A 

Abortion
Accounting
Advertising
Africa
African-American Studies
Aging
Agriculture
American Indian Studies
Anthropology
Archaeology
Architecture
Argumentative
Art: Artists (Alphabetized)
Art: General
Become an Affiliate and Earn $$$
Biographies (Alphabetized)
Book Reviews (Non-Fiction) (Alphabetized)
Business: Companies (Alphabetized)
Business: General
Business: Industries (Alphabetized)
Business: International
Business: Small
California
Canada
Caribbean
Child Abuse
China
Communication: Journalism
Communication: Language & Speech
Communication: Media
Communication: Non-Verbal
Communication: Television
Communication: Television & Children
Communism
Computer Science
Consumerism
Criminal Justice: General
Criminal Justice: Juvenile Delinquency
Criminal Justice: Police Science
Criminal Justice: Prisons
Cuba
Death & Dying: Euthanasia
Death & Dying: General
Death & Dying: Suicide
Drama: American
Drama: English
Drama: World
Drugs: Alcohol
Drugs: General
Economics: Banking
Economics: Economists (Alphabetized)
Economics: General
Economics: Inflation
Economics: International Trade
Economics: Macroeconomics
Economics: Microeconomics
Economics: Taxation
Education: Administration
Education: Curriculum
Education: General
Education: Higher
Education: Physical
Education: Psychology
Education: Reading
Education: Special
Education: Teaching Methods
Education: Theory
Energy: General
Energy: Nuclear
Energy: Solar
Environmental Studies
Evolution
Family & Marriage
Films: Artists (Alphabetized)
Films: General
Finance: Companies (Alphabetized)
Finance: General
Former Soviet Union: Post-1990
France
Gender & Sexuality
Geography
Germany
History: Ancient Greek & Roman
History: European
History: Great Britain
History: U.S. (After 1865)
History: U.S. (Before 1865)
History: U.S. Presidency
History: U.S. Presidents (Alphabetized)
Homosexuality
Immigration
India
Indonesia
International Relations: Arms Control
International Relations: Cold War
International Relations: Non-U.S.
International Relations: U.S.
Japan
Jewish Studies
Korea
Labor
Latin America
Law: Business
Law: Capital Punishment
Law: General
Law: International & Non-U.S.
Law: Supreme Court
Leadership
Literature, American: Authors (Alphabetized)
Literature, American: Faulkner
Literature, American: Fitzgerald
Literature, American: General
Literature, American: Hawthorne
Literature, American: Hemingway
Literature, American: Melville
Literature, American: Poe
Literature, American: Steinbeck
Literature, American: Twain
Literature, English: Authors (Alphabetized)
Literature, English: Chaucer
Literature, English: Conrad
Literature, English: Dickens
Literature, English: General
Literature, English: Joyce
Literature, English: Lawrence
Literature, English: Shakespeare
Literature, English: Swift
Literature, General: Children
Literature, General: Classic (Greek & Roman)
Literature, General: Russian
Literature, General: World
Management: General
Management: Japanese
Management: Motivation
Management: Theory
Management: Women
Marketing: Companies (Alphabetized)
Marketing: General
Marketing: Plans
Mathematics
Medical: Aids
Medical: Dentistry
Medical: Diseases & Disorders (Alphabetized)
Medical: General
Medical: Nursing
Mexican-American Studies
Mexico
Middle East: Egypt
Middle East: General
Middle East: O.P.E.C.
Military
Music: Classical
Music: General
Mythology
Nutrition
Parapsychology/Occult
Philosophy: Ancient Greek
Philosophy: Descartes
Philosophy: Eastern
Philosophy: General
Philosophy: Kant
Philosophy: Sartre
Poetry: American
Poetry: English
Poetry: Milton
Poetry: World
Political Science: Elections & Campaigns
Political Science: Foreign
Political Science: Lobbyists & Pressure Groups
Political Science: Machiavelli
Political Science: Mill
Political Science: Political Theory
Political Science: U.S.
