Law mandating ethanol use 2016

The standards we are proposing for 20 in particular would drive growth in renewable fuels by providing appropriate incentives to overcome current constraints and challenges to further the goals of Congress in establishing the RFS program.The approach we propose taking for 20 is forward-looking and consistent with the purpose of the statute to significantly increase the amount of renewable fuel used as transportation fuel over time, particularly renewable fuels with the lowest lifecycle GHG emissions, in the transportation fuel supply." (p.7) It is particularly striking that the EPA claims the proposed ethanol mandates are high enough to require levels of ethanol use beyond the E10 blend wall or the use of significantly more non-ethanol biofuels. The purpose of today's article is to examine whether this claim by the EPA is supported by the data.The federal Energy Information Agency reported that 10 percent of 143 billion gallons of gasoline came from ethanol in 2016. While adding ethanol means burning fewer fossil fuels, the study found that the benefits were lost as even larger amounts of carbon held in the soil were released into the atmosphere in newly cultivated farm fields.The study shows the unintended consequences of a federal policy meant to reduce U. The researchers used satellite images and other data to identify landscape changes over time and used computer modeling to estimate the carbon that had been stored in soil. The Renewable Fuels Association, based in Washington, D. Lark, two graduate students in the department of geography, and the project’s principal investigator, Holly K. The ethanol mandate has been controversial, with critics saying it has led to higher food prices and has spurred pollution by uprooting idle land into crops that require fertilizer and increased energy consumption to produce and refine the crops as a fuel additive. Many pro-ethanol groups say ethanol has been a boon to farm income.In addition, the renewable portion of the mandate can also be satisfied with discretionary blending of advanced biofuels, so we refer to the renewable mandate as an implied mandate.Cellulosic biofuels have been in very limited supply, so the EPA has written down the cellulosic mandate to very low levels relative to statutory levels each year.This is the "push" that was implicit in the RFS standards when passed by the U. More specifically, we review the methodology used by the EPA to formulate the ethanol mandates for 2014-2016 and then analyze whether the proposed mandates are likely to provide incentives for ethanol use beyond the E10 blend wall or significantly higher use of non-ethanol biofuels.

Criticism from ethanol supporters was swift and severe. " farmdoc daily (5):102, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, June 3, 2015. Good "The EPA's Proposed Ethanol Mandates for 2014, 2015, and 2016: Is There a 'Push' or Not?The biodiesel mandate was established as a minimum of one billion gallons per year from 2012 through 2022, with larger amounts subject to EPA approval.The proposed standards announced by the EPA on May 29 are compared to statutory mandate levels in Table 1.

Leave a Reply