Adjust Text Size

Ethanol Blended Gas = Lower Mileage?

Written by Nickel - 272 Comments

Bank Deal: Earn 1.00% APY on an FDIC-insured savings account at Barclays Bank.

According to a recent article, drivers in Honolulu (and perhaps elsewhere) are complaining of reduced gas mileage in the two months since Hawaii switch to gasoline blended with 10% ethanol. According to the Ethanol Promotion and Information council, most drivers using a 10% ethanol-blended gas will experience a 1-2% drop in mileage. But some drivers in Hawaii are claiming that their mileage has dropped by 25-30%. While I’ve heard of substantially lower mileage in cars running on E85 (a blend of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline that can be used in certain makes/models) I never really heard anything about reduced mileage in the more ‘standard’ 90/10 ethanol blend.


Published on June 1st, 2006 - 272 Comments
Filed under: Automotive,Energy

About the author: is the founder and editor-in-chief of this site. He's a thirty-something family man who has been writing about personal finance since 2005, and guess what? He's on Twitter!

Related articles...

Was this article useful? Please sign up to receive our content via e-mail:

You will receive only the daily updates, and can unsubscribe at anytime.

Comments (scroll down to add your own):

  1. You have to take it for what it’s worth. Sure, these people are experiencing lower gas mileage… but, they are probably not attempting to measure it. They notice that they go to the pump sooner, and then exaggerate. I know absolutely no one, besides myself, who ever “tests” their gas mileage.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 1st 2006 @ 12:06 pm
  2. My MINI Cooper gives me a live readout of my at-the-moment gas consumption as well as my average gas consumption. Maryland also just made the switch to 10% ethanol a few weeks ago, and I can definitely confirm that my mileage has dropped a good 10-15% since then. My driving habits have not changed, and I made the comparisons based on both city and highway driving; both have gone down 2-3 MPG since the switch.

    So who do I sue to get my money back? (I’m half serious…)

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 1st 2006 @ 1:00 pm
  3. Ethanol has a lower energy density than gasoline, so it seems logical that mileage would drop a bit. Also, ethanol could be the ticket for reducing our dependence on foriegn oil, but it’s actually less energy efficient to fuel vehicles with the stuff, as opposed to gasoline, if the entire energy production chain is accounted for. As one of the editors of Car & Driver Magazine (can’t remember which one) said recently, “if the gasoline engine didn’t exist, we’d have to invent it to save the planet”

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 2nd 2006 @ 2:47 pm
  4. great post thanks 🙂

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 19th 2006 @ 2:15 pm
  5. I do religiously check my fuel mileage and here is my experience using E10:

    Driving a compact pickup with a 4-cylinder engine I usually get about 32 mpg while driving at steady highway speeds and using gasoline.

    When using E10, my mileage drops to about 29 mpg.

    That means on a trip of 320 miles I would burn 10 gallons of gasoline. If I used E10 for the same trip, I would need just a bit less than 11 gallons.

    But, 90% of that E10 would be gasoline. That means when I burn 11 gallons of E10, I burn 9.9 gallons of gasoline.

    Whether I buy gasoline or E10, I burn almost exactly the same amount of gasoline, but if I use E10, I have to buy 11 gallons of fuel.

    I now buy E10 only when I really need gas, and have no choice.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 22nd 2006 @ 11:15 pm
  6. I have for two years carefully tracked my gas milage and have found that I get 2 miles per gallon less with an Ethanol blend. This means I pay an extra $15 per month at the pump. This seems to me to be a state imposed extra gas tax.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 16th 2006 @ 2:16 pm
  7. There was an article in a recent Car & Driver magazine that looked at the subject of E85. Using a flex fuel Chevy Tahoe, the magazine found a substantial drop in fuel economy. It was as much as 25%! Although it’s great to save the environment and help eliminate the U.S. dependence on foreign oil, I doubt too many U.S. consumers are willing to incur a 25% increase in fuel bills to do it. If ethanol supplies can be increased, prices of E85 may drop and it may become more economicly viable for the average consumer. Given that ethanol production is heavily subsidized at the moment, the real cost is even higher.

    If the quantity demanded was high enough, however, there would be an economic incentive for supplies to increase and production methods to improve. We’d then see lower prices, leading to even greater productivity. Prices would then likely fall enough to offset the decreased fuel economy.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 28th 2006 @ 7:28 pm
  8. I measure gas milage every couple months (I drive a min. of 120 miles a day). I dropped from 30 mpg in my 2003 Jetta to 27 mpg when the Shell gas station I use swapped over. I don’t beleive in coincidences.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 28th 2007 @ 7:48 am
  9. I am an economic statistician by trade so I constantly collect data on numerous things just by habit. I’ve collected MPG stats on my 92 Sentra since I got her new years ago. Prior to the 10% ethanol switch, I would get a median average of 35MPG with a range of about +-1mpg. This was established over about the past 30k miles. After the ethanol switch, I am now down to a median average of 33MPG with a range of about the same as before. This shows a 2MPG drop or about 5%. I’ve racked on about 10k since the switch so my data is fairly conclusive: Ethanol switch did indeed drop my mileage by 5%.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 11th 2007 @ 9:26 pm
  10. Mileage has dropped at least 20% on the two vehicles we tested, resulting in an overall INCREASE in gasoline consumption and emissions.

    The assurances of a small 2% drop in mileage seem like propaganda to me, and someone is surely making money off of this while increasing damage to the environment. I suspect the “testing” done to ensure vehicle compatibility was a sham.


    If only I had Al Gore’s e-mail address.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 10th 2007 @ 9:13 pm
  11. I am a Ph.D. chemist and worked in fuels research 20 years ago for a major oil company. My 2004 SAAB 9-3 has a trip computer. I live in Houston. Average gas mileage was just above 30 mpg on gaosline. Once the switch was made to 10% ethanol, that dropped to 24-25 mpg (for a 17% drop in gas mileage). No change in driving habits. I just got a new 2007 SAAB 9-3 and am getting 25.8 mpg over the first 3000 miles. This is easily tested by someone with an engine lab. I am surprised it hasn’t been done. I believe that not only is the energy content less (by about 3%), but that burn in the engine is less efficient (probably burns at a lower temperature). This means that the energy use is not as efficient and so gas mileage is reduced far more than the 3 % theoretical. I have a friend who is an R & D director for a major chemical company who has anecdotedly noted the same result in his car and those of about a dozen of his friends. No wonder we are using more gasoline this year!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 1st 2007 @ 5:37 pm
  12. I have a 2006 Dodge Ram. I keep very good track of mileage. 10% ethanol meant a 10% drop in mileage for me in both the Dodge and My Ford Explorer. That’s a fact. No driving changes. Just a change in fuel

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 18th 2007 @ 9:36 am
  13. I’m so very glad to read these posts. I drive a Prius and have an absolute 10% drop in my mpg with the 10% ethanol blended gasoline. Going from 50 mpg to 45 makes it very obvious and I have a constant readout. We just need someone articulate and vocal to bring this to the fore to expose that it harms the air and water quality, costs the taxpayers a fortune in gov’t subsidies, raises the price of food and gasoline, and all for naught. It doesn’t get us any farther on a gallon of gas!

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 12th 2007 @ 6:26 pm
  14. My brother just ran a test on this. He took a trip to Missouri, filling up with 10 percent ethanol at a Quik Trip station in Tulsa on 22 November, and filling up with straight gasoline at a Phillips 66 station in Missouri before starting back to Tulsa. Driving a Lexus ES 350 (3.5 liter V-6 engine) he got 28 mpg on the tank with 10 percent ethanol, and 31 mpg on straight gasoline averaging approximately the same speed on both legs of the trip, which calculates to 7.14 percent better fuel mileage on straight gasoline. Of course, that’s only a single test, but it does seem to indicate a significant decrease in fuel mileage with a 10 percent ethanol blend. Seems very logical when you consider that ethanol produces significantly less heat when burned than gasoline.

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 25th 2007 @ 11:42 pm
  15. So now we pay the same in gas prices and get less mileage. What is that all about? My wife and I have also noticed a 15% drop in our mileage here in Texas. What can we do about it? We have checked and we dropped from 250 to 200 for a jeep and 300 to 250 on a chevy truck.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 14th 2007 @ 10:39 pm
  16. I live in Maryland and have kept detailed records of fuel mileage for years. I experienced a drop of 10% on one vehicle and over 15% on another when the 10% ethanol became mandatory. Where is the advantage or savings in using 10% ethanol if we pay more to begin with and get fewer miles per gallon. We still burn the same amount or more gasoline plus the ethanol that is mixed in. We pay more and any reduction in pollution per gallon is more than offset by burning more gallons. We have been had!

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 16th 2007 @ 11:10 pm
  17. My Kia got from 33 to 36 mpg on the highway. Then it dropped down to 28 or 29 mpg. In Kansas E-10 by law dosnt have to be labeled as such. I asked the station owner where I by gas if it was E-10. He said yes and they started it right at the time my mileage dropped. I wish there was a way to find stations that sold pure gas. Ethanol sucks!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 19th 2007 @ 10:11 am
  18. They just opened an Ethanol station in my area (Meijer). I have a 2005 Ford Explorer FFV. So I thought I would give it a try. The first thing I noticed is that my instantaneous/avg MPG readout was much lower than with regular gasoline. Normal highway is around 20. It looks like I am getting about 17 or maybe a little less with the E85.

    I guess part of the benefit is supposed to be cost as well. The E85 was $2.57. Regular was going for about $2.87 in the area. Doing the math on a 500 mile trip, the gas would be $71.75. Wit E85 the same trip would be $80.31. the the 30cent savings doesn’t really make up for the loss in MPG.

    I do get some pleasure in knowing I am not buying a gallon of foriegn product. And I think I am helping the environment. Maybe if we can improve the price of ethanol to even it out, and get more people buying, we really can get the oil prices to come down??

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 22nd 2007 @ 8:06 pm
  19. I have a 07 Prius and have tracked mpg for about 15 months. Used E10 mix for 3 months and have noted a 15% drop in efficiency.

    So now we will be using more fuel to travel the same distances; 5 gal of fossil fuel to produce 1 gal of ethanol; more smog as in summertime ethanol’s volitility pumps more pollutants into our air (EPA data);and ADM & Co take home our tax dollars in subsidies.

