The Office of Management and Budget has on its 2018 unified agenda for the proposed REGS rule to be finalized by the end of the year. If finalized, it would ban E16 and higher blends and would ensure that E15 is the ceiling until new certification fuel or sub-sim waiver is granted. The REGS Rule or Renewables Enhancement and Growth Support Rule would codify a regulation based on EPA’s misinterpretation of a Clean Air Act provision.

Urban Air President David VanderGriend called the proposed rule yet another example of the EPA representing petroleum interests over public interest and using its unchecked rulemaking authority to suppress the ethanol industry.

UAI filed extensive comments on the REGS rule when initially introduced by the Obama Administration. In those comments, UAI argued that as of 2017, ethanol was a fuel additive already being utilized in certification. Therefore, the ethanol concentration of market fuel is no longer controlled by the sub-sim law, which only controls fuels and fuel additives that are not substantially similar what’s utilized in the certification of new vehicles. Moreover, higher ethanol blends reduce toxic compounds used to enhance octane and offer substantial savings to consumers at the pump.

“It absolutely defies logic to tell the ethanol industry that this is any kind of growth or stimulus when in fact it would cap growth and limit value,” said VanderGriend. At a time when the auto industry is supporting higher blends to provide them with much needed octane, and our own Department of Energy and National Labs have endorsed blends from 20-40%, this is nothing more than a market guarantee and giveaway to the petroleum industry.”

UAI and others note that EPA’s smokescreen of claiming this will facilitate the Flex Fuel Vehicle market is adding insult to injury. VanderGriend went on to point out that EPA has effectively killed the FFV market by phasing out incentives to automakers that they used to offset EPA certification requirements.

“We do not need FFVs to utilize higher blends of ethanol. We are demonstrating higher blends all over the country and another EPA fallacy is to suggest the burden of proof is on the ethanol industry to show these fuels do not increase emissions when they have no basis to suggest they do,” said VanderGriend.

“If this Administration considers itself a friend to domestically produced biofuels, I would hate to see what an enemy looks like. This was an Obama proposal, that in and of itself should have been cause for scrapping it. But somehow EPA found the time to send off for review this ill-advised rule and yet have not addressed the critical RVP issue.”

UAI, the Clean Fuels Development Coalition, the National Farmers Union, and several other groups were on the comments to EPA when the rule was first introduced and will consider a legal challenge if finalized.

The post EPA Set to Give Oil Another Victory at Ethanol’s Expense appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

Today, 97% of gasoline in the United States contains 10% ethanol (E10). The new data from these studies provide evidence that air quality can be significantly improved when you add more ethanol to gasoline, creating higher blends with between 15% (E15) and 30% (E30) ethanol.

*Click Here for Infograpic Related to Fuel Studies 

For example, the NCSU study compares a regular E10 gasoline bought in Raleigh, North Carolina to that same fuel with ethanol simply added, making it an E25. The E25 had a 30-40% reduction in ultrafine particulates (UFP’s), one of the most toxic emissions recorded. The E25 also reduced carbon monoxide by 15-30% and carbon emissions by up to 5%. Another positive result was that E25 had no change in NOx emissions compared to E10 using both Flex Fuel and Non Flex Fuel vehicles.

The NOx data was even better in the UCR study. It showed a 10-30% reduction in NOx. This is a key difference from EPA designed studies that show ethanol blends raise NOx, according to UAI Technical Director Steve Vander Griend.

“By simply adding ethanol to current gasoline, this testing demonstrated the benefits of ethanol as a cleaner, higher octane fuel. The fact that these studies used consumer fuels and real world driving conditions is the most accurate reflection of what happens on the road every single day. It’s this kind of science that will help give consumers more access to a healthier fuel,” said Vander Griend.