Psychology: Behaviorism
Psychology: Child & Adolescent
Psychology: Disorders
Psychology: Dreams
Psychology: Experimental
Psychology: Freud
Psychology: General
Psychology: Jung
Psychology: Physiology
Psychology: Piaget
Psychology: Rogers
Psychology: Social
Psychology: Testing
Psychology: Therapies
Public Administration: General
Public Administration: Government Agencies (Alphabetized)
Racism
Real Estate
Recreation & Leisure
Religion: Eastern
Religion: General
Religion: Islam
Religion: The Bible
Research: Completed Studies (With Statistics & Results)
Research: Designs & Proposals
Research: Statistics & Methodology
Russia: Pre-1917 Revolution
Science: Astronomy
Science: Biology
Science: General
Science: Genetics
Sociology: Durkheim
Sociology: General
Sociology: Marx
Sociology: Social Problems
Sociology: Social Theory
Sociology: Social Welfare
Sociology: Weber
Soviet Union: 1917-1990
Sports: Drugs
Sports: General
Technology
Transportation: Automotive
Transportation: Aviation
Transportation: General
Transportation: Railroads
Urban Studies
Vietnam
Women Studies
 

METHYL TORT-BUTYL ETHER (MTBE).   Term Paper ID:29569 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Discusses public and government response.... More...

15 Pages / 3375 Words 18 sources, 49 Citations, TURABIAN Format $60.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Discusses public and government response. Controversy over addition of MTBE to gasoline to reduce carbon monoxide emissions. MTBE as a human carcinogen; contamination of water supplies. Health risks. Goal of 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA) to reduce polluting emissions. Clean Air Act issues. Paper Introduction: From the mass of regulations generated by the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA) the increased use of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) as an oxygen-enhancing additive in gasoline (intended to reduce carbon monoxide emissions) has been the result that produced the most widespread public response and the greatest amount of regulatory and legislative reshuffling. From local government in Fairbanks, Alaska to the State Senate of California to the Environmental Protection Agency citizens, legislators, regulators, and various commercial interests have been involved in a struggle to determine how best to protect the public interest as regards the use of MTBE, a likely human carcinogen that produces significant reductions in carbon monoxide emissions but is sometimes claimed to be an airborne health hazard and has been definitively shown to contaminate Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. [vi]Susan Mayer, "Implementing the Clean Air Act Amendments of 199 ". [xi]Lead Industries Association v. Available from http://www.cnie.org/Mayer, Susan. In an ordinary year prior to199 the EPA's Air and Radiation Office ordinarily issued from five toeight rules, but "during the two years after the signing of the amendments,the agency proposed or finalized 76 implementation rules."[v] Conservativeestimates in 1995 held that the EPA would be required "to issue some 175new regulations, write more than 3 guidance documents, conduct some 5 research efforts, prepare 25 reports to Congress, and create 7 panels."[vi] In addition states that contained areas that had not attained the NationalAmbient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) were required to submit StateImplementation Plans (SIPs)--all of which had to be reviewed and approvedby the EPA--and could face sanctions for failing to submit plans, forproviding inadequate plans, or for failure to implement approved SIPs. At the state level Alaska,New Jersey, Maine, Minnesota and others have been among the most active inconfronting the EPA over MTBE. "Implementing the Clean Air Act Amendments of 199 : Where Are We Now?" Congressional Research Service Report 95-234 ENR. McCarthy. The primary thrust ofthe legislation was completion of efforts begun under the CAA of 197 andits 1977 amendments. Conflicting reports by the National Academy ofSciences and an EPA advisory panel, however, have left the effectiveness ofRFG in some doubt. The EPA has subsequently admitted that it did not have "the healthtesting requirements that [exist] now when MTBE started being used as anoctane enhancer" and retesting should have been a priority when theincreased usage became likely because of the 199 Amendments.[xxxvi] But,despite the fact that states' resistance to the compound grew rapidly oncethe water contamination problem became widely known, the EPA continued toresist calls for changes in its two programs. [xli]Ibid. [xxiv]Ibid. Ethanol has been added to gasoline since the 192 s, althoughlead proved to be more cost effective and was more widely used until the197 s. "Air Quality: State Plans and Sanctions." Congressional Research Service Report 93-1 62 ENR. S. Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 23 December 1993. "The National Debate About the Gasoline Additive MTBE." National Governors Association Online. It had clearly begun to seem thatMTBE's days were numbered. percent.Since this was the accepted level in some other areas, the EPA "announcedthat it would not oppose New Jersey's decision" and other states proceededto mandate changes of their own.