Phaseout of MTBE

これまで米国ではガソリンにoxygenate （含酸素分成分）としてＭＴＢＥやエタノールの含有を義務付けていた。
ＭＴＢＥは漏れて飲み水に混じり、臭いや味で問題となっている。

ＭＴＢＥは、酸素を分子内に含んでいるために、エンジン内で燃焼を良好な状態に保つ能力があって、車による大気の汚染には有効に作用するとされている。米国の見解では、酸素を含んだ分子をガソリンに添加することが、クリーンな大気を守るために必要不可欠であるとのこと。そして１９９０年に大気浄化法ができて、米国のガソリンには、２％の酸素*を含むことが法律的に決まった。実質上ＭＴＢＥを添加することが唯一の方法なので、ＭＴＢＥは米国においてもっとも大量に生産されている化学物質になった。*　正しくは　2wt%以上（上限3.7wt%）の含酸素成分の添加

汚染の実態は地下水汚染。ガソリンスタンドの地下タンクには必ず漏れがある。そこで、ＭＴＢＥを含んだガソリンが地下に浸透している。これまでガソリンで地下水が汚染されていなかったのは、ガソリンを分解する細菌がいて、かなり速やかにガソリンを分解してしまうから。ＭＴＢＥは、細菌にとっても新規な化合物だから、これを分解するのが得意な細菌はまだ多くはない。そこで、分解されないものが、地下水に混じる。しかも、ＭＴＢＥは酸素を含むので、水に対する親和性があって、水に溶け込みやすい。

米国では、川の水を得ることが難しい地域があるから、そのような地域では、必ず地下水が飲料水源になっている。一方、町には、必ずガソリンスタンドもある。ということで、西部のある村では、飲料水中のＭＴＢＥがかなりの濃度になってしまって、飲料不適ということになった。

ＭＴＢＥに対する米国政府の対応は、今後３年間でＭＴＢＥを入れたガソリンを禁止すること。大気環境を改善するために、酸素分子を含んだ成分をガソリンに入れることは不可欠との見解は変わっていないようだ。そこで、ＭＴＢＥの代わりに、エタノール（エチルアルコール）を入れるという案が出ているようだ。(2000/10/8 市民のための環境学ガイド）

1990 年改正の大気浄化法は、自動車排気ガス対策として、より厳しい自動車排ガス基準の設定と、通常のガソリンよりもクリーンな燃料導入の2 つの措置を柱とする規制を導入した。
このクリ−ン燃料導入措置の一環として、スモッグが問題となっている地域（ロサンゼルス地域、サンディエゴ地域、サクラメント地域等全米で約10 地域）において、1995 年から重量ベースで2％以上の酸素を含有する改質ガソリンの販売が義務付けられた。さらに、大気浄化法に基づいて義務付けられた地域以外の多くの地域や州においても、自主的に同様の基準が導入されており、現在、全米のガソリンの約30％が改質ガソリンとなっている。
改質ガソリンは、エンジン内での燃焼を改善して、スモッグの原因物質である排気ガス中の一酸化炭素排出濃度を大幅に低下させる効果を有している。ガソリン中の酸素濃度を高めるための主要な添加剤としては、エタノールとMTBE（メチル・トリブチル・エーテル）があるが、エタノールは揮発性が高いため、排気ガス中の揮発性有機化合物を増加させる。このため、現在、改質ガソリンへの添加剤としては、MTBE が85％以上の改質ガソリンに使用されており、エタノールを使用している改質ガソリンは8％程度である (ＮＥＤＯ海外レポート 2000/8/21)

2003/1/30 NEDOワシントン事務所 　米国におけるバイオ燃料としてのエタノール利用を巡る現状

カリフォルニア等ではこの問題からMTBE使用を禁止。但し代わりのエタノールは遠くから輸送する必要があること、Oxygenate混入なしでも問題のないことから義務免除を要請、ロスのようなスモッグ地域を除き、免除となっている。
（カリフォルニア州に続いて、ニューヨーク州、コネティカット州でも２００４年１月１日からガソリン添加剤としてのMTBEを禁止してエタノールに切り替える。）

ＭＴＢＥ業界は被害を訴えられても（法律上の義務ということで）免責にしてほしいとしたが、昨年のEnergy Bill 審議で拒否された。

2006/5/5にOxygenate含有義務が失効する。

しかし、オクタン価向上のためにoxygenateが必要とするメーカーはエタノール使用に向かうため、供給が十分か、価格が上がらないかが、問題となっている。oxygenateを除くとその分、量が減ることにもなる。

エタノールプラントはサウスダコタ、アイオワ､ミネソタ、イリノイなどの農村地帯に建設されている。

New York (Platts)--27Apr2006

Wisconsin, Maryland, Virginia mulls RFG waiver requests: EPA

Wisconsin, Maryland and Virginia may request gasoline waivers allowing the use of conventional formula gasoline instead of reformulated gasoline (RFG) blended with ethanol due to supply concerns, John Millet, a spokesman for the Environmental Protection Agency, said Thursday.

He said Thursday only Pennsylvania has officially asked EPA to allow it to use conventional gasoline. The agency has not yet made a decision on that waiver.