While both studies focused on what comes out of the tailpipe, the UCR study went a step further to evaluate the impact emissions have on air quality after leaving the tailpipe. Researchers found ethanol blends reduce toxic emissions by up to 50%, this includes smog and ultra-fine particulates. It also found that aromatics like benzene and toluene added to gasoline to boost octane directly raise emissions, while ethanol added to fuel decreases emissions. This study compared E10, E30 and E85 fuels and found the best results with the higher ethanol blends.

“This testing is about as real world as we can get when it comes to fuel blending and it is clear ethanol can significantly improve public health. The studies further validates the importance of splash blending, or simply adding ethanol to gasoline for fuel testing,” Vander Griend said.

The NCSU study is one of the first to look at real world fuels and real world driving conditions when evaluating tailpipe emissions. Researchers used Portable Emission Measurement System (PEMS) equipment to validate the benefits of ethanol. The data from both of these studies was presented at different workshops last month. They will both be peer reviewed and published later this year.

For more information, please email [email protected].

The post New Studies Show Ethanol Reduces Emissions and Improves Air Quality appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

The Sierra Club sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for failing to provide Congress with an anti-backsliding study and a report to Congress on the environmental effects of the Renewable Fuel Standard. Both are required by law. But the Sierra Club mistakenly alleges that EPA’s failure to provide this information has resulted in respiratory health issues for one of its members in California. Specifically, the Sierra Club blames its member’s respiratory problems on the ethanol added to motor fuel.

UAI agrees with the Sierra Club that EPA should complete the anti-backsliding study and the report to Congress. However, these documents must reflect the best available science, which demonstrates that higher levels of ethanol blending reduce harmful emissions. Urban Air Initiative filed a motion to submit the amicus curiae (or friend of the court) brief to challenge Sierra Club’s erroneous assumptions about ethanol’s health effects and Sierra Club’s constitutional standing to bring this suit.

The Sierra Club’s complaint asserts that in some places, air pollution increased due to tailpipe emissions from fuel with high ethanol content. The Urban Air Initiative’s brief says this is not true.

“The research shows that when ethanol is simply added to gasoline, the fuel only gets better and the emissions are cleaner. Studies show that ethanol either lowers or has no effect on nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. And ethanol blending significantly reduces particulate matter and its respiratory health effects,” said Urban Air Technical Director Steve Vander Griend.

“The Sierra Club should know better than to build a federal lawsuit on bad science and incorrect information,” Vander Griend said. “We should be encouraging the EPA to produce the required anti-backsliding study and report to Congress with the most recent and reliable science available. If the Sierra Club really wants to alleviate its members’ respiratory problems, it should promote ethanol blending, and combat the toxic aromatics in gasoline, like benzene and toluene, that ethanol displaces.”

Urban Air Initiative’s amicus brief asks the court to dismiss the Sierra Club’s lawsuit for lack of jurisdiction.

The post Urban Air Initiative Discredits Sierra Club’s Inaccurate Assumptions about Ethanol appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

“We commend EPA for giving this important issue of fuel economy and carbon reductions the thorough and complete evaluation it requires. This final determination opens the door for EPA to potentially remove the regulatory barriers limiting midlevel ethanol blends,” said UAI President Dave VanderGriend.

In the report released by EPA, it cites comments from the auto and ethanol industries that high-octane mid-level ethanol blends could help reduce greenhouse gas. And EPA agrees that these and other commenters have identified “promising technologies that may be able to deliver significant improvements in reducing GHG emissions once fully deployed.”

“We welcome a more comprehensive review to show high octane fuels such as ethanol can increase efficiency in not just cars of the future but in the cars on the road today. But we will also continue to point out how the EPA’s own rules are the primary obstacle to the development of high octane technologies” VanderGriend said.

The latest decision comes because the 2012 CAFE rule included an agreement by all parties to conduct a Mid Term Evaluation of the program. At the time, the ambitious standards were based on a number of assumptions such as high oil prices, significant improvements in electric vehicle technology and price and consumer preferences. The evaluation that was to have taken a year to review was rushed though before President Trump took office.