    Write your congresspersons and demand answers

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 23rd 2007 @ 10:27 pm
  20. I measured a consistent 5% drop in my Civic when using MTBE and Ethanol blended fuel when they used it in my area. Stations could use either so I’m not sure if one had more negative impact than the other.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 2nd 2008 @ 8:05 pm
  21. With Oregon’s switch to 10% ethanol, my 2000 Beetle dropped from 26 mpg to 21 mpg. This 24% drop in gas mileage means my vehicle spews our MORE petroleum by-products than before, my cost for driving goes UP at least 24%, and the state of Oregon collects 24% more gas tax.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 7th 2008 @ 12:21 pm
  22. Handy, very handy. Thank you guys.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 7th 2008 @ 12:56 pm
  23. I have been expierencing the exact same reductions in mileage with the ten percent ethanol in a 2006 G-6. Here in Kansas the stations don’t have to label the pumps and you must ask a clerk what you’re purchasing. How do we get this stuff abolished? I doubt any lawmaker will actually listen to reason.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 13th 2008 @ 10:11 pm
  24. I live in Iowa, and we are being praised as providing the savior to the internal-combustion engine with ethanol. Well, I’m not convinced. I also did the fuel mileage check for myself and experienced 2 mpg loss. So I did the math for my family and here’s what I’ve come up with: If the ethanol blend(E10) is 11 cents cheaper per gallon then regular, then I break even on cost. Anything less than that, I put in the regular. I spend a little more at the pump ($2.00 at most), but I get an extra 30 miles out of a tank. I’m convinced that the sun is causing the earth to warm, not humans, so I would rather put a few extra bucks in my pocket every tank, than give in to the American love affair with ethanol. I suggest you do the math for yourself. If nothing else it’s a good mental activity and could save you a few bucks.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 15th 2008 @ 9:11 am
  25. Interesting dialog. I have 5 vehicles, two of interest might be a 1996 windstar and 1998 Wrangler. The windstar has 225k miles, always logged every gallon of gas that went in since new. Same with the Jeep, 200k miles. During the life of these vehicles we installed E10. I have graphed the consumption, shows the obvious annual flucuations due to temperature, also variability due to long trips. Nowhere in the data can you detect the installation of E10. So until somebody at a lab does the testing, I think people should avoid the anticdotal evidence. There was a lab that tested, search report ACE optimal ethanol blend study, that actually followed the BTU curve of the ethanol/gasoline blends, from straight gas to E85, but found some interesting peaks at intermediate blends. I know it was sponsored by ethanol, but was done by an independant lab. I am tempted to try them, but don’t really want to mess around with two pumps when filling. I would be interested in others that actually keep logs, graph the data, and show the results. Just watch what 10 degrees of temp does to your data. you can get the temp data from NOAA site.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 29th 2008 @ 3:31 pm
  26. This E10 stuff is SOME BULL. I used to get 16 mpg solid out of my silverado (5.7) and sometimes upwards of 18 on the highway. what do i get now with E10 everywhere? 12 city/13 highway. and we’re still being charged the same price as conventional gasoline! Al Gore is a dead man. hes about to incite a riot.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 3rd 2008 @ 7:05 pm
  27. Dus10 – for your information, I check my gas mileage at every fill-up.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 3rd 2008 @ 10:11 pm
  28. I suppose having a lab test would be nice, but considering most people are noticing the drop, I think there might be something to it. I didn’t even know I was running 10% a few months ago, but I did know my milage had dropped. I thought something was wrong with my car, I was getting a worried. Then I heard about the reduction in milage so I decided to test it out. I went to a station that sells straight gas, and every time, I get better milage. With 10%, I get about 400 miles, with straight gas, I get about 440. I’m glad its not my vehicle, but it ticks me off that I’m paying so much money for less efficiency. Plus, even if demand did get the price down, food prices would skyrocket out of control.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 4th 2008 @ 7:46 am
  29. Oregon now requires E10. I record every gallon purchased. I recently took a trip to Colorado. Got 15.9 with E10, averaged 18.4 without. Note that the interstate speed limit here in Oregon is 65 and was 75 in Idaho, Utah and Wyoming. Didn’t travel on a freeway in Colorado but the limit was 70 on the 2 lane highway I drove. I go 86% as far on E10. E10 is costing us MORE foreign oil, not saving any.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 8th 2008 @ 8:44 pm
  30. My mileage is down 30% since the ethanol came online. Even had my fuel system cleaned, no difference.

    Plus, the dealership told me that the ethanol was likely responsible for my cracked o-rings.

    Thanks, ethanol!

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 15th 2008 @ 7:24 pm
  31. My ’98 Corolla has suffered a distinct drop in mileage with the mandatory E10 rule that went into effect last summer (in Portland). With 100% petroleum, I got 39 mpg. That’s about 25.6 gallons to go 1000 miles. With 10% ethanol, I use 30.3 gallons to go 1000 miles. If 90% of that is petroleum, I used 27.3 gallons of petrol. To coin an acronym my kids use, WTF? Ethanol appears to have degraded my performance so much I actually burn more fossil fuel than before. Is there a flaw in my math? I’m very diligent in checking my mileage and gas usage. Or is this just another con to line the pockets of oil producers?

    I’ve also read that ethanol (a solvent, not a lubricant), is very bad for older cars, and will degrade your fuel system. We’ve got three older cars, a 1998, a 1996 and a 1984.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 19th 2008 @ 6:08 pm
  32. Yes, I’ve noticed about a 4 mpg drop in my escort doing all city driving, from 27 to 23. (since the E10 blend started) My car is 19 years old, so i hope that the ethanol isn’t screwing up my fuel system. I was wondering when they are going to switch back to straight gas, and if anyone knows of any stations that still sell straight gas even though the other ones are using the blend. Thanks everyone!

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 26th 2008 @ 8:25 pm
  33. 10% ethanol in IA is ten cents less per gallon than regular. My car’s instant and average mpg drops 2 to 2.5 mpg using ethanol.
    For me ten gallons of Ethanol = about 190 miles (city).
    Ten gallons regular = 210 miles (city) so it’s actually $2 less per ten gallons to use regular gas over ethanol because ten gallons of regular only costs $1 more than ten gallons of ethanol, while I have to pay $3+ for a gallon of either gas to drive the extra approx. 20 miles I lose burning ethanol.
    Most people don’t figure this out and just use the cheaper priced ethanol without realizing its actually costing them more (total miles driven is the “hidden” higher cost of using ethanol).
    Octane also tells the same story. Regular is about 87 octane (more BTU’s = more power), ethanol is about 89 octane (less BTU’s = less power). Ethanol needs to be 0.30 cents less a gallon than regular for me to break even and drive the same total miles using it compared to regular gas.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 6th 2008 @ 10:48 pm
  34. For about nine years, my 4 cylinder SLK has been consistently getting 27 mpg. In the last year, it has dropped to 25 mpg – over a 7% reduction. This seems to have occurred with the introduction of ethanol in the gasoline. This means if I travel the same number of miles per week, I am using virtually the same amount of oil as before, in addition to the ethanol. Considering the energy involved in the manufacture of the ethanol, it appears this 90/10 “solution” is contributing to the problem, not solving it. Do you think with big business and politics involved, the consumer has any chance this “solution” can be rethought?

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 7th 2008 @ 12:38 am
  35. I have a 1995 gsxr motorcycle, Last year I could run 87octane(100% gas). Now I have to use 97octane or it runs like its running out of gas at low rpm. My 1990 civic got 40.5mpg before, Now it gets 37mpg with the new ethanol gas. And yes i know how to check it.(most don’t)

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 9th 2008 @ 11:40 am
  36. I started noticing a drop in gas mileage the first of the year. I keep track of fill ups and mileage for business purposes. I was averaging 20 mpg prior to January. I am now averaging 15 mpg or a 25% loss. I contacted the local gas providers in the area and they confirmed they changed to an E10 formula in January. Prior to calling, not knowing what was going on, I asked about ten friends if they noticed a drop in mpg and they all confirmed they have. None of us knew what was happening. I started doing everything suggested to increase gas mileage – ie. tire pressure, etc without any change. At first I was thinking I was having engine problems of some sort. So now we are paying the same price at the pump but getting less miles for the product, while corn prices rise as well. I asked the provider if they had any suggestions and they suggested changing the fuel filter as the ethanol probably cleaned out the fuel system and gunked up the filter. My problem is that my fuel filter is attached to the fuel pump inside the gas tank, which means if it is gunked up and is causing problems, the E10 has just caused me another expensive headache. I asked if the pumps are marked indicating the blend is E10. I was told there is a small sticker that says it “may” contain up to 10% ethanol. I have yet to notice it. So, what do we do now?

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 10th 2008 @ 12:16 am
  37. You can stop this thread here.

    There have been many careful studies of the ethanol issue, Pimental at Cornel probably the best.
    Ethanol absolutely contains less energy when burned per gallon than gas. Thus the more alcohol you add the lower the mileage you will get until with 100% ethanol you would see about a 30% decrease in MPG. The actual mix in the gas you buy may vary since it is not mixed at the refinary but more locally. Ethanol is also more expensive than gasoline and goes up with the price of gas.
    It is a government boondoggle that helps get the vote in the midwest.
    We are now trading food for energy and according to most studies we are not getting much if any additional energy.
    This will pass due to the rapid increase in grain prices.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 16th 2008 @ 2:31 pm
  38. Ethanol contains about 70% as much energy as gasoline, so theory would suggest only a 3% loss of mileage when gas is diluted 10% with ethanol. But as postings above suggest, experience says something else is going on to reduce mileage below what theory suggests.

    The only “studies” I have seen online are published by ethanol advocates and they suggest a loss of 3% at most and some assert an increase in mileage–obviously an outright lie. I would like to see some organization with some credibility and reputation for objectivity do a study. The simplest would be to run a car using E10 on a track at a constant speed until the tank ran dry, then do the same with pure gasoline and compare distance traveled.

    BTW, the petroleum companies had to invest big bucks (big to us, pennies to them) to buy sophisticated mixing equipment, to insure it does get thoroughly mixed as it goes into the truck. The gas at the stations in Oregon is regularly tested to insure it meets the 10% standard.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 16th 2008 @ 3:03 pm
  39. I also drive a Prius in Oregon. So do several of my friends. Each of us noticed an immediate 12-20 % drop in mpg when Ethanol started, and ths has continued every tank for months, and for all driving conditions: city when from 46 down to 37; highway went from 53 down to 46.