A switch to ethanol-blended RFG this year has created logistical issues, with some Midwest ethanol having a hard time making its way on clogged US railroads, in particular to the East Coast and the Gulf Coast.

Wisconsin, Maryland and Virginia are all "closely monitoring the situation" in gasoline, said Millet.

MTBE in Fuels 　　http://www.epa.gov/mtbe/gas.htm

What is MTBE?

MTBE (methyl tertiary-butyl ether) is a chemical compound that is manufactured by the chemical reaction of methanol and isobutylene. MTBE is produced in very large quantities (over 200,000 barrels per day in the U.S. in 1999) and is almost exclusively used as a fuel additive in motor gasoline. It is one of a group of chemicals commonly known as "oxygenates" because they raise the oxygen content of gasoline. At room temperature, MTBE is a volatile, flammable and colorless liquid that dissolves rather easily in water.

Why is it used?

MTBE has been used in U.S. gasoline at low levels since 1979 to replace lead as an octane enhancer (helps prevent the engine from "knocking"). Since 1992, MTBE has been used at higher concentrations in some gasoline to fulfill the oxygenate requirements set by Congress in the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. (A few cities, such as Denver, used oxygenates (MTBE) at higher concentrations during the wintertime in the late 1980's.)

Oxygen helps gasoline burn more completely, reducing harmful tailpipe emissions from motor vehicles. In one respect, the oxygen dilutes or displaces gasoline components such as aromatics (e.g., benzene) and sulfur. In another, oxygen optimizes the oxidation during combustion. Most refiners have chosen to use MTBE over other oxygenates primarily for its blending characteristics and for economic reasons.

What are the oxygenate requirements of the Clean Air Act?

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAA) require the use of oxygenated gasoline in areas with unhealthy levels of air pollution. The CAA does not specifically require MTBE. Refiners may choose to use other oxygenates, such as ethanol. The two oxygenated gasoline programs are:

Winter Oxyfuel Program: Originally implemented in 1992, the CAA requires oxygenated fuel (gasoline containing 2.7 percent oxygen by weight) during the cold months in cities that have elevated levels of carbon monoxide. Ethanol is the primary oxygenate used in this program.

Year-round Reformulated Gasoline Program: Since 1995, the CAA requires reformulated gasoline (RFG) year-round in cities with the worst ground-level ozone (smog). RFG is oxygenated gasoline (minimum of 2 percent oxygen by weight) that is specially blended to have fewer polluting compounds than conventional gasoline. At this time, about 30 percent of this country’s gasoline is reformulated gasoline, of which about 87 percent contains MTBE.  Refiners have chosen MTBE as the main oxygenate in RFG in cities outside of the Midwest primarily for economic reasons and its blending characteristics. Unlike ethanol, MTBE can be shipped through existing pipelines, and its volatility is lower, making it easier to meet the emission standards.

To address its unique air pollution problems, California has adopted similar, but more stringent requirements for its gasoline (California RFG).

What are the air quality benefits of using reformulated gasoline (RFG) that contains oxygenates?

RFG has been helping improve the air for millions of Americans since 1995. The use of RFG compared to conventional gasoline has resulted in annual reductions of smog-forming pollutants (volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides) and toxics (such as benzene). With the second phase of RFG program, which began January 2000, EPA estimates that smog-forming pollutants are being reduced annually by at least 105 thousand tons, and toxics by at least 24 thousand tons. Refiners are required to reduce the emissions of volatile organic compounds, toxics, and nitrogen oxides by 27, 22, and 7 percent, respectively, compared to the conventional gasoline they produced in 1990.

2006/3/24

Lyondell urges EPA action on gasoline supply

Lyondell Chemical Co said Friday that the US is likely to see sharp increases in gasoline prices, gasoline supply disruptions and a deterioration in air quality as a result of the rulemaking to remove the reformulated gasoline oxygen content requirement.

Lyondell submitted comments and recommendations to the EPA as part of the public participation process to the rulemaking removing the oxygen content requirement as included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The accelerated removal of MTBE, brought on by the elimination of the oxygen content requirement, will negatively impact gasoline prices and supply, distribution patterns and air quality, Lyondell said.

The negative impacts could be averted if the EPA would issue a transition rule that encourages refiners to continue to blend the oxygenate MTBE through the spring and summer, as refiners have for the past 13 years. Additionally, Lyondell urged the EPA to engage in a full notice-and-comment review of the impacts on gasoline price and air quality of removing the oxygen content requirement.

"We recognize that Congress intended to remove the oxygen requirement in Energy Policy Act of 2005 and we are not attempting to reverse that," said Norman Phillips, Senior Vice President, Fuels and Raw Materials for Lyondell.
"We are asking the EPA to facilitate the process of removing the oxygen standard in accordance with existing regulations, in a manner that minimizes the negative impacts on air quality and gasoline supply for consumers."

2006/3/24

US Senate environment panel to consider effect of removing MTBE

The US Senate Environment Committee has scheduled a hearing Wednesday to take testimony about the supply implications of removing the controversial oxygenate MTBE from gasoline.

A number of oil companies announced their intention to stop using MTBE after Congress eliminated the oxygenate requirement for reformulated gasoline in last year's comprehensive energy legislation. That will take effect May 5.