“We will continue to work with all the interested parties to share our emissions, efficiency, and health data to see if working together we can achieve these goals of cleaner fuels and efficiency,” said VanderGriend.  “That said, we will be adamant in calling on regulators to recognize that internal combustion engines will remain the primary source of propulsion. These cars can achieve significant improvement with clean, high octane fuels”.

The post Recall of CAFE Rule is Opportunity to Improve Fuel Quality appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

Dr. Dong went on to say that he believes more ethanol in the fuel supply can help prevent cancer because of its ability to replace the most carcinogenic compounds in gasoline, aromatics like benzene and toluene. Right now consumer gasoline contains at least 25% aromatics, toxins that are known for severely harming our health.  The Urban Air Initiative has known this for years and has been gathering research and raising awareness on the dangers of aromatics and how ethanol can help improve the air we breathe.

This IRFA Summit panel reinforced the work we’ve been doing and why it’s so important for consumers to have access to higher ethanol blends. Another panelist, Dr. Steffen Mueller with the Energy Resource Center at the University of Illinois-Chicago even pointed out the work Urban Air is doing to fix the MOVES Model, or Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator.  Updating the MOVES model to accurately reflect ethanol’s emission benefits will go a long way for access to higher blends.

Dr. Mueller has published several studies reinforcing the fact that ethanol reduces toxic tailpipe emissions. “Ethanol is a much better solution for fuel, it provides a dramatic difference in decreasing air toxins.”  He says the work being done by scientists and groups like Urban Air are helping move the needle with decision makers.

For instance, the EPA recently conceded there are compelling reasons to further regulate aromatics and we have not been shy to remind them they not only have the authority to do so but are also required to reduce these toxics. Provisions in the Clean Air Act direct the agency to control aromatics to the greatest degree possible. The Agency has even acknowledged that ethanol is a viable alternative. “We appreciate the work that scientists like Dr. Dong and Dr. Mueller have done to help prove ethanol’s health benefits. It’s going to take everyone working together to provide the data needed to show EPA that more accurate science exists and to start accepting it,” said Urban Air Technical Director Steve Vander Griend.

We are so glad the conversation is growing about ethanol being a cleaner and healthier fuel that protects public health. Kudos to the Iowa RFA for putting this panel together. We will continue working on the regulatory, research and education fronts to make the fuel changes needed to protect public health.

The post We Have a Health Problem with Our Fuel appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

The comments were filed in response to EPAs Request for Comment on the Reconsideration of the Final Determination of the Mid Term Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards for Model Year 2022-2025.

The Urban Air Initiative-led effort included the Clean Fuels Development Coalition, Nebraska Ethanol Board, Nebraska Ethanol Industry Coalition, Glacial Lakes Energy, Siouxland Ethanol, Prairie Horizons Agri-Energy, Little Sioux Corn Processors, South Dakota Farmers Union, and Nebraska Farmers Union.

“We commend EPA for giving this important issue of fuel economy and carbon reductions the thorough and complete evaluation it requires, and correcting the serious errors in the technical assessment issued last November,” said UAI President Dave VanderGriend.

The evaluation that was to have taken a year to review was rushed though in a matter of weeks, according to VanderGriend. “We believe a more comprehensive review, including a thorough cost benefit analysis, will show high octane fuels can increase efficiency in not just cars of the future but in the cars on the road today,” he said.

UAI notes that compared to other octane boosting compounds, ethanol has superior octane and low carbon properties. Specific recommendations included the following actions the agency can take and has the authority to do so.

-EPA Should Repeal Certification Fuel Rules that Prevent Auto Manufacturers from Building More Efficient Vehicles.

– EPA Should Repeal Its Erroneous and Outdated Interpretation of the Sub-Sim Law as Capping Ethanol Use in Existing Vehicles

– EPA Should Repeal Unnecessary RVP Regulations that Limit the Viability of E15 and
Mid-Level Ethanol Blends.

– EPA Should Repeal and Replace Its Inaccurate Fuel Economy Formula.