[xxviii] Utah ended its oxygenate seasonearly and in Wisconsin as many as 2, complaints a day were beingreceived which "led Gov. Initially another 4 cities volunteered to adopt the RFG program. [xvii]Peter Nulty, "Ethanol Capers," Fortune, 21 March 1994, 14. "Clean Air Act Issues in the 1 6th Congress." Congressional Research Service Issue Brief IB1 4. It was estimated, forexample, that the new regulations would "fill 6 pages of the U. [xxxii]Paul J. Accessed 2 March 2 . The "Oxy Busters"group in New Jersey, and similar associations in numerous other states,staged protests, gathered signatures, and generally caused enough troubleto initiate changes at the state level. [xl]Ibid. . "Air Quality Standards: The Decisionmaking Process." Congressional Research Service Report 97-722 ENR. Accessed 3 March 2 . Cir. [xlvi]James E. Anine-year study of 3 sites, prepared for two industry groups, "concludedthat use of oxygenated fuels was associated with a fourteen percentreduction in ambient CO concentrations."[xxxvii] The problem with MTBE, therefore, came down to the conflict betweenconcern for air quality and protection of water supplies. Available from http://www.cnie.org/Bohm, Martha. Accessed 2 March 2 . Accessed 26 February 2 ; available from http://www.nga.org/Pubs/ IssueBriefs/1999/991112MTBE.aspEmond, Mark. The automobile industry, on the other hand, "was conflicted" sinceRFG reduced its share in reducing emissions "by placing some of the burdenon the oil industry" yet feared that mandated fuel changes "would forceexpensive technological changes in automobiles to make themcompatible."[xiv] One of the deciding factors in getting the RFG programapproved was agricultural industry support based on the belief,subsequently disappointed, that ethanol would receive a major boost fromthe program. With the implementation of the RFG program, however, the publicprotests were stronger and more widespread than ever. [xiv]Ibid. Cost is not, of course, technicallya consideration in EPA decisions regarding air quality. [xliv]Quoted in Bohm. Korte, and John S.Zogorski, "Environmental Behavior and Fate of Methyl tert-Butyl Ether(MTBE)" (accessed 26 February 2 ), available fromhttp://www.nga.org/Pubs/IssueBriefs/1999/991112MTBE.asp [xxxiii]Bohm. Overall the Amendments "made major changes in the waythat air pollution is controlled in the United States" including therequirement that state and local air-quality authorities participate indesigning local compliance plans.[i] The CAA had not been re-authorized in two decades and the passage ofthe Amendments came about because the Bush administration was able topersuade the EPA and proponents of the changes to employ an "innovativeapproach to regulation" in which "flexible techniques were used toformulate the amendments--negotiations, round-table discussions, advisorycommittees" which allowed most interested parties to be involved in theprocess and the EPA to craft wording that would be both procedurally andoperationally acceptable while ensuring that no interest felt it had notbeen heard.[ii] The addition of emissions allowance trading, for example,was approved by the administration because it gave greater leeway tobusinesses in adjusting their required responses while "the EnvironmentalDefense Fund saw it as a means to get even steeper emissionsreductions."[iii] The regulatory burden, however, was immense. .whether the continued use of MTBE is appropriate."[xli] The governors ofthe Northeastern states, also requested a study by the Northeast States forCoordinated Air Use Management whose report end the RFG oxygenate mandatebecause of the higher cost of ethanol. In addition to generating a number of new laws and regulationsrequiring "public water suppliers to monitor their drinking water sources,"the state also began to consider new regulations on water craft that usedMTBE-enhanced gasoline.[xlii] On the basis of the study recommendationsand "on subsequent public hearings," Governor Gray Davis issued anexecutive order in March 1999 that called for phasing out of MTBE use inthe state's gasoline supply by December 31, 2 2.[xliii] But, at the sametime, the Governor also requested an EPA waiver from the oxygenate mandateon the understanding that "California will still fully meet the air qualityemissions standards of the Act" including the other goals of the RFGprogram.[xliv] In the California State Assembly a bill (SB 989 by ByronSher) that would codify the executive order as well as requiring increasedregulation of underground storage tanks was set in motion. [v]Ibid. The EPA's Blue Ribbon Panel on Oxygenate Use inGasoline, "composed of industry representatives, state and local officials,environmentalists, academics, and others," arrived at several conclusions.The panel held that the oxygenate mandate should be repealed, the oxygenaterequirement for RFG be eliminated, that Congress should "clarify stateauthority to regulate gasoline components," and that MTBE use besubstantially reduced or eliminated altogether.