Posted on 05/12/2018 6:52:54 AM PDT by Kaslin
Like most people Ive spoken with, I have no innate, inflexible antipathy to ethanol in gasoline. What upsets me are the deceptive claims used to justify adding mostly corn-based ethanol to this indispensable fuel; the way seriously harmful unintended consequences are brushed aside; and the insidious crony corporatist system the ethanol program has spawned between producers and members of Congress.
What angers me are the legislative and regulatory mandates that force us to buy gasoline that is 10% ethanol even though it gets lower mileage than 100% gasoline, brings none of the proclaimed benefits (environmental or otherwise), drives up food prices, and damages small engines. In fact, in most areas, its almost impossible to find E-zero gasoline, and that problem will get worse as mandates increase.
My past articles lambasting ethanol (here, here, here and here) addressed these issues, and said ethanol epitomizes federal programs that taxpayers and voters never seem able to terminate, no matter how wasteful or harmful they become. Thats primarily because its beneficiaries are well funded, motivated, politically connected and determined to keep their gravy train rolling down the tracks while opponents and victims have far less funding, focus, motivation and ability to reach the decision-making powers.
Ethanol got started because of assertions that even now are still trotted out, despite having outlived their time in the real-world sun. First, we were told, ethanol would be a bulwark against oil imports from unfriendly nations, especially as the USA depleted its rapidly dwindling petroleum reserves. Of course, the fracking (horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing) revolution has given America and the world at least a century of new reserves, and the US now exports more oil and refined products than it imports.
Second, renewable fuels would help prevent dangerous manmade climate change. However, with the 2015-16 El Niño temperature spike now gone, average global temperatures are continuing the 20-year no-increase trend that completely contradicts alarmist predictions and models. Harvey was the first major hurricane in a record twelve years to make US landfall. And overall, the evidence-based scientific case for dangerous manmade climate change has become weaker with every passing year.
Moreover, the claim that ethanol and other biofuels dont emit as much allegedly climate-impacting (but certainly plant-fertilizing) carbon dioxide as gasoline has also been put out to pasture. In reality, over their full life cycle (from planting and harvesting crops, to converting them to fuel, to transporting them by truck, to blending and burning them), biofuels emit at least as much CO2 as their petroleum counterparts.
Ironically, the state that grows the most corn and produces the most ethanol the state whose Republican senators had a fit when EPA proposed to reduce its 2018 non-ethanol biodiesel requirement by a measly 315 million gallons, out of 19.3 billion gallons in total renewable fuels buys less ethanol-laced gasoline than do average consumers in the rest of the USA. That state is Iowa.
In fact, Iowans bought more ethanol-free gasoline in 2016 than what EPA projects the entire United States will be able to buy in just a few more years, as the E10 mandates ratchet higher and higher.
And so this past week, after months of battles, debates and negotiations, President Trump hosted a White House meeting with legislators The purpose was to address and compromise on at least some of the thorny issues that had put Ted Cruz, Joni Ernst and other politicians at loggerheads, as they sought to reform some aspects of the Renewable Fuel Standards (RFS) system while protecting their constituents.
In an effort to expand the reform agenda, by making legislators and citizens better informed in advance of the meeting, 18 diverse organizations wrote a joint letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, underscoring why they believe broad and significant RFS reform is essential. Signatories included major national meat and poultry producers and processors, restaurants, marine manufacturers, small engine owners, consumer and taxpayer organizations, and conservation and environmental groups. They were especially worried about the prospect that the Congress and Administration might allow year-round sales of 15% (E15) ethanol blends in gasoline, but they raised other pressing concerns as well.
* As large shares of domestic corn and soy crops are now diverted from food use to fuel production, poultry, beef, pork and fish producers (and consumers) face volatile and increasing prices for animal feed.
* Ethanol wreaks havoc on the engines and fuel systems of boats, motorcycles and lawn equipment, as well as many automobiles, which are not capable or allowed to run on E15. Repair and replacement costs are a major issue for marine and small engine owners (as I personally discovered when I owned a boat).
* Consumers and taxpayers must pay increasing costs as biofuel mandates increase under the RFS.
* Millions of acres of native prairie and other ecosystems have been turned into large-scale agricultural developments, because the RFS encourages farmers to plow land, instead of preserving habitats. This endangers ecosystems and species, exacerbates agricultural run-off and degrades water quality.
* Biofuel demand promotes conversion of natural habitats to palm oil and other plantations overseas, as well as domestically. Their life-cycle carbon dioxide emissions rival or exceed those of oil and gas.
* Expanding markets for corn ethanol by increasing E15 sales ignores and exacerbates these problems while benefiting a small subset of the US economy but negatively impacting far more sectors, including the general public and the industries and interests represented by signatories to the Pruitt letter.
Following the meeting, several signatories expanded on these concerns and noted that the compromise did increase E15 sales, while reducing the RFS impact on small refineries that were being forced to buy paper biofuel certificates because they werent making enough gasoline to need mandated real biofuel.
Requiring every American to buy ethanol gasoline isnt good enough for biofuel companies anymore, the National Council of Chain Restaurants remarked. Now they want a waiver from federal clean air laws so they can sell high blends of ethanol, which pollutes the air in warm weather months, year round.
Arbitrarily waiving the E15 [ozone emissions] restriction and permitting year-round E15 sales, without comprehensive reform of the RFS, merely boosts ethanol sales and justifies future government-imposed increases to the ethanol mandate, the National Taxpayers Union noted. These hidden taxes, damage to small engines, and lower gas mileage are a direct hit on family budgets, especially for poor families.
