*>End Ethanol Mandate For Gasoline <*
*>End Ethanol Mandate For Gasoline <*
Senate Bill Introduced To End Ethanol Mandate For Gasoline (Let us pray 4-$ure) Email your representative's 4-Sure 
By Stephen Edelstein 10 hours ago
A decade ago, the biofuel ethanol was viewed as one way to reduce the nation's consumption of oil for transportation fuel.
In 2007, Congress approved the Renewable Fuels Standard, which mandated increasing amounts of ethanol gradually be blended into the fuel supply.
Now, those rules could be struck down.
Ethanol was seen as a homegrown way to reduce dependence on foreign oil and keep money spent on transportation fuel in the country, while cutting overall carbon emissions due to its theoretically carbon-neutral status.
But the bulk of U.S. ethanol was and remains based on distillation of corn, a far less efficient feedstock than either the sugar cane used in Brazil or the cellulosic sources that were expected to improve yields substantially.
Since 2007, sources of cellulosic ethanol simply haven't come on line in the volumes required to meet the EPA rules implementing the Congressional requirements.
Big square baler harvesting wheat straw for production of cellulosic ethanol
Meanwhile, the fracking boom, stringent new corporate average fuel economy regulations, and the emergence of modern plug-in electric cars have lessened the national security and environmental impetus for the ethanol mandate.
So roughly eight years after the Renewable Fuels Standard was passed into law, a bill that would end the ethanol mandate entirely has been introduced, The Hill reports..
Called the "Corn Ethanol Mandate Elimination Act of 2015," the bill was introduced Thursday by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), with Semator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) as an additional cosponsor.
The legislation had originally been introduced as an amendment to the bill approving the Keystone XL Pipeline--which President Barack Obama vetoed last week.
The Senators argue that the current rule drives up the price of corn, which in turn causes food prices to rise. They claim 40 percent of the U.S. corn crop is currently used for fuel production.
They also claim the ethanol mandate discourages the development of other alternative fuels, and that refiners will soon hit a "blend wall"--at which point no more ethanol can be added to gasoline.
FlexFuel badge on E85-capable 2009 Chevrolet HHR
Adding more ethanol to gasoline supplies could cause "problems for many gas stations and older automobiles," Sen. Feinstein said in a statement,
Most drivers currently pump E10--a mixture of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline--into their tanks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved E15--a 15-percent ethanol blend--for vehicles from 2001 or later, but few station operators have chosen to spend the money to install the necessary "blender pumps" to sell it.
"Flex-Fuel" vehicles can also run on 85 percent ethanol--or E85--but that fuel is available at less than 2 percent of gas stations nationwide, meaning most of them only ever burn gasoline.
The move to end the ethanol mandate drew immediate criticism from the Renewable Fuels Association trade group.
There is "simply no truth" that using ethanol for fuel drives up food prices, Bob Dinneen--the group's head--said in a statement, adding that ethanol blends are typically cheaper than pure gasoline.
E85 Corvette Racer
But even without legislative threats, the Renewable Fuels Standard has been in trouble for some time.
The rule's ethanol targets are based on volume, meaning they don't account for an overall decrease in fuel consumption.
That's a problem, because over the past few years new cars have become more fuel-efficient, and Americans haven't increased the number of miles they drive each year.
This led the EPA to propose cutting the requirement by 20 percent in 2013.
Soon after regulators were forced to face the reality that cellulosic sources--which constitute a separate part of the mandate from corn ethanol--essentially didn't exist.
That's left corn ethanol as the only substantial part of the mandate remaining. If this new bill passes, America's dream of an ethanol economy will likely end.
By Stephen Edelstein 10 hours ago A decade ago, the biofuel ethanol was viewed as one way to reduce the nation's consumption of oil for transportation fuel.
In 2007, Congress approved the Renewable Fuels Standard, which mandated increasing amounts of ethanol gradually be blended into the fuel supply.
Now, those rules could be struck down.
Ethanol was seen as a homegrown way to reduce dependence on foreign oil and keep money spent on transportation fuel in the country, while cutting overall carbon emissions due to its theoretically carbon-neutral status.
But the bulk of U.S. ethanol was and remains based on distillation of corn, a far less efficient feedstock than either the sugar cane used in Brazil or the cellulosic sources that were expected to improve yields substantially.
Since 2007, sources of cellulosic ethanol simply haven't come on line in the volumes required to meet the EPA rules implementing the Congressional requirements.
