[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 20, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4982-S4983]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION
By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. Toomey, Mr. Menendez, and Ms.
Collins):
S. 2385. A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to eliminate the corn
ethanol mandate for renewable fuel; to the Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President: I rise today to reintroduce bipartisan
legislation. The ``Corn Ethanol Mandate Elimination Act of 2021'' is
cosponsored by Senators Pat Toomey, Bob Menendez, and Susan Collins and
would end the corn ethanol mandate in the Renewable Fuel Standard.
The mandate requires annual increases in the amount of renewable fuel
that must be blended into the total volume of gasoline refined and
consumed in the United States.
Our bill would amend the Renewable Fuel Standard to remove the volume
requirements for corn ethanol while leaving in place the requirement
that oil companies use low-carbon advanced bio fuels, including
cellulosic biofuel and biodiesel.
The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) was initially included in the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 and subsequently amended in 2007. The RFS
sought to reduce our dependence on oil and increase production of
biofuels for transportation. It requires gasoline and diesel producers
to blend increasing volumes of renewable biofuels in their supply.
The law includes separate volume requirements for four categories of
biofuels: 1) unspecified (completely filled by corn ethanol, also
called the ``corn ethanol mandate''); 2) advanced biofuels; 3)
cellulosic biofuel; and 4) biodiesel.
The EPA is authorized to reduce the required volumes if supply does
not match the statutory volume. Every year since 2014, the total
production of all ethanol exceeded the ``blend wall''--the amount of
ethanol that can safely be blended into the fuel supply, which is about
10% of gasoline. A blend beyond 10% ethanol can damage car engines.
Unfortunately, rather than encourage the development of more advanced
biofuels with lower carbon emissions, the RFS has resulted in a market
flooded with ethanol, which has higher carbon emissions than other
advanced biofuels.
This year oil companies will be required to use 33 billion gallons of
renewable fuel, and next year the requirement will increase to 36
billion gallons of renewable fuel.
The original law requires that an increasing portion of this mandate
be met using low-carbon advanced biofuels that are not derived from
corn starch and reduce lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions by at least
50 percent.
However, last year, 15 billion gallons of the statutory requirement
was met using corn ethanol.
The corn ethanol mandate is unwise and unworkable for several
reasons.
First, the corn ethanol mandate results in 40% of the U.S. corn crop
being used for fuel and not food, nearly double the rate compared to
before the RFS was passed. Ethanol production requires 38 million acres
of land--an area larger than the state of Illinois--which could be used
to feed 150 million people.
We should prioritize our agriculture and land use toward feeding
people and combating the climate crisis, not perpetuating it,
particularly when severe drought threatens crops throughout the West.
Second, the corn ethanol mandate has increased the price of corn and
products made from corn, such as livestock feed. This has made it more
expensive for families to put food on their table.
Third, corn ethanol production achieves little to no reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions over regular oil and poses other environmental
risks, including deforestation, habitat destruction and diminished
water quality or availability due to cropland expansion.
Finally, as fuel economy standards and increased vehicle
electrification drive down gasoline consumption, the RFS mandate
exceeds the limit at which ethanol can be blended safely into the fuel
supply--roughly 10% of total gasoline consumption.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency's final 2013 rule
establishing renewable fuel standards, the ``EPA does not foresee a
scenario in which the market could consume enough ethanol . . . to meet
the volumes . . . stated in the statute.''
The Congressional Budget Office confirmed this judgment in a June
2014 report, saying that the statutory goal of escalating corn ethanol
volumes would be ``very hard to meet in future years.''
The Corn Ethanol Mandate Elimination Act would make necessary fixes
to the Renewable Fuel Standard, reducing our reliance on corn ethanol.
Our bill would address the blend wall directly, thereby allowing EPA
to continue increasing volumes of lowcarbon advanced biofuels.
It would also maintain important provisions that encourage the
development of low-carbon advanced biofuels, like cellulosic ethanol,
algae-based fuel and biodiesel.
This would increase the market for the innovative, nascent, domestic
industry that this statute was designed to support.
The Federal corn ethanol mandate no longer makes sense when better,
lower-carbon alternatives exist. I urge my colleagues to join us in
passing this important legislation to eliminate the corn ethanol
mandate in the Renewable Fuel Standard.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
______
By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Wicker, Mr.
Cramer, Mr. Lankford, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Young, Mr. Marshall, Mr.
Cruz, Ms. Ernst, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Scott of Florida, and Mrs.
Hyde-Smith):
S. 2395. A bill to require an annual feasibility report on
cooperation between the National Guard and Taiwan, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to print my bill for
introduction in the Congressional Record. The bill's purpose is to
require an annual feasibility report on cooperation between the
National Guard and Taiwan, and for other purposes.
S. 2395
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
[[Page S4983]]
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Taiwan Partnership Act''.
SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.
It is the sense of Congress that the United States should--
(1) continue to support the development of capable, ready,
and modern defense forces necessary for Taiwan to maintain a
sufficient self-defense capability by increasing exchanges
between senior defense officials and general officers of the
United States and Taiwan at the strategic, policy, and
functional levels, consistent with the Taiwan Travel Act
(Public Law 115-135; 132 Stat. 341), especially for the
purposes of--
(A) improving the interoperability of the military forces
of the United States and Taiwan;
(B) improving the reserve force of Taiwan; and
(C) expanding cooperation in humanitarian assistance and
disaster relief;
(2) expand and strengthen Taiwan's capability to conduct
security activities, including traditional activities of the
combatant commands, cooperation with the National Guard, and
through multilateral activities; and
(3) using appropriate authorities and consistent with the
Taiwan Relations Act (Public Law 96-8; 22 U.S.C. 3301 et
seq.), seek to develop a partnership between the National
Guard and Taiwan as a means of maintaining a sufficient self-
defense capability.
SEC. 3. ANNUAL FEASIBILITY REPORT ON COOPERATION BETWEEN THE
NATIONAL GUARD AND TAIWAN.
(a) In General.--Not later than February 15, 2022, an
annually thereafter, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to
the congressional defense committees (as defined in section
101 of title 10, United States Code) a report on the
feasibility and advisability of enhanced cooperation between
the National Guard and Taiwan.
(b) Elements.--Each report required by subsection (a) shall
include the following:
(1) A description of the cooperation between the National
Guard and Taiwan during the preceding calendar year,
including mutual visits, exercises, training, and equipment
opportunities.
(2) An evaluation of the feasibility of enhancing
cooperation between the National Guard and Taiwan on a range
of activities, including--
(A) disaster and emergency response;
(B) cyber defense and communications security;
(C) military medical cooperation;
(D) Mandarin-language education and cultural exchange; and
(E) programs for National Guard advisors to assist in
training the reserve components of the military forces of
Taiwan.
(3) Recommendations to enhance such cooperation and improve
interoperability, including through familiarization visits,
cooperative training and exercises, and co-deployments.
(4) Any other matter the Secretary of Defense considers
appropriate.
____________________