The Environmental Protection Agency’s long-standing mission is to protect human health and the environment, so it seems counterintuitive that the agency would promote policies that allow more pollution and jeopardize consumer safety. Yet, the EPA did just that with its recent official announcement approving the year-round sale of 15% ethanol fuel.
Ultimately, by approving year-round sales of E15, the EPA is implicitly condoning an increase in pollution, given that the move requires an extension of a pollution waiver to allow an increase in the vapor pressure of the fuel. The use of E15 also results in fewer miles per gallon in automobiles compared to E10 and increases the number of times consumers must fill up their gas tanks.
But the damaging effects of the EPA’s actions go beyond pollution. Often marketed to consumers as unleaded 88, E15 damages marine engines and many other recreational products. In fact, some engines are federally prohibited from using it because catastrophic engine failures have occurred.
The EPA has done a poor job of requiring fuel retailers to communicate and warn consumers of the dangers of E15. The only warning the EPA provides consumers is in the form of a small sticker strategically hidden on gasoline fuel pumps.
According to a recent study, more than 60% of consumers mistakenly assume that any gas sold at standard stations is acceptable for all of their engines. Despite this, the EPA dismissed the need for physical controls and sufficient labeling to prevent misfueling in its rule for year-round E15 sales, even though nearly 9 in 10 Americans believe the U.S. government should do more to educate the public on correct fueling for various engine types. Adding even more of this fuel to the market without proper safeguards will increase the likelihood of consumers misfuelling or selecting a harmful blend, unknown to them, thereby jeopardizing the function of and voiding warranties for millions of marine and off-road engines.
The EPA must ensure that consumers are fully aware of the damage that can occur if E15 is inadvertently used in unapproved engines. Prompting consumers to confirm their fuel choice via electronic keypad on the fuel pump could be one step to further help confirm a consumer’s choice and understanding. Additionally, the EPA should mandate the continued availability of E10 to ensure consumers have access to approved fuels.
There’s also a better option than E15, one that only requires cutting red tape hindering the widespread usage of a next-generation biofuel: biobutanol. Unlike ethanol, biobutanol contains nearly 90% of the energy content of gasoline (compared to 67% for ethanol), is compatible with the existing fueling infrastructure, does not phase-separate in the presence of water; behaves similarly to gasoline, lowers evaporative emissions, and can be blended with gasoline at up to 16.1% by volume while remaining compatible with engines and fuel systems.
Broadly, biobutanol has all the positive properties of gasoline without the negatives of ethanol. What’s more, biobutanol is currently produced from the same feedstocks that go into ethanol, meaning there are no negative impacts on existing farming infrastructure and stakeholders, such as corn growers, transporters, processors, and fermenters.
The recreational marine industry has worked proactively to successfully test, validate, and approve the use of biobutanol. Supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, and Argonne National Laboratory, my company, Evinrude, has been integral to a five-year comprehensive testing program including the American Boat and Yacht Council, and other boat and engine manufacturers across the industry, in helping commercialize biobutanol in limited markets across the U.S.
The EPA currently grants waivers that allows E10 to exceed evaporative emission standards, but biobutanol lowers evaporative emissions in the summer. Unfortunately, the EPA’s regulation technically makes it illegal for a fuel to pollute less.
Some states have found solutions to this EPA requirement. In Texas, for example, consumers have access to renewable biobutanol and can choose between biofuels.
While the ethanol industry has been afforded numerous economic incentives in the form of subsidies and low-interest loans, biobutanol producers only want the chance to fairly compete in the marketplace. Ethanol should not be the only choice for consumers.
Given the many demonstrated benefits of biobutanol, especially compared to E15, the EPA’s approach to consumer education and widespread adoption of E15 is irrational and contradicts its own mission. We need our government agencies to adopt common sense policies that protect consumers above all else. I urge the EPA to fulfill its duty to the environment and the American people by encouraging the exploration of alternative fuels in its place, like biobutanol.
Jeff Wasil leads marine outboard engine emissions testing and certification at Bombardier Recreation Products Evinrude Product Development Center.
