Ethanol Blog
Todd Neeley DTN Staff Reporter

Monday 12/07/09
Ethanol Ruling Seen as Good News for Corn Farmers

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's decision to delay the approval of E15, although the agency said it is leaning toward allowing the higher blend for vehicles 2001 or newer, is good news, said Mark Sponsler, CEO of Greeley-based Colorado Corn, according to The Fence Post.

"The effort to clear the way for E15 represents a significant advancement for this nation and rural communities. Renewable fuels are a clean and secure alternative to fuels based on foreign crude oil. E15 will mean additional jobs for rural communities and income for corn farmers," Sponsler said in a news release, according to The Fence Post.

EPA Assistant Administrator Gina McCarty told Growth Energy in a letter that the agency is waiting for additional studies to be completed before rendering a decision -- which could come by June 2010.

(The Fence Post, Dec. 3, 2009)
(http://www.thefencepost.com/…)

DTN: EPA's preliminary idea about limiting E15 usage to cars that were made in 2001 or later is not the answer the ethanol industry was looking for. That's because limiting E15 in that manner, according to Renewable Fuels Association Communications Director Matt Hartwig, would "be shutting out 40-50 percent of the vehicle and fuel market." In other words, the U.S. ethanol industry might be better off keeping it at E10 for any standard vehicle. The purpose of Growth Energy's request to allow E15 was to create an expanded market for the current corn-based industry that would allow it to get past an approaching blend wall, where production would exceed demand. In addition, the move toward cellulosic ethanol faces a significant road block with the current E10 market. Without allowing all vehicles to use E15, an EPA waiver would only partly solve the bigger market issue. (Todd Neeley)
Posted at 11:21AM CST 12/07/09 by Todd Neeley
Comments (7)
People are fooling themselves if they think that approving E15 is good for the ethanol industry. EPA has no intention of approving E15 for all cars. It’s just for model years 2001 and after. Go to the source and read EPA’s letter in the original. Don’t read Growth Energy’s press release. They are not even testing E15 in older cars. http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/additive/lettertogrowthenergy11-30-09.pdf That means pumps dispensing E10 and E15 instead of regular and premium. And there are going to be warnings: “Don’t put this stuff in older cars! It might dissolve stuff in your engine.” So people will ask: “Why risk my new car either? What’s it to me?” And state legislatures outside the Corn Belt will start responding to their constituents who will want an E0 option. So then instead of Regular, Premium, and Super Premium pumps, people will get a chance to buy E0, E10, and E15. And guess what, some people will become gasoline purists and won’t put anything besides neat gasoline (like God intended) in their beloved 1969 Mustang. And so ended the great experiment in biofuels.
Posted by Marcus Anonymous at 7:17PM CST 12/07/09
Short term (next year or two at the most) ethanol may face a choppy future. Long term though (two years or so + we face a looming oil crisis that only grows closer and larger every day. New oil production worldwide is not keeping up with the depletion of existing oil fields. If the reports posted on "theoildrum.com" are correct we'll be glad to have anything affordable to put in our gas tanks in the near future. When gasoline is $5.00 or $10.00 per gallon all the arguments about ethanol will disappear. Ethanol converts corn sugars and natural gas into a usable and affordable liquid fuel that can replace or supplement our gasoline supply. That’s it and that’s why we need it. E-10, E-15 or E-whatever really doesn’t matter if it’s the difference in being stranded or having some measure mobility. Over the next few years we will likely face radical changes as world oil production continues to decline from its 2005 peak of about 85 million barrels per day. Fasten your seat belt for change not speed. If you want to use pure gasoline you may consider buying gold now to pay for it in the future.
Posted by Thomas Blazek at 8:14PM CST 12/07/09
Marcus - the beloved '69 Mustang would not have lasted long on the unleaded gas that became mandated in 1974 either. Th heads would have had to be reseated and revalved with stellite. There are no "older cars" that would have a problem with E-10 or E-15 for that matter. The problem is the misguided rants and raves made by those who don't have a clue. As an ASE Master Certified Automotive Technician - I can tell you that there are a lot more benefits to running E-10 or E-15 in all cars - cleaner fuel systems, higher octane, less pollution, and it's American Made energy.
Posted by Energy User at 1:14PM CST 12/08/09
Energy User -- Well you should take your "scientific knowledge" to the EPA who doesn't see convinced. They are running tests but don't seem to think that the issue is even open for older cars. The issue would be the long-term corrosive effects of exposure to E15. I don't know how you would get 10 years worth of experience in that department in less than 10 years. But if you know how to get 10 years worth of experience in less that 10 years, I'd be real interested. The only people who generally think you can get 10 years worth of experience in a lesser time are under the legal drinking age (the one thing that state legislatures generally get right).
Posted by Marcus Anonymous at 7:33PM CST 12/08/09
Marcus - [I don't know how you would get 10 years worth of experience in that department in less than 10 years. But if you know how to get 10 years worth of experience in less that 10 years, I'd be real interested. The only people who generally think you can get 10 years worth of experience in a lesser time are under the legal drinking age (the one thing that state legislatures generally get right).] What are you talking about ???
Posted by Energy User at 8:26PM CST 12/08/09
Energy User -- OK, I'll be blunt. If you haven't tested these engines for years on E15, you have no business saying you know that the parts won't corrode due to long-term usage. The ethanol industry is perfectly willing to risk other people's engines, but they are not willing to cover the engine damage if they are wrong -- Just as they haven't covered the damage to lawnmowers and boats.
Posted by Marcus Anonymous at 9:47PM CST 12/08/09
Marcus - lawnmowers and boats??? Is there documentation to prove it was the ethanol? More likely a lack of maintenance and a dirty fuel tank which ethanol cleaned out for them and plugged up the carb. E-10 ethanol has been available at the pump for 25 years now and I still haven't seen a viable reason for not using it in any vehicle, with proper maintenance. E-15 will be voluntary not required, and I don't forsee any issue using it either, with proper maintenance - no reason to "end the great experiment in biofuels".
Posted by Energy User at 8:56AM CST 12/09/09
Post a Blog Comment:
Your Comment:
Post Comment
DTN reserves the right to delete comments posted to any of our blogs and forums, for reasons including profanity, libel, irrelevant personal attacks and advertisements.