– EPA Should Repeal and Replace Its Rule Requiring States To Use Incorrect Emissions Estimates in Pollution Reduction Planning

According to VanderGriend, “These counterproductive regulatory barriers have prevented ethanol’s superior automotive and environmental values from driving its continued growth in the U.S. fuel market as a source of clean octane for today’s motor vehicles and the highly efficient vehicles that increased ethanol blending would enable in the near future.

The post High Octane Ethanol Blends Needed for Fuel Economy Standards appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

The EPAct Study data is what EPA used to create the MOVES Model, an emissions model that shows ethanol raises toxic emissions. The data is inaccurate and for years Urban Air has been working to update the MOVES Model to give ethanol the credit it deserves for in fact lowering toxic emissions. If left as is, States needing to use the MOVES Model to meet emissions standards will not use ethanol.

In 2015, Urban Air and the Energy Future Coalition sued EPA for failing to release FOIA documents in a timely fashion. Urban Air wanted access to the information to better understand how the test fuels were created and how much influence the oil industry had in the testing process. Previous emails provided to Urban Air shows that consultants supported by the American Petroleum Institute assisted in this process.

Urban Air believes this is a significant victory. This gives reason to hope that EPA’s new court-ordered search may turn up new documents that it must produce concerning EPA’s last-minute changes to the design of the EPAct study.

Once received and reviewed, the information could help Urban Air continue to build its case with the EPA that the EPAct study is flawed, therefore the MOVES Model needs to be changed. Urban Air Technical Director Steve Vander Griend now sits on the MOVES Model review working group and will be able to take the new details, if any to the group for discussion.

The post Judge Rules EPA to Release More Info on Test Fuels appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

While this is great and welcomed news, the ethanol industry needs to remain aware of a potential octane change. The question at hand is whether the E15 will come into the market at 87, 88, or 89 octane? As you know, when you simply add ethanol to gasoline, you increase octane values and improve air quality.

Currently most retailers are passing the value of E15 to the consumer with both a superior fuel and a less expensive price at an 88 or 89 octane.  So the consumer is currently enjoying better engine performance, no mileage loss, lower emissions, and more money in their wallet. 

The retailers are doing this by utilizing blending pumps that typically mix E85 and E10 to dispense E15. If the retailer does not have a blending pump, they will pick E15 up at the terminal and truck it to their stand-alone tank and dispense it directly.

If Magellan offers E15 at 87 octane, then the octane value is not captured by the consumer or their engine.

This happened about eight years ago, when E10 went from 89 octane to its current 87 octane. The upstream suppliers lowered the octane of the E0 base fuel and took advantage of the octane that 10% ethanol brought when added. The consumer and auto manufacturers lost that octane value.

So while Urban Air is thrilled Magellan will give more retailers the ability to sell E15, we will continue to actively educate that octane matters. We encourage retailers to stay diligent in offering consumers the full value of E15 at an 88 or 89 octane, which improves engine performance and air quality.

The post Does E15 Octane Matter? Yes it Does! appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

In contrast to what has appeared to be a history of regulatory roadblocks for ethanol, EPA’s National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory has spent nine years working to patent a high efficiency engine designed to take advantage of the benefits unique to higher ethanol blends.

After several appeals and re-boots, the patent was granted based on EPA’s argument in a 2014 appeal. Here is an excerpt. “There is a great need in the world at this time for a highly efficient and commercially viable alcohol fuel engine…Brazil, for example, predominantly uses ethanol for transportation fuel in place of gasoline…”

David VanderGriend, President of the Urban Air Initiative (UAI) said this action supports and validates years of UAI research and data analysis that high octane ethanol blends are superior motor fuels to gasoline, if engines are designed to take advantage of ethanol’s properties. EPA also relied on work by the Coordinating Research Council (CRC) which is a joint auto and oil industry research organization. They cited a CRC study that concluded: “If the octane number increase were to be derived by addition of ethanol to gasoline, larger torque increases may be possible in turbocharged DI engines due to the high latent heat of vaporization of ethanol. An E30 blend with 91 RON gasoline blend-stock could potentially improve torque by 50% but this level of increase is not proven in any vehicle application…”

VanderGriend noted that an E30 100 RON can easily be made by splash blending 20% ethanol on to today’s E10. The question this action raises, according to VanderGriend, is what was EPA’s intent in getting this patent?

