portfolio- password protected- recent evolution of u.s. transportation emissions policy

7/27/2019 Portfolio- Password Protected- Recent Evolution of U.S. Transportation Emissions Policy

1/17

Baker 1

Recent evolution of U.S. emissions policy

SUBMITTED TO:Ed Ray

Sustainable Energy Initiative President

SUBMITTED BY:Jack BakerPre-Environmental Engineer Major

Oregon State UniversityCorvallis, OR 97331

June 2012

Figure 0. Fuel nozzle


2/17

Baker 2

Table of contents:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................3

Scope.................................................................................................................3

Methodology.......................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................4

Scope.................................................................................................................4

Methodology.......................................................................................................5

FINDINGS..........................................................................................................5-13

Recent research in biofuels................................................................................5-6

Transportation emission reduction programs and legislature..................................7-9

Evolution of policy concerning greenhouse gas emissions...................................10-13

CONCLUSION................................................................................................13-14

Recommendations..........................................................................................................14

REFERENCES.................................................................................................15-16

List of figures cited...........................................................................................................17


3/17

Baker 3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The following report provides a look at the evolving role of federal agencies in regulating the

nation's transportation fuel supply by summarizing and organizing a combination of pamphlets,

bills, scientific studies, court cases, and announcements into three categories. The first category

provides a look at recent research in biofuel efficiency, the second category looks at bills and

acts related to transportation efficiency, and the third category looks at some significant political

decisions and cases which are changing policy and legislature concerning greenhouse gasemissions.

Biofuels have been coming under closer examination as the industrialization of foreign countries

and exponential growth in the human population increases the demand for petroleum energy. The

U.S. has been heavily subsidizing corn-derived ethanol in an effort to increase domestic energy

production, but many indirect issues involving monocultures of food used as fuel have begun to

emerge as a result. Biofuels using materials such as rapeseed, soybean, palm, sunflower, wheat,

maize, sugar beet, and potatoes are being explored, along with biohydrogen, biogas, and natural

gas in order to lessen the demand on foods as fuel, and to pinpoint more efficient conversions of

biomass into liquid fuel.

Similarly, the forces that spur research in biofuel development also put additional responsibilities

of energy diversification into the hands federal government agencies such as the Environmental

Protection Agency, Department of Energy, and Department of Transportation. Goals that these

agencies push for include increasing vehicle fuel efficiency, reducing vehicle fuel emissions, and

diversifying fuel sources in order to increase energy independence.

There is also an emerging call for increasing regulation of greenhouse gas emissions in order to

slow the rate of global climate change. Before recent supreme court cases and presidential callsfor action and policy, much of the country and federal agencies weren't equipped or ready to deal

with the profound impact from greenhouse gas emissions on the climate. As these consequences

are becoming increasingly proved and accepted, new policies, programs, and collaborations

between federal agencies are being implemented with previous legislative frameworks to address

the multifaceted problem of energy use and it's consequences.

SCOPE

This report looks at effects from the increasing global demand for petroleum energy, which has

recently spurred research in biofuels, changes in US federal policies regarding energy efficiency,

and most recently collaboration between separate and independent federal agencies in an effort

to address global climate change.

METHODOLOGY

The sources secured for this paper were primarily found on government agency websites which

provide the public with copies of federal mandates, statutes, and pamphlets. The OSU online

database was also used to find articles discussing the emergence of new biofuel production

techniques and their efficiencies.


4/17

Baker 4

INTRODUCTION

The following report examines the evolving role of government agencies in regulating the

nation's transportation fuel supply by summarizing and organizing a combination of federal

pamphlets, bills, scientific studies, court cases, and announcements into three categories. The

first category provides a look at recent research in biofuel efficiency, the second category looks

at transportation emission programs and legislature designed to increase transportation energy

efficiency, and the third category looks at some recent federal decisions and cases which arechanging policy and legislature concerning greenhouse gas emissions.

