Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Renewable Fuel Standard ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

VIII. What Are The Impacts Of Increased Ethanol Use On Emissions And Air Quality? In this section, we evaluate the impact of increased production and use of renewable fuels on emissions and air quality in the U.S., particularly ethanol and biodiesel. In performing these analyses, we compare the emissions which would have occurred in the future if fuel quality had remained unchanged from pre-Act levels to those which will be required under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Energy Act or the Act). This approach differs from that traditionally taken in EPA regulatory impact analyses. Traditionally, we would have compared future emissions with and without the requirement of the Energy Act. However, as described in Section VI, we expect that total renewable fuel use in the U.S. in 2012 to exceed 7.5 billion gallons even in the absence of the RFS program. Thus, a traditional regulatory impact analysis would have shown no impact on emissions or air quality. Strictly speaking, if the same volume and types of renewable fuels are produced and used with and without the RFS program, the RFS program is having no impact on emissions or air quality. However, levels of renewable fuel use are increasing dramatically relative to both today and the recent past, with corresponding impacts on emissions and air quality. We believe that it is appropriate to evaluate these changes here, regardless of whether they are occurring due to economic forces or Energy Act requirements. In the process of estimating the impact of increased renewable fuel use, we also include the impact of reduced use of MTBE in gasoline. It is the increased production and use of ethanol which is facilitating the removal of MTBE while still producing the required volume of RFG which meets both commercial and EPA regulatory specifications. Because of this connection, we found it impractical to isolate the impact of increased ethanol use from the removal of MTBE. A. Effect of Renewable Fuel Use on Emissions 1. Emissions from Gasoline Fueled Motor Vehicles And Equipment Several models of the impact of gasoline quality on motor vehicle emissions have been developed since the early 1990’s. We evaluated these models and selected those which were based on the most comprehensive set of emissions data and developed using the most advanced statistical tools for this analysis. Still, as will be described below, significant uncertainty still exists as to the effect of these gasoline components on emissions from both motor vehicle and nonroad equipment, particularly from the latest models equipped with the most advanced emission controls. Pending adequate funding, we plan to conduct significant vehicle and equipment testing over the next several years to improve our estimates of the impact of these additives and other gasoline properties on emissions. The results of this testing will not be available for inclusion in the analyses - 154 -
supporting this rulemaking. We hope that the results from these test programs will be available for reference in the future evaluations of the emission and air quality impacts of U.S. fuel programs required by the Act. 80 The remainder of this sub-section is divided into three parts. The first evaluates the impact of increased ethanol use and decreased MTBE use on gasoline quality. The second evaluates the impact of increased ethanol use and decreased MTBE use on motor vehicle emissions. The third evaluates the impact of increased ethanol use and decreased MTBE use on nonroad equipment emissions. a. Gasoline Fuel Quality For this proposal, we estimate the impact of ethanol use on gasoline quality using fuel survey data obtained by Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) from 2001- 2005. 81 We estimate the impact of removing MTBE from gasoline based on refinery modeling performed in support of the RFG rulemaking. We plan to update these estimates for the FRM using refinery modeling which is currently underway. In general, as shown in Table VIII.A.1.a-1, adding ethanol to gasoline is expected to reduce levels of aromatics and olefins in conventional gasoline, as well as reduce mid and high distillation temperatures (e.g., T50 and T90). RVP is expected to increase, as most areas of the country grant ethanol blends a 1.0 RVP waiver of the applicable RVP standards in the summer. With the exception of RVP, the effect of removing MTBE results in essentially the opposite impacts. Please see Chapter 2 of the DRIA for a detailed description of the methodologies used and the specific changes in projected fuel quality. Table VIII.A.1.a-1 CG Fuel Quality With and Without Oxygenates Fuel Parameter Typical 9 RVP CG MTBE CG Blend Ethanol CG Blend RVP (psi) 8.7 8.7 9.7 T50 218 206 186 T90 332 324 325 Aromatics (vol%) 32 25.5 27 Olefins (vol%) 7.7 7.7 6.1 Oxygen (wt%) 0 2 3.5 Sulfur (ppm) 30 30 30 Benzene (vol%) 1.0 1.0 1.0 The effect of adding ethanol and removing MTBE on the quality of RFG is expected to very limited. RFG must meet stringent VOC, NOx and toxics performance standards. Thus, the natural effects of MTBE and ethanol blending on gasoline must often be addressed through further refining. The largest differences are expected to exist 80 Subject to funding. 81 Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers North American Fuel Survey 2005. For the final rule, we intend to supplement this empirical approach with the results of refinery modeling which might better capture all of the effects of ethanol blending on gasoline quality. - 155 -
Page 1 and 2:
The Administrator signed the follow
Page 3 and 4:
Ave., NW, Washington DC. This Docke
Page 5 and 6:
Table of contents: I. Background A.
