefits of ethanol, well, there aren’t any. … The next president should work with Congress to kill the renewable fuel standard and end all ethanol subsidies.”
“In fact, recent research suggests ethanol-blended fuel could be worse for the environment than gasoline alone once you tally up the effects of producing and using it. … Meanwhile, diverting tons of corn to fuel production has affected the price of many agricultural products, costing consumers billions of dollars. … This page opposed the renewable fuel standards when they were adopted, and the evidence of corn-based ethanol’s shortcomings since then has only firmed our position. Congress should move to end it.”
“Lowering the ethanol requirement is good for consumers, cars and the planet. … In addition, the claims of ethanol’s earth-friendliness appear dubious: Reports from the National Academy of Sciences, the United Nations and the Environmental Working Group found that corn ethanol may actually have higher emissions than petroleum-based gasoline. … Meanwhile, since 40 percent of U.S. corn goes into biofuels, Americans pay an estimated $40 billion a year more at the grocery store.”
“The blending standards should be eliminated. [Since] so much corn is being used to produce ethanol, we pay more for foods such as bread, snacks, beef and chicken in large part because corn once used for livestock feed is now used to make fuel. Our vehicles get fewer miles per gallon from a blend of ethanol and gasoline than they would from gasoline alone, and we’re paying more for that fuel, about 13 cents per gallon, because of the lost efficiency. … Eliminating the ethanol mandate would allow market forces to determine how to diversify our fuel supplies. It also would result in cheaper foods, as less corn would be diverted from the table and the livestock feeds to the fuel tank.”
RETHINK ETHANOL
Rethink Ethanol is a non-profit group dedicated to increasing awareness and initiating changes in ethanol usage in order to help the environment and people.
© 2016 Rethink Ethanol | Privacy Policy
CONTACT US
Email: info@rethinkethanol.com
FOLLOW US