This is a sample posting on blog.
This is a sample posting on blog.
By Jeremy P. Greenhouse | October 18, 2011
When the U.S. EPA granted Clean Air Act fuel waivers allowing gasoline containing 10 to 15 percent by volume of ethanol (E15) for use in model year 2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles, the agency included the following condition, as published in the Jan. 26, Federal Register: “The final fuel must have a Reid Vapor Pressure not in excess of 9.0 psi [pounds per square inch] during the time period from May 1 to September 15.” (Read entire article at link above)
NOTE: Unless the EPA grants a waiver on the Reid Vapor Pressure, this could be a “HUGE” obstacle to getting the newly approved 15% ethanol in the market. “Pete” Landry
By Iowa Renewable Fuels Association | December 28, 2011
“2011 was certainly a good year for Iowa ethanol producers with increased production and profitability,” said IRFA Executive Director Monte Shaw. “However, we relied on export markets for growth. We’re also facing the expiration of ethanol’s tax credit. Those factors place a premium on pushing the rapid commercialization of E15. Higher blends like E15 are the only way to guarantee increased ethanol production in the future and the jobs and foreign oil displacement that comes with it. We are waiting for final federal approvals, but Iowa will be a leader in E15.”
Iowa is the leader in renewable fuels production with 41 ethanol refineries capable of producing 3.7 billion gallons annually. In addition, Iowa has 13 biodiesel facilities with the capacity to produce 320 million gallons annually.
The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association was formed in 2002 to represent the state’s liquid renewable fuels industry. The trade group fosters the development and growth of the renewable fuels industry in Iowa through education, promotion, legislation and infrastructure development.
“Pete” Landry……..comments welcome……..at ………..email@example.com
The current do-nothing, argue-over-everything Congress managed to do something right before adjourning last Friday, by — surprise, surprise — doing nothing.
Congress failed to extend a 30-year tax subsidy for corn-based ethanol that cost taxpayers $6 billion annually and ended a tariff on imported Brazilian ethanol.
Ending that egregious subsidy was the right thing to do on so many fronts that it’s hard to enumerate them all. Here are a few reasons to praise Congress’ action/inaction:
• It saves $6 billion a year. That’s a pittance compared with the savings from ending the war in Iraq, which had the added benefit of saving American lives. But even in Washington, at least outside the Pentagon, $6 billion is real money.
• Supporters of corn-based ethanol claimed it was an interim step on the way to cellulosic ethanol, which would use leftover wood chips, corn stalks (rather than kernels) and other waste products to create ethanol. But after 30 years, that’s a lame argument.
• It’s not like the subsidy is a critical price support that is keeping family farmers from going bankrupt and losing their land. Growing demand from China has boosted crop prices. The subsidy was icing on the cake, pushing corn prices just that much higher.
You can reach James B. Treece at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20111229/BLOG06/111229922#ixzz1hznnTRwh
Here are some suggestions for your first post.