Ethanol in gasoline, not such a hot idea?

I'm all in favor of weaning America off foreign petroleum, but the following is not the way to do it. The EPA and the state of Minnesota in separate but related stupidities have decreed we will have 15% Ethanol (E15) in our gasoline (EPA) and 20% Ethanol (E20) in our gasoline (Minnesota, starting August 2013) -- both before the testing results of what that would do to automobiles came in.

Well, the test results are now in, and it's a crap shoot for car owners -- CRC final report for project CM-136-09-1B, Intermediate-Level Ethanol Blends Engine Durability Study (PDF).

Those cars older than 2001 stand a good chance of fuel system damage from the lower 15% version. We here in Minnesota will be seeing this version in our pumps very soon, if I understand the Minnesota statute correctly (I may not, since it's very obtuse: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=239.791). The rest of the country is likely to see E15 as a result of the EPA ruling, as well.

For cars newer than 2001, some may be ok with 15%, while others the manufacturers (e.g. Ford) specifically disclaim warranty if used with 15%, while others specifically label their gasoline caps to say NO gasoline with more than 10% ethanol.

20% ethanol is, of course, even worse than 15% as far as risk of damage to fuel systems and engine metals (CRC testing showed damaged valves, for example).

While the Minnesota statute is obtuse in its many subdivisions and references to federal law, and numerous special interest exceptions (ATVs, airplanes, boats, etc.), one thing is clear. The law was not written using science, engineering, or with the purpose of reducing air pollution or dependence on foreign oil. It was instead written with one purpose, political payback. It benefits Minnesota corn growers and ethanol industry members who helped elect former governor Tim Pawlenty and the legislators who pushed the law. This is made obvious in that decisions regarding expiration of the law are based on determinations made by the commissioner of agriculture.

Ed Welsh, Oneida County Legislator (New York) and Central Region General Manager for AAA New York, has written a good editorial about the ethanol situation and the CRC study results.  It's very worth reading. My favorite passage says:

If we examine how the federal government mandates certain products we would find that it occurs in one of three ways. In no particular order, the first is to subsidize it , the second is to protect it from competition and third is to require its use. Corn Ethanol as used in our gasoline has the remarkable distinction as perhaps the only product that enjoys all three.

Ask yourself, who would purposely buy fuel that’s more costly, gets worse mileage and increases carbon emissions? Due to government mandate, the answer is: All of us!

Start saving money for car repairs now, folks.