Will Trump stiff America at the gas pump for a political pal?

Donald Trump was elected president, in part, by Americans’ desire to shake up “business-asusual.”

Like millions of Americans who aren’t on Hollywood awards shows or otherwise predicting disaster, I’m eager to give our new president a chance to do the right things.

One of those chances — that’s coming up pretty quickly — isn’t the stuff of headlines or talk-show fodder. It’s a wonky issue that’s important only if you care about the cost of gassing up your car or truck.

Here’s the deal: When you pull into an Arizona gas station, you may notice that sticker on the pump telling you that the gas you’re buying contains ethanol. Ethanol, a biofuel that comes primarily from corn, is required by federal law, by way of a renewable fuel standard.

It’s probably not something you think about much.

But if you did think about it, you might ask: How does the ethanol get there? Who puts it in the gasoline? Is it the gas station, or is it someone else further up the supply chain?

From a technical, chemical and logistical standpoint, the answer is mindnumbing. From the important legal and financial standpoint (yes, it costs money to put the ethanol there.), the federal government answers that question by assigning a “point of obligation” within the supply chain.

For consumers and for those who care about the environment, this fine print in the federal register is actually important.

Years ago, the Environmental Protection Agency determined that the most efficient point of obligation is with the refiners and importers. That’s the most efficient approach because it imposes the least regulatory burden on the overall industry, as opposed to smaller distributors and retailers — who get their product from refiners and importers anyway.

Here’s where the swamp test comes in: Virtually everyone involved with getting renewable fuels into the fuel supply process agrees that, for once, the EPA has it right. Common sense and practicalities support leaving the point of obligation for ethanol blending right where it is.

However, a few major oil-industry players are pushing hard to have the point of obligation moved “downstream” to the distributors, terminal operators and even your local convenience store. One of them is Carl Icahn, one of the Trump’s largest financial campaign backers and, now, an adviser to the president.

Why does Mr. Icahn care? Turns out he owns 80 percent of CVR Energy, one of the few refining operations that isn’t integrated with downstream terminals and retailers. Now, Icahn wants ethanol compliance to become everyone else’s problem. He claims the current arrangement is costing his company $200 million per year, and he wants EPA to fix it.

The problems with Icahn’s plan are exactly the reasons that convinced EPA to adopt the current system in the first place: It would be harder to administer, raise prices at the pump, and, ultimately, undercut the ethanol program itself.

Donald Trump, on the other hand, vowed during his campaign to protect the renewable fuel standard — not undercut it. The president also wants to keep energy costs low for consumers.

The EPA will have to make a decision about Mr. Icahn’s plea. That decision will tell us a lot about how the government will operate under President Trump. Will it be business as usual, with the rich getting richer, or will a Trump EPA stand with everyone who has to put gas in a vehicle?

Mike Mathers is vice president of operations for Pro Petroleum, which operates pipeline-connected fuel storage and truck-loading terminals in Arizona and elsewhere in the Southwest. Email him at mmathers@propetroleum.