The 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA), 1992 Energy Policy Act (EPAct), 2007 Energy Independence

and Security Act (EISA), and programs such as the reformulated gasoline program and clean

cities program have been making contributions in securing energy independence, reducing

emissions of toxic air-borne pollutants, and making petroleum energy more efficient and

affordable in the US. To meet these goals, federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection

Agency, Department of Transportation, and Department of Energy have drafted various bills and

programs which require increases in fuel efficiency, reductions in toxic emissions, and increases

in alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles. A heavily used strategy of the federal

government involves lowering the price of corn through subsidizations so farmers have

incentives to plant massive monocultures for ethanol blenders. This ethanol is most often mixed

in a 10:1 ratio with petroleum gasoline to make what's called an E10 fuel mixture. E10 fuel

mixture gasoline is often the only kind of gasoline available at commercial gas stations in the

United States. This means that ethanol blenders, farmers, and states with fertile agricultural land

are nearly always voting for further ethanol subsidizations and less regulation of dangerous but

effective nitrogen fertilizers.

In the past twenty or so years however, there has been an increasingly urgent call for the federalgovernment to create and enforce mandatory standards for petroleum greenhouse gas emissions

as the impact on the climate is becoming more dramatic. Because actions to address these

problems are often multi-faceted, controversial, and costly, there has been a slow political

response to the scientifically grounded urgency of atmosphere-insulating emissions. It is widely

recognized that it is not healthy for Earth's climate to accumulate excess amounts of insulating

chemicals. As sunlight enters the atmosphere these emissions act as insulators slowing the rate at

which incoming heat reflects from the Earth's surface back into space, which slowly raises the

overall temperature of the climate. This phenomena has become known as the 'greenhouse

effect', because the trapping of heat in a greenhouse is a similar and easily understood

comparison. This is also why gaseous insulating compounds are call 'greenhouse gases' (GHG).

SCOPE

This report looks at effects from the increasing rate of energy consumption, which has recently

spurred research in biofuels, changes in federal policies regarding transportation efficiency, and

collaboration between federal agencies to address global climate change.


5/17

Baker 5

METHODOLOGY

The sources secured for this paper were primarily found on government agency websites which

provide the public with copies of federal mandates and statutes, and their pamphlets. The OSU

online database was also used to find articles discussing the emergence of new biofuel

production techniques and their efficiencies.

FINDINGS

Recent research in biofuels

Ethanol Production Using Corn, Switchgrass, and Wood; Biodiesel Production Using Soybean

and Sunflower:

The following statement can be used to sum up Pimentel's and Patzek's report regarding ethanoland biodiesel efficiency; "In contrast to the USDA, numerous scientific studies have concludedthat ethanol production does not provide a net energy balance, that ethanol is not a renewableenergy source, is not an economical fuel, and its production and use contribute to air, water, andsoil pollution and global warming" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 66). The authors support theseclaims by citing both their own and others scientific findings. The report looks at ethanol derivedfrom corn, switchgrass, and wood, and biodiesel from soybean and sunflowers. There aresignificant problems with corn derived ethanol, particularly issues resulting from using corn as afuel rather than food. "An average U.S. automobile travels about 20,000 miles/yr and uses about1,000 gallons of gasoline per yr (USBC, 2003). To replace only a third of this gasoline withethanol, 0.6 ha [1.48 acres] of corn must be grown. Currently, 0.5 ha [1.24 acres] of cropland isrequired to feed each American. Therefore...to feed one automobile with ethanol, substitutingonly one third of the gasoline used per year, Americans would require more cropland than theyneed to feed themselves" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 67). This means that further ethanolsubsidization "can be expected to increase corn prices further for beef production and ultimatelyincrease costs to the consumer. Therefore, in addition to paying the $8.4 billion in taxes forethanol and corn subsidies, consumers are expected to pay significantly higher meat, milk, andegg prices in the market place" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 68). Switch grass derived ethanol,similar to corn, "results in a negative energy return...[of] 50%,...slightly higher than the negativeenergy return for corn ethanol production" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 70). Pimentel andPatzek also find that "about 57% more energy is required to produce a liter of ethanol usingwood than the energy harvested as ethanol" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 71). For biodiesel, oilderived from soybeans and sunflowers is primarily used. For soybeans, after factoring in theusable byproducts of production, " the net loss in terms of energy is 8%" (Patzek & Pimentel,2005, p. 72). To produce sunflower-derived biodiesel, "the fossil energy input is 118% higherthan the energy content of the sunflower biodiesel" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 73). In theirconclusion, the authors recommend the use of photo-voltaics for energy, which can capture about10% of the sunlight they are exposed to. In contrast, plants, which gain their biomass through thesame process, capture and convert on average only 0.1% of the energy they are exposed to bythe sun (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 73).