[xlvi] But, while the EPAcan act to reduce MTBE use generally, "repealing the mandate requirescongressional action" and the Panel recommended that unified action betaken by all involved parties in order "to avoid a patchwork of MTBEregulations and fuel formulations throughout the country."[xlvii] A short time later the Senate approved an amendment to the FY2 Agriculture appropriations bill "expressing the sense of the Senate thatuse of MTBE should be phased out."[xlviii] In 1999 a bill in the House,mandating the elimination of the oxygenate requirement for RFG (HR 11(Bilbray)) was headed toward approval. 198 ), quoted in John E. "What Price, MTBE?" E, July-August 1998, 15-17."Rallying Federal Action on MTBE." ACWA's MTBE Bulletin, 11 February 2 . RFG requires a higher oxygencontent (2. Such charges ofrushing and faulty science have frequently been leveled at the EPA in thecontroversy over the use of MTBE. McCarthy, "Air Quality Standards: The DecisionmakingProcess," Congressional Research Service Report 97-722 ENR (Washington, DC:Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 24 June 1998,accessed 2 March 2 ), available from http://www.cnie.org/ [xii]Susan Mayer, Lawrence Kumins, and Migdon Segal, "Implementationof the Reformulated Gasoline Program," Congressional Research ServiceReport 95-85 ENR (Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute forthe Environment, 1 August 1995, accessed 2 March 2 ), available fromhttp://www.cnie.org/ [xiii]Ibid. The resistance was based onthe claim that the MTBE-enhanced RFG and Oxygenated gasoline had been veryeffective in helping meet NAAQS. [xxxi]Suzanne Zolfo Patton, "What Price, MTBE?" E, July-August 1998,15. Available from http://www.cnie.org/McCarthy, James E., and Mary Tiemann. "MTBE, Ethanol Advocates' Squabble May Complicate RFG Implementation." Oil and Gas Journal, 2 February 1995, 17-2 .----------------------- Endnotes [i]Susan Mayer, "Implementing the Clean Air Act Amendments of 199 :Where Are We Now?" Congressional Research Service Report 95-234 ENR(Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment,3 January 1995, accessed 2 March 2 ), Available fromhttp://www.cnie.org/ [ii]Hugh McIntosh, "Catching up on the Clean Air Act," EnvironmentalHealth Perspectives, 1 1 (August 1993), accessed 3 March 2 . Therange of possible sanctions included "a ban on approval of new highwayprojects and a loss of highway funding, as well as a requirement for 2 to 1offsets of existing pollution before new construction projects may beapproved."[vii] In addition, the 15 years for full implementation of most portions ofthe amendments meant that all parties were working under the constraint ofvery tight deadlines. New Jersey's governor canceled theoxygenate season two months before schedule in 1995 and mandated that theoxygenate level in New Jersey would be lowered from 2.7 to 2. [vii]Susan Mayer, "Air Quality: State Plans and Sanctions,"Congressional Research Service Report 93-1 62 ENR (Washington, DC:Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 23 December 1993,accessed 2 March 2 ), available from http:// www.cnie.org/ [viii]Quoted in McIntosh. Carbon monoxide (CO) emissions, for example,despite having decreased by 5 percent since 197 , still far exceeded theNAAQS and constituted a continuing threat to health in many regions.Health is the only criterion to be used in setting the NAAQS. Ethanol at its most recent peak, however, accounted "for only 5 to6 percent of the additive market."[xviii] Still, in the event that MTBE isruled unusable, ethanol is the most likely replacement. Zogorski. "MTBE in Gasoline: Clean Air and Drinking Water Issues." Congressional Research Service Report 98-29 . Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 17 January 1996. In the yearsfollowing definitive demonstrations of the high levels of MTBEcontamination in water supplies throughout the nation the states began toseriously reconsider their options in meeting NAAQS, while the EPA and theCongress debated either the elimination of the two programs, a ban only onthe use of MTBE as an oxygenating additive in RFG, a total ban on MTBE use,or an end to the requirement for any oxygenating additive in RFG. Accessed 2 March 2 . California, in particular, experienced a number of serious incidentswith MTBE contamination, "including a well field supplying half of SantaMonica's water."[xxxiv] The state legislature mandated a University ofCalifornia testing program that determined that 48 cites, including 14reservoirs, were contaminated. Pankow, Nic E. Environmental Protection Agency,647 F.2d 113 (D. [ix]Mayer, "Implementing the Clean Air Act Amendments of 199 ". [xxxiv]Ibid. [xxi]Ibid. Pankow, Nic E. Parker, and James E. Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 24 June 1998. The debate over MTBE has many aspects, not the least of which isthe rivalry between the Oxygenated Fuels Association which represents MTBEproducers, and the Renewable Fuels Association, which represents ethanolmanufacturers. S.EPA grant California a waiver of the 2 percent federal oxygenaterequirement" and a campaign was underway to gain support for therequest.[xlix] This means that at the national level the main issue beforethe Congress is "whether Clean Air Act provisions concerning reformulatedgasoline should be modified to allow refiners to discontinue or lessentheir use of oxygenates."