Tag Archives: standard

Response to House E&C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

by Posted on June 24, 2013

back

Response to House E&C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

Posted 24 June 2013 in

National

The bottom line:

Our nation’s continued reliance on oil ensures that American families and our economy will continue to be burdened by the high and volatile prices of the global oil market and the national security challenges that come with oil dependence, as well as a greenhouse gas intensive transportation fuel supply. The Renewable Fuel Standard is the single-most important policy driving our nation toward oil alternatives.

Read the full letter to Reps. Upton and Waxman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee on the energy policy implications of the Renewable Fuel Standard.

 

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
Visit link: 

Response to House E&C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Response to House E&C Committee White Paper on Energy Policy

Five pest species now immune to GMO corn and cotton

by Sang N. Jones Posted on June 13, 2013

Five pest species now immune to GMO corn and cotton

By John Upton

Shutterstock

Yum, genetically engineered corn and cotton.

That isn’t what most people would think. (Especially the cotton bit. And especially the GMO bit.)

But a growing number of pests appear to share this sentiment. They’ve developed immunity to corn and cotton crops genetically engineered to contain the pesticide Bt, so they’re now munching away with impunity.

As of 2010, five of 13 major pest species had become largely immune to the Bt poisons in GMO corn and cotton, compared to just one species in 2005, scientists write in a paper published in the journal Nature Biotechnology.

“Three of the five cases are in the US, where farmers have planted about half of the world’s Bt crop acreage,” reports Business Standard. “[The study] indicates that in the worst cases, resistance evolved in 2 to 3 years; but in the best cases, effectiveness of Bt crops has been sustained more than 15 years.”

The scientists, who analyzed 77 studies conducted on five continents, also found that other species appear to be developing resistance.

Perhaps as alarming as the growth in the number of Bt-resistant species is the growth in the amount of land upon which Bt crops are planted. From the paper:

Nature Biotechnology

Click to embiggen.

So not only are farmers wasting money on GMO seeds that don’t perform as advertised, but they are then spraying their crops with more insecticides to help overcome bugs’ growing resistance. Meanwhile, nobody really knows what those Bt genes are doing to other animals that eat them. Such as pigs. And us.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Food

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Continue reading: 

Five pest species now immune to GMO corn and cotton

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, organic, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Five pest species now immune to GMO corn and cotton

RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

by Posted on May 24, 2013

back

RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

Posted 24 May 2013 in

National

The bottom line:

Changes to the RFS will only destabilize the current investment environment, slow the development of renewable fuel, and protect the oil industry from competition, effectively locking in our current greenhouse gas emission profile from the transportation fuel sector for decades to come.

According to the EPA, greenhouse gas emissions attributed to transportation accounted for about 31 percent of U.S. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in 2010, with nearly 65 percent of those emissions stemming from gasoline consumption for personal vehicle use.
Renewable fuel has already displaced petroleum in 10 percent of our gasoline supply, with 13 billion gallons in 2012
In 2012, the use of renewable fuel slashed greenhouse gas emissions by 33.4 million metric tons
The RFS will do even more to reduce oil in our transportation fuel supply and bring increasingly low carbon alternatives to market, so long as it remains in its current form, particularly as the production of cellulosic and advanced renewable fuel increases

Read the full letter to Reps. Upton and Waxman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee on the environmental benefits of the Renewable Fuel Standard.

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
Continue reading here: 

RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

by Posted on May 24, 2013

back

RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

Posted 24 May 2013 in

National

The bottom line:

Changes to the RFS will only destabilize the current investment environment, slow the development of renewable fuel, and protect the oil industry from competition, effectively locking in our current greenhouse gas emission profile from the transportation fuel sector for decades to come.

According to the EPA, greenhouse gas emissions attributed to transportation accounted for about 31 percent of U.S. CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion in 2010, with nearly 65 percent of those emissions stemming from gasoline consumption for personal vehicle use.
Renewable fuel has already displaced petroleum in 10 percent of our gasoline supply, with 13 billion gallons in 2012
In 2012, the use of renewable fuel slashed greenhouse gas emissions by 33.4 million metric tons
The RFS will do even more to reduce oil in our transportation fuel supply and bring increasingly low carbon alternatives to market, so long as it remains in its current form, particularly as the production of cellulosic and advanced renewable fuel increases

Read the full letter to Reps. Upton and Waxman of the House Energy & Commerce Committee on the environmental benefits of the Renewable Fuel Standard.

