ABOUT
Smart discussion of the latest science and news on toxins in your food, water, and air, and what government agencies should be doing to protect public health. Written by EWG staff.
DONATE TO EWG TODAY
We need you to help protect your health and environment! Please donate $5 to EWG today.
GET EWG'S TIPS & ACTION ALERTS
Sign Up here to receive email updates and tips from EWG and stay informed on the issues that matter most to you.
Get EWG widgets & blog badges.
ENVIROBLOG TO YOU
ENVIROBLOG VIA EMAIL
Cell Phone Radiation Blog Series - All In One Place
Rubber Ducky: You're so not the one
Epigenetics hits the mainstream
Cosmetics Safety Series - Part 2: Mind the (data) gap
SEARCH ENVIROBLOG
FEATURED
Why, oh why is there plastic in my aluminum water bottle?
Cell phone radiation series - Part 2: 8 Ways to reduce your exposure
Infant formula: How to choose it & use it
EWG's Tips for Parents: The Series
EWG's Tips to avoid BPA exposure
Let's talk some serious shop about TSCA reform
EWG on TV
Cutting the Pork from U.S. Farm Bill
Sunscreen safety & DC drinking water
Perchlorate in people, kids' personal care products & plastics, and sunscreen
BPA in baby formula & safe cosmetics
What can I do about fluoride in my water?
What is new carpet treated with? What can I do?
Are stainless steel water bottles safe?
Is mineral-based makeup safer?
PEOPLE TALKING TOXICS
TALK TO US
Did we miss something? Email Enviroblog.
« Science update: More proof that BPA leaches from bottle to body | Main | BPA legislation in California: The time has come »
Higher Ethanol Fuel: A Lose-Lose
Corn prices are projected to reach $5 a bushel this year, thanks to heavy rains in the corn belt and fewer acres planted. That's good news for corn farmers, who have watched prices sag after last year's record highs past the $7 mark.
But it's not so good for consumers, who can expect higher food prices.
And it puts even more stress on the corn-based ethanol industry, which ramped up too big, too fast in mid-decade and then suffered a flurry of bankruptcies and lagging demand.
The ethanol industry is desperate.
As reporter Philip Brasher of the Des Moines Register pointed out in a smart analysis yesterday, "Biofuels producers didn't take into account sufficiently the potential risks of a downturn in energy prices, or the possibility that agricultural commodity prices could increase sharply." Also, Brasher writes, "Their dependence on the government created another risk for the industries."
Fact is, there wouldn't be much of a market for ethanol if the 2007 energy independence act hadn't mandated steadily increasing quantities of biofuels in fuel for vehicles and other motors, up to 11.1 billion gallons by this year and 36 billion gallons by 2022.
Even so, the ethanol industry over-built and over-produced.
Now, in a last-ditch quest for new markets, the industry is pressing the Environmental Protection Agency to raise the cap on ethanol in engine fuel from 10 percent to 15 percent. The resulting blend would be known as E15.
The idea makes great financial sense for the ethanol industry.
But as for the rest of us, we think it's a lose-lose.
Why?
Bad for the air. Bad for health. Bad for engines.
My colleague, Olga Naidenko, has conducted an extensive review of the scientific literature on the environmental and mechanical effects of fueling engines with higher ethanol fuel.
Her painstaking study deserves close attention. For those of you who are reading on the run, here's my speed read:
- There's a long list of good reasons to be wary of E15.
- There is no good reason to embrace it.
Your chain saw should start when you want it to.
There's considerable evidence ethanol/gasoline fuel can, to use a technical term, gunk up your chain saw, boat motor, weed trimmer, lawn mower, jet ski, generator, snowmobile and all those other expensive, useful machines you use for work and play.
Some studies have even indicated that the ignition of small motors could be impaired by high ethanol fuel and might fire up spontaneously - not a happy prospect, if you've set down your chain saw too near your ankle. Me, I've been known to get pretty close to my outboard motor's prop blades while tinkering with the cotter pin, and I like my hand where it is.
Now, the research is not definitive. But until there's more study and solid scientific answers to the gunk and ignition questions, those of us who don't have enough money to replace all our gear would not like to see the Obama administration grant the ethanol industry's plea for E15.