[l] The general feeling in the literature is thatthe high level of popular pressure and state demands will result in agradual phase-out of MTBE use as an oxygenate. Available from http://www.cnie.org/McCarthy, James E.. [xxv]Williams, 18. McCarthy, "Clean Air Act Issues in the 1 6thCongress," Congressional Research Service Issue Brief IB1 4 (Washington,DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 5 November1999, accessed 2 March 2 ), available from http://www.cnie.org/ [xxxviii]Bohm. [xxx]Ibid. They were limited on the question ofopting out of the RFG program by the requirement that the decision be madeby January 1, 1998 and that the decision to remain with the program be ineffect for five years in order to prevent "stranded investments by thepetroleum industry."[xxxviii] But when Maine's Governor opted out fivemoths after the deadline the EPA approved the request but required thestate to develop measures to produce reductions in air toxins equivalent tothose that were to be achieved with the use of RFG. BibliographyAndrews, Charles. [xlix]"Rallying Federal Action on MTBE," ACWA's MTBE Bulletin, 11February 2 (Association of California Water Agencies, accessed 3 March2 ), Available from http://www.acwanet.com/legislation/ regulatory/mtbe - 2.html [l]McCarthy. "MTBE: A Long-term Threat to Ground Water Quality." Ground Water, 1 September 1998, 7 5-7 7.Blodgett, John E., Larry B. When theclaim that costs and technical feasibility also needed to be considered bythe EPA in setting CAA rules and regulations was litigated by leadproducers the court ruled that, "the statue and its legislative historymake clear that economic considerations play no part in the promulgation ofambient air quality standards" and that the EPA administrator "may notconsider economic and technical feasibility" in making such decisions.[xi] Among the major titles in the 199 Amendments that addressed thecontinued reduction of CO emissions were Title I (Urban Air Pollution)which prescribed reduction goals for 41 metropolitan areas and Title II(Mobile Sources) which, among other programs, required the use ofreformulated gasoline (RFG) to reduce emissions generally and required thewinter-time use of oxygenated fuels to reduce CO emissions in designatedareas. [xlii]Wiley. [xxxvii]James E. Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 3 January 1995. Court of Appeals stayed the rulein 1994 and ruled in April 1995 that the EPA "did not have the authority tomandate ethanol use."[xv] The mandate regarding ethanol, which is madeprimarily from corn and other grains but can be produced from other typesof biomass, was highly controversial on political grounds. Clean Water: Does California Need MTBE?" California State Senate Online, February 1998. Subsequently MTBE was found in unsafeconcentrations in water supplies throughout the country. Available from http:// ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/1993/1 1-3/focus1.htmlMendes, Joshua. C. Accessed 2 March 2 . But there is littlecertainty whether alternative oxygenates will be used (or the RFG oxygenateregulation be maintained) since the general feeling is that the states willnot accept oxygenate rules if it means high costs from ethanol use andwill, instead, opt to develop other strategies to achieve NAAQS. Association of California Water Agencies. Available from http://www.sen.ca.gov/ ftp/sen/sor/environ/98mtbe.htmWilliams, Bob. Available from http://www.cnie.org/Mayer, Susan, Lawrence Kumins, and Migdon Segal. Squillace, James F. [xv]David Gushee, "Alternative Transportation Fuels and CleanGasoline: Background and Regulatory Issues," Congressional Research ServiceInformation Brief IB1 8 (Washington, DC: Committee for the NationalInstitute for the Environment, 17 January 1996, accessed 2 March 2 ),available from http://www.cnie.org/ [xvi]Joshua Mendes, "A White House quid pro quo?" Fortune, 16 November1992, 16. In addition to its high octane rating the additive has been usedextensively because of its "low cost of production, ability to readily mixwith other gasoline components, dilution effect on undesirable components,and its evaporative qualities."[xxiv] MTBE had also been used as an oxygenating agent in Colorado since198 . It cannot be practicallytransported by pipeline and is only practically produced in areas where theraw materials are readily available, i.e., the Midwest. The EPA and state and local air quality agencies credited theoxygenate-enhanced fuels with some improvements in the levels of ozone-producing contaminants. Availablefrom http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/ docs/1993/1 1-3/focus1.html [iii]Ibid. Blodgett, Larry B.Parker, and James E. MTBE does not occur naturally but "is produced in very large amountsfrom isobutylene, a waste product in the gasoline refining process" andmethanol, a byproduct of natural gas refining, and over 4 billion gallonsof the substance is consumed in the United States each year.