List of figures cited...........................................................................................................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 gas emissions.
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 calls for 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. 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 are changing 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 federal government 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.
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 ethanol and biodiesel efficiency; "In contrast to the USDA, numerous scientific studies have concluded that ethanol production does not provide a net energy balance, that ethanol is not a renewable energy source, is not an economical fuel, and its production and use contribute to air, water, and soil pollution and global warming" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 66). The authors support these claims by citing both their own and others scientific findings. The report looks at ethanol derived from corn, switchgrass, and wood, and biodiesel from soybean and sunflowers. There are significant problems with corn derived ethanol, particularly issues resulting from using corn as a fuel rather than food. "An average U.S. automobile travels about 20,000 miles/yr and uses about 1,000 gallons of gasoline per yr (USBC, 2003). To replace only a third of this gasoline with ethanol, 0.6 ha [1.48 acres] of corn must be grown. Currently, 0.5 ha [1.24 acres] of cropland is required to feed each American. Therefore...to feed one automobile with ethanol, substituting only one third of the gasoline used per year, Americans would require more cropland than they need to feed themselves" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 67). This means that further ethanol subsidization "can be expected to increase corn prices further for beef production and ultimately increase costs to the consumer. Therefore, in addition to paying the $8.4 billion in taxes for ethanol and corn subsidies, consumers are expected to pay significantly higher meat, milk, and egg 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 negative energy return for corn ethanol production" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 70). Pimentel and Patzek also find that "about 57% more energy is required to produce a liter of ethanol using wood than the energy harvested as ethanol" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 71). For biodiesel, oil derived from soybeans and sunflowers is primarily used. For soybeans, after factoring in the usable 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% higher than the energy content of the sunflower biodiesel" (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 73). In their conclusion, the authors recommend the use of photo-voltaics for energy, which can capture about 10% of the sunlight they are exposed to. In contrast, plants, which gain their biomass through the same process, capture and convert on average only 0.1% of the energy they are exposed to by the sun (Patzek & Pimentel, 2005, p. 73).
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 petroleum fossil 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 1 Figure 2 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 impact of 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), NO x (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 with implementation 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, and V, which outline "mandatory and voluntary measures to promote replacement fuels to the maximum extent practicable and to Figure 3 Baker 8
reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil" (Report to Congress, 2008, p. 4). Under title 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 of title III provides agencies with credits for "each light-, medium-, or heavy- duty AFV they acquire each year and for biodiesel (typically used in 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 and V of this act form the basis for the Clean Cities 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 United States toward greater energy independence and security, to increase the production of clean renewable fuels, to protect consumers, to increase the efficiency of products, buildings, and vehicles, to promote research on and deploy greenhouse gas capture and storage options, and to improve the energy performance of the Federal Government, and for other purposes" (110th Congress, 2007, p. 1492). One of the most significant elements of this bill is "TITLE II ENERGY SECURITY THROUGH INCREASED PRODUCTION OF BIOFUELS" (110th Congress, 2007, p. 1492), where congress defined the seven different types of advanced biofuels that are currently recognized and encouraged for implementation in conjunction with annually decided 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
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 5 Figure 6 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 the Massachusetts 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 GHG emissions of 2005 petroleum gas and diesel to define GHG displacement thresholds for these renewable fuels using new specific volume standards. The specific volume standards and GHG emission displacement thresholds can be found in figures 7 and 8. These standards might vary slightly as they are reviewed by the DOE annually to ensure they can be carried out based on current economic conditions and progress in reaching the goals. This program is now known as the Renewable Fuel Standards 2 (RFS2).
Background for historic Massachusetts 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 J anuary 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 Figure 8 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 the CAA. 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 climate change 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 or welfare, 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.
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 19 th , 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 trucks sold 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 also simplifies 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 and cohesive collaborations between separate federal agencies, the Environmental Protection Agency 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 greenhouse gas (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 Conservation Act" (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 1). EPA's GHG emission standards are the first of it's kind under the CAA as a result of the EPA's 'endangerment finding' established after the Massachusetts 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 to President 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's previous 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 climate change is and will create "more frequent and intense heat waves, more severe wildfires, degraded air 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 to agriculture, 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 to reduce "GHG emissions from the U.S. light-duty fleet by approximately 21 percent by 2030 over the level that would occur in the absence of the national program". Figure 9 provides specific emission compliance levels. When considering all of the GHG emissions in the US, 31% of them come from mobile sources, and out of these mobile sources light cars and truck "are responsible for nearly 60 percent" of the GHG emissions (EPA, NHTSA, 2010, p. 2-3). If the policy does meet its goals, and if the EPA's emissions data is correct, by 2030 the policy would result in a reduction 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 Baker 14
CONCLUSION Earth's increasing rate of industry and population growth is quickening the rate at which petroleum fuels are burned around the world. In the past century, the US has been a leader in energy use policy, creating mandatory regulations to decrease smog emissions, increase the efficiency of transportation fuel, and increase future vehicle's fuel efficiency in an effort to slow oil imports, increase national security, and grow domestic industry. Recently, environmental consequences from such widespread GHG and toxic gas emissions are emerging which threaten the long term sustainability of such growth. Unfortunately the idea of climate change regulation isn't popular with those in industry because solutions often involve costly technologies and new regulations to abide by. Though the price to reduce emissions may be costly initially, this internalization will end up being less expensive and more effective than scrambling to respond to rising sea levels, the destruction of wildlife diversity and thus total biomass of the earth, ocean acidification, increasingly violent weather, and increasing rates of disease.
RECOMENDATION Another important consideration in enacting GHG and renewable fuel regulations is the reserve of Earth's petroleum fuels; according to a study done by Shahriar Shafiee and Erkan Topal at the University of Queensland, at the current rate of energy consumption, "coal reserves are available up to 2112, and will be the only fossil fuel remaining after 2042" (Shafiee & Topal, 2008). This means that at the calculated rate of consumption, after 2042, the reserves of both oil and natural gas 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 to Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Cars and Trucks', shows the world a small step in the right direction.
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 CIRCUIT MASSACHUSETTS 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. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421508004126
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 Baker 16
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2007). Federal Fleet Requirements. Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/43500.pdf
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2005). Clean Cities: Low-Level Ethanol Fuel Blends [Fact Sheet]. Office of Weatherization http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy05osti/37135.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (2009) Federal Register, Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act; Final Rule, http://epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/downloads/Federal_Register- EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171-Dec.15-09.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). (2010). EPA and NHTSA Finalize Historic National Program to Reduce Greenhouse Gases and Improve Fuel Economy for Cars and Trucks (EPA- 420-F-10-014). Office of Transportation and Air Quality. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420f10014.pdf
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Transportation and Air Quality, New Regulation proposal for the National Renewable Fuel Standard Program for 2010 and Beyond. (2009). http://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420f09023.pdf