New poll shows 82 percent of Americans support E15
By Chris Hanson | September 19, 2013
After surveying more than 1,000 U.S. citizens, Fuels America released its polling results, which discovered 82 percent of U.S. citizens support the availability of E15 ethanol blends at their local gas stations.
“The overwhelming majority of Americans understand that having options when you fill up at the gas station is a good thing. They have spoken loud and clear that they want access to clean, homegrown renewable fuel,” said Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy. “What we clearly see from this poll is that consumers like higher blends of ethanol in their gas because it saves them money. Ethanol is currently trading 80 cents lower than regular unleaded gasoline and the bottom line is that ethanol provides consumers a choice and savings at the pump.”
Roughly 70 percent of respondents desired higher blends at the pumps, Buis explained. He added nearly four out of five believed the oil industry’s effort to block E15 was bad for consumers. “People want oil to quit running these negative campaigns and denying them at the pump,” Buis said.
Other speakers during a teleconference following the poll release aimed to dispel messages promoted by the oil industry, such as high costs to implement E15 and lack of demand from customers and retailers.
Last week, the Petroleum Equipment Institute released a report that showed, in some cases, a retailer may only need to invest $1,200 to update an entire station, said Robert White, director of market development from the Renewable Fuels Association. “It’s nowhere near the $200,000 to $300,000 that’s been quoted almost religiously by E15’s opponents for the past couple years,” added White.
Scott Zaremba, owner of Zarco USA gas stations, explained how an oil company implemented rules that prohibited him from selling E15. In July 2012 he became the first retailer in the U.S. to offer E15 under Phillips 66 name. However, Phillips implemented rules th
EPA releases draft rules to cut emissions from power plants
Julian Hattem - 09/20/13 09:25 AM ET
The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday released draft rules that represent the first limits for carbon emissions from new power plants.
The new rules are a central component of President Obama's push to protect the environment through regulation and executive action, and will fuel a political fight with the coal lobby and its supporters on Capitol Hill.
In offering the rules on Friday, the EPA quickly pushed back at arguments the rules represent an attack on coal, and that they will hurt the economy.
"We have proven time after time that setting fair Clean Air Act standards to protect public health does not cause the sky to fall," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said during a speech at the National Press Club unveiling the draft rules. "The economy does not crumble."
Opponents of the new rules have worried that they would require an expensive technology that would lead to an effective ban on coal power plants. But McCarthy said that the effort is aimed at just the opposite.
"I believe that this proposal, rather than killing future coal, actually sets out a certain pathway forward for coal to continue to be part of a diverse mix in this country," she said.
Together with regulations on power plants already up and running, which are set to be proposed next year, the rules form the centerpiece of what Obama described in a speech at Georgetown University as “bold action to reduce carbon pollution.”
In a statement, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Science Committee, countered that the administration “is offering a costly, heavy-handed proposal that risks jobs and economic growth, all for negligible changes to our carbon dioxide emissions and no discernible impact on the global temperature.”
Power plants are the source of about one-third of the country's greenhouse gas emissions.
On Friday, McCarthy said that reducing the amo
Gina McCarthy @GinaEPA Read my op-ed on why we must #ActOnClimate now for the health and well-being of our children: huffingtonpost
With these facts in mind, and given our legal obligation to the American people, EPA is releasing a proposal to limit carbon pollution from future power plants.
Today's proposal applies only to future power plants, and sets separate national limits for natural gas-fired power plants and coal-fired power plants.
New large natural gas-fired turbines would need to emit less than 1,000 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour, while new small natural gas-fired turbines would need to emit less than 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour.
New coal-fired units would need to emit less than 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour or, to provide plants the flexibility and time to optimize technologies, between 1,000 and 1,050 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour on average over 84 months of operation.
These levels are achievable by using partial carbon capture and sequestration, a proven technology that is being used right now to support the development of both new conventional and new unconventional coal plants.
These proposed standards would minimize carbon pollution by taking advantage of modern, cleaner energy technologies that power companies are already using to build the next generation of power plants. This is exactly what the Clean Air Act requires.
Without these steps we will continue to pay an ever-increasing price for climate impacts. In 2012 alone, the cost of weather disasters exceeded $110 billion in the United States, the second costliest year on record.
Beyond the costs of property destruction and disaster relief, there are significant public health risks and costs from climate change. Warmer temperatures spurred by carbon pollution worsen smog and pollen levels. This can lead to more asthma attacks and other respiratory problems. The nation's
Time to Act on Climate Change
Posted: 09/20/2013 6:00 am
Administrator, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency
didn't plan for a life built around protecting the environment. In fact, I started my career as a health agent in the town of Canton, Mass., and later worked for the Stoughton Board of Health. But at some point I realized that at its core, the issue of a clean environment is a matter of public health. The two are inextricably linked.
That's why, when President Obama unveiled his Climate Action Plan earlier this year, he talked about the health of our children when laying out his strategy to take responsible steps to cut carbon pollution.
As part of that plan, the president directed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to "complete new pollution standards for both new and existing power plants." That directive rests on legal authority our agency was granted by Congress through passing the Clean Air Act back in 1970. In 2007, the Supreme Court underscored that authority when it definitively determined that carbon pollution is covered by the Clean Air Act.
Among scientists, there is near universal agreement that climate change is happening, it's human caused, and it's a threat to our health and welfare.
The 12 hottest years on record have come in the last 15. Last year was the warmest year ever in the contiguous United States; sea ice in the Arctic shrank to its smallest size on record and about one-third of all Americans experienced 10 days or more of 100-degree heat.
We know that carbon pollution is the most prevalent heat-trapping greenhouse gas, warming our planet and fueling climate change. In 2011, power plants and major industrial facilities in the United States emitted over 3 billion metric tons of carbon pollution, which is equal to annual pollution from over 640 million cars. Annually in the U.S., carbon pollution from power plants accounts for one-third of all greenhouse gas emissions, or 40 percent of total