A number of states have banned MTBE outright, and oil companies also fear liability exposure because the chemical, a suspected carcinogen, has fouled water supplies in a number of locations after leaking from underground tanks.

Most companies in the short-run intended to replace MTBE with ethanol to replace the octane-boosting and clean-burning qualities of MTBE.

Bill Holbrook, spokesman for the Senate committee, said the hearing will focus on issues raised by an Energy Information Administration report released last month. The report stated that the "rapid switch from MTBE to ethanol could have several impacts on the market that serve to increase the potential for supply disruptions and subsequent price volatility on a local basis."

The agency said the impacts stem mainly from a net loss of gasoline production capacity, a tight ethanol market that is limited in the short-term by ethanol-production capacity and transportation capability to move increased volumes to areas of demand, issues hampering the ability of gasoline suppliers to get terminal facilities in place to store and blend ethanol, and the loss of import supply sources that cannot deliver MTBE-free product.

Holbrook said a final witness list is not complete; he would not name invitees. Based on the issues the committee intends to pursue, the committee would probably like to hear from refining and ethanol industry representatives, as well as the EIA.

2006/3/22 Platts

Bodman says ethanol supply 'adequate' to replace MTBE

US Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman on Wednesday said he believes supplies of ethanol will be "adequate" in the US after use of the controversial gasoline additive MTBE is phased out due to the coming expiration of the federal oxygenate mandate.

"There appears to be adequate ethanol," Bodman told reporters after appearing at a meeting of the National Coal Council.

Still, Bodman acknowledged there could be some "dislocations" in gasoline supply after MTBE is phased out due to potential logistical problems in shipping ethanol. Ethanol, because of its chemical properties, is difficult to ship through a pipeline due to its tendency to absorb water, making railcar distribution the only feasible delivery method.

Bodman also warned of "gyrations" in the price of ethanol since it will be by far the primary oxygenate in gasoline once MTBE use dwindles.

The federal mandate requiring the use of an oxygenate in gasoline expires May 5, meaning refiners no longer need to blend their product with MTBE, a suspected carcinogen that has been found to leak from underground storage tanks into drinking water supplies. Makers of MTBE were not granted a liability waiver in last year's energy bill, further discouraging use of the chemical.

But with refiners still needing an oxygenate to boost the octanes in gasoline, ethanol has become the preferred replacement to MTBE.

2006/3/21

ExxonMobil CEO expects 'rapid' phase out of MTBE use by refiners

ExxonMobil sees a "fairly rapid" phase out of the controversial gasoline additive MTBE by US refiners ahead of the May 6 end of the US oxygenate mandate, CEO Rex Tillerson said Tuesday at the National Petrochemicals & Refiners Association meeting here.

Meanwhile, large East Coast refiner Sunoco also sees a rapid phase out, but with possible "temporary disruptions" at gasoline terminals this summer if supplies of the MTBE replacement ethanol fail to get to refiners in a prompt manner due to potential logistical problems, Sunoco refining head Joel Maness told Platts on the sidelines of the meeting.

Maness said while terminals may run out of gasoline, "we certainly don't anticipate seeing any interruption of supply to [retail] customers at all," since refiners can do exchange agreements with each other or access other terminals to get supply.

Both ExxonMobil and Sunoco see sufficient ethanol supply, but note potential logistical concerns getting it to refiners. In Sunoco's case, its big Philadelphia refining complex is taking ethanol by rail, mostly on a delivered basis.

Ethanol producers have said a lack of new railcars, known as unit trains, will make it hard to get ethanol where it needs to go in the short term. "The rails seem to be fully occupied," said Maness.

"If you look at the situation broadly...it would appear there will be sufficient ethanol..," said Tillerson. "It's a logistics and a distribution challenge in terms of ensuring [ethanol] gets to the right places where it's needed."

Shipping options for ethanol via pipeline are limited because the chemical can absorb water during its movements.

Both ExxonMobil and Sunoco are currently phasing out reformulated gasoline blended with MTBE.

Sunoco expects most of the industry to follow suit by May 6, with a few refiners selling RFG with MTBE for only weeks to a couple months after that date. "We're not expecting the worst, but we're not expecting the best" this driving season, said Maness. He said Sunoco's biggest concern is "just getting [the ethanol] there."

2006/3/20

US has enough ethanol to replace MTBE in phaseout: Valero

The US will have enough ethanol to blend into gasoline during the current spike in demand as companies transition away from oxygenate MTBE, according to Valero Energy CEO William Klesse.

Valero is also eyeing potential "opportunities" in the ethanol industry, he told Platts Sunday on the sidelines of the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association's annual meeting. "It's still very much in the study phase," he said, adding, "we're looking at the [ethanol] market to try to make sure we understand it and to see what opportunities might really be there." He would not give further details.

US refiners are in the process of replacing MTBE, known to contaminate drinking water, with ethanol, and there is some disagreement in the industry over whether there will be enough ethanol to go around ahead of the summer driving season.

Last week, ethanol lobbyists at the Renewable Fuels Association publicized a letter they wrote to the Energy Information Administration criticizing an EIA report that warned of possible gasoline price spikes due to the sudden need for more ethanol.

