EPA Sets Lower 2013 Cellulosic Ethanol Use Requirement
Earlier this week, the Environmental Protection Agency put in place 2013 requirements for cellulosic ethanol for automotive use in the United States at 810,000 gallons, an amount far short of the 1 billion gallons Congress desired seven years earlier when the Renewable Fuel Standard Act came into force.
The Detroit News reports production of the fuel has fallen short of expectations, prompting the agency to set required production for 2013 to what was actually produced “due to the reduced estimate of anticipated cellulosic biofuel production in 2013 that was announced shortly after EPA signed its final rule by one of two companies expected to produce cellulosic biofuel in 2013.”
The reduction comes on the heels of a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in favor of the American Petroleum Institute, stating the EPA had overstepped its authority by mandating refiners buy more fuel — 17 million gallons for this year alone — than what was produced. API official Bob Greco applauded the decision, calling upon the agency to base future mandates on reality instead of prognostication:
EPA should base its cellulosic mandates on actual production rather than projections that — year after year — have fallen far short of reality. For four years running, biofuel producers have promised high cellulosic ethanol production that hasn’t happened. EPA must also reconsider its unrealistic proposal to mandate 17 million gallons of cellulosic biofuels for 2014.
Despite lower production numbers and delays in bringing ethanol refineries online, the Obama administration is pushing ahead with the RFS, which requires 21 billion gallons of biofuel — including 16 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol — to be in use annually as a way to wean the nation’s dependency on foreign oil resources.
Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.
More by Cameron Aubernon
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- SCE to AUX How well does the rear camera work in the rain and snow?
- MaintenanceCosts The Truth About Isuzu Troopers!
- Jalop1991 MC's silence in this thread is absolutely deafening.
- MaintenanceCosts Spent some time last summer with a slightly older Expedition Max with about 100k miles on the clock, borrowed from a friend for a Colorado mountain trip.It worked pretty well on the trip we used it for. The EcoBoost in this fairly high state of tune has a freight train feeling and just keeps pulling even way up at 12k ft. There is unending space inside; at one point we had six adults, two children, and several people's worth of luggage inside, with room left over. It was comfortable to ride in and well-equipped.But it is huge. My wife refused to drive it because she couldn't get comfortable with the size. I used to be a professional bus driver and it reminded me quite a bit of driving a bus. It was longer than quite a few parking spots. Fortunately, the trip didn't involve anything more urban than Denver suburbs, so the size didn't cause any real problems, but it reminded me that I don't really want such a behemoth as a daily driver.
- Jalop1991 It seems to me this opens GM to start substituting parts and making changes without telling anyone, AND without breaking any agreements with Allison. Or does no one remember Ignitionswitchgate?At the core of the problem is a part in the vehicle's ignition switch that is 1.6 millimeters less "springy" than it should be. Because this part produces weaker tension, ignition keys in the cars may turn off the engine if shaken just the right way...2001: GM detects the defect during pre-production testing of the Saturn Ion.2003: A service technician closes an inquiry into a stalling Saturn Ion after changing the key ring and noticing the problem was fixed.2004: GM recognizes the defect again as the Chevrolet Cobalt replaces the Cavalier.fast forward through the denials, driver deaths, and government bailouts2012: GM identifies four crashes and four corresponding fatalities (all involving 2004 Saturn Ions) along with six other injuries from four other crashes attributable to the defect.Sept. 4, 2012: GM reports August 2012 sales were up 10 percent from the previous year, with Chevrolet passenger car sales up 25 percent.June 2013: A deposition by a Cobalt program engineer says the company made a "business decision not to fix this problem," raising questions of whether GM consciously decided to launch the Cobalt despite knowing of a defect.Dec. 9, 2013: Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew announces the government had sold the last of what was previously a 60 percent stake in GM, ending the bailout. The bailout had cost taxpayers $10 billion on a $49.5 billion investment.End of 2013: GM determines that the faulty ignition switch is to blame for at least 31 crashes and 13 deaths.It took over 10 years for GM to admit fault.And all because an engineer decided to trim a pin by tenths of a millimeter, without testing and without getting anyone else's approval.Fast forward to 2026, and the Allison name is no longer affiliated with the transmissions. You do the math.
Comments
Join the conversation
I actually wonder if we will see this with CAFE standards eventually. When the goal is set impossibly high, and people don't want to buy a Golf sized car with a million fuel saving doo-dads attached that cost $60k and break at 50k miles, maybe the epa will back off. Unfortunately by that time how many billions or trillions of wasted dollars will have been lost, or companies that have gone under chasing uneconomic goals? Maybe it won't matter because we will just make the public pay for it... Or just print the money?
I don't really mind incentives for cellulosic ethanol. I do have a problem with ethanol from corn. I'm a bit surprised no one has mentioned the fight over E15. I personally believe that isn't about emissions/pollution, but rather an outlet to dump more ethanol into the market. Mandates for making & using more ethanol mean it has to go somewhere, and since E85 hasn't caught on, E15 would be that channel. Regardless of mandates, I strongly believe that the regions that produce ethanol should be the primary markets for it, e.g., use it for farm machinery. (Another example is Coors. They use non-food grade, waste grain products to make ethanol. They--and their neighbors--should acquire equipment that runs specifically on that ethanol.) I believe if E85 is going to exist, it should be used in high compression ratio engines designed to run on only that fuel instead of being flex fuel. Concentrating its use would better justify manufacturing such engines. If people believe ethanol can be a significant part of our energy portfolio, then demonstrate it locally rather than across the whole nation.