    This is not anecdotal. This is measured. On tank after tank.

    Friends who do not drive riuses report similar drops, but with less accuracy. Hill climb power seems reduced – but is not measured.

    The burn of E10 must be weaker – i.e. the energy delivered by gasoline is hindered:
    1) Ethanol may absorb water
    2) Ethanol may change the burn of gas, perhaps by reducing the heat or molecular impact energy
    3) The computers may inject more gas (sensor)
    4) The E10 may “age”

    There are and other Ethanol insiders who claim otherwise. But we get what we get. And that is NOT Good.

    We need credible testing in real-world conditions. Not special mixes made on the spot, but “pump” E10. And against real controls, not un-identifiable gas. With gas tested chemically, not taking oil company word.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 23rd 2008 @ 4:18 pm
  40. I ride a motorcycle, and when i first started to ride this bike, I would get 192 (+/-4) miles before my low gas light would come on. Recently, it has been coming on at 166 miles. I have not changed my riding habits at all. I actually make a shorter highway commute to work, and yet, I have lost almost 20 miles per tank! 4.8 gallon tank. that’s boils down to a 5 mile a gallon loss. (light comes on with .75 gallons left in the tank). With my bike which was getting roughly 50 mpg, I now get 45. (I know, poor me) But think of the average car driver. If you drive a vehicle that gets 25 mpg, you now get roughly 20 mpg. Which means you fill up more frequently, spending more money on a lower quality product. Prices are going up, yet quality goes down! Is anyone else outraged about this!!?!?!?!

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 25th 2008 @ 1:03 pm

    Government statistics document that a mix of 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline “E85” will
    Produce a drop in gas mileage of approximately 20%. When I first read these figures
    I thought it sounded strange. So, I decided to make a “rule of thumb example” that could be easily related to by the average American, and here is what I came up with.

    Just to make things simple:
    A car traveling 100 miles and getting 10 mpg on regular gasoline.
    100 mi / 10 mpg = 10 gal of gasoline.
    The same car using E85 would get 20% less gas mileage, 80% of 10 mpg = 8 mpg.
    100 mi / 8 mpg = 12.5 gal of E85
    How much of this is gasoline ? 85% of 12.5 gal/mix = 10.625 gal. of gasoline.
    ?? I am trying to keep this simple .
    We just burned .625 gal more gas with the E85 mix plus the additional Ethanol.
    How much additional ethanol? 12.5 gal. mix – 10.625 pure gas = 1.875 gal of ethanol.
    It is my understanding that it takes about 1 gal of gasoline to make 1 gal of ethanol.
    So we have 1.875 gal (used to produce the ethanol) + .625 gal = 2.5 gal of additional gas or 25% more gas just to go the same distance as we did with straight gasoline.
    That’s 25% more pollution from gasoline and 25% more gas dependency per gal of E85 used, etc., obviously we are not reducing our oil dependency with this choice.
    Now we have to add in the Ethanol, another 1.875 gal with it’s associated pollution , environmental and geopolitical problems created by over farming our ground , changing our crop rotations and grain balances, both U.S. and exported.

    Even if you got the ethanol for free, you still used 6.25% more gasoline!

    I understand from people who drive flex fuel cars that the reduction in fuel mileage is closer to 30% to 35%. So here is the calculation for a 30% gas mileage reduction using the example above (7mpg).

    14.29 gal. of mix, 12.14 gal. of gasoline (a 21.4% increase in gas consumption before considering the gas it takes to produce the ethanol), 2.147 gal of ethanol and the matching 2.147 gal of gas to produce the ethanol. That’s a 42.9% increase in gasoline consumption for each gal. of gas used, plus the ethanol.

    I have never thought it a good thing to burn our primary food sources, no matter what the reason (unless of course its toast in the morning). However, if I were wanting to terrorize the U.S., this might be an effective way to do it.
    Of course these figures might not be perfect, but they should be good enough for rule of thumb.
    Additional thoughts:
    For the same 100 miles driven starting with 10 mpg on std gasoline at a price of $3.50 per gallon;
    Standard gasoline cost for 100 miles would be ……… $35
    E85 cost at the governments estimated 20% reduction….. $43.75.….or $4.38 per gallon.
    E85 at 30% (estimated by motorists) $50.00 ….or $5.00 per gallon.
    Figuring gas prices in this way gives us an equivalent price per gallon, looks like the gas companies are getting more per gallon, without raising the price. Just a thought.
    I estimate the 10% max. additive disclaimer now being used could reduce gas mileage 10% to 20%, most gas stations seem to have this disclaimer, good luck finding pure gasoline. My wife says when she uses pure gasoline in her new car, it increases the gas mileage about ……..20%!

    Jim Johnson
    Port charlotte, Florida 4/8/08

    Comment by Anonymous — May 2nd 2008 @ 2:54 pm
  42. Just for info, E85 means 85% ethanol, not gasoline. That is about as close as you can get to pure ethanol. And if you do the simple BTU calcs, that number quoted by the feds was pretty close to what you might expect for a linear adjustment based on BTU. But here we pay less than 80% of the price of normal gasoline for E85. I’ve been burning it in anything that will take it. It is a bargin, albeit highly subsidized.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 2nd 2008 @ 6:03 pm
  43. I posted here ealier about an 03 Kia. My milleage has gone back up to where it is supposed to be. I now use Shell V-power gas. The best grade they have. The only one without ethanol in it. I have gone from about 25 to 27 mpg back up to 34 to 36. That cost me between $3 and $3.50 a tank more to fill up but well worth it. You can pay less for ethanol but I wont. Not worth it.My tank is 11.7 gallons. I live in Kansas

    Comment by Anonymous — May 6th 2008 @ 12:11 pm
  44. $3 and $3.50 a tank more to fill up that is. 11.7 gallons.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 6th 2008 @ 12:14 pm
  45. I have a 1982 model Kawasaki Motorcycle. It’s air cooled. Although ethanol burns cooler it does burn longer than gasoline and causes engines to retain more heat. As you can imagine I get a serious reduction in mileage, almost 30% or about 20 in stead of 10 and I just about burn up because the engine stays considerably hotter. Either way I read somewhere once that a tune up could make any engine run fine on E10 gas, you just have to tune it for that and then you would lose milage on non E10 gas, since I live in Tennessee I can be picky, but if you live in a state where it matters it might be worth doing a little home work about the tuning idea, although it couldn’t hurt any of us to have the car tuned by a pro at the current prices.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 13th 2008 @ 8:51 pm
  46. I drive a 2000 Toyota Echo and live in Northern Kentucky (three counties alone have E10 and RFG in the gasoline). I keep detailed mileage logs, and as soon as I started filling up with straight gas in Ohio, I saw a 16% jump in mileage. It’s been consistent for the last two months, and when I filled up with E10, it IMMEDIATELY dropped back 15%.

    Ethanol is the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the American public by the energy industry.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 14th 2008 @ 12:52 am
  47. There is a definate loss in fuel mileage when using the ethanol fuel. I drive the exact same route between Nebraska and North Dakota a couple times a year in the same car. My mileage is always the same every time I check it. I get 5mpg better mileage with regular unleaded gas. I have quit using ethanol completely in both of my cars.
    Ethanol is bad for our economy and will soon be proven to be one of the greatest mistakes ever made.
    In a recent Popular Mechanics issue it was reported that it takes approx. 1.3 gallons of oil to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. This is tue to the cost to transport the fuel in diesel powered trucks. It’s just not worth it.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 14th 2008 @ 12:38 pm
  48. I drive a 2006 Toyota Corolla XRS. Unfortunately it requires premium fuel. At first I thought oh gerat 10% ethanol mix. It’s good and good for you… Until I noticed a drop in fuel economy. I took a trip to St. Augustine from Tampa on the 10% mix and got about 290 miles for the tank. On the way back I used straight gas and made a return trip and got 330 miles for the tank. I had cruise control set to 75 both ways. Now to me that is a significant fluctuation in fuel economy. I say corn is meant to be eaten not driven on.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 23rd 2008 @ 12:37 pm
  49. We recently purchased a 2008 Mercury Milan. I have two credit cards I use for gas. Mobil & Shell. My very first tank, averaged 26.2 MPG. The 2nd & 3rd…..increased to 27-28 MPG combination of city/highway. The last fill-up was at a Shell station. The first thing I noticed was a sign posted that Shell regular is now mixed with 10% Ethanol. (I live in VT.)

    I constantly monitor my wife’s Milan by checking the MPG reading on the dash. To my horror when I checked the readout with the 10% Ethanol mix, the MPG fell off by 3 mpg to around 23 MPG. Putting some highway miles on the vehicle improved it to 28 MPG, but the same type of driving with a previous fillup of Mobil delivered 32 MPG. I am guessing I am losing around 10% using the Ethanol mixture. And to add insult to injury, Shell is around
    3 cents higher than regular Mobil gas.

    Needless to say, I am going to inform Shell I will no longer purchase their gas as long they use an Ethanol mixture. We as consumers somehow have got to convince our ‘clueless’ politicians to give up on this Ethanol Craze. I am convinced that Ethanol is really consuming more oil than it saves.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 25th 2008 @ 10:37 pm
  50. I have a new (8000 miles) 2008 Toyota Avalon. Before my Costco changed to 10% ethanol, I was getting 29 mpg highway and 24 mpg city; I am now getting 25 mpg highway and 21 mpg city. These are repeatable results.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 3rd 2008 @ 1:31 pm
  51. Here is the rundown. The corn growers love ethanol for obvious reasons. The oil companies love it because E10 ethanol mixes decrease fuel consumption, thus increasing the demand for more oil. The government (both state and federal) love it because they receive increased taxes because their tax is on every gallon of fuel sold.

    Anybody else see a connection to this E10 gasoline junk and our “oil demand” problem that has driven fuel prices up?