6/17

Baker 6

Progress and Recent trends in Biofuels

This is a very extensive article from Ayhan Demirbas that uses over 127 sources in 18 pages to

define the variety of biofuels in use today and those that will be in use in the future, the chemical

processes and energy inputs involved in producing these, the benefits and ease of societal

integration of each type of fuel, and the advantages for adopting them in the future. The paper

gives global biofuels scenarios based on today's political climate and future prices of petroleumfossil fuels. The paper takes a look at current production technologies and economic advantages

of biohydrogen, bioethanol, biodiesel, biomethanol, and bio-oil, all derived from modern

biomass. In the abstract Demirbas states that these modern biofuels can be used for "efficient and

clean combustion technologies and sustained supply of biomass resources, environmentally

sound and competitive fuels, heat, and electricity [if] using modern conversion technologies"

(Demirbas, 2006, p. 1). Figure 1 provides projections of the percentage and type of alternative

fuels that will be phased into the global petroleum fuel supply. Figure 2 illustrates the "resources

of main liquid biofuels for automotives" (Demirbas, 2006, 4).

The study looks at petroleum displacement scenarios using biofuels and the resulting cropland

normally used to grow food that would be sacrificed growing resources used to manufacture

these biofuels. "According to International Energy Agency (IEA), scenarios developed for the

USA and the EU indicate that near-term targets of up to 6% displacement of petroleum fuels

with biofuels appear feasible using conventional biofuels, given available cropland. A 5%

displacement of gasoline in the EU requires about 5% of available cropland to produce ethanol

while in the USA 8% is required. A 5% displacement of diesel requires 13% of USA cropland,

15% in the EU [32]" (Demirbas, 2006, 3).

Figure 1Figure 2


7/17

Baker 7

Transportation emission reduction programs and legislature

EPA reformulated gasoline phase II

This is a well designed pamphlet made by the

EPA to easily communicate the purpose, costs,

and benefits of phase I (1995-1999), and phase

II (2000-present) of the reformulated gasoline

program. The switch to reformulated gasoline

(RFG) was a strategy outlined in the Clean Air

Act. The program's first phase "cut smog-

forming pollutant levels by about 17 percent

compared to conventional gasoline in

communities where 75 million people live and

work" (EPA, 1999). The pamphlet gives concise

figures for comparisons; "The combined impactof Phase I and Phase II of the reformulated gasoline program will be substantial. Reducing

emissions of smog-forming chemicals by 105,000 tons is the equivalent of taking about 16

million vehicles that burn conventional gasoline off the road" (EPA 1999). Figure 3 shows the

reduction in smog-forming pollutants VOCs (volatile organic compounds), NOx (Nitrogen

oxides), along with gaseous toxic pollutants.

Clean Cities Fact Sheet: Low-Level Ethanol Fuel Blends

This is a two page fact sheet authored by Clean Cities, a voluntary initiative born from the U.S.