Page 7 and 8:
C. Requirements for Producers and I
Page 9 and 10:
G. Executive Order 13045: Protectio
Page 11 and 12:
The increased use of renewable fuel
Page 13 and 14:
establish the applicable national v
Page 15 and 16:
Today's proposal outlines the full
Page 17 and 18:
enewable fuel feedstock market pric
Page 19 and 20:
Unlike VOC and NOx, emissions of CO
Page 21 and 22:
These renewable feedstocks are then
Page 23 and 24:
5. Potential Water Quality Impacts
Page 25 and 26:
enewable fuel volume which each par
Page 27 and 28:
certain volume of renewable fuel. E
Page 29 and 30:
est practices would have the option
Page 31 and 32:
As stated, the renewable fuel stand
Page 33 and 34:
enewable fuel volumes in the calcul
Page 35 and 36:
For illustrative purposes, we have
Page 37 and 38:
These credit provisions have meanin
Page 39 and 40:
Stdi = The RFS program standard for
Page 41 and 42:
gasoline. The Act is unclear on whe
Page 43 and 44:
. Ethanol Made From Any Feedstock I
Page 45 and 46:
generate thermal energy used to pro
Page 47 and 48:
animal wastes, including poultry fa
Page 49 and 50:
limit this program solely to a stra
Page 51 and 52:
presence of the denaturant. For ins
Page 53 and 54:
First, doing so could create an inc
Page 55 and 56:
For purposes of this preamble, the
Page 57 and 58:
capability for all of the small ref
Page 59 and 60:
trading program, without any per ga
Page 61 and 62:
obligated parties. However, there i
Page 63 and 64:
particular importance for 2013 and
Page 65 and 66:
have to significantly change their
Page 67 and 68:
The D code would identify cellulosi
Page 69 and 70:
Another case in which a RIN may not
Page 71 and 72:
Section IV. In the context of demon
Page 73 and 74:
equired volumes shown in Table I.B-
Page 75 and 76:
We request comment on the valid lif
Page 77 and 78:
e used for current year compliance.
Page 79 and 80:
equirements by roughly 10 to 30 per
Page 81 and 82:
4. Provisions For Exporters Of Rene
Page 83 and 84:
Previous-year RINs: RINs that came
Page 85 and 86:
a. Responsibilities Of Renewable Fu
Page 87 and 88:
another, in electronic or paper for
Page 89 and 90:
e a one-to-one correspondence betwe
Page 91 and 92:
Parent batch Actual volume (gal) Ba
Page 93 and 94:
should also have the right to separ
Page 95 and 96:
3. Distribution Of Separated RINs O
Page 97 and 98:
obligated parties to exercise marke
Page 99 and 100:
Our proposed program is designed to
Page 101 and 102:
As discussed in Section III.D, it i
Page 103 and 104: additional enforcement burdens plac
Page 105 and 106: B. Requirements for Obligated Parti
Page 107 and 108: fuel and containing identifying inf
Page 109 and 110: We request comment on our proposed
Page 111 and 112: We also request comment on our prop
Page 113 and 114: The refiner or importer would be li
Page 115 and 116: Plant Feedstock Corn a Table VI.A.1
Page 117 and 118: Leading the Midwest in ethanol prod
Page 119 and 120: EPA forecasts ethanol production to
Page 121 and 122: As shown in Table VI.A.2-1 and Figu
Page 123 and 124: 3. Current Ethanol and MTBE Consump
Page 125 and 126: Oxygenate Use (Bgal) 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.
