SHU T T ERSTO CK
GOVERNMENT & POLICY
the renewable fuel target set by EISA may not be possible without increasing the ethanol level in gasoline. According to the Department of Energy, the U.S. consumed just over 13 billion gal of fuel ethanol in 2010. So unless the blend level increases, “there is no way we will ever meet the goal of 36 billion gallons by 2022,” Christopher Thorne, Growth Energy’s director of public affairs, states. To get the U.S. closer to meeting the EISA goal, Growth Energy submitted its petition for a waiver under the Clean Air Act for a higher blend of ethanol in gasoline.
NOT IN THIS ENGINE
Lawn mowers, snowmobiles, and boats are among motorized equipment that can’t accept E15.
E15 CONTROVERSY Proposed shift to HIGHER ETHANOL-BLENDED GASOLINE draws questions from industry, activist groups, and Congress RAJENDRANI MUKHOPADHYAY, C&EN WASHINGTON
SOMEDAY, WHEN drivers pull into the
gas station to fill their tanks, the little label on the gas pump that currently says “E10” may say “E15.” That’s because the Environmental Protection Agency has approved a change in gasoline blend—allowing the percent of ethanol in fuel for certain types of vehicles to increase from 10% ethanol to as much as 15%. But the proposed shift from E10 gasoline, which now makes up more than 90% of the U.S. gasoline market, to E15 has several industries, organizations, and even some members of Congress in an uproar. The worries range from what this change will do to vehicle performance to how an increase in demand for corn—from which much of the ethanol is derived—will affect the agricultural and livestock sectors. Trade groups and some environmental groups have also raised questions about the data EPA used in deciding to raise the ethanol level. “Engines are not made for” E15, states Charles T. Drevna, president of the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA), an industry trade group. “You’re going to be putting consumers at risk.” The seed of the uproar was sown in 2009 when Growth Energy, an organization that represents U.S. fuel ethanol supporters, and 54 ethanol manufacturers applied for a waiver under the Clean Air Act to increase the level of ethanol in fuels from 10% to
15%. The Clean Air Act prohibits the sale of fuels or fuel additives that don’t closely match those used to certify vehicles and engines for emission standards. The prohibition is in place to protect the emission control systems of vehicles and engines. Ethanol is an oxygenate that improves combustion and reduces tailpipe exhaust emissions, so blended gasoline differs from the fuel used to certify standards, thus requiring a waiver to be obtained from EPA for its use. E10 was granted such a waiver under the Clean Air Act more than 30 years ago. What led Growth Energy to apply for the waiver was a piece of legislation that was passed by Congress in 2007 and signed into law by President George W. Bush late that year. That legislation, the Energy Independence & Security Act (EISA), expanded the federal Renewable Fuel Standard program to reduce petroleum imports and greenhouse gas emissions. One of the provisions of the law calls for the volume of renewable fuels in the transportation infrastructure to be 36 billion gal by 2022. In 2007, 4.7 billion gal of biofuel was added to gasoline. Growth Energy realized that achieving
MEANWHILE, EISA had prompted DOE in
2008 to begin testing various ethanol-gasoline blends, ranging from E0 to E20, in vehicles. “We were on a fact-finding mission” to see if the existing U.S. fleet of vehicles could accept a blend higher than E10, explains Patrick Davis, the program manager of vehicle technologies at DOE. He says the agency got input from various stakeholders, such as EPA, automakers, and fuel providers, to develop its test program. A large portion of the program looked at how tailpipe emissions would change when vehicles ran on a gasoline-ethanol blend over their full useful life—measured in terms of miles, where the end point is 120,000 miles on the odometer. In October 2010, largely on the basis of DOE’s data, EPA partially granted Growth Energy’s waiver request. The partial waiver initially let fuel and fuel additive manufacturers introduce E15 for use in light-duty motor vehicles made in 2007 or later. After more DOE test data became available, EPA extended the waiver earlier this year to cars, sport-utility vehicles, and light-duty trucks made in 2001 or later. A number of steps must be taken at the federal and state level before E15 can show up at gas stations. But several industries and organizations aren’t waiting for that to happen and have already taken action against EPA. NPRA, the Grocery Manufacturers Association, the National Chicken Council, and the Outdoor Power Equipment Insti-
“We believe [EPA] made this decision based on politics rather than on science and technology.” WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
26
AUGUST 1 5, 20 1 1