Department of Energy. The Clean Cities act was formed to provide information on how to

comply with U.S. Energy Policy Act (EPACT) statutes and regulations of 1992, particularly withimplementation of alternative fuel vehicles in government fleets. The two page fact sheet gives a

brief background on the initiative and is focused on the GHG emissions from fossil fuels as a

reason to blend with ethanol. According to the article, ethanol fuel blends' "reduction of CO can

be significant (20% to 30%)" (DOE, 2005). The pamphlet also brings up how "Production costs

for ethanol, currently more expensive than for gasoline, are subsidized by about $0.50 per gallon

of ethanol, taken as a tax credit by blenders" (DOE, 2005). The controversy of ethanol fuel

efficiency and subsidization are outlined in the summary of David Pimentel's and Tad W.

Patzek's report regarding ethanol and biodiesel energy returns.

Review of Energy Policy act of 1992 (EPACT)

1992, Congress passed the first Energy Policy Act (EPACT) in order to " to facilitate the

introduction of alternative fueled vehicles (AFVs) and replacement fuels into the U.S.

transportation sector and to improve air quality" (Report to Congress, 2008, p. 4). One of the

most significant components of this bill are Titles III, IV, andV, which outline "mandatory and

voluntary measures to promote replacement fuels to the maximum extent practicable and to

Figure 3


8/17

Baker 8

reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil" (Report to Congress, 2008, p. 4). Undertitle III of

EPACT 1992, 75% of light-duty vehicles

acquired by federal fleets for use "in U.S. metropolitan areas must be alternative fuel vehicles

(AFVs)" (DOE, 2007, p. 1). The second component oftitle III provides agencies with credits for

"each light-, medium-, or heavy-

duty AFV they acquire each year

and for biodiesel (typically usedin B20, a blend of 20% biodiesel,

80% petroleum diesel) used in

fleet vehicles" (DOE, 2007, p. 1).

Title IV of EPACT 1992

"includes programs focused on

alternative fuel trucks and buses,

public information, state and local incentives, and technician training" (Report to Congress,

2008, p. 7). Title V outlines AFV acquisition requirements for "AFPs [Alternative Fuel

Providers], state governments, private companies, and local governments" (Report to Congress,

2008, p. 8). Title V primarily sets and defines replacement fuel production goals for the motor

fuels sector with a goals to be met by 2010. This 1992 act aimed to replace 10% of the nation's

transportation fuel with a biofuel by 2000, and 30% of U.S. fuel by 2010. However, after the

2005 Clean Energy Act amendment enacted by George W. Bush through executive order, the

DOE now has the ability to modify the goal's replacement percentage and timeframe. Although

10% replacement goal has been met by the original timeframe, on March 6, 2007 the "DOE

determined through its analysis that the 30 percent Replacement Fuel Goal cannot be met by

2010" (Report to Congress, 2008, p. 9). After completing the analysis the "DOE determined that

the 30 percent goal can be achieved by 2030, and revised the replacement fuel goal accordingly"

(Report to Congress, 2008, p. 9). Together, title IV andV of this act form the basis for the CleanCities program activities which provides information for the public regarding AFV's and

alternative fuels. A goal of the Clean Cities program to increase ethanol fuel blends was

examined in the previous summary.

Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA)

The purpose of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) is "To move the UnitedStates toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of cleanrenewable fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products, buildings, andvehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and toimprove the energy performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes" (110thCongress, 2007, p. 1492). One of the most significant elements of this bill is "TITLE IIENERGY SECURITY THROUGH INCREASED PRODUCTION OF BIOFUELS" (110thCongress, 2007, p. 1492), where congress defined the seven different types of advanced biofuelsthat are currently recognized and encouraged for implementation in conjunction with annuallydecided replacement fuel goals. The biofuels and their definitions are as follows:

"(I) Ethanol derived from cellulose, hemi-cellulose, or lignin.

(II) Ethanol derived from sugar or starch (other than corn starch).

Figure 4


9/17

Baker 9

(III) Ethanol derived from waste material, including crop residue, other vegetative waste

material, animal waste, and food waste and yard waste.