    Let the revolution begin……

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 4th 2008 @ 3:48 pm
  52. I have a 2002 Mercedes 320ML. When it was new it used to cost under $25.00 to fill it. It’s now north of $75.00. I meticulously record my mileage. when the local stations went to this E10 junk my mileage went down a consistant 20-25% by changing only the fuel. Corn is the absolute most expensive crop you can extract Ethanol from. It takes 1.2 gallons of energy and 1,700.00 gallons of water to make 1 gallon of the garbage. There are billions of barrels of oil sitting in readily accessible shale but the senate, of course , voted down allowing the oil companies to go back in and extract it. The majority of the public seem to be akin to sheep being led to slaughter. Its’ the “don’t confuse me with the facts, I know what I’m told by the media and the politicians.
    It’s amazing we can borrow money from other suspect countries to fund a foreign war and we can allow other countries to drill 50 miles off of our coasts but we can’t do the same to solve our own problems. Do you think anyone might be doing all this for their own selfish reasons? Oh, by the way, does anyone realize than more petroleum seeps out of natural fissures in the oceans of the World’s floors every day than has ever been spilled by man in the history of the planet????
    Greg is right, Let the revolution began!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 4th 2008 @ 6:40 pm

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 17th 2008 @ 11:00 am
  54. I have noticed in my last three or four tanks of gas a decline from 53 mpg (Prius) to 43. (About a 20% decrease in mpg.) Right now I’m struggling to get it up to even 41 (by annoying everyone behind me I’m sure.) I have changed my car air filter and got new tires thinking that could be it. (But it was not.) Are there any gas stations that carry a non-ethanol blend of gas? How do we get some action on this? I agree with the person who posted they are “half serious” about finding out who to sue!

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 5th 2008 @ 3:39 pm
  55. I live in west virginia but drive mostly in maryland, and there are only 2 stations left in my area that sell straight gasoline. Even the quality of gasoline without ethanol has gone down, example: have an 05 F150 and i use to get 16mpg, but now im down to 12mpg, and if i use any gas with E10 my truck spits, sputters, knocks, and will barely stay running, on E10 it gets 7mpg if im lucky. My camaro used to get 25mpg but now it gets 20mpg on that stupid ethanol

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 16th 2008 @ 9:19 am
  56. Upon Taking my son to shool this morning I saw a Big sign pure Gas at 1.86.9 a gal this is south carolina so I don’t know about everywear but it sure was a welcome sight. I stopped and put gas in pure gas. Didn’t notice anyone talking about the way they meter that 10% gas but seen to me they would need to change the internal flow componets to measure a diffren’t liquid the specife gravity is diffrent i not an endineer but have worked in the chemical industry for 30 years . We have to use diffrent meters for diffrent liquids

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 18th 2008 @ 11:09 am
  57. Is there an additive to counteract the ethanol?

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 13th 2008 @ 4:23 am
  58. Absolutely the worst thing to do…add ethanol. I religiously take my gas mileage, and as soon as NY went to E10, my mileage went from 17.5 to 13.7, >20% decrease. It doesn’t take a mathematician to realize that +10% ethanol, -20% mileage, we as a nation are actually using more “gas”.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 18th 2008 @ 5:35 pm
  59. I have 3 street bikes, a Jeep with over 200,000 miles and a Ford Taurus twin cam with over 100,000 miles. I have noticed no significant drop in fuel mileage running E10 fuels. It has been my experience that most folks methodology for checking actual fuel mileage is suspect at best and this would include those who rely on in vehicle mileage computers because the source for their test data is an on board computer that receives data which is known to be off by as much as 3% right from the start due to odometer error. Both the Jeep and the Taurus are still well within the EPA fuel mileage ratings as suggested by Consumer Reports for their respective years. If E10 was an issue this would not be possible on vehicles with the kind of mileage these have.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 20th 2008 @ 8:43 am
  60. I have been using Ethanol since the 70’s (It used to be called Gasahol) in all my vehicles. But never tracked my mpg’s.

    I bought a 2008 Prius which gives me constant mpg feedback. My results: 44-47 mpg with straight gas, 38-41 mpg with Ethanol E10. This is more than a 10% reduction in mpg.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 2nd 2009 @ 7:18 pm
  61. I have a 2007 Prius.
    42.1 mpg driving 999 miles in December of 2007 on regular gas.
    37.1 mpg driving 967 miles in December of 2008 on E10.
    11% worse on E10. This is absurd. Write to your Congressman.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 15th 2009 @ 9:11 pm
  62. I have a 2008 Acura TSX and it shows mpg on the info screen. For the first year, avg. was 32+ (all highway) and 25/26 (mix). After we got switched to E10, it is 29 (all highway) and 20/21 (mix) which by the way is more consistent with EPA ratings which also means that the new EPA ratings were revised to take into account E10 and driving conditions. So, the drop is definitely not 1-5% as suggested on website.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 20th 2009 @ 11:52 am
  63. I have a 97 Chevy blazer, i use to get 350 miles per tank not with e10 i get 175 per tank. I’m self employed and can’t afford this crap, either get rid of e10 or make all e10 gas $0.25 a gal. I also HAD a 96 Grand Prix until the motor locked the mechanic told me he has had a lot of that 3.1 v6 motors with warped heads cause of e10. Who do i submit the bill to for the cost of the car?

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 26th 2009 @ 12:11 am
  64. I’m out in CA for a few months. I used to love ARCO gas ’cause it was cash only and 10 cents cheaper. My mileage dropped to 37 to 39 mpg in the 2008 Prius (which is miserable for a Prius). I started thinking maybe ARCO was using ethanol, but could not find out for sure. It wasn’t listed on the pump, and the forums couldn’t tell me. It sure felt like E10 was the culprit.

    Out of curiosity, I got a half tank of Shell just down the block, and it jumped to 42 mpg, then my next tank at Shell was 44 mpg, and this last tank is now 46 mpg. My theory is, I think all the ethanol burned out of the tank after 3 fillings. I’m not going back to ARCO, sorry ARCO.

    Here is the math:

    Shell is more cost effective even though it costs 10 cents more per gallon. from 37 to 46 mpg = 20 % improvement in mpg, while it only costs $2.10 at ARCO vs $2.20 at Shell = only 5% more cost per gallon. I’m saving 15% at Shell even though it costs more.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 26th 2009 @ 9:47 am
  65. Some shocking facts:
    – my Prius is, like many, down 12%-17%
    – it looks like big oil snuck ethanol into the EPA as one of six oxigenators in about 1990 – but asked that E10 be exempt from testing; the EPA refused but Bush Sr granted a waiver in perpertuity
    – thereafter big oil started sneaking 1-5% E into our gas, and people’s mpg started going down
    – the consumer reports peopke tested pump gas (othern with Ethanol at E5 to E10) and explained the differeence of EPA and pump mpg as “driving habits”
    – it looks like E10 thanges the burn rate of gasoline so that the burn time is lengthened and about 7% to 25% of the gas energy is wasted – pushing the piston after it has gone by.
    – so people is states that had slowly increasing E content never saw a drop, but people who had MTBE gas saw a sudden bug drop
    – we’re apparently all helpless – we’ve been scammed for 20 years!

    – E10 is increasing our foriegn oil demand by about 15-20%!nnThat costs us for gas, and also by push demand that causes shortages, and also by forcing rises in shipping costs for, like, milk

    Write your congressman to have E10 tested by the EPA!

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 26th 2009 @ 11:42 pm
  66. Very Interesting article that might explain the huge variation between ARCO and Shell and other gas station mpg differences. This article states two things. 1) This is the first time the EPA has granted a testing exemption (not sure what a testing exemption is), and 2) the Ethanol percentage can vary from 4% to 24%. Yikes !!

    Here is an excerpt from this page:

    In the U.S., the primary method for blending ethanol into gasoline is splash blending. The ethanol is “splashed” into the gasoline either in a tanker truck or sometimes into a storage tank of a retail station. Renergie believes the inaccuracy and manipulation of splash blending may be eliminated by precisely blending the ethanol and unleaded gasoline at the point of consumption.

    A variable blending pump would ensure the consumer that E10 means the fuel entering the fuel tank of the consumer’s vehicle is 10 percent ethanol (rather than the current range of 4 percent ethanol to at least 24 percent ethanol that the splash blending method provides) and 90% gasoline, Renergie said.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 27th 2009 @ 5:14 pm
  67. One more very interesting article:

    MIC, Other Groups Ask EPA for More Ethanol Tests

    Fourteen organizations, including the Motorcycle Industry Council, recently called for “unbiased and comprehensive testing” before the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) permits the use of mid-level ethanol blends in engines.

    The letter contends the existing test results suggest mid-level ethanol blends might be incompatible with current motor vehicle and non-road equipment engines, might cause emission control devices or systems to fail, might defeat engines’ safety features and could lead to significantly higher emissions during the engines’ lifespan.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 27th 2009 @ 5:17 pm
  68. I drive an older car (1989) and my mileage drop is about 2-3 MPG with Ethanol, or around 10%. I track my mileage using the fuel logbook at

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 4th 2009 @ 11:59 pm
  69. Yep. Seems to be 10% or more is a normal drop in mpg.

    I just don’t get how such a smart bunch of people (All of the U.S) got scammed into thinking this will save our countries energy and pollution problem without doing adequate testing !!

    If you add 10% Ethanol, and you get 10% less mpg. Tell me exactly what we are saving?

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 5th 2009 @ 12:22 am
  70. where in california can i find gas without ethanol
    does anyone know.
    i have tested at some gas stations and it seems to have 5% ethanol

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 26th 2009 @ 2:10 am
  71. An article in the LA Times says that at the beginning of 2004, all gasoline sold in the California was required to carry 5.6% ethanol.

    Also, something I didn’t know till I just read this today: Ethanol appears to damage boat fuel tanks made of fiberglass.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 26th 2009 @ 6:56 pm
  72. My fuel-injected 2002 Harley low rider gets just abour 50 mpg on pure high octane gas, and about 47 mpg when 10% ethanol is added. In otherwords, just under a 10% decrease. That’s a pretty carefully computed estimate: bikes have small fuel tanks, and you really want to keep track of how far you can get on a tank.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 18th 2009 @ 11:29 pm
  73. I just finished an 8,000 mile road trip in a lincoln town car, and this road trip was the first time I paid any attention to fuel economy and ethanol.

    I found my drop in efficiency was at *least* 10 percent, which means that when I buy E10, I’m basically buying 10 percent inert filler and 90 percent gas, yet paying for all 100 percent.

    I hadn’t bothered trying to compare in the past, because my daily driving isn’t consistent enough to offer an unbiased test. This road trip, however, was pretty darned consistent. And out of the 300+ gallons I put into my car, about 50 gallons were E10. (Once I noticed the drop, I became religious about searching for pure gasoline). When I drove with E10, I was doing the exact same sort of cruise-controlled highway driving as when I drove with actual gasoline.