Page 127 and 128: change from the 2004 base case. 53
Page 129 and 130: per gallon to biodiesel produced fr
Page 131 and 132: ased on the assumption that the ble
Page 133 and 134: Modifications to the rail, barge, t
Page 135 and 136: other waste materials as discussed
Page 137 and 138: elatively small fraction of the tot
Page 139 and 140: production costs using prices for s
Page 141 and 142: the capital cost of making the nece
Page 143 and 144: information on biodiesel freight co
Page 145 and 146: For further details on RVP reductio
Page 147 and 148: assuming only that blending of etha
Page 149 and 150: costs). At a $70 per barrel crude o
Page 151 and 152: gasoline use scenarios will cost th
Page 153: the incentive to blend in ethanol b
Page 157 and 158: We base our estimates of fuel quali
Page 159 and 160: Table VIII.A.1.b-2 Effect of MTBE a
Page 161 and 162: pre-1998 model year onroad diesel e
Page 163 and 164: 1. Primary Analysis The national em
Page 165 and 166: Table VIII.B.1-4 Annual Emissions N
Page 167 and 168: RFG due to the absence of an RVP wa
Page 169 and 170: increase in ambient ozone levels is
Page 171 and 172: developing a model of secondary org
Page 173 and 174: IX. Impacts On Fossil Fuel Consumpt
Page 175 and 176: intended to help fuel producers est
Page 177 and 178: efficiency and to reduce air emissi
Page 179 and 180: combined those displacement indexes
Page 181 and 182: 3. Displacement Indexes (DI) The di
Page 183 and 184: Table IX.C.1-1 Fossil fuel impacts
Page 185 and 186: as on the exports of agricultural p
Page 187 and 188: which may change in response to an
Page 189 and 190: X. Agricultural Sector Economic Imp
Page 191 and 192: XI. Public Participation We request
Page 193 and 194: ways to comply with any previously
Page 195 and 196: small refiner under this proposal.
Page 197 and 198: meet these criteria to be considere
Page 199 and 200: “economically significant” as d
Page 201 and 202: 40 CFR Part 80 is proposed to be am
Page 203 and 204: (b) Renewable Fuel Standard for 200
Page 205 and 206:
(2) The term “Renewable fuel” i
Page 207 and 208:
RFStdi = Renewable Fuel Standard in
Page 209 and 210:
a party’s renewable volume obliga
Page 211 and 212:
(a) YYYY is the calendar year in wh
Page 213 and 214:
(ii) The value for EEEEEE in an ext
Page 215 and 216:
(2) A deficit is calculated accordi
Page 217 and 218:
(a) (1) Any party that exports any
Page 219 and 220:
(e) If a refiner is complying on an
Page 221 and 222:
calendar year; however, disqualific
Page 223 and 224:
§80.76, if such information has no
Page 225 and 226:
(1) A summary report of the annual
Page 227 and 228:
(4) Reports shall be submitted on f
Page 229 and 230:
(1) Fail to acquire sufficient RINs
Page 231 and 232:
(b) The following attest procedures
Page 233 and 234:
(B) That the RFS-FRGAS remained seg
Page 235 and 236:
EPA employees or EPA contractors, f
Page 237 and 238:
(iv) Determine the date and time th
Page 239:
(ii) Be licensed as a Certified Pub
show all

Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Renewable Fuel Standard ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?