nents is misfueling. Because motor vehicles made before 2001—motorcycles, boats, snowmobiles, school buses, delivery trucks, and off-road equipment—can’t use E15, EPA issued regulations last month to reduce the potential for those engines to be misfueled. The regulations include a label that would alert consumers at E15 gas pumps to check if their engine is compatible with the blend. The black and orange label, with the word “Attention” across a corner, has not allayed misfueling concerns. “A lot of people simply may not read the label because the label isn’t alarming in any way,” Karpf says. “If somebody is in a hurry at the gas station and DAVIS SAYS that criticism isn’t true. Aldoesn’t actually see the label, they may put though a significant portion of DOE’s test E15 in a small engine, like a lawn mower or a program looked at emissions from vehicles chain saw, and cause that engine to fail.” using higher ethanol blends, other parts But Thorne claims the label is acceptof the program considered factors such as able. “It’s strictly educational, which the effects of the blends on vehicle parts should be the intent of the label. It informs and whether the fuels affected the driving the motorist at the pump what they are experience. “We did go reaching for, which is all it beyond just the emisshould do.” sion control systems,” EPA is also getting an earful Davis says. about E15 from Congress. A Thorne also disputes House of Representatives Scithe claim that EPA had ence, Space & Technology subinsufficient data. “This committee held a hearing last was the most rigorous month on E15 use. Representatesting of a Clean Air tives from the American PetroAct petition in the hisleum Institute, National Chicktory of the Clean Air en Council, Outdoor Power HEADS UP EPA’s proposed Act,” he says. “There are label for E15 has critics Equipment Institute, and other worried that it won’t effectively organizations testified against 11 previously approved grab the consumer’s attention the increase in ethanol. They waivers. None had been at the gas pump. tested as rigorously as” raised the misfueling concern the one for E15. as well as a fear that livestock Sheila Karpf, a legislafeed prices would go up if more tive and policy analyst with the Environcorn is shunted into making ethanol. mental Working Group (EWG), an activist Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), group, says this is a rare case where the vice chairman of the full committee, disorganization has broken ranks with EPA. played responses he received to a letter he “Normally, we support EPA in regulating sent to 14 U.S. automakers asking how E15 chemicals and air pollutants, but in this would affect their vehicles. The automakers, instance, we believe EPA made the wrong including Honda and Volvo, expressed condecision,” she says. cerns that their vehicles would wear more Karpf agrees with Drevna that the tests quickly from E15 and warned that using the on the vehicles were incomplete; she also blend in their cars would void warranties. says the tests didn’t look into the effects of “While Congress has recognized that having higher blends of ethanol in the gas subsidizing the ethanol industry simply pumps and other pieces of equipment in props up an inferior product and holds the fuel distribution system. EWG is worback our energy policy, the EPA is obstiried that higher blends of ethanol may cornately pursuing its own political agenda. rode the underground fuel storage tanks This decision came at the request of the and cause groundwater contamination, a ethanol lobby, but it will cost Americans point that Thorne dismisses. According to dearly,” Sensenbrenner said in a statement. him, E15 is not harsh enough to cause unThe growing presence of the U.S. ethaderground storage tanks to crumble. nol lobby also has E15 opponents particuAnother general concern of E15 oppolarly troubled. “Right now, most of the EPA
tute are among the organizations that have sued the agency to block introduction of E15. Their concerns are that EPA relied on inadequate data to make its decision and that the agency took insufficient steps to ensure that consumers don’t attempt to use E15 in engines that are incompatible with E15, a practice called misfueling. “We believe [EPA] made this decision based on politics rather than on science and technology,” NPRA’s Drevna states. He says the tests EPA looked at didn’t consider the full automobile, only the exhaust emissions, which is what the Clean Air Act cares about.
WWW.CEN-ONLINE.ORG
27
AUGUST 1 5, 20 1 1
ethanol in the U.S. is made from corn ethanol. We have a lot of problems with corn being used for ethanol,” Karpf says, adding that growing corn has other environmental consequences. The way forward, Karpf says, is to adopt biofuels other than corn ethanol that have better environmental impacts. However, these biofuels are still in the R&D stage and are not commercially available (see page 10). Drevna says his group will be asking Congress to reconsider EISA because it’s placing a heavy burden on fuel refiners in trying to meet its requirements. “We’re not opposed to ethanol. Ethanol is a valuable blend stock for gasoline,” he says, “up to a point.” Thorne says the stated concerns over E15, especially the misfueling issue, are simply scare tactics. He says the U.S. has previously gone through fuel changes without fuss, citing the move in the 1990s from leaded to unleaded gasoline as an example. Thorne says by requesting the E15 waiver, ethanol producers are asking for a chance to compete in the fuel marketplace, where he is confident that consumers will happily pump higher blends of ethanol. ◾