    Most interesting to me was that in some of the corn belt areas (the states all ran together, to be honest) stations sold both E10 *and* real gas, and charged more for the real gas. Meaning that where they’re producing this ethanol, and most knowledgeable about it, consumers *know* that E10 is crud and will pay extra not to buy it.

    Nothing is more maddening than needing gas, getting off the interstate, and finding that dreaded “This fuel may contain up to 10% ethanol” sticker. At a bare minimum, E10 should have to be labeled on the price billboard for the station so you don’t have to find out once you reach the pump.

    We’re being rooked, and in many cases, this sham actually *increases* our oil dependency, rather than decreasing it. At best, for most, it appears to be a zero gain (and that doesn’t include any petroleum consumed producing the corn).

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 10th 2009 @ 4:28 am
  74. I just took a trip and regular 87 octane gave me 26.6 mpg. As I got into Kansas where 10% ethanol is added my mileage dropped to 19.9

    This is a total scam.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 25th 2009 @ 1:05 am
  75. i have noticed a drop in gas milage and power, since new york went to 10% (water)ethanol in gas. and just wait till it goes to 15% .the older cars will be blowing pistons all over the place. just the government destroying our lives a little at a time

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 25th 2009 @ 10:09 pm
  76. When I started driving my ’49 Dodge Power Wagon this year, I had driveabilty problems that were due to a lean fuel mixture- had to run with the choke partially out to get any color on the plugs. All the plugs were affected, so after eliminating things like air leaks and inadequate fuel pressure/volume, it came down to needing more fuel. I used to get 10-12 mpg- OK for a flathead in a 6800 lb truck, now with my choke-enhanced fuel delivery, I get about 5 mpg. Now I get to experiment with main jet drilling- and main jets for 60 yr old carburetors aren’t very common! All the gas stations in Maine pump E10- an oil company decision, not a State mandate. Maybe it’s time for a nationwide class-action lawsuit- The oil companies shouldn’t have too many allies after last year’s attempt to break the $5 per gal mark!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 30th 2009 @ 3:53 pm
  77. We need two things:

    1) Eliminate the waiver for E10 testing in the EPA. Or more specifically, reuire that the EPA test each gas mixture (within two percent or whatever) before that mixture can be sold.

    2) Require that a federal agency test the gas at the pump, randomly, for each service station, to assess its content.

    A class action lawsuit might be useful, but the above is what we need to fix the problem.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 30th 2009 @ 5:42 pm
  78. In Maine, the oil companies’ decision to make life easy for themselves leads to potentially life-threating situations for boaters and snowmobilers. When you’re 40 miles offshore in the North Atlantic with a dead engine when the weather starts making up, you’re on the way to becoming just a memory. Ditto for the snowmobiler whose engine siezes up at 20 below 15 miles from the nearest road. In my opinion, E10 and non-oxygenated gasoline should be available in equal quantities, at equal grades, and at equal pricing- then let the consumer be the judge. I suspect the oil companies won’t do this unless they’re about to lose a considerable amount of cash. I also think that under an equal availablilty scenario, E10 won’t stick around any longer than a purse-snatcher.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 1st 2009 @ 6:08 pm
  79. Many aspects of the use of corn based ethanol in motor fuel are well known. This “renewable” source of energy was alleged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and start the nation on the path to energy independence. In the pursuit of these goals, treated as being akin to motherhood, the federal government has mandated wide usage of gasoline blended with 10% ethanol. Billions of taxpayer dollars have gone to subsidizing the production of ethanol for use in fuel. I will show that using 10% ethanol blended in gasoline results in higher petroleum usage than if the ethanol were not used.

    For reference, here are some salient facts regarding the use of corn based ethanol in motor fuel:
    1. Using ethanol in our fuel almost certainly does NOT cut the emissions of carbon dioxide, especially if deforestation to grow corn is considered. Further, it has been documented that ethanol leads to increased emissions of VOC’s and oxides of nitrogen. (California requested but was denied exemption to EPA mandated ethanol usage.)
    2. The use of corn to produce fuel has raised food prices around the world, often resulting in needless third world starvation.
    3. Many gasoline powered machines, such as boats, lawn, farm, and construction equipment are damaged by ethanol in their fuel. Apparently some modern cars are affected also, notably certain recent Lexus models.
    4. Ethanol cannot be transported in gasoline pipelines. This means it must be moved by truck or rail. Not only does that add to the cost and to highway congestion, but there is a safety issue as evidenced by two recent horrible accidents (one truck and the derailment of tank cars in Chicago resulting in fierce fires and at least one fatality).
    5. A huge quantity of water is needed to make ethanol from corn, and this aggravates shortages of fresh water in many parts of our nation.

    However, one aspect of ethanol has not previously been considered. That is that it very likely INCREASES the nation’s consumption of fossil fuel. But, you say, the very purpose of using ethanol is to reduce our dependence on imported petroleum. I will show that a given trip, say one that would require 100 gallons of unadulterated gasoline would require more fossil fuel if the trip were made with a 10% ethanol blend (E10).

    Consider: Based on data from the EPA, a gallon of ethanol contains about 76,100 BTU, while a typical gallon of gasoline has 114,000 BTU. Crunching the numbers shows that E10 has about 3.3% less energy than 100% gasoline and thus could be expected to decrease fuel mileage by that percentage. If the only degradation in gas mileage with E10 were 3.3%, you would not be reading this blog. However, I have been fortunate to find a local source of 100% gasoline. I have made a careful comparison of mileage with E10 vs. that with pure gasoline. It is well known that gas mileage varies depending on whether the driving is highway or local. So in order to make a valid comparison, I have taken advantage of the trip computer in my 2008 Nissan Rogue and recorded the average speed (mph) for every tank full of fuel. See chart below. For the (tank average) speed range of 27 to 53 MPH, using pure gasoline gave me an average of 7.8% better mileage than E10. Others on this blog have reported even higher savings in mileage with pure gasoline.

    Return now to that hypothetical trip that took 100 gallons of pure gasoline (E0). Based on my experience, the same trip would require 107.8 gallons of E10. Agreed? Ten percent of this E10 usage would be 10.78 gallons of ethanol. Well, from that we note that the energy equivalent of the ethanol would be 7.2 gallons of gasoline. (10.78 x 76,100 / 114,00 = 7.2) But not even ethanol protagonists allege that a gallon of ethanol requires less than 75% of its energy content to produce. So that 7.2 gallons would need the equivalent of 5.4 gallons of gasoline to produce. (7.2 x 0.75 = 5.4) Thus the trip with E10 would need 102.4 gallons of gasoline or its equivalent. (107.8 – 10.78 + 5.4 = 102.4) Which is to say that by using 10% ethanol in my fuel, I am using 2.4% more fossil fuel than if our benighted government had not modified our motor fuel in the first place.

    The bottom line is — it is patently obvious that the government’s ethanol mandates and subsidies have but one indisputable effect. They enrich the corn growers and the ethanol producers at the expense of all the rest of us taxpayers. Now who in government will stand up to the farm and ethanol producer (think ADM) lobbies and declare that there should be an end to this blatant scam on the American public? Think of what those billions in wasted subsidies could do for our troubled economy or health care.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 13th 2009 @ 8:36 am
  80. In the recent past I was using Shell gasoline because it did not contain ethanol, but now it has an ethanal blend of 10%. As others have stated, I also track gas mileage and have done so for many years. On my current vehicle (’07 Ram, 5.7 liter Hemi) I have seen a 10% drop in mpg since being ‘forced’ to use the blend. To me this is an invisable tax since the cost per gallon of gas did not go down when the blend was introduced in our area (southeastern Alabama). I say “forced” because there is no gasoline with 0% ethanol, due to the federal mandate, available in our area. If anyone knows of any brand that still sell gasoline and not an ethanol blend, please let everyone know.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 18th 2009 @ 11:59 am
  81. I spent a good deal of time experimenting with carb settings and jet drilling on my Power Wagon- my mileage went from 4.5 to 6- then quietly, witout telling anyone, the oil companies in Maine went from 10% to 5%! I’m now at my original jetting, and am getting 9-10 Mpg. Legislation mandating the sale of non-ethanol gas alongside E10 is set to be introduced, so it looks like the oil companies are going back to a blend that’s been sold for the last twenty years with minimal problems. I took samples from all the major brands and two independents, and it was remarkable to see everyone right at 5% excepting one independent at 6%. The ethanol is blended at the terminal as the tanker loads up- but they must have invested in some special equipment to get that kind of consistency! They used to “splash blend”- pour the ethanol into the load and let it mix as the truck drove down the road.
    As far as the “fuel vs food” debate is concerned, raising livestock for protein nets about a 1% conversion effeciency, whereas the leftover mash from ethanol production can be dried and processed into protein with a 10% conversion effeciency. Presently it’s being landfilled or used to slop hogs. There’s no shortage of carbohydrates in the world- protein is the big problem. If the ethanol idea was run correctly, we would repower our farm equipment with engines optimized to use pure ethanol- we can produce enough to keep our farm equipment moving in the event of a catastrophic oil shortage. We live right on the edge as it is- less than 1/2 of 1% of the US population grows food, We’re down to 45 days of grain reserves (used to be 4-5 years), and supermarket warehouses typically have about 3 days supply. Right now, 21% of the US ethanol plants are idle- they’re going out of business left and right because it’s being imported from Brazil. No one is being helped by the present situation except the oil companies- amazing how things always seem to work out for them!

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 19th 2009 @ 4:46 pm
  82. The station where I normally fill has just gone to 10% ethanol. My 1994 Saturn was consistently getting ~43mpg. Now it’s 38. Gas costs the same. Bottom line, the net result of using ethanol is that the consumer is now paying more, with ZERO added benefit.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 27th 2009 @ 10:44 am
  83. I have a 2004 Saab 93 2.0T / I used to get 24 miles per gallon up to 2007 then last year through the first quarter of 2009 20 miles to 22 miles per gallon. I don’t know if they are putting more ethanol in the gas but I’m actually getting between 16 to 18 miles per gallon now. I’m even changing the oil every 5K miles to see improvement and had a tune up done… no luck. The Government should regulate what is going on. Pretty soon we are going to have expensive repairs due to this ethanol on cars that weren’t design for it. Europe, South America and other places don’t mix Gasoline with Ethanol. They have indivual pumps for Diesel, Ethanol and Gasoline. Does anyone know a lawyer that would like to sue the oil industries and everyone behind them?