(IV) Biomass-based diesel.

(V) Biogas (including landfill gas and sewage waste treatment gas) produced through the

conversion of organic matter from renewable biomass.

(VI) Butanol or other alcohols produced through the conversion of organic matter from

renewable biomass.(VII) Other fuel derived from cellulosic biomass" (110th Congress, 2007, p. 1519-1520).

Costs and benefits of the Clean Air Act: 1990-2020

This report provides cost, benefit, and emission scenarios of EPA's 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA)

which uses data ranging from 1990 to the data projections for 2020. It then compares these data

sets to projected scenarios also dating from 1990-2020 in which the United States and earth are

living without the Clean Air Act. The report uses figures to communicate the many levels of

economic benefits resulting from the act, compared right next to the cost which are 2000-2020

projections (figures 5 and 6). Comparisons of "key pollutant emissions" can be seen in figure 6.

Figure 5Figure 6


10/17

Baker 10

Evolution of policy and legislature concerning greenhouse gas emissions

Proposal for Updated National Renewable Fuel Standards for 2010 and beyond

On May 9th 2009 the EPA proposed revisions for the Renewable Fuel Standard Program

(RFS1) born from theMassachusetts vs. EPA case and Energy Independence and Security Act of

2007. The changes include "new specific volume standards for cellulosic biofuel, biomass-based

diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel that must be used in transportation fuel each

year" (EPA, 2009, p. 1). The revision of the definition of lifecycle GHG emissions now includes

the "production and transport of the feedstock; land use change; production, distribution, and

blending of the renewable fuel; and end use of the renewable fuel" (EPA, 2009, p. 1). The

lifecycle GHG emissions from these renewable fuels is then compared to the lifecycle GHGemissions of 2005 petroleum gas and diesel to define GHG displacement thresholds for theserenewable fuels using new specific volume standards. The specific volume standards and GHG

emission displacement thresholds can be

found in figures 7 and 8. These standardsmight vary slightly as they are reviewedby the DOE annually to ensure they canbe carried out based on current economicconditions and progress in reaching the

goals. This program is now known as the Renewable Fuel Standards 2 (RFS2).

Background for historicMassachusetts vs. EPA case ruling

On October 1999, 19 organizations filed a petition against the EPA for failing to issue emissions

standards for known greenhouse gases (GHG) as required by section 202(a) of the CAA. After

reviewing and considering over 50,000 public comments, on January 23, 2001 the EPA denied

the petition filed on the grounds that "the Clean Air Act does not authorize EPA to issue

mandatory regulations to address global climate change, see id., at 5292552929; and (2) that

even if the agency had the authority to set greenhouse gas emission standards, it would be

unwise to do so at this time" (EPA Federal Register, 2009). The EPA claimed that even if the

CAA did authorize the EPA to issue mandatory GHG regulations to address global climate

change, the economic toll would be too great, and that the agency's mandatory regulation's

Figure 7

Figu


11/17

Baker 11

effectiveness would be minimal, as much of the carbon prevented from being released into

ambient air will be offset by other developing country's GHG emissions. The EPA argued that

this is an issue too broad for a single government agency to deal with, that doing so would

undermine potential presidential negotiations for international GHG emission standards, and that

this issue should be dealt with by congress. In response to the EPA's denial of the petitions,

several cities and 12 states filed a lawsuit in the district of Columbia court of Appeals against the

EPA for their failure to enact GHG regulation standards for vehicle fuel emissions under theCAA. In 2007 The court of appeals was granted a writ of certiorari by the Supreme Court. This

means that the case would be handed to the Supreme Court for ruling. However, all the

petitioners were denied eligibility for lawsuit by the court on the grounds that they were not

individually affected by global warming, with the exception of the state of Massachusetts (EPA

petition denial, 2001).

