New EPA mandate for more Ethanol in 2019

[WingAdmin]

The EPA has proposed a new mandate to increase the amount of ethanol in our fuel even more than there already is. I received this notice from Smarter Fuel Future, which is running a petition which you can take a couple minutes to sign electronically. The petition is to tell the EPA to reduce, not increase ethanol in fuel, and can be found here: SmarterFuel Future EPA Renewable Fuel Standard petition. It takes about 30 seconds to complete.

NOTE: It has been reported that the form does NOT work with the FireFox web browser. If you are going to fill out the petition, you'll need to use a browser other than Firefox.

Here's their notice:

The recently proposed 2019 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) volume obligations are clear indicators that the Environmental Protection Agency is doubling down on the failures of the ethanol mandates.

Instead of recognizing what’s broken with the RFS, EPA decided to increase some of the mandates’ biggest flaws. As a result, the 2019 renewable volume obligations (RVOs), which dictate how much ethanol and other biofuels will be forced into the U.S. fuel supply next year, could be the highest ever.

Bigger biofuel mandates are bad news for our country and our energy security—and could cost consumers dearly. NPR reports that taxpayers have already poured out an average of $5.4 BILLION a year on biodiesel—a fuel that’s more expensive and less energy dense per gallon than regular diesel. It’s also frequently imported from overseas. With the 2019 RVOs, costs to consumers could skyrocket and our dependence on foreign biofuels will continue.

Additionally, most engines are not designed to run on gasoline with more than 10 percent ethanol. For boats, small engines and many cars, misfueling can lead to metal corrosion, rubber swelling and full engine break-downs.

That’s where you come in.

We have the chance to push back on the EPA about the way it’s handling RFS mandates. Submit a comment today and urge them to lower the 2019 RVOs.

The RFS is a failed government mandate, and as long as it’s on the books, consumers will be paying the price. With your help, we can urge the EPA to lower the 2019 RFS mandate to levels that are better for consumers, and better for our country. And we can continue to push Congress to repeal and reform RFS once and for all.

Click here to submit your comment to the EPA on the out-of-touch 2019 RVO proposal

[landisr]

WA; with your permission, I would like to post this on other forums that I participate in.

Thanks in advance.?

Ron in AZ

[DarthJ]

Done. Getting tired of this heavily subsidized low energy garbage. If it's so good, let people see what the true price is at the pump. Tired of higher food prices as food crops are being replaced by fuel crops.

[WingAdmin]

WA; with your permission, I would like to post this on other forums that I participate in.

Thanks in advance.?

Ron in AZ

Absolutely, please do!

[AZgl1800]

that form is hard to use, I have no idea who is in the EPA

"one click?"

didn't work for me

[DaveO430]

I filled in the form but there is no submit button.

[WingAdmin]

I filled in the form but there is no submit button.

I tested...from my informal testing, it looks like if you load the form using Firefox, it does not show a Submit button. It worked in every other browser I tried. Strange. I'll let them know...

[DaveO430]

I filled in the form but there is no submit button.

I tested...from my informal testing, it looks like if you load the form using Firefox, it does not show a Submit button. It worked in every other browser I tried. Strange. I'll let them know...

You're right, tried another browser.

[RockportDave]

Done.
Hate to say, but the company I work for built some of the ethanol plants back in the 90s.
I had a 90 hp Yamaha 2 stroke boat motor that was bullet proof until ethanol. Let it sit and the carbs had little orange balls that looked like corn that had to be cleaned out to run.
We have come a long way from the leaded 97 octane premium fuels of the 60s and 70s.
Dave

[AZgl1800]

the problem I have with that form, is it does not preselect the representative for your state.
and I don't know who to send it to.

[bluthundr31]

Form submitted, but I'm "ticked-off" that I can't submit a dozen (or a hundred) forms with the same complaint!!!!

I wonder if I can "print" out a truck-load of the forms and truck it down to the local EPA office???, , , hehe

[mterraci]

Submitted a petition.

Thanks for letting us all know about this. There's enough crap in the gas we purchase now, without adding more.

[cardinal]

I'll be trying to send the petition, later. I'd like to attach the Cornell University's comments about Ethanol. Here's a cut and paste of part of the paper.
CU scientist terms corn-based ethanol 'subsidized food burning'

Neither increases in government subsidies to corn-based ethanol fuel nor hikes in the price of petroleum can overcome what one Cornell agricultural scientist calls a fundamental input-yield problem: It takes more energy to make ethanol from grain than the combustion of ethanol produces.

At a time when ethanol-gasoline mixtures (gasohol) are touted as the American answer to fossil fuel shortages by corn producers, food processors and some lawmakers, Cornell's David Pimentel takes a longer range view.

"Abusing our precious croplands to grow corn for an energy-inefficient process that yields low-grade automobile fuel amounts to unsustainable, subsidized food burning," said the Cornell professor in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Pimentel, who chaired a U.S. Department of Energy panel that investigated the energetics, economics and environmental aspects of ethanol production several years ago, subsequently conducted a detailed analysis of the corn-to-car fuel process. His findings will be published next month in the forthcoming Encyclopedia of Physical Sciences and Technology.