The biggest bone of contention is the speed at which refiners will be making the switch to ethanol from MTBE. EIA thinks a rapid transition has put the gasoline market at risk for price volatility, while RFA says refiners are planning a staged phaseout.

Valero will stop selling MTBE-blended gasoline May 5, the date the new US energy law repeals a federal oxygenate mandate, Klesse said. "It's a two-month phaseout [for Valero]...To me that's orderly..."

"Obviously [ethanol supply is] tight because the price is higher than gasoline," Klesse said. However, "we think there is enough ethanol."

Valero's decision to stop using MTBE is directly related to the new US energy law's lack of a liability waiver coupled with the oxygenate mandate repeal.

"Now that you've lost the oxygenate mandate...with that gone, we don't think we have this protection now from defective product and that we're just wide open (to potential lawsuits), and I believe the industry feels that way too," Klesse said.

2006/2/16 Mercury News

Ethanol mandate for gas dropped
CRITICS APPLAUD CHANGE, SAY ADDITIVE NOT NEEDED

California will no longer be required to put ethanol in its gasoline, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Wednesday, ending a decadelong battle over an additive that state leaders of both political parties said wasn't needed and had fought for years to remove.

The EPA's announcement resulted from the new national energy bill approved by Congress and signed by President Bush in August. The bill repealed federal rules that had required chemicals called oxygenates to be put in gasoline in areas that don't meet federal smog standards.

Ethanol, made from corn, is one such oxygenate. Another is MTBE, a chemical additive that was used in California but was banned statewide in 2004 because it created a huge water pollution problem.

Studies cited

The intent of the original federal rule was to help gasoline burn more cleanly. But critics -- including former Gov. Gray Davis, a Democrat, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, along with leaders from New England states -- argued that numerous scientific studies show that gasoline could be made to burn as cleanly without ethanol as with it.

And because corn isn't grown in their states, ethanol had to be shipped thousands of miles on rail cars from Iowa and other Midwestern states, increasing costs for motorists, they contended.

Under a compromise in last summer's energy bill, the oxygenate mandate was dropped, except for a few areas, such as Los Angeles, where carbon monoxide levels in smog are high. Instead, the new law requires an increase in the use of plant-based fuels such as ethanol and biodiesel to 7.5 billion gallons by 2012. Oil companies can decide where and how they want to meet those rules.

California leaders cheered the new EPA rule. Some even noted that some studies show ethanol increased air pollution because of its high evaporation rate during hot days.

``The federal requirement has forced California's refiners to use an oxygenate even though they can make cleaner-burning gasoline without MTBE or ethanol,'' Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said in a statement. ``The announcement means that California refiners will finally be allowed to make gasoline that is cleaner-burning than what they are making today.''

No price changes

Oxygenate additives such as MTBE and ethanol increase the price of gasoline by 4 to 8 cents a gallon, the EPA estimates. But energy experts said they did not expect any immediate changes for motorists in California in price or availability of gasoline.

Rob Schlichting, a spokesman for the California Energy Commission in Sacramento, said his agency surveyed the state's refiners last fall and found that none planned to reduce or increase ethanol use in California gas in 2006 even though they knew the mandate for its use was going to be eliminated.

The reason: Ethanol makes up 5.7 percent of gasoline in California by volume now, and if it were eliminated, the companies would have to produce that much more gasoline to make up the difference, potentially causing shortages. Also, the companies have contracts that have not yet expired with ethanol producers, and they only recently spent millions of dollars retooling their distribution systems to blend it with gasoline.

California used 900 million gallons of ethanol in 2005, and produced only about 4 million, the commission's survey found.

``I never saw the need for the mandate for ethanol,'' said Frank Wolak, a Stanford University economics professor who specializes in energy issues. ``It was more of a handout for Midwestern corn producers.''

Supporters of ethanol say it reduces the need for imported oil. Wolak noted that new sources for making ethanol, such as wood waste, do not require fertilizer or harvesting like corn, and may be more energy-efficient overall.

``We should set the standards for cleaner-burning gasoline, and let refiners use the best technology to do that,'' Wolak added. ``That will help keep prices lower.''

2003/1/30 NEDOワシントン事務所

米国におけるバイオ燃料としてのエタノール利用を巡る現状
http://www.nedodcweb.org/report/2003-1-30.html

１．はじめに

一般にバイオ燃料として扱われているものは、エタノールとバイオディーゼルに大別できる。バイオディーゼル油は、植物油、動物脂、あるいはリサイクルされた料理油等から製造されているが、エタノールはトウモロコシのような炭水化物に富んだバイオマス を発酵させることによって生産される。 (ブラジルはサトウキビ）

エタノールは、それ自身純粋に燃料として利用できるが、バイオ燃料としてのエタノールの利用を巡る議論の多くは、既存のガソリンに添加物として混合する場合（改質ガソリン）に関するものである。このエタノール混合物は、都市部においてスモッグ関連の環境問題を低減させつつ、ガソリン効率を向上させるために使われる。

また、バイオディーゼル油もエタノール同様、そのまま自動車燃料や発電のために使われたり、排気汚染源を減らすためにディーゼル油に加えられることがある。

ここでは、米国における燃料添加物として利用されるエタノールとして、連邦、州政府の規制及び導入促進・優遇策を中心として、最近の状況を概観する。

　

