{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01794145420207743, 'fraction_numerical': 0.02644003777148253, 'mean_word_length': 5.091954022988506, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A new question worth billions: why did RIN prices spike in 2013?

ABSTRACT A seminal economic paper theorized that when US refiners encountered the 10% blend wall for blending ethanol into gasoline, they would experience a shortage of Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) compliance credits and consequent higher prices. When Renewable Identification Number (RIN) prices spiked in 2013, many economists and policy makers incorrectly deduced it was due to the predicted shortage stemming from the blend wall. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response made changes to the RFS to provide oil refiners relief from the blend wall. Compliance data now published by the EPA demonstrate that US refiners and importers have blended more than 10% ethanol in obligated gasoline volumes since 2010 and did not experience any compliance credit shortages between 2010 and 2015. The 2013 spikes in RIN prices therefore cannot be explained by market shortages of compliance credits. The EPA's changes to the RFS did not reduce demand for ethanol below the blend wall.