EPA sued over ethanol ruling

Offices of The Coca-Cola Company in Sugar LandImage via Wikipedia
Bloomberg/Houston Chronicle:

The Grocery Manufacturers Association, the American Petroleum Institute and other groups filed a lawsuit challenging the EPA’s decision to allow more corn-based ethanol in gasoline.

Lobbying organizations representing companies that include Tyson Foods Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. are part of the lawsuit filed today in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The groups, including the American Meat Institute and the Snack Food Association, said the EPA lacked the authority to make the decision and will result in higher food costs.

The EPA’s decision “will increase the amount of corn being diverted to our gas tanks and away from meat and poultry production,” J. Patrick Boyle, the Meat Institute’s chief executive officer, said in an-mailed statement. The AMI includes Tyson, Smithfield Foods Inc. and Kraft Foods Inc. among its members.

The EPA last month granted a request from ethanol producers to increase concentrations of the fuel in gasoline to as much as 15 percent from 10 percent for vehicles made for 2007 and later. The agency may make a decision affecting model years 2001 through 2006 later this month, after further testing.

The American Petroleum Institute said government and industry tests have shown “potential safety and performance problems” and that the EPA should have waited for the additional tests to be completed.

...
It is time to declare this experiment a failure. We would be better off if this administration would stop strangling domestic production of oil and gas and would quit subsidizing "alternative" energy like ethanol. If it has a place in the energy food chain, it should make it on it s merits and not on government fiat, or worse, subsidies.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

Apple's huge investment in US including Texas facility

Is the F-35 obsolete?