Massachusetts vs. EPA

After the suit filed by Massachusetts was deemed eligible, the state argued that the EPA is failing

to set GHG emission standards which are required in the CAA. This failure regulate GHG

emissions is resulting in rising coastal waters which costs the State millions in relocating

expenditures. After the EPA argued that they did not have the authority to enforce GHG

emission standards for vehicles because that regulation is under the jurisdiction of the

Department of Transportation (DOT) under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act, the court

responded, saying that because the DOT sets mileage standards in no way licenses EPA to shirk

its environmental responsibilities. EPA has been charged with protecting the publics health

and welfare, 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(1), a statutory obligation wholly independent of DOTs

mandate to promote energy efficiency (Massachusetts vs. EPA, 2006). In addition to this

definition of responsibility of the EPA, the court's final ruling permanently changed the political

perception of the effects of GHG on global climate change; "The harms associated with climatechange are serious and well recognized. The Governments own objective assessment of the

relevant science and a strong consensus among qualified experts indicate that global warming

threatens, a precipitate rise in sea levels, severe and irreversible changes to natural ecosystems,

significant reduction in winter snowpack with direct and important economic consequences, and

increases in the spread of disease and the ferocity of weather events" (Massachusetts vs. EPA,

2006). Although the final court ruling never required that the EPA make mandatory GHG

emission standards, it did define greenhouse gases as air pollutants for the purposes of the Clean

Air Act (CAA). The court then gave time to the EPA administrator to "determine whether or not

emissions of greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines cause or

contribute to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health orwelfare, or whether the science is too uncertain for EPA to make a reasoned decision"(EPA,

NHTSA, 2010, p. 8). After the EPA administrator released a proposal of it's findings for a 60-

day public comment period during which over 380,000 comments were considered, the

Administrator responded to the Court's remand by issuing two findings under section 202(a) of

the Clean Air Act.


12/17

Baker 12

First, "the Administrator found that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-

mixed greenhouse gases -- carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O),

hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) -- in the

atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations" (EPA,

NHTSA, 2010, p. 8).

This is referred to as the 'endangerment finding'

Second, "the Administrator found that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse

gases from new motor vehicle and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas

pollution which threatens public health and welfare" (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 8).

This is referred to as the 'cause or contribute finding'

After extensive examinations of scientific evidence and reviews of public contributions, the EPA

found that today's "science compellingly supports a positive finding that atmospheric

concentrations of these greenhouse gases result in air pollution which may reasonably be

anticipated to endanger both public health and welfare" (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 8).

This historic finding defined GHG as being a danger to "both public health and welfare", which

gives both the DOT and EPA the responsibility of mitigating these consequences of

transportation emissions.

President Obama Announces National Fuel Efficiency Policy

On May 19th, 2009 Obama made history by setting in motion a new national policy aimed at

both increasing fuel economy and reducing greenhouse gas pollution for all new cars and truckssold in the United States. The new standards, covering model years 2012-2016, and ultimately

requiring an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 mpg in 2016, are projected to save 1.8

billion barrels of oil over the life of the program with a fuel economy gain averaging more than 5

percent per year and a reduction of approximately 900 million metric tons in greenhouse gas

emissions (The White House, 2009). This is the most significant plan of the federal government

to regulate and reduce GHG emissions by improving both the fuel economy of vehicles sold in

the U.S. and the sources of energy for these vehicles through the "collaboration between the

Department of Transportation (DOT), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the worlds

largest auto manufacturers, the United Auto Workers, leaders in the environmental community,

the State of California, and other state governments" (The White House, 2009).

The policy alsosimplifies standards for the public and manufacturers by setting the standard under one name

rather than separate standards required by DOT, EPA, and California agencies individually.

