Friday RFS Roundup – 6/6

June 6, 2014

Despite fierce competition between local Chicago restaurants and food providers, several came together this week at our “Steak”holders event in Chicago to fight a common threat: the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS). As more and more corn is used for fuel, rather than food, restaurants around the country are under drowning pressure, and as basic food costs continue to rise because of this failing policy, restaurants are forced to either swallow these burdening costs or raise their prices for customers, both of which can drive them to financial ruin. Led by the Illinois Restaurant Association, these Chicago restaurant stakeholders joined together to urge the EPA and Congress to lower the 2014 ethanol mandates.

See more from this week:

CBS Chicago, Restaurant Owners Support Cutting Ethanol Requirement to Help Food Prices: From increased prices on eggs, meat and basic foods, Chicago restaurant owners, food providers and businessmen gathered to speak out against the RFS. In this recap, Steve Miller provides an overview of our “Steak” holders event and addresses these restaurant groups’ most concerning issues of the RFS.

In Short: “The EPA has proposed reducing the amount of ethanol that’s mixed into fuel, and that proposal is supported by Chicago restaurant owners like Dave Samber, who owns Polo Café in Bridgeport. Right now, he said, restaurants are suffering – paying high prices for food. ‘How do you pass these huge product increases on to your customers? You don’t,’ he said. If you did, customers might disappear.”

Washington Examiner, A Bipartisan Way to Cut CO2 Emissions: Slash the ethanol mandate: What’s missing from President Obama’s carbon emissions climate change plan? Ethanol mandates. In this article, political columnist, Timothy Carney points out the EPA’s opportunity to lower GHGs by lowering the 2014 ethanol mandate, which Carney notes is much more possible for a bipartisan agreement than Obama’s plan.  

In Short: “But the Environmental Protection Agency has on the table a far more modest proposal for curbing emissions — with far greater possibility for bipartisan and trans-ideological agreement. The Environmental Working Group finds that the federal requirement (created by Republicans in 2005) causes a net increase in greenhouse emissions: ‘Taking 580,000 cars and trucks off the road would reduce a lot of greenhouse gas emissions. And something like that would happen if a proposal by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency becomes reality.’”

Ethanol Producer Magazine, European Commission Widens Application of Anti-Dumping Duty: In previous years, the U.S. was sending its unused ethanol to the European Union through Norway. This week, the European Commission applied anti-dumping duties on all U.S. ethanol that comes through Norway. What does this mean? All of the U.S. unused ethanol will have to be sent somewhere else since the EU doesn’t want U.S. ethanol. 

In Short: “The European Commission came to a decision June 4 to apply anti-dumping duties on all U.S. ethanol coming to the European Union through Norway, according to ePURE, the European Renewable Ethanol Association. Anti-dumping duties were imposed on imported U.S. fuel for a period of five years beginning in February 2013. This followed an anti-dumping investigation that began October 2011.In January, ePURE filed a complaint with the European Commission, saying that a new pattern of trade had emerged, with U.S. ethanol going to Norway, where it was blended with gasoline and then exported to the EU without anti-dumping duties levied by EU customs.”