E15 may make more smog.
Other red flags have been raised by studies suggesting that engines burning fuel blends with above-E10 ethanol spew more toxic emissions, including the probable carcinogens acetaldehyde and formaldehyde.
Again, this issue needs more objective research. But in the meantime, those of us who breathe air are understandably skeptical that E15 will do anybody much good.
Except, of course, the ethanol industry, which faces an existential moment.
Business Week: Ethanol is a "scam."
If you're not convinced, after reading Dr. Naidenko's thorough work, take a look at journalist Ed Wallace's excellent piece, "The Great Ethanol Scam," published May 14 online edition of Business Week.
Wallace marshals yet more facts - not opinion, facts - that should give any thinking person pause:
...Using ethanol actually creates more smog than using regular gas, and the EPA's own attorneys had to admit that fact in front of the justices presiding over the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1995 (API v. EPA).Second, truly independent studies on ethanol, such as those written by Tad Patzek of Berkeley and David Pimentel of Cornell, show that ethanol is a net energy loser. Other studies suggest there is a small net energy gain from it.
Third, all fuels laced with ethanol reduce the vehicle's fuel efficiency, and the E85 blend drops gas mileage between 30% and 40%, depending on whether you use the EPA's fuel mileage standards (fueleconomy.gov) or those of the Dept. of Energy.
Fourth, forget what biofuels have done to the price of foodstuffs worldwide over the past three years; the science seems to suggest that using ethanol increases global warming emissions over the use of straight gasoline.
The mechanics' golden -- sputtering, stalling, spewing -- parachute
So who needs E15? The ethanol industry, of course.
And, Wallace jests, underemployed car shops, where he reports the word is that "if the government moves the ethanol mandate to 15%, it will be the dawn of a new golden age for auto mechanics' income."
Speak for yourself.
EPA has solicited public comments on the ethanol industry's proposal for E15 fuel.
If you'd like to tell the Obama administration what you think about this idea, it's easy. Go to the EPA docket at this link, click on "Add Comments" and fire away.
You can agree with us, Ed Wallace, the National Marine Manufacturers Association and other makers and users of small engines. Or you can agree with the ethanol industry. Whatever you think, let the government hear your voice. Government should make decisions as momentous as this after hearing from everybody with a stake in the outcome.
Not just those who stand to make the most money.
[Photo courtesy of oxyboricua on FlickrCommons]
« Science update: More proof that BPA leaches from bottle to body |
dan bloom { 05.18.09 at 9:38 pm } Dan Bloom to k ward
http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/your-dot-meet-the-neighbors/?apage
Ken
i read about your blog on Andy Revkin’s DOT EARTH blog….can you look
at my video speech about COAL and blog on it pro or con>
here is yotuube vide and NYTIMES above
http://tr.youtube.com/watch?v=n-wnrm2jE-E&feature=channel_page
my goal is just to get young people to THINK about coal pro and con
DANNY BLOOM\
Tufts 1971
I agree, I never understood the ethanol push from an environmental perspective (it makes sense from a political one), especially when you factor in how much gasoline it takes to grow enough corn to make a gallon of gasoline.
Corey, thanks for your comment. We'd like to see the fuel costs of growing and transporting factored in -- also the high fertilizer requirements for growing corn.
Dr. Naidenko's has ties to the Oil Industry. You are only saying whats wrong with ethanol. And the bad it does. You sem to forget the damage the Oil industry is causing. The Oil industry is killing the earth. And creating these Oil rich contries that want to kill us. Im sorry next time you compare ethanol with oil please put down all the problems Oil has caused us and not just ethanol. Your blaming an industry trying to help. Also the car companies can make the adjustments to make cars burn more effiecent. Jus like they did in the 70s
thanks for all the info. I live in Iowa in a small town and own a small Delivery Company! We see 1st hand that ethanol is not the answer! Much money was spent to build refineries for ethanol. Many of them are already vacant! Ethanol requires so much corn that the demand pushed the price so high that it cost more to make than it was worth. There has to be a better answer.
We all know that the car companies could have made more fuel efficient vehicles if they wanted to. So now that they are being forced to improve vehicles will we have to give up safety standards for efficiency?