２．改質ガソリンに関する規制

(1)連邦政府の改質ガソリンに関する規制

改質ガソリン（ RFG ；Re-formulated Gasoline）は、大気の清浄度を向上させることを目的とし、ガソリンに混合物を混ぜ合わせたもので、自動車の排気ガスを減少させる清浄なガソリンと位置づけられている。 RFG は、最も汚染のひどい都市を擁する１７州及びﾜｼﾝﾄﾝDCで利用されており、全体の米国ガソリン消費量のおよそ３２パーセント（１日２５０万バレルあるいは１日１億ガロン）に達している。

1990年に改正された大気清浄法Section211(k)では、ＥＰＡに対し、オゾン発生及び揮発性有機化合物（ VOC ）排出を削減するため、ガソリン改質を義務付ける規則を制定するよう求めている。酸化化合物は、精製事業者が高いオクタン価と燃料性能を維持しつつ大気汚染を削減できることから、連邦議会は RFG について、重量比で最低２％の酸素を含むように義務付けている。

連邦政府の改質ガソリン（ RFG ）プログラムは２つの段階に分かれており、第１段階は１９９５年から１９９９年まで、第２段階は２０００年からとなっている。

また、EPAは、RFG を有していない地域において供給されるガソリンの品質が悪化しないよう「反ダンピングプログラム」を導入している。このプログラムは、精製業者が RFG から分離された「汚い」組成物を通常のガソリンに混入することを禁ずるものである。第２段階は第１段階 に類似したものであるが、より大幅な排気削減をもたらすよう設定されている。もちろん、国内のオゾン破壊のひどい地域ではRFG利用は義務化されているが、他のエリアであっても自主的に参加することが出来る。

RFG はこれまでのところ、比較的成功していると言われている。酸化化合物業界団体である“酸化化合物燃料協会（Oxygenated Fuels Association）”によれば、RFG は、17%以上オゾン排気を減らし、ベンゼンの排出は43％低減し、 有害物質全体では22%減少したと言われている。

RFG で使われる酸化化合物は、主にメチル Tertiary ブチルエーテル（ MTBE ）であり、全ガソリン販売量の約3割から5割のガソリンにおいて、何らかのレベルでMTBEが混合されていると言われている。RFG のために用いられる添加物としては、MTBEが約87%で、2番目にエタノールが用いられている。

(2)MTBE-エタノールを巡る議論

MTBE は水溶性であり、90年代後半の米国地質調査によって、RFG が使われている地域の約2割において地下水にMTBEの痕跡が見られたという報告があった。これは、非 RFG 地域の2%というレベルに比してきわめて大きなものとなっている。

これらMTBEの地下水への混入は、貯蔵タンクやパイプラインからの漏洩によって起きているが、ほとんどの場合EPAの設定した基準を下回り、健康へのリスクは問題ない状況にある。これに関しEPAは、RFGの利用拡大によって大気清浄度は大幅に向上したものの、それはMTBEを用いることなく、国の水資源の質を損なうことなく維持可能であるとしている。

クリントン政権下において、Browner EPA長官は、専門家の独立したパネルを設け“ガソリンへの酸化化合物の混合とその健康影響”について調査を行い、1999年にその報告を発表した。その報告は、議会とＥＰＡが RFGの 酸素含有率の義務付けを廃止することにより、ガソリンへのMTBEの大幅な利用削減及びMTBE によって汚染されたサイトの浄化を勧告した。ＥＰＡはこの委員会の勧告を踏まえ、地下貯蔵タンク、安全な飲料水、改善策および研究プログラムを強化しているところである。

前第107議会において、MTBE 問題を解決するための法律が通過しなかったことから、EPAは、MTBEを規制するために、（それ自身数年要するかもしれないが、）有害物資管理法(TCSA)に基づく規制を行おうとする動きもある。

　

３．エタノールの利用の現状と連邦レベルでの議論

２００１年における米国のエタノール利用状況を見ると、 @連邦政府が定める改質ガソリン（主にシカゴとミルウォーキーにおいて）として約４億５千万ガロン、 A連邦政府の冬期酸化物燃料プログラムとして２億５千万ガロン、 Bミネソタ州の州で定められた酸化物燃料プログラムのため２億５千万ガロン、そして C従来のガソリンのマーケットで８億２千万ガロンとなっている。 ＥＰＡによれば、エタノールの約２０％が連邦が定める一酸化炭素が問題となる地域における冬期酸化物燃料プログラムにおいて使用されていると言われている。そして、残りの５０％は米国の周辺国において、オクタン価を高めたり燃料供給量を増やすために使われている。

２００１年５月に出されたブッシュ大統領の国家エネルギー計画においては、議会に対してエタノールへの消費税免除に対して賛同するように勧告している。 エタノール生産者のための連邦のクレジットは、１ガロン当たり＄0.3926から＄0.60まで幅がある。ブッシュ政権は、エタノールは農産物の追加的付加価値であると考えており、経済的価値も併せ持った環境向上策として推進している。

ブッシュ政権及び議員、特に中西部あるいは農村部においては、それが農業に依存する州経済を拡大するものとして支援されている。 しかし、エタノール代替の義務付けに反対する法律家からは、エタノールの価格急騰や供給不足が発生するのではないかとして反対を表明している。さらに、彼らはエタノール利用義務化されれば、カリフォルニア州の税金を用いて中西部の農民へ補助金を出すだけであるという見方をしている。