[xxiii] MTBEhas been used as a gasoline additive since 1979, primarily in lowpercentages intended to increase gasoline octane and prevent engineproblems. [xxxix]Ibid. [iv]Ibid. The oxygenated fuels program, which began in the winter of 1992-1993,"required all gasoline sold in 39 carbon monoxide nonattainment areas tocontain 2.7 percent oxygen," which allows the fuel to burn cleaner andproduces far less CO.[xii] This is especially necessary in the wintermonths when CO concentrations reach their peaks. The MTBE controversy has taken in so many parties and hasgenerated so much political activity that it undoubtedly ranks at the topof the dilemmas posed by the 199 Amendments. The two principal oxygenating additives of choice, in both programs,were ethanol and MTBE. In New Hampshire, however, the Governor's decision to seek an EPAwaiver to discontinue the RFG program at least temporarily was denied,instead "urging the state to reduce spills to keep gasoline out of thewater supply."[xxxix] In July 1999 the governor of Kansas, after opting inon the RFG program discovered that the state could "achieve transportationconformity by implementing EPA's national low emission vehicle program(NLEV)" and hoped to opt out of the program while the state worked atdeveloping another fuel blend that would meet the clean airrequirements.[xl] New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut all opted out of the RFGprogram, citing MTBE concerns, and Connecticut's legislature passed a law"requiring the commissioner of environmental protection to report . From local government in Fairbanks, Alaska to the StateSenate of California to the Environmental Protection Agency citizens,legislators, regulators, and various commercial interests have beeninvolved in a struggle to determine how best to protect the public interestas regards the use of MTBE, a likely human carcinogen that producessignificant reductions in carbon monoxide emissions but is sometimesclaimed to be an airborne health hazard and has been definitively shown tocontaminate water supplies. McCarthy, "Clean Air Act Issues in the 1 6th Congress." Congressional Research Service Issue Brief IB1 4 (Washington, DC:Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 5 November 1999,accessed 2 March 2 ), available from http://www.cnie.org/ [xlvii]Bohm. [xlviii]McCarthy. Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 15 October 1999. "Alternative Transportation Fuels and Clean Gasoline: Background and Regulatory Issues." Congressional Research Service Information Brief IB1 8. RFG program required thatreformulated gasoline, designed to burn cleaner, be sold in the nine worstozone nonattainment areas as of January 1, 1995. [xxvi]Ibid., 19. Since 197 ambient (outdoor) air concentrations of key pollutants hadbeen greatly reduced. All stationary sources of pollution ofany size in or near urban areas, for example, were to be required to obtainpermits and the reduction of urban pollutants from all sources was to beadministered on a locale by locale basis. [xxxvi]Patton, 16. [xlv]Ibid. "Implementation of the Reformulated Gasoline Program." Congressional Research Service Report 95-85 ENR. Clean Water: Does California NeedMTBE?" California State Senate Online, February 1998, accessed 2 March2 ), available from http://www.sen.ca.gov/ftp/sen/sor/ environ/98mtbe.htm [xix]Martha Bohm, "The National Debate About the Gasoline AdditiveMTBE," National Governors Association Online, accessed 26 February 2 ),available from http://www.nga.org/Pubs/ IssueBriefs/1999/991112MTBE.asp [xx]Ibid. This is no longerthe case and since, even with the best efforts, gasoline spills areinevitably the addition of MTBE in such large percentages to at least 7 percent of all gasoline (the figure estimated for 2 because of the CAAprograms) is "a prescription for disaster with respect to ground waterresources."[xxxv] The growing understanding that the water supply couldonly be further endangered by the increasing usage of MTBE under the CAArules for RFG and oxygenated fuels has led to intensive demands forelimination of the compound from fuels. NAAQS could be achieved,within certain limits, by various combinations of measures--so long asattainment was reached within specified time limits. Accessed 2 March 2 . From the mass of regulations generated by the 199 Amendments to theClean Air Act (CAA) the increased use of methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) asan oxygen-enhancing additive in gasoline (intended to reduce carbonmonoxide emissions) has been the result that produced the most widespreadpublic response and the greatest amount of regulatory and legislativereshuffling. Available from http://www.cnie.org/McIntosh, Hugh. "Environmental Behavior and Fate of Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE)." accessed 26 February 2 : available from http://www.nga.org/Pubs/IssueBriefs/1999/991112MTBE.aspWiley, Kip. The states have, since 1995, produced a variety of responses to theMTBE air-versus-water dilemma and, especially, to broad public protest overthe extensive use of the compound. As one ground water expert noted, however,gasoline spills of all kinds are extremely common but gasoline's componentshave traditionally degraded readily in the subsurface. Although the EPA initially mandated the use ofethanol in RFG and oxygenated fuels a U.S. percent by weight) but also differs from conventional gasolineand oxygenated fuels" in that, unlike oxygenated fuels that essentially aimat reducing CO emissions alone, it must be "formulated to achieve thegreatest degree of reductions in the emission of ozone-forming volatileorganic compounds and toxic air pollutants."