Open Fuel Standard companion bill introduced in Senate
Nearly five months after the Open Fuel Standard Act was first introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and Dick Lugar, R-Ind., have introduced a companion bill in the Senate. “For too long oil has had a monopoly over transportation fuel and American drivers have had no choice but to pay volatile and elevated prices at the pump,” Cantwell said. “Phasing in vehicles that can run on fuels other than petroleum will allow a whole host of new domestic sources of transportation fuel to come online, which should reduce our dangerous overdependence on foreign oil and help keep American dollars here at home.”
If passed into law, the Open Fuels Standard would require increasing levels of new vehicles manufactured or sold in the U.S. be flex fuel capable, or able to run on mixtures of E85, methanol or other alcohols or liquid fuels. It would start in 2015 with 50 percent and increase to 80 percent by 2018. Adding this capability would cost manufacturers between $100 and $210 using technologies that are already widely available, according to a report from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Due to fuel savings, consumers could recoup the additional cost within a year of purchasing a new vehicle.
The bill would help give motorists choices at the pump and help open the market for alternative fuels such as ethanol Growth Energy said Sept. 26. “If we are ever going to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and allow consumers a fuel choice, we will need an open market,” said Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy. “An open market will drive the investment into cellulosic ethanol and other biofuels. ... The more ethanol we have in the market, the less oil we need to import from overseas – keeping our money here in the U.S., putting it to work on our economy.”
The Renewable Fuels Association and the American Coalition for Ethanol have also come out in support of the Open Fuel Standard in the past.
Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., introduced the bill in the House May 3, with the help of three co-sponsors. As of Sept. 27 the House bill had 16 co-sponsors. There are some differences between the two proposed bills. The House version is slightly more aggressive, calling for 50 percent flex-fuel capable vehicles by 2014, one year earlier than the Senate bill, and ends up with 95 percent flex-fuel capable vehicles by 2017. The Senate bill halts with 80 percent flex-fuel capable vehicles in 2018.
The introduction of the companion bill in the Senate on Sept. 21 coincided with the launch of the United States Energy Security Council, which was formed with the goal of reducing U.S. energy vulnerability and enhancing national security by finding alternatives to foreign oil. One member, former Director of Central Intelligence R. James Woolsey, recently wrote a New York Times op-ed entitled, “How to Weaken the Power of Foreign Oil.”
In it, Woolsey said that although electric cars may someday be common, in the “near and middle term” the solution is opening the marketplace to fuels other than petroleum. In order to rapidly ramp up production of alternative fuels, investors in cellulosic ethanol or methanol from natural gas need to know that there will be flex-fuel capable vehicles on the road to use those fuels. “Here too, however, a solution is at hand; it lies in Detroit’s making more flex-fuel cars—cars able to use gasoline, ethanol, methanol or any mixture of these,” he said in the opinion piece. “And because this flex-fuel option costs less than $100 per car, making such a change is not exorbitant.” He added that many of the 90 percent of the flex-fuel vehicles sold in Brazil last year were made by U.S. automakers.
For more information check out www.openfuelstandard.org.
6 Responses
Chip Daigle
2011-09-28
1I like the Idea of Following the Brazil Model and moving towards FFV's but nowhere does this bill call for moving towards Sugar based Ethanol while we wait for Cellulosic and Algae Based Biofuels to become a reality. Corn Ethanol while 15% cleaner than Gasoline and while it does reduce dependence on Foriegn Oil is not and cannot be the answer. We must move towards importating Sugar-based Ethanols and moving the tariffs over to Imported Oil. We must beging producing Ethanol from Sugarcane, Sweet Sorghum and Sugar Beets up North instead of Dirty Corn. Instead of making Ethanol from Corn and driving up Food Prices Worldwide, Trade Corn for Sugar-based Ethanol and make some friends for a change.
Joe
2011-09-29
2Chip, The problem with your model is that if we use other crops (besides corn) to produce ethanol then we will only switch acres away from corn. This will do nothing to bring down the price of corn. Plus corn is only a very small fraction of the cost going into food. 75 - 80 % of the cost of food is transportation and processing(energy). The big increase in food over the last couple years was from the dramatic increase in the the cost of oil.
Alex Kovnat
2011-09-30
3I am not in favor of proposed legislation that would require cars to be capable of operation on methanol, ethanol, gasoline or any combination thereof. The automobile industry has enough problems as it is, coping with the ever-intensifying regulatory aggression coming out of Washington. Already, there are regulations pending that would require cars to attain 50+ miles per gallon CAFE. If the cost of fuel is the biggest concern, isn't it enough already that cars be required to attain double the fuel economy a typical 4-cylinder small car currently achieves in urban driving? Also, there are enough problems as it is with ethanol. We don't need to create additional engineering problems in demanding that cars be able to run on methanol as well.
Barry
2011-10-11
4You have got to be kidding. As an owner of an FFV vehicle, I find that there are very few outlets that sell E85. I have also found that my fuel efficiency drops from 24MPG with gasoline down to 18MPG with ethanol which is not justified by the reduced cost of the E85. More ethanol means less acearge to grow food crops and therefore higher prices for food. It seems that there should be an Open Drilling ACT that will allow for more exploration and production of oil which will then reduce prices, increase land use for food while reducing U.S. dependency on crude oil imports from the Middle East. BE AMERICAN, BUY AMERICAN!
David Ruggles
2011-10-23
5This is NOT about ethanol made from food crops. AND the technology already exists to manufacture true flex fuel vehicles. The FFVs built today are NOT true flex fuel. The cost is about $150. per vehicle to produce a true flex fuel vehicle. There are thousands running round the roads of Brazil. Possible fuels would be methanol from natural gas and coal as well as ethanol from non food feed stocks. We currently tariff Brazilian sugar cane 52 cents per gallon. Diesel can be made from coal, as can methanol. Methanol is useful as a blend. WHAT regulatory aggression are you talking about Alex? The kind that works to free us from the grip of the world market price of oil or the ones that protect our air and water?
Giggles
2011-10-21
6Free knowledge like this doesn't just help, it promote deomccray. Thank you.
Leave a Reply
Comments are closed