環境・公衆衛生関連の連合、州政府の役人、石油精製業者、農業団体及び再生可能燃料製造業者は、連邦政府のMTBE利用禁止、改質ガソリンに対する酸化物要求規定の削除、大気保全の促進、再生可能ｴﾈﾙｷﾞｰ基準（RPS）に対して圧力をかけている。

第107議会で可決された上院の包括エネルギー法案で導入された RFS規定が、仮に法律として成立していれば、エタノールやバイオディーゼルといった再生可能な燃料は、米国全体で2004年に23億ガロンのものが、次第に増加し、2012年では50億ガロンにまで達する見込だと言われている。

上下両院の法案を統合し包括的エネルギー法案をとりまとめるために設けられた両院協議会において、下院側から上院側 に修正規定を提出することが決定された。下院から出された提案は上院を通過した規定に対し多くの変更を提案するものであり、それはMTBE 使用禁止規定を否定し、２００５年までの１年間RFS 実施を延期し、50億ガロンという RFS の完全実施を2年間延期するものとなっていた。

しかしながら、第107議会においては、他の主要条項に関する際立った両党間の意見の相違から、エネルギー法案は通過しなかった。

今年に入り、第108議会が始まったが、早くも農業に対しｴﾀﾉｰﾙを含むバイオ燃料の生産、輸送、貯蔵に関する投資を支援するため政府保証融資制度を設ける等の規定を含む法案が提出されている。

　

４．各州における議論と利用促進に向けた優遇策

(1)カリフォルニア州

１９９９年３月２５日に、デイビスカリフォルニア州知事は、政令Ｄ - ５-９９を発表した。 この政令は、ガソリンへのMTBE混合を２００２年１２月３１日までに撤廃することを求めたものである。 また、この政令は、カリフォルニア・エネルギー委員会（ CEC ）に対して、“カリフォルニアにおける廃棄物及び他の Biomass エタノール産業の可能性を評価し報告する”ように指示するとともに、“もしエタノールが MTBE に代替可能であるということが明確になったら、カリフォルニアにおける廃棄物及び他の Biomass エタノールの開発促進に向けて、次に何を行うべきかを明確にする”ことも求めている。

しかしながら、CECによって行われた研究では、非常にわずかな供給不足でも価格が大きく変動するなどこの数年間のガソリン価格の不安定さは拡大しており、２００２年の MTBE 廃止が結果として、5.5〜10万バレル/日での供給不足に到るかもしれないという内容になった。このような供給不足が起これば、需要と供給が均衡する以前に価格が倍増してしまう可能性があり、供給不足は南カリフォルニアに多大な影響を与える可能性が高いとしている。

デイビス知事は、２００２年３月１５日、元来設定されていた期限（ ２００２年１２月３１日）までに切替を実施するとすれば、価格面や供給不足という面で多大な影響をもたらすという観点から、MTBE のエタノール切替期限を１年間延期するという新しい政令Ｄ - ５２-０２を発表した。この新たな政令によると、このような 切替えにより供給不足あるいは価格上昇をもたらさないように、製油所は２００３年１２月までにエタノールへの移行を完了すればよいこととなっている。

Chevron Texaco 社は、２００３年1月〜５月の間に南カリフォルニアで 販売するガソリンの添加物をMTBE からエタノールに転換する予定であると発表した。Chevron Texaco 社の発表は、Conoco Phillips 、BPシェル及び Exxon Mobilも合わせ、カリフォルニアのガソリン供給の８０パーセント以上がエタノール混合となることを意味している。

(2)各州における利用促進に向けた優遇策

多くの州においては、エタノール生産に対する生産者へのインセンティブとして、消費税免除のかたちの種々の優遇措置が導入されている。 直接的にエタノールに対するインセンティブは提供しないものの、代替エネルギー産業に対する優遇措置をもっており、エタノール産業もその中に含まれることとなっている州もある。

中西部の州とハワイは、エタノールのために最も手厚いインセンティブを提供している。 イリノイ、アイオワとサウスダコタの各州では、エタノール混合割合10%に対して２セントの減税措置があり、 また、ミネソタ州では E85 燃料（８５％エタノール混合）に対して免税措置が講じられている。

再生可能燃料協会によれば、中西部の６つの州では、生産者クレジットを導入している。具体的には、ミネソタ、サウスダコタとウィスコンシンでは、１ガロン当たり２０セントのクレジットが生産者に対して与えられるものとなっている。また、 カンザス州では、２００１年７月１日以前に生産を開始している事業者に対してはガロン当たり５セントのクレジットが、また、新規のあるいは生産能力増加分に対してはガロン当たり７.５セントのクレジット（１千５百万ガロン / 年が限度）が与えられる事となっている。

なお、各州毎の優遇措置について表２に示している。

(3)都市部における利用拡大の可能性

都市部の汚染低減の観点からエタノールは有益であると利害関係者は指摘している。エタノール業界団体である再生可能燃料協会（ RFA ）によれば、エタノールを使うことによって、大気の清浄度が規定を満たさない40地域のうち27地域で一酸化炭素(CO)汚染の削減に成功したと言われている。独自にエタノールを混合した RFG を使うことによりシカゴ近隣地域及びミルウォーキー地域は、大気の清浄度向上を実現しており、非達成地域という位置付けから達成地域への変更を求めている。