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 28th 2009 @ 5:27 pm
  84. I drive 100 miles per day, same course, same habits. My 95 Taurus usually makes the week on one tank, low fuel light on Friday afternoon. My local Exxon switched to E10. Now I get the low fuel light on Thursday Mornings. A NOTICABLE drop in efficiency.
    I don’t think we are imagining this, my checkbook reflects the change!
    Somebody please notify your lawmakers!

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 3rd 2009 @ 10:44 pm
  85. I notice a 5 to 10% drop in gas mileage when using gas from a pump that says “may contain up to 10% ethanol.”

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 24th 2009 @ 3:56 am
  86. I have a 2001 Ford Sport Trac, until they started adding ethonol I was getting 20-22 around town and 24-26 on trips. I keep track of my gas milage all the time. Now with ethanol I get 17-19 town and 20-22 highway. Have same proble with my wifes Dodge Ram dropped 20% both ways. Who do you coplain to about this. I think we all should send letters to Congress State and Federal, they are the idoits that made it a law to put ethanol in our gasoline. Plus I have had to replace the gas lines in my mowers and weedeater they are eaten up from the ethanol. Let’s do something.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 1st 2009 @ 7:26 pm
  87. The oil companies got a permanent waiver from Pres Bush Sr in about 1990 – they could add up to 5% Ethanol without telling anyone and up to 10% without having it tested by the EPA. Now they are asking for a 15% waiver.

    E10 has NEVER been tested by the EPA. The EPA tests pure gas. The deviations in mpg may be due Exx in gas since 1990.

    Now the oil companies are quietly trying to get up to E15!

    Stop them!

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 4th 2009 @ 5:36 pm
  88. I’m trying. I have been in contact with both SC senators and our congressman. How about the rest of you? At the risk of repeating myself, if E10 degrades fuel mileage by 7% or more, then putting 10% ethanol in our fuel actually increases our consumption of petroleum. My careful mileage comparisons show 7.8% better mileage with pure gasoline. This scam on the American public must be stopped. Please – do write your legislators and newspaper editors and get the word out.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 4th 2009 @ 5:52 pm
  89. The milage in my 4 cylinder 1999 Dodge Caravan dropped from 28mpg to 21mpg when I had to start using E10 in Fl. Also my old lawn mower float valve started sticking every time I use it. That is with Stabill additives. And my 4-stoke outboard motor must have additives or it will not run. The government subsidies make E10 cost taxpayers/users much much more than gas and the additives and agrevation also take a toll.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 16th 2009 @ 6:13 am
  90. I have a 2003 Ford Taurus and a 2006 Mazda 5. My Taurus gets 19-28 MPG (city/highway) when we had real gas and 13-21 on the E-crap which is hideous for a mid size front wheel drive car with a 3.0 V6. The Mazda 5 was at 22-31 but when I can’t find straight gasoline I get 17-24. The ethanol is a joke and must be discontinued as soon as possible. A Ford Escape Hybrid that normally got 24-28 I’ve seen 31 on straight gasoline and only 21 MPG on cheap crappy fuel from just anywhere. In North Carolina I recommend Exxon or BP as I’ve seen my best fuel economy from those two.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 5th 2009 @ 6:06 pm
  91. I drive 37 miles on way to work on a freeway. My 2008 Mazda B2300 got roughly between 345 to 360 miles to a tank. In the last few months the Austin, TX area has swapped to make it mandatory for ethanol fuel to be in our area. Since then, I get 300 miles to a tank. I actually drove 45 miles out of town to get a FULL tank of the non ethanol fuel to see if the difference was there. I got 352 miles on that tank of fuel. I have now done this three times. Every time its over 340 miles to the tank. Ethanol stinks. Not only will it NOT be good for the enviroment (think of all the fuel that will be poured into the ground come summer when everyone realizes there 2 gallon and 5 gallon fuel cans, mowers, weedeaters, etc have bad gas in them) but it, like everything else the federal government says is good, only costs the consumer more and more.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 7th 2009 @ 5:44 pm
  92. I just found this blog on a Google search, and I was totally oblivious to E-crap before I took a 400 mile round-trip road trip to Pennsylvania last week (I live in NY). I got 18 % less gas mileage in a 2008 Honda CRV (usually gets 30 MPG highway, got 23.5.)Of course I have a computer which tells me the gas mileage. Apparently, E-10 is sold at most stations in NY State, although, my research tells me it’s not mandatory, and I can still get real gas in several locations. I didn’t even know what the hell was going on, I’m like “damn, I need to change the spark plugs in this thing!!” But seeing as I burned up 7/8 of a tank going down, I filled up with real gas in Pa., and sure enough, the computer read 29-30 MPG on the remainder of the trip home. Screw that shit, never again. I drive 25,000-30,000 miles per year, as I have a 42 mile round trip drive to work for the last 21 years. I might have a different opinion if E-crap was considerably cheaper, but it isn’t. Same price here in NY.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 14th 2009 @ 11:04 pm
  93. To all readers about Ethanol gas all E10,+ all-ratings, this fuel is bad and its not makeing us dependent from foreign oil,
    – Sinse using E-10 here in Florida sense 2008 to present day 12-20-2009 My 1993 Nissan stanza Altima has been getting bad gas mileage and the car stalls I have to keep my foot on the pedal to rev the engine to keep it running if I don’t the car stalls, with this gas it dirty my exhaust is pitch black with soot when running can see the stains on the ground where the exhaust came out the tail pipe. I have also had to replace 7 Fuel pumps sense 2008 to now December 19th was my last fuel pump changed, and from that day I devoted myself never to use ethanol ever again in my car. I have replaced everything to do with the fuel system is new.
    with this gas I have noticed my mileage from 46 mpg drop to 28 mpgs,

    QUESTION: How can using more fuel make us dependent on foreign oil? this is what ethanol is doing making you and me use more fuel at the pumps.

    Update I have found a gas station that sells non-ethanol gasoline, I have been using it sense 21st of December 2009 and I noticed my gas mileage went up, at 55 to 60 mph I got 51 mpg on my car. I drove 102 miles and filled up using 2 gallons of gas so thats 51 miles per gallon, I did the test twice, the second time was 50 mpg.

    Oh the most important part my car no longer stalls and it runs alot quieter, no more black exhaust, im glad I did not give in to the cash for clunkers deal. I dont think I would have found a car that does 40 to 50 mpg’s

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 27th 2009 @ 8:12 am
  94. I bought a 2006 Toyota Prius brand new and felt as if I had gotten my money’s worth for the first couple of years. Until the U.S. Govt force fed the Ethanol mix into our gasoline. My car was getting an average of 52.4 mpg and the 11.5 gas tank would go 444 miles on a tank of gas. However, as of this morning, 31 Dec 2009, my car is getting an average of 40.1 mpg and will only travel 283 miles on a tank of gas. Hmmm, doesn’t anyone else think there is something wrong with the Ethanol mix in our gasoline that has been forced upon us without any choice??? I want to see Ethanol removed from our service stations across the United States NOW!!!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 31st 2009 @ 7:39 am
  95. To the last person who has the 2006 Toyota Prius, I too would like to see ethanol out of gas, and a choice should be there for the use of regular gasoline to be back at pumps, we all should get to get together and repeal ethanol from gas.

    I know the ethanol was destroying my cars fuel system so I dont use it ever.

    [Oregon] is the only state that I know of for 2010 what will have non-ethanol gas avaliable to its people.

    I believe if everyone gets together we can achieve that goal to have non-ethanol gasoline back at the pumps.
    If it takes a petition im for it, even if needed to protest at the white house gates im for it.

    I’m tired of living in a comunist ran country when things are forced apon us. without a choice by the people.

    take care

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 31st 2009 @ 9:43 am
  96. I wish I could find a gas station that did not put ethanol in it’s gas. I had a discussion about this with my grandpa (who works at an oil company). I explained my observation that I consistently get better gas mileage from some gas stations than from others and asked him what was up with that. I have a 2008 CR-V, which tells me the MPG. I reset it each time I fill up so I can keep track. My grandpa explained the ethanol to me – and explained to me that even though all the gas stations around here (Florida) have the same “may contain up to 10% ethanol” sticker on the pumps, that each gas station actually has a different amount of ethanol – some may have the full 10% while others may have only 2%. He explained that the more ethanol (percentage) there is in the gas, the lower my gas mileage will be. There are now only two gas stations I will buy from…and the last one must have increased the ethanol b/c my mileage went down by 2 MPG on the last fill up 🙁 Although that could be a fluke b/c my husband has been driving my car over the last 2 weeks, and he has very different driving habits (he LOVES that gas pedal!). So I’ll give that gas station another chance 😉

    PS – Al Gore is a MORON!

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 31st 2009 @ 11:06 am
  97. According to consumer reports, E85 dropped gas mileage 27%. That would suggest that E10 will drop gas mileage 3.2% and that pure Ethanol has a mpg ratio of .68 compared to regular gas.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 2nd 2010 @ 8:38 pm
  98. That is only if you assume a straight line curve on Ethanol ratio vs mpg loss.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2010 @ 1:22 am
  99. Comparing mpg between E10 and E0 accurately is not easy. While the theoretical loss in mpg with E10 is 3.32%, my own experience, which measures tank average mpg and plots it against tank average speed, shows I am losing about 7.5% mileage with E10. My vehicle is a 2008 Nissan Rogue. I am fortunate to have a source of E0 and have been collecting data for 8 months. The speed data, from my trip computer, is essential to wash out the effect of city vs. highway driving.

    It is very important to know the real mileage penalty of E10, because anything over about 3.5% means that using E10 generates more greenhouse gas emissions than if there were no ethanol in the fuel. Further, above 5% penalty makes if very likely that ethanol actually increases our dependence on foreign oil, as more petroleum is required when production of ethanol is considered.

    If any of you have good speed corrected data for both E10 and E0, please e-mail me at [email protected]. I will use this as ammunition to try to get my legislators to move to relieve the mandates for ethanol use.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2010 @ 8:31 am
  100. Please let’s share information on where to get E0. We should also share information on testing to see if E0 is REALLY E0, because unfortunately the original waiver allows use of E5 without ANY NOTIFICATION.

    Does anyone know a source in Oregon or Washington?

    If we can measure Ethanol content accurately we can then develope a “E* vs mpg” database to detect linearity. This is of course something that our governement EPA should do – but that was the point of the waiver: it forbids EPA from testing E10 MPG. So the best thing would be to repeal the waiver (I think Obama has to do that) and let EPA testing be done.