Here's a link to the article...https://www.organicconsumers.org/scient ... ol-cornell

[FM-USA]

EthKRAPanol is made from corn squeeze'ins.
Pulled over and ticketed for weaving and crossing the lines.
"But your honor, I just filled up with 15% ethanol.
I was totally sober, the car was drunk."


.

.

.

[AZgl1800]

Just bought a '09 Piaggio MP3 250cc scooter.

the manual calls out " 91 Premium pure fuel only "

huh?
no E-10 allowed per the Italians.

[vv0350]

We absolutely are loosing our minds to think raising the ethanol % in gasoline is a good thing. It ruins lawnmowers, chainsaws, weedeaters, and for sure, all older motorcycles...We have had to buy Staratron and Marine Stable for our equipment since ethanol began bring added...The additive stuff helps, but the motor parts and operation still slowly degrade as has been proven to me on several occasions... I have spent hundreds of $$ getting riding mowers carbs rebuilt and hoses replaced.......Don't the guys making these decisions do any of the activities associated with the above equipment...I guess not....
We have done lots of cross country traveling on our 1997 GL1500 trike and have had almost zero luck buying 100% gasoline EXCEPT in Oklahoma....Oklahoma has at least one station in every town that carries the good stuff....Leave Okla and forget it....gasahol, gasahol, gasohol...
I too tried to fill out the form but had no luck...

[FM-USA]

Sent.
Also added this line...
"WHERE DO I SEND THE BILL FOR MY VEHICLES DAMAGED PARTS FROM FORCED USE OF ETHANOL?"
Probably will fall on deaf ears.
EH, I TRY.


.

.

[FM-USA]

I too tried to fill out the form but had no luck...

The PHONE needs to be filled in.
Then (oddly) scroll up to SEND EMAIL.

.

.

[AZgl1800]

I drove from home to Salina, KS and found 2 pure-gas stations on that leg of my trip to Colorado.

in Hays, KS a station was marked as E-0 but had a tag 10% ethanol on the pumps.
truck was empty so I filled it with E-10 and immediately the fuel mileage suffered and the power of the Suburban fell way off. took more throttle to get to the same speed....

even in cruise, the Tach jumped up from 1800 to 2450 rpm just to maintain the same speed... yup, it down shifted because not enough torque at 1800 rpm to keep it going.

found 2 stations in Colorado City with E-0 that serviced the Marina crowd

no more until I found a race track owner 10 miles east of Pueblo, CO until I got back home in Oologah.

none in Enid, here I can find it in several places. in fact, our new owner of the convenience store changed all of his 91 pumps over to 91 E-0, says a lot of 91 is being sold now.


Suburban was pulling a Toy Hauler grossed out at 9,000 lbs, the truck has the 5.7L Vortex engine.
I reprogrammed the ECM for more torque on 87 octane.

[seabeechief]

I just completed the EPA email campaign docs. I am not very confident that it will do any good, but at least I'm trying. Again. Writing to my two senators and my congressman repeatedly over the years regarding the ethanol fiasco has produced zero results. I have long held the opinion that if corn farmers need subsidies, then make the case for subsidies and move on. The dog and pony show in congress is nothing more than political pablum for the dumb masses.

That's all I got to say about that.

Chief

[tk2-425]

I, too, submitted the form, on 2 of the 3 links. I got the standard/substandard chain response from one of my Senators, but the other sent this:

Dear Mr. Jordan:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the use of ethanol and renewable fuels as part of our national energy policy. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter.

As you may know, the federal government has historically subsidized the production and mixture of ethanol into gasoline. The Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) provided gasoline suppliers a tax credit of 45 cents for each gallon of ethanol blended into gasoline and was based on a similar tax incentive first enacted in 1978. Additionally, in 1980, Congress enacted a tariff on ethanol to discourage competition from foreign biofuel imports. However, both of these laws expired on December 31, 2011, and I am pleased that Congress chose not to renew either policy.

On June 16, 2011, after lengthy debates concerning the future of biofuel policies, the Senate passed the Ethanol Subsidy and Tariff Repeal Amendment (S.Amdt. 476) to the Economic Development Revitalization Act (S. 782). I supported this amendment to immediately repeal the VEETC and tariff on imported ethanol and am pleased that it was adopted in the Senate by a vote of 73–27. The VEETC was an expensive tax incentive costing $6 billion annually, and the tariff on imported ethanol was a protectionist measure designed to insulate domestic ethanol producers from free market forces. Together, these policies worked to artificially inflate the ethanol fuel market for more than 30 years. Although the underlying bill, S. 782, was not approved by the Senate, the strong bipartisan support for repealing ethanol subsidies was instrumental in Congress’s decision to allow these subsidies to expire at the end of 2011.

