US House Shows E15 The Door

[William Maley]

US House Shows E15 The Door

William Maley - Editor/Reporter - CheersandGears.com

February 22, 2011

The US House has blocked the EPA from continuing with their plans to introduce a higher blend of ethanol into gasoline this past Saturday. The amendment introduced by Rep. John Sullivan, R-Oklahoma to a bill for government funding was overwhelming voted by a count of 286-135 to prohibit the EPA spending money on waivers to allow gas stations to sell E15 till September 30th.

"The EPA has completely ignored calls from lawmakers, industry, environmental and consumer groups to address important safety issues raised by the 50 percent increase in the ethanol mandate issued over the past year. Putting E15 into our general fuel supply could adversely impact up to 60 percent of cars on the road today leading to consumer confusion at the pump and possible engine failure in the cars they drive," Sullivan said.

The Renewable Fuels Association, a trade association representing producers of ethanol see it differently.

"The fact remains ethanol is a thoroughly tested, safe, and effective motor fuel. Americans spend nearly $1 billion a day importing oil, often from hostile regions of the world. The House has denied consumers choice in the type of fuel they use. Instead, they have chosen to continue giving oil companies a virtual monopoly over the fueling system."

The Senate still has to vote on their version of the government spending bill where ethanol has support. The fight over E15 is far from over.

Source: The Detroit News: House votes to block E15 from gas pumps

[CSpec]

I'm glad that this happened, but wrong reasons.

[SoCalCTS]

We shouldn't be subsidizing corn in the USA. I agree that they are blocking this for the wrong reasons but this is a blessing in disguise.

[Croc]

We shouldn't be subsidizing corn in the USA. I agree that they are blocking this for the wrong reasons but this is a blessing in disguise.

Yup. I'd go as far as to say we shouldn't be subsidizing agriculture, period. Given what has been said about the much lower yields of organic farming, I wonder what the economic effects would be if US farms all stopped using pesticides and grew organically. Specifically, what would happen to crop yields and therefore the amount of ag subsidies?

[daves87rs]

This is going to be a nasty fight.

[regfootball]

to me it would make more sense to mandate that all cars be E85 capable, and then let the market decide. I want pure gas in my car, unless I can run any ethanol blend. Right now here its a mandate for 10% ethanol blend in all fuels. I get 10% worse mileage. Call it the ethanol tax. Leave it to the choice of the customer.

[AAS]

to me it would make more sense to mandate that all cars be E85 capable, and then let the market decide. I want pure gas in my car, unless I can run any ethanol blend. Right now here its a mandate for 10% ethanol blend in all fuels. I get 10% worse mileage. Call it the ethanol tax. Leave it to the choice of the customer.

That works for new cars, but what about older cars that aren't E85 capable? I assume it would cost a fair amount of money to upgrade. I, as probably many are, am worried that running more ethanol in my 2000 Camaro may harm it (and it's not even that old!).

[CSpec]

Yup. I'd go as far as to say we shouldn't be subsidizing agriculture, period. Given what has been said about the much lower yields of organic farming, I wonder what the economic effects would be if US farms all stopped using pesticides and grew organically.

There would be famine. "Organic" just means arbitrarily stopping improvement in agriculture at a certain date, like the Amish.

[z28luvr01]

If E85 were taken seriously as an alternative fuel in this country (and not just a way to subsidize corn farmers) it would go a long way to reducing our dependence on (foreign) oil. Right now it's a half-assed implementation, and it's giving the fuel a bad name. reg's idea would work bundled with the proliferation of at least one E85 pump in most major gas stations. A better E85 infrastructure would give automakers reason to design engines from the ground up to run on E85. I also say we open up E85 production to competition. Let the corn farmers compete against sugar farmers, waste management outfits, switchgrass farms, etc to see who can produce the best ethanol for the cheapest.

Slightly off topic, but I really do hope that they pass some sort of government funding bill relatively soon. I'd like to...you know....keep my job.