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
More – 

RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on RFS & Environmental Benefits: Our Response to the House Energy & Commerce Committee White Paper

They’ll say whatever it takes

by Posted on May 23, 2013

back

They’ll say whatever it takes

Posted 23 May 2013 in

National

Today, the American Petroleum Institute gathered reporters on a conference call to try and escape blame for what are sure to be record-high gas prices this summer. And while this event was full of API’s typical misdirection, one particular claim stood out to us – that compliance with the Renewable Fuel Standard will cause gasoline prices to increase by 30 percent in 2015. This could not be further from the truth.

The RFS and its associated “RIN credits” have not been a factor in higher retail gasoline prices, according to a new analysis conducted by Informa Economics, Inc. In fact, the study found ethanol costs significantly less than gasoline at the wholesale level and is reducing pump prices for consumers across the country.

Underlying API’s claims about the RFS is the idea that there’s a “blend wall” preventing the wider adoption of E15 renewable fuel (which happens to be the DoE’s most extensively tested fuel, ever). Back when the RFS was first passed, oil companies who supported the law effectively pledged to invest in the infrastructure necessary to bring E15 to our gas pumps. But now that they see renewable fuel as viable competition, they’ve done everything in their power to prevent its adoption. That means engaging in frivolous lawsuits, fabricating safety concerns about E15 and discouraging franchisees from carrying the fuel.

The oil companies don’t want to blend more renewable fuel into gasoline because it hurts their bottom line. In fact, it cost them (and saved you) $50 billion in 2012, so it’s no surprise they’re doing what they can to squash the competition. So who benefits from renewable fuel? You do, in the form of lower gas prices, reduced carbon emissions and increased national security. The choice should be clear.

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
This article – 

They’ll say whatever it takes

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on They’ll say whatever it takes

Gulf Coast refineries accidentally belch out a lot of chemical pollution

by sreg2 Posted on May 22, 2013

Gulf Coast refineries accidentally belch out a lot of chemical pollution

By John Upton

Mike Smail

ExxonMobil’s accident-prone complex in Baton Rouge.

“Oops.”

Gulf Coast oil refiners and chemical processors say that a lot, but regulators are doing precious little to rein in what the industry euphemistically calls “upset” emissions.

Upset emissions are inadvertent releases of chemicals by industrial operations when something goes awry. And things seem to go awry awfully frequently. An ExxonMobil refinery in Baton Rouge, La., was averaging two accidental releases every week during one grim stretch.

That’s according to an analysis by The Center for Public Integrity, which found that upset emissions are more prevalent than industry admits or government knows. Some highlights from the center’s investigative report:

[A 411-barrel chemical leak last year] has played out again and again at the sprawling, 2,400-acre ExxonMobil Baton Rouge complex, which encompasses an oil refinery and a chemical plant, and dwarfs the Standard Heights community. The leak marks the 1,068th upset emissions event at the compound in the last eight years, according to a database of incident reports compiled by the Bucket Brigade. Of these events, 172 involved benzene, a carcinogen that can trigger headaches, dizziness and rapid heart rate.

Exxon’s chemical plant had 265 of all incidents. At the refinery, the data show 803 accidental releases over these years; at its height, the facility averaged two a week. …

The steady hazards extend far beyond Baton Rouge. In the Gulf states of Texas and Louisiana, the vast number of plastics, power and gas plants provide an on-the-ground case study of a national problem.

“Non-routine” upset emissions have become regular occurrences at oil refineries, chemical plants and manufacturing facilities.

The upset emissions can pose serious health risks, but the oil and chemical companies say there’s nothing to worry about.

Dr. Mark D’Andrea, at the University of Texas Cancer Center, began tracking 4,000 residents exposed to the poster child of all upsets — the “40-day Release” at the BP refinery, in Texas City, which belched 514,795 pounds of benzene and 20 other pollutants throughout the spring of 2010. Earlier this year, D’Andrea unveiled preliminary data showing the residents have “significantly higher” white-blood cell and platelet counts than their Houston counterparts. The data suggests BP’s release may have increased their risk of developing such cancers as leukemia, the doctor says.

In a statement, BP says it does “not believe any negative health impacts resulted from” its 40-day release. “To our knowledge, the University Cancer Centers’ pilot study does not support a claim for any plaintiff alleging injury from that flaring and has no relevance to those claims,” the company wrote, referring to pending litigation filed by 47,830 residents and workers against BP alleging health ailments caused by the release. D’Andrea has not been hired as an expert witness for either side in the case, but has testified in pre-trial discovery.

For more, read the full report in all its grotesque glory.

