As the political frenzy heats up leading into the Democratic and Republican Conventions, the ethanol industry’s campaign to stop a waiver to the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) is heating up as well. This week, several ethanol organizations have sent out letters to key legislatures including governors explaining why there is no need for a waiver. The governors who are advocating for a waiver include Arkansas, North Carolina, Texas, Georgia, and New Mexico.

The letter from Growth Energy supports statements made by others in the industry including an explanation of the inherent flexibility built into the RFS and how obligated parties can easily meet the volume requirements this year. The letter also debunks the fallacy of the total corn crop that is actually used in ethanol production. In addition, the letter explains that waiving the RFS would not have any significant impact on corn prices; rather, commodity prices are affected by speculation and Mother Nature.

Growth Energy CEO Tom Buis dropped by the Farm Progress Show Tuesday just before heading to Tampa for the Republican convention and Cindy Zimmerman was able to speak with him in more detail about why a waiver for the RFS would not help, but hurt farmers, the ethanol industry and most important consumers.

You can listen to the full interview with Tom Buis here: Tell Governors No to RFS Waiver

Renewable Fuels Association President and CEO Bob Dinneen said in his organization’s letter, “The rash of governors rushing to appease the pleas of the livestock and food processing industries are ignoring the damage a waiver would do to consumers at the pump. Removing ethanol from our fuel mix would drive oil and gasoline prices higher, adding pain at the pump and increased cost at the checkout counter due to higher energy costs for farmers, food processors, and food transporters. These increases in gas prices would far outpace any negligible relief to food prices from a waiver. The alleged economic harm cited by these governors does not rise to the kind of economic harm EPA determined necessary to waive the RFS. The facts cited in support of their case also fail to pass muster.”