    I would be glad to participate in a scientific study. The key is to get either absolutely reproduceable conditions, to get known conditions, or to get blind conditions. Blind conditions means that we each become part of a team where part of the team fills tanks and others drive – but drives should NOT know what their tanks were filled with; then we can use statistical inferences. Knwon conditions might mean that we all get GPS, temp and wind measurements and normalize our individual data.

    In any case it is imperative that we be able to measure the ethanol content of our gas IN THE TANK – for example, syphon out a small amount of gas after rocking the car to mix it, and measuring that sample.

    Do we have any University Professors listening??? Chemistry profs who are true patriots?

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2010 @ 10:54 am
  101. YES! Agreed. We need Ethanol mpg metrics. since the EPA can’t do this by law, then private metrics are needed, otherwise we will go on discussing this forever with no hard data.

    Read post #66 above, we have no idea if the E content is E4 E5 E10 E15 or even E24 in each tank we use. This probably explains why my mpg are fluctuating all over the place now in my Prius from 37 mpg to 47 mpg, normally, they are now usually below 39 mpg (bad for a Prius). So each tank needs to be analyzed for E percentage.

    The one time in my life that I would like some government input 🙂

    Since the EPA can’t or won’t give us the data, wouldn’t this would be perfect for one or even a dozen university masters or PhD thesis someplace? Even if testing it only on a couple types of vehicles. Maybe someone out there is already doing this or thinking about doing this. If so we would be very interested in seeing the results.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2010 @ 11:26 am
  102. I would be glad to participate in a scientific study as well,

    I don’t see why Ethanol has to be add to gasoline to cause problems for older cars, or to cars that were not designed to run on.
    I have one of the cars that don’t run on ethanol fuels
    E10, if I use this fuel the car stalls,

    I found non-ethanol gas and now the car runs good. and I dont have that problem stalling, and I do noticed I get better gas mileage, the car gets 40 to 50 mpgs, highway miles.

    I do like the government to wake up, and take the ethanol out of gasoline and stop forcing crap on the people.

    IF the ethanol companies go out of business they need to invest in a new companie to start like gasoline.
    or electric cars.

    take care folks

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2010 @ 3:13 pm
  103. Really, we need Consumer Reports to tackle this. The trick is getting them to understand what really needs to be tested (real cars, different years, on e10 and e0).

    This whole thing is one of the most heinous acts of sabotage against the collective good to benefit a favored few in years. It isn’t supposed to be possible to fleece us all like this in the age of Internet transparency.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 4th 2010 @ 8:40 am
  104. Thanks to those who sent e-mails. As reminded by Ed and Dr_SFZed, getting data to accurately compare gas mileage between E10 and E0 takes a bit of doing. Although I did correct for average speed, I have to recognize that the ethanol content does vary. This explains why there is so much more data scatter on the E10 curve compared to the one with pure gasoline.

    As a minimum, the following should be done to get each data point:
    1. Record the miles driven between each fill up and the gallons to fill the tank. Use MPG calculated as miles divided by gallons. The trip computer MPG is not usually accurate.
    2. Measure the ethanol percentage in the tank after the fill up. There are test kits on the market. One is sold online by “fueltestkit”. If you know of others you like, please advise. I think the best thing to do is to draw a sample from the tank after at least 10 miles of driving from where the tank was filled. This assures that the fuel is mixed.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 4th 2010 @ 3:38 pm
  105. This is a continuation of post no. 104 —
    There are other factors that can affect accuracy such as air temperature between fill ups, the number of cold starts, driving style, etc. I think a large number of data points and good record keeping should provide convincing data. Interloper’s idea of getting consumer reports to do this testing is fine. If anyone is a subscriber, please request CR to do this testing.

    Hopefully, armed with this data from several of you in different parts of the country, or even better from Consumer Reports, we can persuade some courageous legislators to do something to cause congress to back off on the ethanol mandates which do the nation absolutely no good other than to enrich farmers and ethanol producers at taxpayer expense. Have you been writing to your legislators? I have. If any of you can persuade a TV or radio personality to do a show on the cost of the ethanol scam to motorists and taxpayers, go for it.

    For all those who e-mail me at [email protected], I will send you the graph I have of MPG vs. MPH for both E10 and E0. I will also provide a data sheet you can use to log the data.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 4th 2010 @ 3:40 pm
  106. I converted my car to start on fuel vapor at idle then switches back to fuel injectors at normal temperatures, I have noticed this increases gas-mileage
    I think thats why I get 50 mpgs.

    I use non-ethanol gasoline as I stated before, I can’t use ethanol in my car causes the car to stall.

    I think the fuel systems needs to be redesigned for better fuel economy.


    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 4th 2010 @ 7:08 pm
  107. Hello guys I have a 1986 Jaguar xj6 has 40,000 miles on the car and it has been stalling on me for the past few years, I have drained the gas and parked the car for now, till a date when regular gas will be avaliable to use. I think the ethanol gas is making the car stall but cant get regular gas to prove it.

    _ does anyone know where I can get regular gasoline?

    I now drive a 2006 mazda 4 it only gets 28 to 30 highway miles, but the govenment websites has the car getting 35 mpgs why am I not getting that mileage out of it? can it be the ethanol gas?

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 5th 2010 @ 9:45 am
  108. I religiously monitor my gas mileage in my Hyundai Elantra, and my brother does also in his Chevy Avalanche. He is experiencing 15% reduction, and I am seeing 10-20% depending on what kind of driving. Highway driving was always 35mpg for me, and I’m lucky to hit 30, and local driving has gone from 30 to 26 or 27mpg.
    I’m sure like you all, I’m really bothered by this, and think its one of those things that would make a good 60 Minutes expose’. Somebody must know somebody who knows how to submit to them for consideration. I think the other interesting angle to all of this is the CAFE standards for auto manufacturers. I’m pretty confident that they can’t make their numbers using this gas… so you have a gov’t mandate being met on paper or limited testing, but no fuel available to meet it in real life. There should be pressure applied to the gas companies to fess up to the profit scheme, and there should be a logical way ahead for CAFE standards.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 14th 2010 @ 6:29 pm
  109. I have been informed by a U. S. EPA staff person that they specify pure (ethanol free) gasoline to be used by car mfrs. to test for emissions and to establish the MPG ratings for new vehicles. I have asked my representatives in congress to challenge them on this. I hope you all will do the same.

    If only the general public knew the absurdity of ethanol, something might be done. There are waaaaay more taxpayers and motorists than corn growers and ethanol producers. Please write to your local news editors and to any broadcasters that might listen.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 15th 2010 @ 8:41 am
  110. Hello

    I have a car that does not run on ethanol fuel at all it stalls, (1993 Nissan stanza Altima) and its hand book states not to use oxygenated blends of gasoline, which causes statling and hard to start conditions.

    Id like to see the mandate repealed!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 15th 2010 @ 8:46 am
  111. I measure my gas mileage religiously! I have experienced 13.6% drop exactly. Repeatable results. Every time I fill up.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 24th 2010 @ 9:18 pm
  112. Hello its me again Tom P

    I seen a boat marina its gas pump has non-ethanol fuel and the lable states this fuel will increase fuel mileage and reduce co2.

    —Then why is the government pushing ETHANOL useage that has lower gas mileage and increases C02
    over non-ethanol which has an increase in gas mileage and lower Co2 levels.????

    I think we need to revolt and Repeal Ethanol usage and kick out these Ethanol producers and Governments that support it.

    Ethanol lowers my gas mileage on both my cars.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 25th 2010 @ 7:45 am
  113. I think the best way to get real-world data would be to outfit a car with an auxilary fuel tank and switch, plus an engine sensor scan tool (like the import tuners use). With any mid nineties vehicle on up, you could see exactly what the sensors are telling the computer on regular vs E10 gasoline under actual driving conditions. There are three possible reasons I can think of that would cause more fuel to be dumped into the engine under steady-state running conditions. One, detection of detonation, which would result in timing retard and fuel addition. Two, lean Air/Fuel mixture detection by the oxygen sensor, which would cause fuel addition. Three, insufficent fuel in the exhaust gas to keep the catalytic converter lit, which would also result in extra fuel being added. If you got definite changes between E10 and regular gas that corresponded with 10% plus changes in fuel economy, you’d have visual-type data changes that might interest the media.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 25th 2010 @ 6:15 pm
  114. Hello Dr_SFZed

    I’d like testing of ethanol and non-ethanol gas as well in my car however if I was to add ethanol in my cars gas tank it would stall the car, I would know if ethanol is in my gas, if there was a test, and with ethanol running in my car for that short period when it does run it will have black exhaust from the pipe like a diesel, it will kick and jerk and stall.

    but with the non-E fuel I am using I dont have that problem and my gas mileage went up to 38+ mpgs got 45 a few times.

    with the ethanol I only go 29 was my highest mpgs

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 1st 2010 @ 8:11 am
  115. At least two people have mentioned lower ethanol stations in Florida. Which stations have lower or no ethanol added? Do you need to purchase a certain grade to have a lower percentage of ethanol?

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 4th 2010 @ 12:29 pm
  116. I own and operate a Shell branded location in Gardner,KS, and sell all three grades ETHANOL FREE. In Kansas the pumps don’t require labeling until the Ethanol content exceeds 10%, causing the consumer to think they are saving money when they buy at a lower price per gallon. WRONG!!! Some People have learned the hard (expensive) way. The ones that actually track their mileage and gallons always have better fuel economy averages on ETHANOL FREE. I personally won’t knowingly purchase E10(gasohol) even when I travel. The last road trip I made in my 1995 Mustang GT ( 302 c.i. & 5 speed)I averaged 29.6 at hiway speeds on pure unadulterated Gasoline. If we use fewer gallons to travel the same distance, we pollute less, don’t add to the cost of food, and don’t add to federal debt, by way of “ETHANOL SUBSIDIES”.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 15th 2010 @ 5:44 pm
  117. I haven’t seen any reduction in mileage myself, but my daughter states that she can tell the difference. It will be interesting to know the real deal.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 18th 2010 @ 10:41 am
  118. I own a 1999 Toyota Camry LE with a 4 cylinder engine. I used to get 26-28 mpg all year round in the Maine. Since the Ethanol has been added to the gasoline, I am getting 20-21 mpg. I have spent so much money trying to find out what was causing the sudden drop in mpg (gas adatives, new oxygen sensor, fuel filter, air filter etc). Finally came to the conclusion as to what was causing the problem all along…..ethanol! Don’t waste your time doing what I did unless your vehicle actually needs one of the parts that I replaced above. You’ll just have to live with the drop in mpg. Ethanol is making some rich people very rich!