I recognize that there is a place for renewable energy in the power and transportation fuel markets. However, as consumers continue to see rising food and fuel prices and ballooning federal deficits and debt, Congress must avoid policies that encourage using food for fuel while providing costly and unnecessary subsidies. I will continue to monitor the effect ethanol and other transportation fuels have on motorists.


I appreciate having the opportunity to represent Texas in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator

517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov

I thought that was pretty cool. Always did like that guy.
I've always thought that contaminating our fuel with corn juice was just flamin' stupid. The only station anywhere in the Texas Panhandle that has non-contaminated fuel is in Amarillo, some 70 miles from my home. Of course, every time I goto Amarillo, I take every gas jug I got. It's 20 cents or more higher, but that one station usually has lines of people waiting to get to the pumps, night and day.

[Ghostman]

I was at Speedway gas station this weekend and now they have a sticker on their E15 pumps stating to be used in 2001 and newer cars and flex fuel cars but not to be used in boats and mowers. Amazing what the government and big business will do for money with no care to the consumer.

[seabeechief]

I, too, submitted the form, on 2 of the 3 links. I got the standard/substandard chain response from one of my Senators, but the other sent this:

Dear Mr. Jordan:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the use of ethanol and renewable fuels as part of our national energy policy. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter.

As you may know, the federal government has historically subsidized the production and mixture of ethanol into gasoline. The Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) provided gasoline suppliers a tax credit of 45 cents for each gallon of ethanol blended into gasoline and was based on a similar tax incentive first enacted in 1978. Additionally, in 1980, Congress enacted a tariff on ethanol to discourage competition from foreign biofuel imports. However, both of these laws expired on December 31, 2011, and I am pleased that Congress chose not to renew either policy.

On June 16, 2011, after lengthy debates concerning the future of biofuel policies, the Senate passed the Ethanol Subsidy and Tariff Repeal Amendment (S.Amdt. 476) to the Economic Development Revitalization Act (S. 782). I supported this amendment to immediately repeal the VEETC and tariff on imported ethanol and am pleased that it was adopted in the Senate by a vote of 73–27. The VEETC was an expensive tax incentive costing $6 billion annually, and the tariff on imported ethanol was a protectionist measure designed to insulate domestic ethanol producers from free market forces. Together, these policies worked to artificially inflate the ethanol fuel market for more than 30 years. Although the underlying bill, S. 782, was not approved by the Senate, the strong bipartisan support for repealing ethanol subsidies was instrumental in Congress’s decision to allow these subsidies to expire at the end of 2011.

I recognize that there is a place for renewable energy in the power and transportation fuel markets. However, as consumers continue to see rising food and fuel prices and ballooning federal deficits and debt, Congress must avoid policies that encourage using food for fuel while providing costly and unnecessary subsidies. I will continue to monitor the effect ethanol and other transportation fuels have on motorists.


I appreciate having the opportunity to represent Texas in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.

Sincerely,

JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator

517 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: (202) 224-2934
Fax: (202) 228-2856
http://www.cornyn.senate.gov

I thought that was pretty cool. Always did like that guy.
I've always thought that contaminating our fuel with corn juice was just flamin' stupid. The only station anywhere in the Texas Panhandle that has non-contaminated fuel is in Amarillo, some 70 miles from my home. Of course, every time I goto Amarillo, I take every gas jug I got. It's 20 cents or more higher, but that one station usually has lines of people waiting to get to the pumps, night and day.

I thought the first line "Thank you for contacting me regarding the use of ethanol and renewable fuels as part of our national energy policy. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this matter" looked familiar, and it was only after reading the entire post that I realized it was from John Cornyn. That line, minus the subject "use of ethanol and renewable fuels etc" is the exact same line he uses in every reply I get from him. It is a standard "form" sentence that accompanies his every correspondence. I have serious doubts that he even read petition that WE sent to his office, much less that he wrote the wrote the reply. Mundane tasks like that are left to staff peons.

Unlike you, I do not like the guy. He is the very epitome of "RINO" and his speeches on the senate floor and his "standard form" replies to correspondence are as wishy-washy, I used fourteen paragraph's to say nothing as I have come to expect from the majority of our elected "leaders". As always due to the nature of our system, I NEVER for for him in the primary's and always vote for him in the general election. The alternative in the general election is just too horrible to imagine.

Bottom line, I don't like the ethanol fiasco, and I have zero confidence that John Cornyn will ever do anything to stop it.

Chief

[redbug]

the problem I have with that form, is it does not preselect the representative for your state.
and I don't know who to send it to.

Send it To Jim Inhofe US State senator from the Great state of Oklahoma. One of the biggest fighters of epa and ethanol.

[FM-USA]

First, we should NEVER use human food as a vehicle fuel especially when algae is still being produced in our oceans.
Algae farms speed up this production and takes up zero land real estate. Progress is constantly being made to speed up algae growth.
Besides all that, algae farms is a new industry for more human jobs.

On the other hand.
Human population is currently exploding. Are aliens planning on harvesting us soon?

.

.