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who

tweets

, posts articles to

Facebook

, and

blogs about ecology

. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants:

johnupton@gmail.com

.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Business & Technology

,

Climate & Energy

Also in Grist

Please enable JavaScript to see recommended stories

Taken from – 

Gulf Coast refineries accidentally belch out a lot of chemical pollution

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LG, ONA, solar, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Gulf Coast refineries accidentally belch out a lot of chemical pollution

Fact Check: Tom Philpott and DDGs

by Posted on May 13, 2013

back

Fact Check: Tom Philpott and DDGs

Posted 13 May 2013 in

National

Tom Philpott of Mother Jones recently published a sensationalist, irresponsibly reported blog post insinuating that ethanol production is linked to E. coli contamination. This post ignored public health trends, as well as a wealth of peer-reviewed data on the safety of DDGS, and cherry-picked one study that did not demonstrate a causal link.

There have been a number of peer-reviewed independent studies on food safety that have addressed the issue of distillers grains, a co-product of ethanol production, and they all come to the same conclusion: using DDGs, a high quality animal feed, does not have the health impacts that Philpott alleges. Most importantly, a new study out of Kansas State University (Dec 2012), the same university that published a study in 2007 that the article cites, corrected their previous work, saying:

“There were no significant differences in the concentration of E. coli O157:H7 between animals receiving DDGS and the one receiving only steam-flaked corn. Neither the prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 positive samples, nor the concentration of the bacteria in the positive samples, were affected by the presence or absence of DDGS in the diets. These observations concur with the absence of statistical differences in the colonization rate and prevalence of E. coli O157:H7 in the gastrointestinal tract between the two groups of animals. There was no relationship between the use of DDGS in the diet and the level of E. coli O157:H7 shedding in cattle in this study.”

There are a wealth of additional, recent peer reviewed studies highlighting the fact that there are no e. coli health risks associated with DDGs:

(May 2013) published in Foodborne Pathogens and Disease, the study says: “DDGS had no effect on the STEC O157 prevalence in cattle populations.”
(Jan. 2013) published in Journal of Food Protection, the study says: “Feeding diets containing DDGS had no effect (P > 0.05) on the intensity or duration of fecal shedding of E. coli O157:H7 compared with the standard barley grain finishing diet.”
(Dec. 2012) published by the Agricultural Utilization Research Institute, the report says: “Neither corn distillers grains, nor soy glycerin, in steam-flaked corn-based diets supported shedding of E. coli O157:H7.”
(Feb. 2012) a study by Canadian Dept. of Ag published in the Journal of Animal Science says: “Inclusion of DDGS in cattle finishing diets had no effect on fecal shedding (P = 0.650) or persistence (P = 0.953) of E. coli O157:H7.”

There are more studies to cite, but suffice it to say Philpott selectively picked an old study to create a sensationalist story where there is none.

A quick look at public health trends supports the truth outlined in the above studies: E. coli incidences found in ground beef sampling have dropped by more than 90% in the last decade. This is the same timeframe that DDGs production has increased many times over:

DDGs are not only safe, they are among the highest quality feed available. They are an export item for the US, helping to support economic growth, and they are a key to meeting the rising demand for livestock across the globe. Don’t let an irresponsible journalist trick you into believing otherwise.

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
Continued here: 

Fact Check: Tom Philpott and DDGs

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fact Check: Tom Philpott and DDGs

“The best outcome for the oil companies is if nothing changes”

by Posted on April 26, 2013

back

“The best outcome for the oil companies is if nothing changes”

Posted 26 April 2013 in

National

“The best outcome for the oil companies is if nothing changes”

–Paul Bryan, former Chevron executive

This week, oil companies are releasing their quarterly financials and Chevron, like the rest of the industry, has managed once again to amass exorbitant profits at the expense of the American taxpayer – $6.2 billion dollars in the last three months alone.

Now if oil companies like Chevron were actually interested in reducing the squeeze on our wallets, they would reinvest some of those billions into the research and infrastructure we need to support alternative, renewable fuels. But instead, Chevron “quietly shelved” its renewable fuel projects in 2010, despite assurances from their own scientists that their research had yielded a “technical winner.”

This is all part of a larger pattern. Oil companies were willing to support renewable fuel last decade, when they didn’t see it as viable competition. But now that they see real change on the horizon, they’re more worried about protecting their monopoly than ushering in the next generation of transportation fuel. That’s why API and its corporate backers (like Chevron) will go to any lengths to kill the Renewable Fuel Standard because they know that if gas prices stay high, so do their profits.

If this makes you mad (it sure makes us mad), then take a stand and sign the pledge to support renewable fuel!