“Here we have EPA agreeing that higher ethanol blends can reduce emissions and acknowledging that engines and fuels must be looked at as an integrated system. Adjusting compression to address the slightly lower energy content of ethanol while taking advantage of the octane is something automakers can do. But the inconsistencies with these findings and the actions of the regulators is maddening. The reason we have not seen these engines coming out of the auto industry is the roadblocks EPA has created keeping ethanol out of the market.”

As examples, he noted that in the Tier 3 Rulemaking of 2016 EPA officials declined to provide a pathway for certifying E30 as an approved fuel after asking for comments on doing so. They have declined to lift unnecessary vapor pressure restrictions on higher blends. They have failed to update lifecycle and emission models that validate ethanol’s positive impact on emissions. And they have eliminated GHG and mileage credits for automakers who have clearly stated they would be able to take advantage of these higher ethanol blends if some credits, which are disproportionately applied to electric vehicles, were available to them. Under the current system automakers are essentially mandated to produce electric vehicles despite the higher cost and lack of consumer acceptance.

VanderGriend said there has been a great deal of concern expressed by UAI supporters and many in the ethanol industry that this is an effort to actually limit the use of ethanol by  protecting these high efficiency engines and the use of a 30% ethanol blend.

“Let’s give EPA the benefit of the doubt and proceed under the assumption this is an effort to make the design and emission data available to US industry as a positive return on the taxpayer dollars that went in to this research. It could be a boost to our auto industry, it supports the President’s commitment to rural America, and fosters our policy of economic and energy independence,” he said.

VanderGriend said UAI may apply for a license from EPA and hopes our own government agency will provide it to American companies at no cost or restrictions.

The post Ethanol’s Biggest Advocate May Be EPA? appeared first on Urban Air Initative.

The comments were filed in response to EPA’s Request For Comment on the Regulatory Reform Task Force Evaluation of Existing Regulations. The Urban Air Initiative-led effort included the Clean Fuels Development Coalition; 25x’25 Alliance; Glacial Lakes Energy, LLC; Siouxland Ethanol, LLC;  ICM, Inc.; Nebraska Ethanol Board; Nebraska Ethanol Industry Coalition; South Dakota Farmers Union; North Dakota Farmers Union; Minnesota Farmers Union; Montana Farmers Union; and Wisconsin Farmers Union.

“These EPA regulatory barriers have senselessly limited competition in the market for transportation fuels, killing American jobs and depriving drivers of more economical and healthier alternatives to regular gasoline,” said UAI President Dave Vander Griend.

Specific recommendations included the following actions the agency has the authority to take:

• EPA should repeal certification fuel rules that prevent auto manufacturers from building more efficient vehicles.
• EPA should repeal its erroneous and outdated interpretation of the sub-sim law as capping ethanol use in existing vehicles.
• EPA should repeal unnecessary RVP regulations that limit the viability of E15 and mid-level ethanol blends.
• EPA should repeal and replace its inaccurate fuel economy formula.
• EPA should repeal and replace its rule requiring states to use incorrect emissions estimates in pollution reduction planning.

According to Vander Griend, “These counterproductive regulatory barriers have prevented ethanol’s superior automotive and environmental values from driving its continued growth in the U.S. fuel market as a source of clean octane for today’s motor vehicles and the highly efficient vehicles that increased ethanol blending would enable in the near future”.

For more information, email [email protected]

The post EPA Should Repeal Regulations Limiting Ethanol appeared first on Urban Air Initative.