News
Letter to EPA: Don’t pick emission standard winners and losers
The EPA is being urged to consider more than just electric vehicles when finalizing future tailpipe emission standards.
American Coalition for Ethanol CEO Brian Jennings says the agency’s plan to require battery electric vehicles by 2032 is seriously misguided.
“It’s unachievable, and it’s not going to do a whole lot to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. So they need to fix their proposal and make sure that it’s a technology-neutral approach that leaves room for other low-cost, low-carbon alternatives such as renewable fuels like ethanol.”
Renewable Fuels Association CEO Geoff Cooper tells Brownfield groups representing biofuels, agriculture, petroleum manufacturers, automakers, and consumers are expressing concern with EPA’s proposal.
“So we hope that makes an impact and we hope it causes EPA to take a big step back from this proposal, go back to the drawing board, and figure out the right way to reduce emissions from transportation.”
Jennings tells Brownfield E15 and E-85 have been proven to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to gasoline, and he suggests it’s not feasible to convert the entire transportation sector to electric in such a dramatically quick timeframe.
“Just trying to inject some common sense into the EPA line of thinking about how they’re going to transition vehicles in the future.”
Growth Energy CEO Emily Skor calls the proposal unnecessarily narrow and says EPA is ignoring the proven, available, and American-made solution of emission-reducing biofuel.
National Corn Growers Association president Tom Haag says EPA’s proposed rule picks winners and losers in the energy sector and places ethanol on the losing side.
Brian Jennings interview:
Geoff Cooper interview:
It is a little late to complain about EPA. Once EPA gets comments on a proposed rule, EPA doesn’t change course. The problem started over 10 years ago when EPA set out using manipulated test fuels to model ethanol worse for vehicle tailpipe emissions. EPA’s MOVES model has ethanol raising emissions to include ozone. This is not correct but the ethanol industry is not standing up to EPA and calling them out for letting the oil industry manipulate their models. If EPA believes ethanol is worse, do we really expect EPA to create favorable policy?