[xiii] The RFG program wasintensively debated prior to the passage of the CAA Amendments because theoil industry, while able to make reformulated fuels, did not like theincreased costs--yet feared regulations on the development of alternativefuels. "Widespread Health Complaints about RFG, MTBE Raise Concerns over Program's Fate." National Petroleum News, 87 (April 1995): 35- 4 .Gushee, David. UnfortunatelyMTBE became the center of even greater controversy over perceived healtheffects and, as was later shown, its role as a major pollutant of watersupplies. Los Angeles, with the worst air quality in thenation, credited the programs with an 18 percent reduction in ground-levelozone and a 3 -3 percentage reduction in cancer risk because of loweredlevels of benzene in RFG. The amendments directed the EPA to establishregulations to achieve the various principal goals including: reducingurban air pollution, controlling emissions from mobile sources, reducing oreliminating other air toxins, reducing acid rain, and phasing out ozone-depleting chemicals. The most significant developments have taken place in California.The MTBE scare in regard to water supply contamination produced legislationmandating the University of California study of water supplies throughoutthe state and the study's report recommended a gradual phase-out of allMTBE use. It increases emissionof the toxic pollutant acetaldehyde, but still produces overall reductionsin air contamination, and, in water, it increases "the solubility of othergasoline contaminants' plumes allowing the to spread further."[xx]Ethanol's principal drawbacks are economic. But in the reduction of CO levels both the EPA and theWhite House Office of Science and Technology have found considerablereductions which were directly related to the oxygenated fuels program. Tommy Thompson to ask the EPA to suspend use ofthe new fuel until its health effects could be studied further."[xxix] Butthe Wisconsin legislature took the matter into its own hands and the Senatevoted 31-1 to ban year-round use of MTBE, while permitting "use of ethanolas the oxygenate in RFG."[xxx] Public protest based on the "immediate and short-term reactions toMTBE" died down after the initial outburst--especially as studies continuedto fail to demonstrate the claimed effects.[xxxi] Far more serious,however, was the discovery of the extent to which MTBE had contaminatedwater supplies. The CAA Amendments of 199 were signed into law by President GeorgeBush in November 199 . [x]Ibid. Yet several of the EPA's criteria pollutantsremained serious problems. Beginning in 1993-1994 studies conducted by the U. Accessed 2 March 2 . In the first years of the EPA often missed thescheduled implementation dates and various parties, including PublicCitizen and the Sierra Club, routinely sued the EPA and the courtsestablished deadlines which, according to the Air Policy Office director,"the agency has just never missed."[viii] This, however, produced furthercontention as the EPA was "criticized for ignoring statutorily-imposeddeadlines in favor of meeting court-ordered deadlines."[ix] The rulesdelays were also quite serious because the States were required to meet thepre-set deadlines for implementation but the EPA was producing rules solate that many states were forced "to delay their own SIP submissions andsubsequent implementation of required programs."[x] But rushed deadlinesand serious budgetary constraints often result in neglect of properscientific testing of potential problems and the production of faulty rulesthat simply wind up being overturned in the courts. But the first reaction against the increased use of MTBE under thenew EPA rules came about in Alaska when the oxygenated fuels rule wasimplemented in the winter of 1992. Available from http:// www.acwanet.com/legislation/regulatory/mtbe - 2.htmlSquillace, Paul J., James F. [xxxv]Charles Andrews, "MTBE: A Long-term Threat to Ground WaterQuality," Ground Water, 1 September 1998, 7 6. Due to theflexibility that was built into compliance requirements for SIPs the statesoften had the possibility of opting in or out of various aspects of thedifferent programs mandated by the Amendments. "Clean Air vs. The public's"perception of MTBE health risks [is] high because even at very lowconcentrations it is easy to smell and taste in drinking water."[xxxiii]And in a number of states consumers sued MTBE producers for allegedcontamination of water supplies. It has nearly asgreat a positive impact on air quality and fuel performance and it posesminimal water quality risks "because it is easily degraded."