Big square baler harvesting wheat straw for production of cellulosic ethanolMeanwhile, the fracking boom, stringent new corporate average fuel economy regulations, and the emergence of modern plug-in electric cars have lessened the national security and environmental impetus for the ethanol mandate.
So roughly eight years after the Renewable Fuels Standard was passed into law, a bill that would end the ethanol mandate entirely has been introduced, The Hill reports..
Called the "Corn Ethanol Mandate Elimination Act of 2015," the bill was introduced Thursday by Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Pat Toomey (R-PA), with Semator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) as an additional cosponsor.
The legislation had originally been introduced as an amendment to the bill approving the Keystone XL Pipeline--which President Barack Obama vetoed last week.
The Senators argue that the current rule drives up the price of corn, which in turn causes food prices to rise. They claim 40 percent of the U.S. corn crop is currently used for fuel production.
They also claim the ethanol mandate discourages the development of other alternative fuels, and that refiners will soon hit a "blend wall"--at which point no more ethanol can be added to gasoline.
FlexFuel badge on E85-capable 2009 Chevrolet HHRAdding more ethanol to gasoline supplies could cause "problems for many gas stations and older automobiles," Sen. Feinstein said in a statement,
Most drivers currently pump E10--a mixture of 10 percent ethanol and 90 percent gasoline--into their tanks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved E15--a 15-percent ethanol blend--for vehicles from 2001 or later, but few station operators have chosen to spend the money to install the necessary "blender pumps" to sell it.
"Flex-Fuel" vehicles can also run on 85 percent ethanol--or E85--but that fuel is available at less than 2 percent of gas stations nationwide, meaning most of them only ever burn gasoline.
The move to end the ethanol mandate drew immediate criticism from the Renewable Fuels Association trade group.
There is "simply no truth" that using ethanol for fuel drives up food prices, Bob Dinneen--the group's head--said in a statement, adding that ethanol blends are typically cheaper than pure gasoline.
E85 Corvette RacerBut even without legislative threats, the Renewable Fuels Standard has been in trouble for some time.
The rule's ethanol targets are based on volume, meaning they don't account for an overall decrease in fuel consumption.
That's a problem, because over the past few years new cars have become more fuel-efficient, and Americans haven't increased the number of miles they drive each year.
This led the EPA to propose cutting the requirement by 20 percent in 2013.
Soon after regulators were forced to face the reality that cellulosic sources--which constitute a separate part of the mandate from corn ethanol--essentially didn't exist.
That's left corn ethanol as the only substantial part of the mandate remaining. If this new bill passes, America's dream of an ethanol economy will likely end.
Monte Of The Month -- January 2013
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,612
From: London, Ontario
I'll be happy to see the end of ethanol blend.
Originally I really believed in the stuff. A homegrown petrol substitute made perfect sense on paper. And GM was the best at spearheading the Flex Fuel vehicles offering them across their entire line up. No other company demonstrated such ecological responsibility. Or so it seemed.
After a few years of the ethanol blends we learned a lot more. We figured out that the carbon footprint to produce ethanol is terrible, so it's not so enviro-friendly. And it wrecks havoc on catalytic converters, making them inefficient and causing cars to release more emissions. And making people blow more money on converters. And GM wasted their time and resources in E85 vehicle development, which other manufactures did not. And that yielded no $ return for them and they lost ground to the completion. All part of the fall from grace for GM - they put their eggs in the wrong basket.
Originally I really believed in the stuff. A homegrown petrol substitute made perfect sense on paper. And GM was the best at spearheading the Flex Fuel vehicles offering them across their entire line up. No other company demonstrated such ecological responsibility. Or so it seemed.
After a few years of the ethanol blends we learned a lot more. We figured out that the carbon footprint to produce ethanol is terrible, so it's not so enviro-friendly. And it wrecks havoc on catalytic converters, making them inefficient and causing cars to release more emissions. And making people blow more money on converters. And GM wasted their time and resources in E85 vehicle development, which other manufactures did not. And that yielded no $ return for them and they lost ground to the completion. All part of the fall from grace for GM - they put their eggs in the wrong basket.
Hi `Brent, thanks for your informed post information. I just know the problems that ethanol causes for an engine + the extra cost to the consumer. Hopefully GM & other's have learned their lesson(s) & do more research before there invest & implement these changes.I'm sure the farmers will survive & find other outlets for their corn. I know that I like corn & eat a lot of it + pop it too
Thanks for being the first to post + good infor...You sure keep up on what's happening in our World...I always enjoy what falls outa of head...So does 'Space. I know that he really misses not being able 2 'be online with his Monte Carlo Family. It's difficult to try & copy him 4>Sure...I'm trying
MOTM Mod
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 5,500
From: Nebraska
Lets talk a bit about the Agricultural impacts.
