View source for Open Fuel Standard Coalition

{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2023}}
{{POV|date=January 2013}}
'''The Open Fuel Standard Coalition''' is a [[bipartisan]] group in the United States actively working for passage of H.R. 1687, the "[[Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011]]." The OFS Coalition views this legislation as the solution to the current [[energy crisis]] by the implementing of [[alternative energy sources]] into our fuel transportation market sector, thereby breaking our dependence on [[foreign oil]]. Specifically, by implementing H.R. 1687, the [[Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011]] all vehicles sold in the US will have to either operate on mixed fuels, containing [[E85|85 percent ethanol]], [[methanol]], [[biodiesel]], or any other alternative energy source.
==Purpose==
The open fuel standard will create incentive to promote and invest in the emerging market of [[ethanol]], [[Methanol fuel|methanol]], [[biodiesel]], and any other alternative fuel. Vehicles with these alternative fuel engines will re-energize our economy and create new jobs here in the U.S. Comparatively, mixed fuels produce less [[carbon emissions]] as well as beating the price of oil three to one. The technology and resources are already available for flex-fuel cars, but the availability and access to pumps is scarce. By manufacturing [[flex-fuel|flex-fuel cars]], gas stations can create new revenue by adding mixed fuel pumps that offer low cost alternative to gasoline. However, the first step is allowing a demand by opening up the market to producing more [[Flexible-fuel vehicle|flex fuel]] and alternative fueled cars.
Our foreign competitors, including [[China]] and [[Brazil]] have already successfully implemented similar regulations on auto industries selling cars in their countries resulting in tremendous success and new manufacturing plants in both China and Brazil. The U.S. cannot stay competitive as we fall behind in the investments of alternative energy and auto industries take their business abroad.
==Goal==
The goal of the OFS coalition is to pass H.R. 1687, the "[[Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011]]" in the [[112th United States Congress]] and generate pressures on the administration and federal departments to take further action.  The OFS Coalition is assisting in providing information about the open fuel standard in an effort to educate Members of the [[United States Congress]], while successfully engaging with various groups to promote the tactical purposes of the open fuel standard and draw attention and support of key Members of Congress.
[http://www.openfuelstandard.org/ A web site] has been created by the Open Fuel Standard Coalition to help keep interested parties informed about the [[Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011|Open Fuel Standard Act]]. The purpose of [http://www.openfuelstandard.org/ OpenFuelStandard.org] is to provide information to citizens who want to help the [[Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011|Open Fuel Standard Act]] become law.
::1. Practical actions you can take that will help pass the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011.
::2. Information to further educate you on the Open Fuel Standard.
::3. Posts you can forward to your friends and family to educate them about the Open Fuel Standard.
==Reasons for the Open Fuel Standard==
:1. '''Save money.''' It will bring down gas prices at the pump. The main reason gas is so expensive is that [[OPEC]] deliberately lowers its production to raise the price of [[oil]], and we have no real fuel choice at the pump. It is all made of oil. So when OPEC reduces its production and makes oil more expensive, we have no other choice — we must pay it. OPEC knows this, and takes advantage of its leverage. Fuel choice at the pump will be the end of a long-running monopoly.<ref name=OPEC>{{cite web|last=Zubrin|first=Robert|title=Achieving Energy Victory|url=http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/achieving-energy-victory|publisher=The New Atlantis|accessdate=2011-07-07}}</ref>
:2. '''Healthier.''' The fumes from burning alcohol and other alternatives are less [[toxic]] than the fumes from burning gasoline — considerably less toxic to humans and other living things.
:3. '''Better economy.''' It will generate jobs in the United States. Americans will be building fuel-processing plants, fuel stations, growing the [[raw materials]] to make methanol from [[biomass]], growing crops to make ethanol, inventing new kinds of other alternative fuels, and coming up with new ways to make fuel from [[waste products]]. American ingenuity will have a field day.
:4. '''Safer'''. Alcohol is less [[flammable]] than gasoline, and therefore less dangerous (less likely to explode). Alcohol burns cooler than gasoline, too, which also makes it less dangerous.
:5. '''Cooler'''. Alcohol fuels will put less [[carbon]] into the air. To drill for oil, you're taking carbon out from underneath the surface of the earth and burning it, adding carbon to the air that wasn't already there. But to make ethanol and methanol, you use plant material. So the plant pulls carbon out of the air, and then when it is burned as fuel, it returns the same carbon back into the air.
:6. '''Expensive'''. Manufacturing a car with flex-fuel capability adds to the price of a car. It comprises many relatively small tweaks, usually adding around one hundred dollars to the cost (not the price) of a new car.  Typically, it requires all metal components within the fuel system to be changed to stainless steel and all hoses and o-rings require the substitution of specialist ethanol and methanol-resistant fluoroelastomers<ref name=Expensive>{{cite web |title='O' Ring Guide |website=www.jameswalker.biz |access-date=2023-09-15 |last=Walker |first=James |url=http://www.jameswalker.biz/system/pdf_docs/fichiers/3/original_2011_update.pdf}}</ref>
:7. '''Cheaper'''. It doesn't cost the federal government any money.
:8. '''Environmentally friendly'''. An "alcohol spill" would not be a disaster like an oil spill. Alcohol dissolves in water and is readily consumed by bacteria. Within a few days of an Exxon-sized ethanol or methanol spill, the ocean would be back to normal.
:9. '''Security'''. The fuel competition at the pump will reduce the amount of money going to regimes hostile to America (and hostile to their own populations). These regimes are dangerous for the world, and their enormous revenues give them power and influence around the world. Democracies would be better off if those regimes didn't have their inexhaustible wealth to wield.<ref name=Security>{{cite journal|last=Korin|first=Anne|author2=Gal Luft|title=Energy Independaence Myths and Solutions|date=2011-07-07|url=https://www.scribd.com/doc/56347979/Energy-Independence-Myths-and-Solutions}}</ref>
:10. '''Freedom'''. The bill requires 95 percent of cars to be capable of burning any alternative fuel by 2017, leaving the choice up to the automaker. Because the Open Fuel Standard Act of 2011 does not pick a winner, every alternative fuel can compete against gasoline, thereby allowing consumer choice. Cars could be [[electric]], [[hydrogen]], [[natural gas]], bio-diesel, or any other non-gasoline alternative and qualify under the Act. This is the only '''technology-neutral bill''', meaning that it doesn't favor any particular option and allows the market to decide which innovative solution will win out.
==References==
<references />
[[Category:Sustainable energy]]
[[Category:Political organizations based in the United States]]