EPA and NHTSA Finalize Historic National Program to Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve

Fuel Economy for Cars and Trucks

Detailed in an April 2010 EPA regulatory announcement, in one of the most complex andcohesive collaborations between separate federal agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency


13/17

Baker 13

(EPA) and Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration(NHTSA) made history. For this policy, the EPA finalized "the first-ever national greenhousegas (GHG) emissions standards under the Clean Air Act" in conjunction with NHTSA's new"Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards under the Energy Policy and ConservationAct" (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 1). EPA's GHG emission standards are the first of it's kind underthe CAA as a result of the EPA's 'endangerment finding' established after theMassachusetts vs.EPA supreme court case, which also gave the NHTSA a new responsibility to create vehicle

GHG efficiency standards under the EPA's 'cause or contribute' finding (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p.1).The explanations of these rulings can be found in this report's previous "Massachusetts vs.EPA" summary. These final standards and rules were spurred into development " in response toPresident Obamas call for a strong and coordinated federal greenhouse gas and fuel economy

program" (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 1). A summary of Obama's request can be found in this report'sprevious summary.

In this announcement, the EPA stresses the "Need to Reduce Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

and Improve Fuel Economy from Passenger Cars and Light Trucks"by explaining how climatechange is and will create "more frequent and intense heat waves, more severe wildfires, degradedair quality, heavier and more frequent downpours and flooding, increased drought, greater sea

level rise, more intense storms, harm to water resources, continued ocean acidification, harm toagriculture, and harm to wildlife and ecosystems" (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 1).

Over 2012-2016 with the joint EPA and NHTSA standards, this national program is expected toreduce "GHG emissions from the U.S. light-duty fleet by approximately 21 percent by 2030 overthe level that would occur in the absence of the national program". Figure 9 provides specificemission compliance levels. When considering all of the GHG emissions in the US, 31% of themcome from mobile sources, and out of these mobile sources light cars and truck "are responsiblefor nearly 60 percent" of the GHG emissions (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 2-3). If the policy doesmeet its goals, and if the EPA's emissions data is correct, by 2030 the policy would result in areduction of 18.6% in total U.S. GHG emissions. The EPA projects that the cost of upgrading the

emission technology of 2012-2016 vehicles as planned in the national program will cost under$52 billion, while the benefits "are expected to be approximately $240 billion" (EPA, NHTSA,2010, p. 2-3).

Figure 9


14/17

Baker 14

CONCLUSION

Earth's increasing rate of industry and population growth is quickening the rate at whichpetroleum fuels are burned around the world. In the past century, the US has been a leader inenergy use policy, creating mandatory regulations to decrease smog emissions, increase theefficiency of transportation fuel, and increase future vehicle's fuel efficiency in an effort to slowoil imports, increase national security, and grow domestic industry. Recently, environmentalconsequences from such widespread GHG and toxic gas emissions are emerging whichthreatenthe long term sustainability of such growth. Unfortunately the idea of climate change regulationisn't popular with those in industry because solutions often involve costly technologies and newregulations to abide by. Though the price to reduce emissions may be costly initially, thisinternalization will end up being less expensive and more effective than scrambling to respond torising sea levels, the destruction of wildlife diversity and thus total biomass of the earth, oceanacidification, increasingly violent weather, and increasing rates of disease.

RECOMENDATIONAnother important consideration in enacting GHG and renewable fuel regulations is the reserveof Earth's petroleum fuels; according to a study done by Shahriar Shafiee and Erkan Topal at theUniversity of Queensland, at the current rate of energy consumption, "coal reserves are availableup to 2112, and will be the only fossil fuel remaining after 2042" (Shafiee & Topal, 2008). Thismeans that at the calculated rate of consumption, after 2042, the reserves of both oil and naturalgas will be depleted.

However, recent advances in the political recognition of global climate change, and new U.S.policies such as the revised renewable fuel standards and historical 'New National Program toReduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Cars and Trucks', shows the world asmall step in the right direction.