The new year-round E15 policy will cause serious chaos for recreational boaters, the National Marine Manufacturers Association stated. Over 60% of consumers falsely assume any gasoline sold at retail gas stations must be safe for their equipment. It is essential that EPA launch a public awareness campaign, improved labeling standards, and new safeguards at the pump that protect American consumers.
Granting a Clean Air Act waiver for the corn ethanol industry would mean doubling down on a policy that has already been a disaster for the environment, the National Wildlife Federation said. Congress needs to reform the ethanol mandate before it does more damage.
US farmers are in a severe crisis and millions of people around the world are forced to go without food, ActionAid USA pointed out. We need policies that guarantee everyone enough food to eat, fair prices for farmers, and protect our environment. Biofuels dont do that. In fact, they make the situation far worse.
Unfortunately, a deal was struck. The noisiest and best-connected warring factions got what they wanted. These other pressing concerns were ignored, as the can once again got kicked down the road.
Refiners will now save hundreds of millions of dollars a year, by not having to buy ethanol that they dont need to blend into the smaller quantities of gasoline they are refining. Corn farmers and ethanol producers will rake in hundreds of millions more a year. All that is good for those industries, their workers and investors, and the politicians who get their campaign contributions.
But what about the rest of America? The Congress, White House and EPA need to address our environmental and pocketbook concerns, too. When will the next negotiating session be held?
I have a lot of respect for farmers. But, ethanol is welfare for farmers.
There is a “Racetrack” gas station about 10 miles from me that sells ethanol-free gas, so that’s all I use in my yard equipment now. The corn-based stuff has ruined at least two of my past 2-cycle trimmers.
I just go over there and fill up my 5-gallon container and I’m set for a good while.
Honest question: has anyone done an analysis of the whole ethanol game and what were the conclusions? For example, can they show that “pollution” was reduced by x percentage after implementation of the ethanol mandate?
One thing about government — they are never held to account if their promises never come true and we are stuck with the crap law forever. Same goes with gun laws. Promise are made if we just pass this law or that law and no one ever checks after the fact to see if the promises came true.
In reality, over their full life cycle (from planting and harvesting crops, to converting them to fuel, to transporting them by truck, to blending and burning them), biofuels emit at least as much CO2 as their petroleum counterparts.
Dirty little truth (same with hydrogen). One of many in the article.
Its not just farmer welfare, but corporate farmer and selected business enrichment. Many have gotten dirty rich from their ethanol start-ups, due only to our tax $$$$$$$ subsidizing them.
93 octane premium is $.60 over 87 oxy here in Missouri.
Not all gas stations carry 93 or 91 premium...
Vapor lock is a major problem for the old classic cars. Ethanol has a lower evaporation temperature.
Unfortunately, running high octane gasoline in an old car is not recommended either. I am stuck.
Adding diesel to the tank seems to help. Unfortunately, the car smokes a bit. LOL.
A little history.
This all presented as an energy issue. Can’t disagree with some of the arguements.
I remember one propaganda when started. Local radio station put two vehicles on a race track, ran them at 35 mph and both got the same mileage. If they would have run than on hills and loads and higher speeds the results would have been much different. If in town, I run e85 in my van, and it works which I do. I do think it might help pollution in larger cities also. But the problem is central govt which is a one size fits all......................
I only use it in my yard equipment, I buy five gallons, and add a bottle of “Mechanic in a Bottle”, (available at Walmart and Tractor Supply), which is a preservative for the gasoline to protect it during the long periods of non-use, like through the winter.
Butanol would have many advantages over ethanol, if we insist on adding corn to our fuel.
As someone who grew up in farming, I totally agree.
That corn laced poison needs to be stopped.
Ethanol is evil.
I have a friend who owns a landscaping business. She pays the exorbitant price for E-Zero gas for all her small engines. She figured out the extra being paid was less than paying small engine repair shops to fix her engines. Machine downtime is very expensive for her.
I’m assuming you need a lead substitute also due to non-hardened valve seats pre-1975?
I run that CD-2 additive. If the car sits any length of time, use “Ethanol Shield” stabilizer. The best I’ve found personally to date.
Ethanol and windmills. Fantastic ideas to bilk the taxpayer in favor of rentseeking cronies and swampdwellers.
My 65 Willys jeep handles ethanol free very well.
The Weber 2 barrel probably helps.
They just put up a Maverick gas station just down the road from me that sells ethanol free gas.
I’m on my 2nd tank of it now.
[I only use it in my yard equipment, I buy five gallons, and add a bottle of Mechanic in a Bottle, (available at Walmart and Tractor Supply), which is a preservative for the gasoline to protect it during the long periods of non-use, like through the winter.]
Ethanol Shield from the same company is the preservative. MIB is a cleaning chemical for poor running engines. Use ES for storage. Available at Home Defect also.
If it is truly straight gasoline, it shouldn’t go out of phase like ethanol enhanced gas...
History lesson continued.
Again presented and argued as energy issue. It is a food issue also. We have a long history of government role in food. (yes, I understand much mission creep) At one time we had a 3 year reserve of grain as a national security issue. BUT this was expensive. NOW, if we don’t use the last bushel of last years crop the day before the new crop comes in, we screwed up. DOES THIS WORRY ANYONE?
Back to expensive. It was decided by government this was too expensive and this flooded the market with cheap grain. Thus back when grain was cheap,fuel expensive, and international situation uncertain, this was a GOOD IDEA.
It is more complicated than this I know, but I hope people will get the gist of systems, not just the one point that it ruins their lawn mower.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.