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
View original article:

“The best outcome for the oil companies is if nothing changes”

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on “The best outcome for the oil companies is if nothing changes”

Newspapers parrot oil industry’s favorite attack lines

by Posted on March 21, 2013

back

Newspapers parrot oil industry’s favorite attack lines

Posted 21 March 2013 in

National

In the last few weeks, we’ve seen the oil industry’s propaganda machine go into full gear, misleading consumers and the media as to why gas prices continue to surge. Editorials in the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times and the Washington Times have all piled on, adopting Big Oil’s favorite untruths about the nature of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS).

Essentially, the oil industry (and these editorial boards) are claiming that refiners have hit the so-called “blend wall” – that they’re unable to blend any more renewable fuel into the gasoline they produce and must therefore buy Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) to meet the requirements of the RFS, a cost they say must be passed on to the consumer.

But as usual, this line of attack is a smokescreen, intended to distract from the record profits the oil industry continues to collect all while blocking consumer choice at the pump. So before you read another editorial bashing the only policy we have to reduce our dependence on fossil fuel, make sure you’ve got all the facts:

  1. Oil companies are reaping record profits right now, and they want to protect those profits by shifting attention to biofuels. Last year the five oil majors netted $118 billion in profits, thanks to high gas prices.
  2. The oil industry controls the RINs market because basically everyone trading in the RINs market is an oil refiner, and oil companies only need to use RINs if they refuse to blend ethanol. That’s exactly what they’re doing now – refusing to blend ethanol, because they’ve created the “blend wall.”
  3. Oil created the blend wall by blocking consumer access to E15, which is approved and ready to go. Claims about a “maximum safe limit” are unjustified.
  4. E15 renewable fuel would address any RIN “shortage” and there’s certainly enough ethanol available for purchase right now (at 65 cents cheaper than gasoline).
  5. Since ethanol is cheaper than a RIN, oil companies are actually paying a premium to avoid blending ethanol — and then threatening to make consumers pay for their unwillingness to allow choice at the pump.
  6. Oil was for the RINs market before they were against it. Back in 2007, two major petroleum industry groups threw their weight behind the RINs program – indeed, they insisted EPA create it. Now they’re complaining about a system they wanted:

The rule’s trading program allows refiners and others that do not want to use renewable fuels to buy renewable identification numbers (RIN), or credits from those who exceed the required level of renewable fuels. “The flexibility in the RFS plan is vital in order to integrate ethanol into the gasoline pool quickly and in the most effective way possible,” said American Petroleum Institute spokeswoman Karen Matusic. The EPA has issued a reasonable framework to implement the RFS provisions, said National Petrochemical and Refiners Association Executive Vice President Charles Drevna.

(“Bush officials tout green credentials as EPA rolls out renewable rule,” The Oil Daily, 4/11/2007)

It should be clear now what’s really going on here. Oil companies are threatened by the first viable competition they’ve seen in decades, so they’ll distort and dissemble until they’ve drowned out any opposition to their monopoly on your gas tank. Don’t be fooled.

 

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
See more here: 

Newspapers parrot oil industry’s favorite attack lines

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Newspapers parrot oil industry’s favorite attack lines

Fuels America’s fight to protect consumer choice and the environment

by Posted on March 15, 2013

back

Fuels America’s fight to protect consumer choice and the environment

Posted 15 March 2013 in

National

Today we are proud to announce the new FuelsAmerica.org.

Every day it’s more obvious that renewable fuel and the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) are a critical part of energy investment in the United States, creating new jobs and helping us break our addiction to oil.

But despite its record of success, renewable fuel is still under attack.

Oil companies are spending millions to roll back established industry standards that expand the use of renewable fuel – the one energy policy proven to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and provide real benefits to Americans.

With the re-launch of FuelsAmerica.org, we will be at the forefront of calling out the lies the oil industry has been spreading. We will rally together to create a movement in support of renewable fuel.

To find out more about this movement, you can check out some new site features to get you started:

Fuels America Map: Find and read stories by people and organizations from around the country, showing how much renewable fuel has made a difference in their lives.

The Facts: Want to learn the truth about oil companies? Visit The Facts section to find out exactly how the oil industry is hurting our economy, environment, and livelihoods.

Facebook and Twitter: Like Fuels America on Facebook and follow Fuels America on Twitter to stay up-to-date on our fight against the oil industry.

Fuels America News & Stories

Fuels
View original post here:  

Fuels America’s fight to protect consumer choice and the environment

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, ONA, oven, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Fuels America’s fight to protect consumer choice and the environment