Ethanol Blog
Todd Neeley DTN Staff Reporter

Tuesday 07/27/10
Ethanol, Agriculture Groups Push for E12

The American Coalition for Ethanol, National Corn Growers Association and the Renewable Fuels Association asked U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson to approve the use of E12, Cattle Network in Lenexa, Kan., said, as the industry bumps up against the blend wall waiting for pending EPA approval of E15. The blend wall is where production exceeds market demand.

In a letter to Jackson the groups said "based on the EPA's delay in acting upon the full E15 waiver and on our concerns that the agency will restrict the use of E15 to cars made in 2001 and thereafter, we encourage the EPA to formally approve the use of E12 for all motor vehicles as an immediate interim step pending any ongoing additional testing on E15."

The groups said "EPA must provide a practical and workable solution to the ethanol blend wall issue and do so soon."

The groups' letter reviewed previous EPA findings, policy positions and research to demonstrate the reasonableness of approving E12 for use in the nation's automobile and light truck fleet.

Because federal law states that E12 is "substantially similar" to E10, moving to E12 would not require the same regulatory hoops that E15 does.

(Cattle Network, July 26, 2010)

(http://www.cattlenetwork.com/…)

DTN: In response to the groups' request of the EPA to approve E12, ethanol advocacy group Growth Energy issued a statement indicating the group has already asked EPA to approve E12 or E13. "Growth Energy's Green Jobs Waiver follows the statutory requirements of the law and contained more science supporting E15 than any waiver in the history of the Clean Air Act," Growth Energy CEO Tom Buis said in a statement. "In that waiver, which was filed more than a year ago, we said that the EPA was free to use the data assembled in the waiver to support an immediate increase to E12 or E13 while studying the merits and data relative to the 211(f)(4) waiver up to E15." Buis goes on his statement to say EPA has made "unnecessary delays" on the E15 waiver. (Todd Neeley)
Posted at 10:21AM CDT 07/27/10 by Todd Neeley
Comments (3)
E12 E13 should be a no brainer for the EPA to approve. I know that Big Oil is lobbying hard to keep ethanol from displacing their dirty gasoline but come on! The fact is ALL cars run extremely well on mixes up to E50! Blender pumps should be the standard at all gasoline stations...the driver should be able to choose the amount of clean burning ethanol they want (from E10 to E95 and any amount in between). This can be easily done and most motorists would be choosing around the E40 to E60 blend because that is the range where today's vehicles get the best mpg & power. I use only E85 or higher in my vehicles because of the much cooler combustion temperature (alcohol burns at 1000deg F vs 1400deg F for gasoline) which translates to much lower maintenance costs, much lower emmisions, and I only lose about 8-10% in mpg while usually buying E85 for 15-25% less than regular gasoline! Moreover, next generation Flex Fuel vehicles will get better mpg on E85 and higher blends than vehicles running gasoline only.
Posted by Patrick Reid at 11:16PM CDT 07/27/10
The key to success is talking to our city friends and having them contact Congress as well. This is all about money and votes.
Posted by Pat o'Regan at 9:22AM CDT 07/28/10
EPA isn't interested in E-12, E-13, E-15 or any other E-__ for that matter. The purpose of the current extensive, exhaustive testing of E-15 seems to be to hold up corn ethanol’s progress. Where I live we have gone from E-0 to E-10 over the last 4 months. Guess what no problems that I am aware of. But to add a couple more percent ethanol, are you crazy, that "might" change the whole world. What a joke, and we're paying for the EPA with our taxes. Vote this November, and really change the world.
Posted by Thomas Blazek at 12:02PM CDT 07/28/10
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.