MTBE water contamination can be found throughout the country. I have been told that today, MTBE contamination is the second most commonly found chemical in groundwater. For those who continue to advocate for MTBE I say forget what is happening here inside the beltway, go out to the states and see what they are doing in response to their constituents and the water contamination.
Eight states have taken action to limit or phase-out MTBE use in an effort to protect their water resources, and legislation to ban MTBE has been introduced in another sixteen states. I do believe that Congress should act to come up with a solution to the MTBE debacle that does not sacrifice the air quality gains of the current program and does not jeopardize our nation's valuable water supplies.
I know that Missouri, and I believe this country, requires a renewable, environmentally friendly alternative to MTBE that helps create local jobs, which adds value to our farmer's product and which moves us away from this energy hostage situation where our reliance on foreign-produced oil makes our producers, consumers and economy subject to the whims of international cartel autocrats. In my opinion, that alternative is ethanol.
Mr. Chairman, we all know that the federal oxygen content requirement was adopted in 1990 for several reasons. First, those of us in Congress understood that oxygenates provide a source of clean octane - displacing toxic compounds such as benzene and reducing ozone-forming exhaust emissions of hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide. EPA has stated the program is equivalent to taking 16 million vehicles off the road each year. Congress also recognized the energy security benefits of substituting a certain percentage of imported petroleum with domestically produced renewable fuel such as ethanol. Promoting renewables that are domestically produced, such as ethanol, is a critical element toward regaining our independence from foreign oil. It is unfortunate that the Clinton Administration has done nothing to promote a sound energy policy for this country, and in my opinion came to this debate late. Finally, the Congress hoped the federal oxygen requirement could provide new market opportunities for farmers by stimulating new demand for ethanol. I believe these objectives remain as valid today as they were in 1990.
I firmly believe that ethanol does play and will continue to play in our nation's environmental, economic and energy security. I know that ethanol, an organic, non-toxic, biodegradable substance, is the right thing to pursue in the case of the MTBE debate. Unfortunately, some are trying to use the sins of MTBE as a reason to pull the plug mid-stream on clean-burning ethanol.
Ethanol is widely marketed across the country to increase octane and reduce emissions through its clean burning properties as an oxygenate. Ethanol, which contains approximately 35% oxygen, enhances combustion and therefore contributes to a more efficient burn of gasoline, reducing carbon monoxide emissions, a contributor to harmful ozone formation, by as much as 30%. The use of ethanol reduces emissions of all the major pollutants regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), including ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM10), and nitrogen oxides (NOx). Ethanol is also an effective tool for reducing air toxics. As a renewable fuel, ethanol can dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is clear to me and many others that ethanol is good for the environment, both our water and our air. I believe that my fellow colleagues Senators Grassley, Durbin, and Harkin will be able to outline additional environmental benefits later in this hearing.
Let me touch briefly on another reason we enacted the oxygen content requirement--the economy. Ethanol provides significant benefits to the economy, particularly in farming communities across rural America. Earlier this year, I participated in the first ethanol plant grand-opening in Missouri. This facility is a 15 million gallon per year facility located in Macon, Missouri and owned by farmers across the state. The ethanol facility not only provides new jobs, but a value-added market for their commodities. In light of today's record low prices, value-added ethanol processing provides a much-needed economic opportunity. According to a letter from Secretary Dan Glickman of the United States Department of Agriculture which assumes an MTBE phase out and the oxygen content requirement staying in place, "The MTBE phase-out is projected to have a positive effect on U.S. trade, with the average U.S. agricultural net export value increasing by over $200 million per year. The U.S. import value of MTBE would decline by $1. 1 billion per year and almost $12 billion cumulatively from 2000- 2010. The agricultural export increase combined with the MTBE import decrease would improve the U.S. balance of trade by $1.3 billion per year." In addition, according to Secretary Glickman, "The increase in farm and ethanol production caused by replacing MTBE with ethanol is projected to create 13,000 jobs across the economy by 2010. Over a third of the new jobs, 4,300, would be created in the ethanol sector itself. Another 6,400 jobs are created in the trade, transportation, and service sectors. Farm sector jobs increase by 575. Jobs in other industries, food processing, and energy sectors increase by 1,600."
Mr. Chairman, colleagues, witnesses, and those in the audience--we know alot about ethanol. Ethanol is a safe, biodegradable fuel that does not pose an environmental threat to water or soil, is good for air quality, and has been awarded a "clean bill of health" by the California Environmental Policy Council.
So, let us be very clear about the issue we are addressing. The issue is MTBE contamination of our valuable water supplies, not ethanol. Ethanol will allow us to address several important policy objectives: clean air, clean water, balance of trade, economic development, etc. Ethanol is the solution and I will work with other members of Congress to see that that notion prevails.