エタノール生産のために穀物を用いることは農産物に付加価値が付く、つまり農民が穀物から得る収入が増えることから、中西部の農業州はエタノール利用強化に強く賛成している。また、RFA は、カリフォルニア、ニューヨーク、ニュージャージー、オハイオ、オレゴン、ノースカロライナ、テキサス、メリーランド、ワシントン及びペンシルベニア州においても、木材廃棄物、都市廃棄物、残余飼料及び他の革新的なセルロース飼料を用いるエタノール産業が発展して行くと見ている。

April 6, 2006 Platts 　　

ExxonMobil, Sunoco see quick end for MTBE
Sunoco executive warns of US gasoline supply disruptions this summer

ExxonMobil sees a "fairly rapid" phase-out of MTBE-blended gasoline by US refiners ahead of the May 5 repeal of the US oxygenate mandate, CEO Rex Tillerson said March 21 at the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association annual meeting.

Big East Coast refiner Sunoco also sees a rapid phase-out, with possible "temporary disruptions" at gasoline terminals this summer if supplies of MTBE replacement ethanol, which faces logistical concerns, fail to get to refiners, Sunoco executive vice president Joel Maness told Platts on the sidelines of the meeting.

He stressed that while terminals may run out of gasoline, "we certainly don't anticipate seeing any interruption of supply to [retail] customers at all," since refiners can do exchange agreements with each other or access other terminals.

EIA thinks a rapid transition has put the gasoline market at risk for price volatility, while RFA says refiners are planning a staged phase-out.

US refiners are in the process of replacing MTBE, known to contaminate drinking water, with ethanol, and there is some disagreement in the industry over whether there will be enough ethanol to go around ahead of the summer driving season. The East Coast is particularly vulnerable as it shifts to blending corn-based ethanol which must be transported from Midwest plants. Ethanol, unlike MTBE, tends to absorb water, so many refiners are trying to move it mainly on trains or trucks.

Last week, ethanol lobbyists at the Renewable Fuels Association publicized a letter they wrote to the Energy Information Administration criticizing an EIA report that warned of possible gasoline price spikes due to the sudden need for more ethanol.

The biggest bone of contention is the speed at which refiners will be switching to ethanol. EIA thinks a rapid transition has put the gasoline market at risk for price volatility, while RFA says refiners are planning a staged phase-out.

Unlike ExxonMobil and Sunoco, Valero Energy sees an "orderly" transition, at least for itself. Valero is the biggest refiner in North America, followed by ExxonMobil.

CEO William Klesse told Platts on the NPRA sidelines that the US will have enough ethanol to blend into gasoline during the current spike in demand.

Valero will stop selling MTBE-blended gasoline on May 5, Klesse said. "It's a two-month phase-out [for Valero]...To me that's orderly..."

Both ExxonMobil and Sunoco are currently phasing out RFG blended with MTBE, they said. ExxonMobil will stop blending MTBE into gasoline "by early second quarter," according to spokeswoman Prem Nair.

Sunoco expects most of the industry to halt MTBE-blended RFG sales by May 5, with a few refiners selling RFG with MTBE only weeks to a couple months after that date, said Maness.

Both ExxonMobil and Sunoco see sufficient ethanol supply with logistical concerns. In Sunoco's case, its big Philadelphia refining complex is taking ethanol by rail, mostly on a delivered basis. Ethanol producers have said a lack of unit trains will make it hard to get ethanol where it needs to go in the short term. "The rails seem to be fully occupied," said Maness.

"If you look at the situation broadly...it would appear there will be sufficient ethanol..," said Tillerson. "It's a logistics and a distribution challenge in terms of ensuring [ethanol] gets to the right places where it's needed."

"We're not expecting the worst, but we're not expecting the best" this driving season, said Maness. He said Sunoco's biggest concern is "just getting [the ethanol] there."

"Obviously [ethanol supply is] tight because the price is higher than gasoline," Klesse said. However, "we think there is enough ethanol."

Valero's decision to stop using MTBE is directly related to the new US energy law's lack of a liability waiver coupled with the oxygenate mandate repeal, said Klesse: "Now that you've lost the oxygenate mandate...with that gone, we don't think we have this protection now from defective product and that we're just wide open [to potential lawsuits], and I believe the industry feels that way too."

Valero is also eyeing potential "opportunities" in the ethanol industry, he said. "It's still very much in the study phase," said Klesse, adding, "we're looking at the [ethanol] market to try to make sure we understand it and to see what opportunities might really be there." He would not give further details.

US refiners have been working feverishly to meet a blizzard of new formula changes this year. There are also many projects planned to increase overall plant capacity.

Looking ahead, the US EIA does not think the US will have an oversupply of product if all announced refining capacity expansion plans come to fruition, according to EIA senior analyst Joanne Shore.

However, the Middle East could experience overexpansion because the economics of those projects differ from US projects, she told NPRA participants.

"If you take the US alone, I don't think we're going to be in an oversupply situation....I believe that there's a stronger potential for undercapacity," said Shore.

