Federal Appeals Court Blocks EPA's Cellulosic Ethanol Target
January 29, 2013 3:33 PM
comment(s) - last by
Court argues that goal is simply too unrealistic
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) has pushed aggressively in recent years to promote advanced fuels such as recycled waste oil (biodiesel) and cellulosic ethanol. It also has pushed unpopular corn ethanol,
a food-crop based biofuel
, on the consumer market.
I. EPA Mandate Dealt a Blow
The EPA's weapon to push fuels is its ability to set blending targets that fuel distributors have to meet or risk fines. In recent months the EPA has been under fire for its
efforts to enforce an E-15
(15 percent corn ethanol) blending target. However, in U.S. Appeals Court of the D.C. Circuit, it was the other half of its initiatives -- the advanced biofuels blending targets -- that were on the chopping block.
The Appeals Court ruled this week that the EPA's blending targets for a particular type of advanced biofuel --
-- were simply infeasible. The EPA had demanded that between 2010 and 2012,
20 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol
be produced. But to date almost no cellulosic ethanol has been blended into commercial fuel, and cellulosic ethanol startups have been unable to provide significant stock to blenders.
The EPA claims it has the authority to enforce blends based on the
2007 Energy Act
passed under the Bush Administration, which promoted biofuels (and corn ethanol) growth.
But the Appeals court
[PDF] that argument calling the decision to enforce targets on refiners -- customers of the fuel producers -- rather than the producers themselves as a bizarre and unprecedented government effort.
A Federal Appeals Court has banned the EPA from enforcing cellulosic ethanol blending targets.
[Image Source: Free Enterprise]
The three-judge panel writes, "We are not convinced that Congress meant for E.P.A. to let that intent color its work as a predictor, to let the wish be father to the thought. ...Apart from their role as captive consumers, the refiners are in no position to ensure, or even contribute to, growth in the cellulosic biofuel industry ... [The EPA's message was essentially], 'Do a good job, cellulosic fuel producers. If you fail, we’ll fine your customers.'"
A key fuel industry figure,
American Petroleum Institute
’s director for downstream and industry operations, cheered the ruling, telling
The New York Times
, "There is no onus or accountability on the person who is producing the fuel. They’re incentivized to pump up their projections via press release, and make rosy estimates because there’s no skin off their back if they fail to hit those."
II. Cellulosic Ethanol Damaged, But Not Dead, Other Biofuels Remain Intact
But the court stopped short of handing the refiners (blenders) a total victory. It still left targets regarding biodiesel from fat, waste oil, soybean oil, or other sources intact. It also left targets for sugarcane ethanol -- regarded as another "advanced" biofuel -- intact.
Renewable Fuel Association
(RFA), while disappointed about the cellulosic ethanol rejection, praised the court for not adopting a broader rollback, while defending the EPA's estimates. The RFA
, "The EPA did not determine a reasonably achievable volume and then inflate it. Rather, it set the volume based on the best information available to it at the time."
Cellulosic ethanol remains an interesting idea. Unlike food crop ethanol, it doesn't put pressure on food prices. It in theory would
bolster U.S. energy security
, while minimizing the importance of oil producing states, many of which are hostile to the U.S. And by repurposing carbon-containing waste instead of burning fossil fuels, cellulosic ethanol would cut carbon emissions (versus corn-ethanol which has been
shown to increase net carbon emissions
, compared to petroleum).
Cellulose forms the "woody" component in most plant leaves and stems. It is harder to break down than "sugarier" plant carbohydrates. [Image Source: CUNY]
Two cellulosic ethanol startups -- Inios Bio and KiOR -- claim to be "near" commercial production, after tens of millions in startup capital. But neither company has a working commercial scale plant yet.
Other cellulosic ethanol companies --
such as Coskata
, which General Motors Comp. (
) backed pre-bankruptcy -- are still floating around,
showcasing "semi-commercial" scale
plants. But compared to the ambitious claims of a few years back, it would certainly seem such firms have lost a degree of their momentum.
Federal Appeals Court
Renewable Fuels Association [reaction]
The New York Times
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Regarding advanced biofuels
1/31/2013 11:35:04 AM
I'm going to provide a link to a WSJ article about importing the "advanced biofuel" produced from sugar cane, and corn based ethanol producers concerns about the current RFS. It should be noted that there is a subsidy for advanced biofuels. The subsidy is not mentioned in the article and it's not totally clear if imported ethanol is eligible for the subsidy, but I suspect it is. It's possible that US taxpayers are subsidizing imported ethanol. The blender credit for corn based ethanol has expired.
If some imaginary indirect land use factor were not used in the advanced biofuel calculation for corn based ethanol, it would also be an advanced biofuel. If corn based ethanol distillers grains were using biomass instead of fracked natural gas in the distillation process it would be an advanced biofuel. It's ironic that if some supposed ground cleared to produce sugar cane ethanol (indirect land use) were not used in the advanced biofuel calculation for corn, corn would be an advanced biofuel. If the distiller grain by product that remains after the starch in corn is converted to sugar in the distillation process of corn based ethanol would be given credit for retaining a large percentage of the food and feed value of raw corn, it might be considered an advanced biofuel.
A look at RFS issues:
It should be noted that the volume of ethanol produced from corn has basically reached it's limit as outlined in the RFS.
"We can't expect users to use common sense. That would eliminate the need for all sorts of legislation, committees, oversight and lawyers." -- Christopher Jennings
EPA Clears the Way for E15 Fuel at Local Gas Stations
June 19, 2012, 9:34 AM
EPA Silently Continues Support for Corn Ethanol, Bumping Target for 2012
December 30, 2011, 1:56 PM
EPA Drastically Cuts Cellulosic Ethanol Requirement in Fuel for 2012
June 22, 2011, 11:50 AM
FedEx CEO: "Addiction" to Foreign Oil is Costing the Economy, American Lives
May 20, 2011, 8:37 AM
Study: Corn Ethanol Increases Global Warming, Grass Ethanol Fights It
December 8, 2008, 8:45 AM
Automaker Porsche may expand range of Panamera Coupe design.
September 18, 2016, 11:00 AM
Uber - Everyone's Autonomous Car Driver?
August 20, 2016, 6:01 AM
Volkswagens Vulnerable to Hacking Attacks
August 14, 2016, 1:08 PM
2017 Porsche Panamera: I’ll Take Three of These.
July 24, 2016, 6:44 PM
Ford, Toyota, and Universal Pictures Celebrate "Back to the Future Day' in Style
October 21, 2015, 4:19 PM
Consumer Reports Flexes Muscle, Hits Slumping Tesla Motors Stock
October 20, 2015, 4:13 PM
Most Popular Articles
Are you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
Snapchat’s New Sunglasses are a Spectacle – No Pun Intended
September 24, 2016, 9:02 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
Latest Blog Posts
Are farm children less likely to have allergies and asthma in adulthood?
Sep 30, 2016, 5:00 AM
MH 17 shot down by missile 'brought from Russia' into Ukraine's rebel territory
Sep 29, 2016, 5:00 PM
Burlington Gun Attack
Sep 27, 2016, 5:00 AM
Who is in Risk of Getting Oral Cancer?
Sep 23, 2016, 6:02 AM
France Bans Plastic Eating Utensils in Restaurants
Sep 18, 2016, 10:49 AM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information