Federal appeals court judges had tough questions for U.S. EPA today about its decision to allow a blend of gasoline and 15 percent ethanol for cars from model year 2001 and newer.
The challenge to the blend known as E15 by auto, oil, food and livestock groups will likely come down to whether the plaintiffs can satisfy the standing requirements to bring the case to court. The groups are challenging two partial waivers granted by EPA for E15 use in certain vehicles.
“You’ve got an excellent argument on the merits,” Chief Judge David Sentelle of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit told the plaintiffs. “My problem is getting there.”
Although the judges seemed unsure whether some or all of the challengers have standing, Department of Justice attorney Jessica O’Donnell conceded EPA hadn’t raised that issue in its briefs.
The trade groups’ attorneys argued that their organizations have members that would be harmed by the introduction of E15 to the marketplace.
The food and livestock associations say E15 will spur increased production of corn ethanol and drive up the price of feed. Engine and auto trade groups have broadly opposed E15 on the basis that it damages car engines.
The three-member judicial panel also seemed skeptical of EPA’s interpretation of Clean Air Act provisions that give authority to the agency to grant waivers for new fuels.
Attorneys for the industry coalition argued that EPA prematurely approved E15 and lacked authority to allow some vehicles to use the fuel and to exclude others.
Ethanol is menace to fuel tanks, engines, and the environment. It has caused billions of dollars of damage to fuel systems in boats, requiring expensive overhauls that suck up money and resources. It does the same thing to any vented fuel system in any internal combustion engine. It is a crummy fuel that absorbs water and reacts chemically with fuel additives to create a toxic stew when spilled. It drives up the cost of food and is causing real starvation (not the laziness induced hunger we have in the U.S.) in countries relying on U.S. corn & grain imports by driving up prices. The damage it does requires more steel and plastic production that uses up resources that could be put to use in other ways. It is costly to make, and in the final analysis has a negative pollution footprint and adds nothing to the U.S. fuel supply when examined on all fronts.
Well said.