EnergyWashington Week, staff
Published February 18, 2009
Livestock producers and several environmental groups are ramping up their opposition to ethanol, with the livestock sector outlining a slew of strict conditions to be met before EPA increases the amount of ethanol it permits in gasoline, and activists detailing their plan to roll back the United State's existing ethanol mandate.
A coalition of 10 livestock and grocery groups Feb. 2 sent a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging her to oppose the biofuel industry's push to increase the amount of ethanol allowed in gasoline above 10 percent up to 12 percent ethanol (E12) or more. The industry coalition says that before the agency could grant such an increase it wants to see that a host of scientific and policy goals are met.
The groups -- who oppose higher ethanol because they say corn diverted to fuel has raised prices for animal feed and groceries -- say EPA should only consider raising the ethanol blend after: cellulosic and advanced biofuels are commercially available throughout the nation, Congress has phased out the nation's tariff on ethanol imports and, EPA has conducted a rulemaking process, including a 180-day public comment period, on the proposed change. "Our organizations strongly oppose proposals to increase the level at which ethanol can be blended into motor gasoline and we urge you to subject these proposals to the most careful analysis," according to letter from the coalition, which includes the National Chicken Council, the National Pork Producers Council, the Grocery Manufacturers Association and the National Restaurant Association.
In addition, the groups ask that EPA hold off on approving higher ethanol blends until several ongoing agency policy efforts are completed, including EPA's greenhouse gas lifecycle analysis required by the 2007 energy law, an ongoing EPA and energy department assessment of the impact of mid-level blends on engines, and a National Academy of Sciences study of the impact of the renewable fuel standard (RFS) that the 2007 energy law mandated the academy release this spring.
A source familiar with the letter says the groups could theoretically support blends above 10 percent ethanol, but only after the extensive list of conditions in the letter are met.
The letter was sent just days before the Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the department was in discussions with EPA about raising the ethanol blend level as a short term way to boost the ethanol industry, which has suffered recently due to lack of demand. "I do think it's important for us to look for strategies to make sure the infrastructure of the ethanol industry is preserved, because it is a key component to this new energy future the president's laid out," Vilsack said in a Feb. 6 interview with Bloomberg News.
The biofuels industry has long sought to raise EPA's standard above 10 percent due to fears that the standard will stymie demand for the fuel, causing a glut and crashing prices. Industry officials have recently launched a campaign arguing that E10 acts as a "regulatory cap" on demand.
Meanwhile, a coalition of environmental groups are also ramping up their opposition to the Obama administration's support for the ethanol sector.
The Clean Air Task Force, the Environmental Working Group, Friends of the Earth, the Network for New Energy Choices and the New York Public Interest Research Group, Feb. 11 released their platform on the issue of ethanol, which argues that the nation's renewable fuel policy is not achieving its stated environmental and energy independence goals, and argues to reduce the ethanol mandate.
The groups say their concerns extend beyond corn ethanol because advanced biofuels "can cause the same adverse environmental impacts as conventional ones, while also presenting new dangers, such as those associated with synthetic biology."
The nation's biofuel policy must be revamped, the groups say, to ensure that all renewable fuels policy initiatives require attainment of environmental performance standards, including water, soil, air and habitat quality, in addition to the the climate standards that are already mandated by the 2007 energy law.
The RFS should be capped at 9 billion gallons, compared to the existing 36 billion gallon mandate, and should include feedstock- and technology-neutral environmental performance standards. The standard should also include authority to reduce the mandate to mitigate unintended adverse effects, the groups say.
The biofuels tax credit for blenders should be phased out at the same time that tax credits linked to environmental and health standards are phased in, the groups say. The nation's investments in renewable energy should be recalibrated so that it does not favor corn ethanol, and the government should support research of the impact of biofuels on non-climate environmental resources, commodity prices and other social factors, the groups say in their platform.
However, the biofuels industry is rebutting the opposition from environmentalists and the livestock industry. "This is simply another effort repackage the same stale unfounded rhetoric that the Environmental Working Group and its cohorts in the big food and meat processing industries have been espousing for months," the Renewable Fuels Association said in a Feb. 11 statement.
The industry group says environmentalists' arguments that ethanol increases GHG emissions ignores recent studies the group says show ethanol can reduce GHG emissions by up to 59 percent. The group also argues it is unfair for activists to criticize ethanol subsidies without criticizing government subsidies for the oil, nuclear and coal industries.