[xix] The drawbacks of ethanol are relatively minor. Maine also enacted ahealth threshold regulating the permissible levels of MTBE in drinkingwater. Accessed 2 March 2 . Accessed 2 March 2 . [xxvii]Mark Emond, "Widespread Health Complaints about RFG, MTBE RaiseConcerns over Program's Fate," National Petroleum News, 87 (April 1995),39. Clearly "developments in the states, particularly in California, aredriving the national reconsideration of using MTBE as an oxygenate in RFG"and the total elimination of any oxygenate requirement is being mostvigorously fought by agricultural interests and the ethanol manufacturerswho hope to benefit from the downfall of MTBE.[xlv] All these statedecisions, and the EPA's reactions to them, have also led to a great dealof confusion over authority in the matter of MTBE use and regulation ofoxygenate levels. Korte, and John S. MTBE from emissions is only one of thesources of the contamination, with leakage from storage tanks by far themost important thus far. "A White House quid pro quo?" Fortune, 16 November 1992, 16.Nulty, Peter. [xxix]Ibid. "Ethanol Capers." Fortune, 21 March 1994, 14.Patton, Suzanne Zolfo. Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 1 August 1995. Washington, DC: Committee for the National Institute for the Environment, 5 November 1999. President Bushhad proposed that ethanol be the preferred oxygenating agent and this ledto accusations that the proposal was merely an accommodation for Archer-Daniels-Midland, the largest contributor to the Republican Party, thatwould allow the company to ensure a significant increase in the "$1 billionthe company already gets from ethanol sales."[xvi] The controversy alsoderived from the fact that nearly $75 million per year in federalsubsidies enabled ethanol producers to keep prices competitive with MTBEwhich "is at least as clean--and costs half as much."[xvii] With the court decision to disallow the ethanol mandate MTBE becamethe principal oxygenating agent of choice--except in areas, principally inthe Midwest, where transportation costs were not excessive. Available from http://www.cnie.org/_______. Of the two principal additives the practicality of MTBE has won outover ethanol, but, in the long run, the dangers of MTBE may cause itsdownfall. Consumers soon began to complain of"nausea, headaches, dizziness, and irritations of eyes, nose, and throat"especially after filling their tanks.[xxv] Despite the fact thatoxygenated fuels with the same amounts of MTBE were simultaneouslyintroduced in 38 metropolitan areas in the remaining states, "there were nonoteworthy incidents outside Alaska."[xxvi] A subsequent study, funded bythe Oxygenated Fuels Association, showed that subjects ability to smellMTBE in gasoline made with North Slope Alaskan crude oil "was eight timesgreater than their ability to smell the same concentration of MTBE" ingasoline produced in other states.[xxvii] Further studies by the EPA andothers failed to identify the kinds of ill effects claimed by people inAlaska, yet, on the basis of the protests, the governor had already bannedthe use of MTBE in the state only three months after the EPA program wasput into effect. Yet, as of February 2 the state ofCalifornia had not yet received an answer to its request "that the U. Since 74 percentof the demand for RFG and oxygenated fuels is on the East and West coasts,and ethanol is also more expensive to produce because it "requiresadditional processing to meet the volatility requirements" of RFG, its usewould probably increase the costs of cleaner-burning fuelsconsiderably.[xxi] The Clinton administration, not unsusceptible itself toagricultural interests, proposed that the EPA require that "at least thirtypercent of oxygenates in gasoline be renewable," which meant, in effect, amandate for higher ethanol use since it is the primary fuel additiveconsidered to be renewable, i.e., derived from organic sources.[xxii] Butthe fate of ethanol will probably not be decided for some time as thedebate over MTBE continues. "Catching up on the Clean Air Act." Environmental Health Perspectives, 1 1 (August 1993): Accessed 3 March 2 . S.Geological Survey's National Water Quality Assessment program in eighturban areas MTBE was found to be "the second most frequently detectedcompound."[xxxii] The great majority of MTBE entered the water supply fromleaking underground gasoline storage tanks, often licensed to be situatedfar too near water sources. The overall goal of the amendments was to reducepolluting emissions from all sources by a total of 57 billion pounds perannum when full implementation was achieved in 2 5. codebooks [although] all other environmental codes together fill only 9 pages."[iv] The specificity necessitated by many of the areas ofregulation increased this burden. [xviii]Kip Wiley, "Clean Air vs. [xxiii]Wiley. [xxii]Bob Williams, "MTBE, Ethanol Advocates' Squabble May ComplicateRFG Implementation," Oil and Gas Journal, 2 February 1995), 18. [xliii]McCarthy. [xxviii]Emond. But California, with its special provisionsand problems and its subsequently discovered high rate of ground watercontamination has generated the most extensive political efforts torenegotiate administrative rules and regulations and pass new legislation. But, in realisticpolitical terms, the EPA may have the decision taken out of its hands. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.