The area most likely for refinery capacity overexpansion "is probably Asia and the Middle East," she said, adding that projects in those regions "are not just being driven by returns on refining, but also on the projects and the jobs that they may supply in the region."

US projects are driven more by increased refining profitability, a high light-heavy crude price differential, and increased cash and personnel availability as companies finish low sulfur fuel investments, said Shore. Looking at US refinery plans announced for 2005-2010, the EIA sees 1.7 million b/d of crude unit expansion, she said.

EIA expects the largest capacity additions to occur in the Asia-Pacific area, with an estimated 3.6 million b/d of crude capacity expansions planned for 2005-2010. Middle East exporting capacity is the next highest with 2.5 million b/d of crude capacity expansion plans that will serve both the Asia Pacific area and Europe.

"Fast growing Asian demand is accompanied with plans for large capacity expansions, particularly in China and India," she said, noting that India is planning enough new capacity to increase product exports.

The Middle East "seems to be in a let's develop capacity for export markets game again," she said, citing a 400,000 b/d export-oriented refinery at the Red Sea port of Yanbu being planned by Saudi Arabia and a 600,000 b/d refinery at Al-Zour planned by Kuwait.

Crude distillation plans indicate large increases in all regions except for Europe, said Shore. Those refiners are focusing on hydrocracking, which produces more distillate to meet growing diesel demand. She said while European refiners plan only a 30,000 b/d increase in crude capacity 2005-2010, plans call for hydrocracking to increase 275,000 b/d to produce more distillate.

Shore said European refinery yield changes would mostly raise distillate yield and reduce residual fuel oil production, with little change in gasoline yields. Much of that gasoline is exported to the US.

Current and planned MTBE bans in the US

2003/7/21

Texas Petrochemicals LP and Affiliates File Chapter 11 Petitions to Facilitate Financial Restructuring
http://www.txpetrochem.com/ci/pdf/tpcnews/03-07-21.pdf

Texas Petrochemicals LP (TPLP), and its affiliates Texas Petrochemical Holdings, Inc. (TPH), Petrochemical Partnership Holdings, Inc, TPC Holding Corp, and Texas Butylene Chemical Corporation, announced today that to facilitate a financial restructuring, they have filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas.
TPLP owns and operates petrochemical manufacturing facilities in Houston, Texas and operates product terminals in Baytown, Texas and Lake Charles, Louisiana.
The Chapter 11 filings were necessitated primarily by the drastic and likely permanent reduction in MTBE demand, arising from regulatory changes, and by recent higher raw material and energy costs. These factors led to the conclusion that future cash flows of the companies would be insufficient to meet their subordinated bond debt obligations over the long term, requiring a permanent financial restructuring. The Chapter 11 filings will allow the companies to reduce significantly and restructure their debt, while permitting TPLP to continue to operate its core, profitable business sectors in compliance with the company’s long-standing commitment to the health and safety of its employees and the communities in which it operates. No plant closures are expected as a result of the filings, and the restructuring will have only minimal impact on day-to-day business operations, which will continue as usual and without interruption.
Carl S. Stutts, president and chief executive officer of TPLP, stated "With the assistance of our professional advisors, we conducted a thorough and complete review of all available options for the restructure of our indebtedness. We decided that, though the decision to file for reorganization under Chapter 11 was very difficult, this process is the best way to restore and enhance the existing operational and competitive strengths of TPLP. The Chapter 11 process provides us the opportunity to financially restructure the companies, while not unduly disrupting day-to-day business operations and ongoing relations with our valued employees, suppliers and customers. Our vendors will be paid in full for all goods and services provided after the filing date, and TPLP intends to continue to meet its commitments to employees, customers and suppliers. We expect TPLP to emerge from the reorganization with a significantly improved financial structure that will position TPLP for long-term success in our core butadiene, specialty chemicals and gasoline alkylate businesses, while phasing out our on-purpose MTBE production."
E. Joseph Grady, TPLP's chief financial officer, said, "Over the past several months, TPLP has reduced costs and implemented continuing operational efficiencies. We intend to complete these initiatives in the weeks and months ahead. We believe that TPLP will have more than sufficient liquidity to fund the restructuring process and the cash requirements necessary for our ongoing businesses, including its operating needs, working capital, capital expenditures and other purposes during the bankruptcy case."
For over a month, TPLP has been engaged in active discussions with advisors to an ad hoc committee of holders of TPLP’s 11-1/8% Senior Subordinated Notes on restructuring alternatives and believes that significant progress has been made on a general framework for restructuring. TPLP will continue to work with all parties toward a quick and consensual plan of reorganization.
TPLP is a Houston-based petrochemical company specializing in C4 hydrocarbons. TPLP products are widely used as chemical building blocks for synthetic rubber, nylon carpets, adhesives, catalysts and additives used in high-performance polymers. TPLP also manufactures fuel products used in the formulation of cleaner burning gasoline. The company has manufacturing facilities in the industrial corridor adjacent to the Houston Ship Channel and operates product terminals in Baytown, Texas and Lake Charles, Louisiana. TPLP is a Responsible CareR company dedicated to supporting the continuing effort to improve the industry's responsible management of chemicals.