15/17

Baker 15

References

110th Congress, Public Law 110-140,Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ140/pdf/PLAW-110publ140.pdf

Clean Air Act 1990-2020 full report from

http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdf

Demirbas, Ayhan. (2006). Progress and recent trends in biofuels. Progress in Energy and

Combustion Science 33 (2007) 118

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256

Energy policy act of 2005, from

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ58/pdf/PLAW-109publ58.pdf

Historic EPA regulatory announcement, cooperation between EPA and DOT

http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f09047a.pdf

Massachusetts v. EPA, (2006), CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF

APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUITMASSACHUSETTS ET AL.v.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ET AL. Retrieved from

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdf

Patzek & Pimentel (2005). Ethanol Production Using Corn, Switchgrass, and Wood;

Biodiesel Production Using Soybean and Sunflower:Natural Resources Research, Vol.

14, No. 1, March 2005

http://www.c4aqe.org/Economics_of_Ethanol/ethanol.2005.pdf

Report to Congress, DOE. (2008).Review of Energy Policy Act of 1992 Programs and the

Alternative Fuel Provider Fleet Mandate.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/epact/pdfs/704_report_final.pdf

Shafiee, S., Topal, E. (2008). When will fossil fuel reserves be diminished?School of

Engineering and CRC Mining, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia Qld.


The White House, Office of the press secretary. (2009, May 19). President Obama Announces

National Fuel Efficiency Policy. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-

office/president-obama-announces-national-fuel-efficiency-policy

United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1999). Phase II Reformulated Gasoline: The

next step toward cleaner air.[Pamphlet].

http://www.epa.gov/oms/eparfg.pdf
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ140/pdf/PLAW-110publ140.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdfhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ58/pdf/PLAW-109publ58.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f09047a.pdfhttp://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdfhttp://www.c4aqe.org/Economics_of_Ethanol/ethanol.2005.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/epact/pdfs/704_report_final.pdfhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421508004126http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-national-fuel-efficiency-policyhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-national-fuel-efficiency-policyhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/eparfg.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/eparfg.pdfhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-national-fuel-efficiency-policyhttp://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-national-fuel-efficiency-policyhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421508004126http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehiclesandfuels/epact/pdfs/704_report_final.pdfhttp://www.c4aqe.org/Economics_of_Ethanol/ethanol.2005.pdfhttp://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f09047a.pdfhttp://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ58/pdf/PLAW-109publ58.pdfhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdfhttp://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-110publ140/pdf/PLAW-110publ140.pdf


16/17


17/17

Baker 17

List of figures cited

Figure 0. Fuel Nozzle Image. Retrieved 5/30/2012

http://www.zombiehunters.org/wiki/images/Fuel_Nozzle.jpg

Figure 1. Alternative fuels phasing projections. Retrieved 5/14/2012


Figure 2. Resources of main liquid biofuels for automotives. Retrieved 5/14/2012http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256

Figure 3. Phase II impact of Reformulated Gasoline Program. Retrieved 5/22/2012http://www.epa.gov/oms/eparfg.pdf

Figure 4. Federal Energy Management Program fact sheet, retrieved 5/22/2012http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/43500.pdf

Figure 5. Clean Air Act 1990-2020 cost and benefit review, retrieved 5/25/2012http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdf

Figure 6. Clean Air Act 1990-2020 cost and benefit review, retrieved 5/25/2012http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdf

Figure 7. Proposal for Updated National Renewable Fuel Standards, retrieved 5/26/2012

http://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdf

Figure 8. Proposal for Updated National Renewable Fuel Standards, retrieved 5/26/2012

http://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdf

Figure 9. EPA and NHTSA Reduce GHGs and Improve Fuel Economy, retrieved 5/30/2012

http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f10014.pdf
http://www.zombiehunters.org/wiki/images/Fuel_Nozzle.jpghttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256http://www.epa.gov/oms/eparfg.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/43500.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f10014.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f10014.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/feb11/fullreport.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/43500.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/oms/eparfg.pdfhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128506000256http://www.zombiehunters.org/wiki/images/Fuel_Nozzle.jpg

portfolio- password protected- recent evolution of u.s. transportation emissions policy

Documents