Back in the early 80's I worked for the largest farm cooperative in the USA, a company called Farmland Industries all over the central part of the US you would see these big grain elevators and everyone was a locally owned by the Farmers.
Times for the Farmers were not great in the 80's the Gov. embargoed the export of Grain to countries that didn't see things the American way, eventually the big Co-op I worked for went bankrupt and is no longer in business.
I lost my job with 7,000 other people the same week.
All those little Co-ops were swallowed up by bigger ones and the Farmers lost there stock in them.
Today the small farmer is a very rare item, once the backbone of the American economy.
Today we import a bunch of the stuff we eat, and it is not the same quality as what is home grown, such as meats, fruits, and vegetables.
So along comes the ethanol thing and they build these refineries for the stuff in the Midwest, and the Farmer contracts their crops to the refineries to make the ethanol. If they don't produce they get fined.
There are 5 of them with in 25 miles of my home town.
I personally don't care for the ethanol it is however a bit cheaper here but other states the same price as regular.
So one thing we can do to help our Fellow Americans is to buy USA made products only, if it says made in China, don't buy it!!!! I mean don't!!
A few years ago I was at the local hardware store, standing in line while the registers were offline and all the help were wearing Polo shirts that had a tool brand on them. I asked about them they said the rep was there giving demos that day and I said yah! I know this company they purchased a small tool manufacturer in the south east part of my state and they put about 250 people out of work to send all the manufacturing to China. I indicated that I will never buy that junk because it is now Chinese made. I would be ashamed to wear a shirt with there name on it.
Anyway I had a captive audience and everyone of them agreed with me.
Funny thing I have not seen anyone with those shirts on for along time.
Anyway just the little bit we eat doesn't pay for the equipment these guys use to farm today, just a Tractor is over $100K ( John Deere American made in Waterloo, Iowa), and they just laid off a bunch of people 300 or more.
So every thing makes a difference, and we are not solely using foreign oil.
Sorry for the rant.
Back in the early 80's I worked for the largest farm cooperative in the USA, a company called Farmland Industries all over the central part of the US you would see these big grain elevators and everyone was a locally owned by the Farmers.
Times for the Farmers were not great in the 80's the Gov. embargoed the export of Grain to countries that didn't see things the American way, eventually the big Co-op I worked for went bankrupt and is no longer in business.
I lost my job with 7,000 other people the same week.
All those little Co-ops were swallowed up by bigger ones and the Farmers lost there stock in them.
Today the small farmer is a very rare item, once the backbone of the American economy.
Today we import a bunch of the stuff we eat, and it is not the same quality as what is home grown, such as meats, fruits, and vegetables.
So along comes the ethanol thing and they build these refineries for the stuff in the Midwest, and the Farmer contracts their crops to the refineries to make the ethanol. If they don't produce they get fined.
There are 5 of them with in 25 miles of my home town.
I personally don't care for the ethanol it is however a bit cheaper here but other states the same price as regular.
So one thing we can do to help our Fellow Americans is to buy USA made products only, if it says made in China, don't buy it!!!! I mean don't!!
A few years ago I was at the local hardware store, standing in line while the registers were offline and all the help were wearing Polo shirts that had a tool brand on them. I asked about them they said the rep was there giving demos that day and I said yah! I know this company they purchased a small tool manufacturer in the south east part of my state and they put about 250 people out of work to send all the manufacturing to China. I indicated that I will never buy that junk because it is now Chinese made. I would be ashamed to wear a shirt with there name on it.
Anyway I had a captive audience and everyone of them agreed with me.
Funny thing I have not seen anyone with those shirts on for along time.
Anyway just the little bit we eat doesn't pay for the equipment these guys use to farm today, just a Tractor is over $100K ( John Deere American made in Waterloo, Iowa), and they just laid off a bunch of people 300 or more.
So every thing makes a difference, and we are not solely using foreign oil.
Sorry for the rant.
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,635
From: Central Oklahoma
I don't think this will ever go through. The corn lobby will make sure of that. I'm lucky enough that I live in an area where pure gas is readily available. Ethanol just does too much, especially to older engines. I didn't have pure gas readily available when I lived in TN and I suspect that played a role in the motor in the 73 going to crap before I sold it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
big_mecho13
General Monte Carlo Talk
10
Jun 27, 2007 10:04 AM