As most of us are aware, recent testing of drinking water sources has revealed that a surprising number of wells across the country have been contaminated by MTBE, a common gasoline additive. A study by EPA's Blue Ribbon Panel on MTBE reported that between 5 and 10 percent of community drinking water supplies have detectable levels of MTBE. Private wells and surface waters have also been contaminated. The United States Geological Survey reports that MTBE was the second most commonly detected volatile organic compound in water from urban wells. In Connecticut and the rest of the northeast, these problems are as bad as they are anywhere. The reformulated gasoline that we use is mandated to contain oxygenates, and that mandate has primarily been met by adding MTBE. I am absolutely convinced that we, as a Congress, must do something to reduce or eliminate the use of MTBE in our gasoline supply because of the contamination of the nation's drinking water supply that MTBE has caused.
Despite its negative impacts on drinking water, MTBE has had some positive effects on air quality. We are here today to hear testimony on the potential environmental benefits and impacts of an MTBE replacement that may afford similar air quality benefits: ethanol. I have a number of concerns about replacing MTBE with ethanol. First, ethanol is much more volatile than MTBE. In the Northeast, summer temperatures will exacerbate this volatility, increasing evaporation of ethanol and creating emissions that may worsen summertime smog and ozone problems, which are already a significant concern for Connecticut and the Northeast. My second concern about increasing the use of ethanol in the Northeast is the lack of ethanol production and distribution infrastructure in our region. Ethanol would have to be transported into the region. Due to its affinity for water, ethanol cannot be piped into the Northeast premixed with gasoline. At the moment, viable alternatives to corn ethanol, such as biomass ethanol, are not in widespread existence. I do not know whether the Northeast could cope with a mandate to use much greater volumes of ethanol without facing outrageous increases in gas prices because of small supply. Finally, while the renewable nature of ethanol as a fuel source is desirable, I know there are those that argue that the energy that goes into producing ethanol the fossil fuels that are needed for harvesting, producing, and transporting ethanol undercut the presumed environmental benefits.
These are the very real concerns we in the Northeast have. I hope we are able to use our time today productively, to learn more about the benefits and the risks of using ethanol as a major feedstock in gasoline. Thank you and I look forward to hearing from our witnesses.