EPA rejects ethanol waiver request
 

EPA rejects ethanol waiver request

Environmental agency says it will not curtail the government's ethanol production requirement despite request by Texas Gov. Rick Perry.

By David Goldman, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: August 7, 2008: 3:59 PM EDT

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday it will not curtail a rule requiring that ethanol be added to gasoline, turning back a claim that the additive was artificially raising food prices.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry petitioned the EPA in late April to grant a 50% waiver on the nation's Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), which calls for 9 billion gallons of corn-based ethanol to be added to gasoline supplies this year.

"I am greatly disappointed with the EPA's inability to look past the good intentions of this policy to see the significant harm it is doing to farmers, ranchers and American households," said Perry in a statement. "For the EPA to assert that this federal mandate is not affecting food prices not only goes against common sense, but every American's grocery bill."

After a weeks-long delay in its ruling, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson said the government agency denied the waiver request because it did not find that the RFS caused "severe economic harm."

"The EPA's professional staff conducted a detailed analysis ... and found that the Renewable Fuel Standard mandate is not causing severe economic harm, but rather strengthening the nation's energy security and farm communities," Johnson said on a conference call with reporters.

The EPA held a period of public comment about the standard in June and received over 15,000 comments, according to the government body. Though many came out in favor of the standard, others said the RFS will contribute to a sharp rise in food prices if not reduced.

"Rising food prices are a problem, and as a nation we must work together on these challenges," said Johnson. "But is that the result of the RFS mandate, and are those price increases meeting the statutory requirement of severe detriment to the economy? That answer is no."

The EPA acknowledged that the RFS has resulted in a rise in corn feed prices, but said the mandate has only added 7 cents to each bushel.

But Gov. Perry said the RFS has put undue pressure on the already struggling livestock business.

"Denying Texas' request is a mistake that will only increase the already heavy financial burden on families while doing even more harm to the livestock industry," said Perry. "Any government mandate that artificially props-up a single industry to the detriment of millions of Americans is bad public policy."

Good intentions harming economy?
The EPA currently requires that 7.76% of gasoline products be blended with ethanol in 2008. That amounts to about 9 billion gallons that U.S. ethanol producers have to put out this year. Next year, they will have to produce 11.1 billion gallons of corn-based ethanol.

"The RFS is designed to expand annual biofuel use to 36 billion gallons by 2022 with 21 billion gallons from switch grass, wood chips, municipal garbage, and other cellulosic sources," said Renewable Fuels Association President Bob Dinneen in a statement. "We applaud the EPA for keeping America squarely on the path toward greater energy independence."

But Perry said the EPA is missing a chance to help American families who have unintentionally been hurt by the EPA's mandate.

"Good intentions and laudable goals are small compensation to the families, farmers and ranchers who are being hurt by the federal government's efforts to trade food for fuel," said Perry. "Congress specifically created an emergency waiver provision for situations like these and EPA refuses to implement it."

The EPA had originally said it would make a decision on the waiver by July 24, but last month said it needed more time to review the comments and consult with the departments of Agriculture and Energy.

First Published: August 7, 2008: 12:17 PM EDT

they still cant get it right.

The EPA the biggest waste of American Tax payer money.

no, EPA is worthy. CAFE on the other hand

I would really like to see the information they have.

I could be just me but it seems that more often the connection between food prices and corn ethanol is being refuted...

:iono:

it's inefficient and a waste of time. We have plent of oil in our own ground we don't need to be trying a bullshit way to make fuel so farmer can swap crops just so they can get more subsidies. It is effecting the price of food, not just here but in 3rd world countries where we send grains.

Hopefully they will come up with other ways to make ethanol other than using our food crops and hopefully soon. Current ethanol regulation is just another example of why the goverment should stay out of the markets. Everytime they get involved it is a disaster. And the only people trying to con us into thinking there is no corelation between rising food prices and ethanol are the same people who are lining their pockets with money as well as those who have a dog in the ethanol scam.

The other joke about ethanol is that because of the additional ethanol production mandated by the goverment it has driven up the costs of corn, which has in turn driven up the costs of ethanol beyond the point now that makes it worth buying. It has gone from $2.29 up to $3.00 while at the same time gas is coming down. Because of this I have stopped buying ethonal and just started buying gas again especially since I get much better MPG's with gas.

Good for them...now, on to more important things.
(I don't know...like drilling, other alt. energy sources, and an actual energy policy??!)

How does an increased market (and slightly increased price) for corn hurt farmers? Last time I checked they grew the corn and either sold it or fed it to livestock.

As for ethanol in general, I disagree with corn based production simply because its too ineffcient. Also, isn't E20 (or close to it) supposed to be in some sort of sweet spot where it reduces cost and increases mileage? If so stations should ditch e10 and half of them should switch to E20.

WHY DOES MY STATE KEEP ELECTING MORONS FOR GOVERNOR?

1st George W. Bush and now Gov 'Goodhair'.

I'm moving to Canadia as soon as I can find a spot that has 7 months of Summer like here.

Summer is as long as you want it to be. I count summer as 'time when I can wear shorts' or 'weather above 15C' (thats about 60 for you)

Heres your energy policy. Hope you have some time.

http://www.npchardtruthsreport.org/