[CSpec]

If E85 were taken seriously as an alternative fuel in this country (and not just a way to subsidize corn farmers) it would go a long way to reducing our dependence on (foreign) oil. Right now it's a half-assed implementation, and it's giving the fuel a bad name. reg's idea would work bundled with the proliferation of at least one E85 pump in most major gas stations. A better E85 infrastructure would give automakers reason to design engines from the ground up to run on E85. I also say we open up E85 production to competition. Let the corn farmers compete against sugar farmers, waste management outfits, switchgrass farms, etc to see who can produce the best ethanol for the cheapest.

Wrong wrong wrong. E85 is a vile substance that is only used because it's subsidized to the hilt to the detriment of world food prices and supply.

[z28luvr01]

There would be famine. "Organic" just means arbitrarily stopping improvement in agriculture at a certain date yielding better quality food that's better tasting and healthier for people to eat, like the Amish.

fixed

[Drew Dowdell]

Wrong wrong wrong. E85 is a vile substance that is only used because it's subsidized to the hilt to the detriment of world food prices and supply.

Ok just suck it CSpec.

E85 can be made from many things OTHER than food. The implementation of E85 production is bad.

[z28luvr01]

Wrong wrong wrong. E85 is a vile substance that is only used because it's subsidized to the hilt to the detriment of world food prices and supply.

Thanks. I had no idea E85 was the brainchild of Satan himself. We're better off sticking with oil. There's plenty enough to last us until we run out.

[CSpec]

Thanks. I had no idea E85 was the brainchild of Satan himself. We're better off sticking with oil. There's plenty enough to last us until we run out.

There is indeed. If the US were to grow all its own transport fuel as corn, it would need 30% more land than the land it currently uses to grow food. Rainforests are being chopped down to plant palmoil trees in South America. To call this "green" is insane.

[Drew Dowdell]

There is indeed. If the US were to grow all its own transport fuel as corn, it would need 30% more land than the land it currently uses to grow food. Rainforests are being chopped down to plant palmoil trees in South America. To call this "green" is insane.

wrong wrong wrong wrong.

Implementing the idea badly doesn't mean the idea is bad. It's the implementation that is bad.

Corn is one of the worst sources of E85. Thank your Corn lobbyist.

[z28luvr01]

At this point, for the sake of keeping the thread civil, I'm going to bow out of this thread and continue this discussion with the table in my office. It at least has a leg to stand on.

[Drew Dowdell]

At this point, for the sake of keeping the thread civil, I'm going to bow out of this thread and continue this discussion with the table in my office. It at least has a leg to stand on.

I find this video useful

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nYlZiWK2Iy8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[CSpec]

Implementing the idea badly doesn't mean the idea is bad. It's the implementation that is bad.

Corn is one of the worst sources of E85. Thank your Corn lobbyist.

If the two options are terrible implementation that makes everyone worse off (except Iowa) and doing nothing, doing nothing is clearly superior. Do you see any possibility of importing Brazilian sugar and telling both the American sugar and corn lobbies to suck an egg? Not. Gonna. Happen.

[Drew Dowdell]

If the two options are terrible implementation that makes everyone worse off (except Iowa) and doing nothing, doing nothing is clearly superior. Do you see any possibility of importing Brazilian sugar and telling both the American sugar and corn lobbies to suck an egg? Not. Gonna. Happen.

I see kelp and algae farms being developed off shore and in a couple of small lakes nearly Illinois and Michigan. I see compostable waste being separated like we do with recycling and taken to fuel centers. I see yard waste being dropped off at fuel centers. I see saw mill saw dust being trucked to fuel centers. I see waste tires being broken down into diesel. I see our own sugar beet industry stepping up to the plate.

[loki]

Yup. I'd go as far as to say we shouldn't be subsidizing agriculture, period. Given what has been said about the much lower yields of organic farming, I wonder what the economic effects would be if US farms all stopped using pesticides and grew organically. Specifically, what would happen to crop yields and therefore the amount of ag subsidies?

remember, there are subisidies for farmers to NOT grow crops on parts of their land. but there has actually been a subsidy to flood fields recently for water foul because, supposedly, of the destruction from katrina, or maybe it was the inland hurricane that came though my area ,2 years ago?

Cspec, brazil has been pressuring us through the ....international trade, something, to end our protectionist tariffs and subsidies on sugar and ethanol, respectivily.