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 20th 2010 @ 1:50 pm
  119. Hello folks
    I have been running my car with out ethanol gas I have gotten at a boat yard for the boats, and my car is doing better gas mileage the car gets 51 highest at highway miles, and no more stalling runs great.

    with the 10% ethanol in the gas the car was getting 28 highway miles max, and the car would stall on this fuel,

    why does the government force ethanol to us to use if some of us don’t want that fuel mostly for me, since I can’t use it in my car.

    well have a good one folks.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 20th 2010 @ 4:03 pm
  120. I experience a 15% drop in fuel efficiency with the use of the 10% ethanol blend. This is not a guess, nor is it computed on only one tank of gas.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 26th 2010 @ 11:24 am
  121. I have a 2008 Prius, my mpg dropped from 46-47 to 38 when I used E-10 Ethanol from ARCO in Southern California. I am finding that if I use only Shell gasoline, which I assume is also Ethanol, I am getting usually 43 or 44 mpg. Would anyone know what Shell might be doing different in S. California? Or has anyone else experienced anything similar?

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 26th 2010 @ 11:17 pm
  122. I have noticed about a 10% drop on my 2004 F-150, and except for a slight judder or stumble it drives pretty much the same as before.

    Just for clarification, It is not the oil companies secretly pushing for E15. They would be happy going back to no ethanol at all. It is the corn lobbyists such as ADM that are doing the pushing for E15 or E20.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 10th 2010 @ 1:54 pm
  123. Great Blog. My late father and now I, ALWAYS check fuel mileage at each fill-up. My older truck was consistent with 7% less MPG with E10. Our new Scion has on board computer that shows an immediate drop of 10% MPG using E10 fuel. My manual calculation backs up that info. I have never had any drive ability problems with any vehicle.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 17th 2010 @ 10:03 am
  124. The lower the gas mileage, I would think the happier the governments (Federal and State), since the more gallons of gas will needed for any given distance, and therefore the higher the tax revenue, since the taxes are levied on the “per gallon” basis – 18.4 cents per gallon for the Feds, up to around 32 cents per gallon (varies by state) for states!

    Comment by Anonymous — May 23rd 2010 @ 8:54 pm
  125. My city mileage for my 1998 Toyota Corolla went from almost 27 MPG to 19.5 MPG! And, I drive very conservatively, i.e., letting off the gas way before a red light, etc.

    My mechanic told me that ethanol can damage oxygen sensors and catalytic converters too! Well, my “check engine” light came on today and it said I have a bad oxygen sensor. He re-set the computer. We’ll see what happens.

    This ethanol thing is business as usual. I am NOT a communist, but here in the USA, the Feds need to stop this crap. Ethanol is evil!!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 5th 2010 @ 3:33 am
  126. I have a 2009 seirra 1500 with flex fuel 5.4 liter. Shell has just changed where I was buying my fuel. My milage was 18.5 to 19.3 on a 20 gal tank about 370 to 400 miles at $55.80. After the change milage 16 to 16.2 320 miles per tank. This is 50 miles per tank diff. same price it takes 23.12 gals to get 400 miles at 2.79 a gal. The new gas 10% ethnol is 2.3 gals of ethnol, takes 2.49 gals more real gas to burn it at the same price. adds up to $64.50 in my book. Where is the savings in fossil fuel when it take more to do less. It takes .19 gals more fossil fuel to go the 400 miles (thats gov. at its best) save our planet by using more not less.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 20th 2010 @ 9:08 am
  127. I’m a little alarmed with Mr. Nash’s report — I’d always sort of figured that while those of us who drive vehicles optimized for actual gasoline would suffer greater than 10% drops in fuel economy with E-10, folks driving flex fuel vehicles would only suffer the drop you’d expect from the lower energy content (a couple of percent).

    If even flex fuel vehicles are burning more E0 once ethanol is introduced to go the same distance, this is truly a disaster of the first order.

    Shame none of us are multi-billion dollar corporations, or maybe we might be able to get our representatives to listen to us.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 21st 2010 @ 11:15 am
  128. Hello there,

    Yeah I don’t know why the asses put shit in the gas to have it cleaner but its not, it uses more gas releases more co2 then non-ethanol gasoline the proof is in the mileage loss from ethanol fuels, so why use it, I mean it does not take a wild eyed scientist to find that out.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 22nd 2010 @ 5:48 pm
  129. Since I was force to use E10 my gas mileage in my 1996 Toyota T100 went from around 19.75 to 17.10. My Murray riding lawn mower does not want to run at all with the E10 plus my Operator’s Manual says DO NOT USE GASOLINE CONTAINING METHANOL (WOOD ALCOHAL). GASOLINE CONTAINING UP TP 10% ETHANAL. What do I do when you can not find a gas station that does not sell anything but?????

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 11th 2010 @ 4:21 pm
  130. Hello, I replied on this site before, I’m the one with the 93 Nissan Stanza Altima that stalls on the shit Ethanol gas,
    But that’s ok, it made me design a new fuel system for my car.

    as I recall they used to use this back in the 80’s for the same reasons of today to lower co2 and lower prices, but was found to be bad, and not much people was buying that fuel. so it was dropped. then Bush the SHIT HEAD passed that law to use the shit..

    But today they did not give anyone a choice at the pumps to use non-Ethanol or Ethanol grades at the pump, so we are forced to use crap!!!Ethanol 🙁 and they say we have freedoms and freedom of choice, its a slap in the face of all that whom fight for me to live here and be free. Like my Uncle’s.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 12th 2010 @ 5:12 pm

    Tells you where to buy pure gas, with NO ethanol.

    Don’t believe the .gov hype, ethanol is nothing more than a farm subsidy at your expense.

    I get 5-10% better mileage with my Tundra rolling light, up to 15% better when pulling a heavy load, 5-6000 lbs with regular unleaded, non-ethanol gas.

    Find an Ethanol-free station near you and let the farmers sell corn for hog feed and grocery stores, and keep the ethanol OUT of your gas tank.

    We have plenty of oil in the US if the government will just stop putting drilling moratoriums in and let the free market work. And VOTE CONSERVATIVE in November if you love this country, or we may lose it.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 16th 2010 @ 5:23 pm
  132. Thanks for the post Daro
    There is a station in Monmouth IL that I pass by every couple of weeks.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 16th 2010 @ 6:19 pm
  133. i have a pontiac grand prix GTP. it is supercharged from the factory. it provies me with an average mileage readout that i can reset at will. one store in my area began carrying this e10 fuel and the prices were lower but i heard about the gas mileage issues so i decided to test. i am close to I40 and a very straight stretch of it at that. i ran the same road under extremely similar conditions (weather, humidity, temp. etc.) and at the exact same speed with cruise control. i set the cruise on 70 mph and then reset my mileage readout at ecatly the same mile marker and drove a distance of just over fifty miles never taking the cruise off. the results were: regular gasoline-31.2 mpg/e10-24.6. i ran the car all the way until the low fuel indicator came on and ran one full tank of e10 out then filled up with e-10 again before conducting the test just to make sure that it was purged as well as it could be (for an amateur experiment anyway). so my conclusion is that in a normal vehicle the results of a little lost mileage may be accurate but in a performance verhicle it is definetly worse.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 18th 2010 @ 2:48 am
  134. HI Me Tom again

    I don’t use Ethanol in my car anymore, but when I did it would make my car stall at stops, and run very badly at normal cruse speeds the car would jerk and kick, with large amounts of black exhaust from the back of the car, was like running a train, and running this badly the car would get 16 to 26 Mpg at best High way miles,
    this is not good gas mileage for a 4CYL.

    As I stated I don’t use Ethanol in my gas anymore, now the car get up to 45+ mpg mark Highway miles only non stop driving, the average city and highway
    I get now is 34 driving in I-4 bumper to bumper traffic in Orlando FL, so I am getting good gas mileage in city too. I drive 190miles to work everyday.

    I could not do this with Ethanol no way at all.

    If there’s any petitions for Ethanol to get rid of Let me know so I can sign it.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 18th 2010 @ 7:53 am
  135. I have a 2010 flexfuel escape and got on this site because my mileage dropped when I started using E85 and I see from these reports that confirms my suspicions that you get less mileage from ethanol gas.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 18th 2010 @ 8:40 am
  136. Yeah I know you wont get much mileage from it, there’s no power to ethanol. unlike gasoline, you can even power a car 4cyl to run just off of the fumes from the gas idling the car.

    Have you ever added beer plus gas to your lawn mower and tried to run it, it wont run will not even start, this is the same crap they have in gas, but formulated to mix with gasoline, but when it get damp or water in to the gas then you notice the problems it will cause,

    I work for Lowes, and I have noticed a lot of lawn mowers ridding, push mowers, weed eaters, come back to the store that customers complain that they dont run, or stop working. and the mowers state can use Ethanol but not to exceed 10%, that means must have more then 10% for the mowers to stop working,

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 18th 2010 @ 8:57 am
  137. People need to flood their members of the legislature and their parliamentary ministers in transportation and environment with their observations and research!!!

    First, we are destroying our soils for future food growth. Second, if we have to burn more ethanol fuel to go as far as ethanol free fuel, then what’s the point!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 16th 2010 @ 2:03 am
  138. Hello Brent T,

    thats what I am asking whats the point on having ethanol in gas if it makes you use more gas,
    well I seen online a few months back that So2 is released from gas exhaust that causes cooling on the air temp, I think they are using this to increase this to combat the co2 levels, my opinion at this point.

    I do hate ethanol in gas for my car can’t use it, it will not run on that fuel, it stalls, and puffs alot of black exhaust in to the air before it stalls.

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 16th 2010 @ 8:38 am
  139. I use farm gas with no E. the local stations are E10.
    I get OVER 1/3 better mileage with no E. without a doubt. A relative drove from TN to FL on a tank of noE from here and got 622 miles. on e10 usually 400 miles. (Nissan Altima Hybrid). I have a guzzling Ford Bronco-
    about 6mpg on E10. About 12 on noE. Buy corn stocks I guess..put them near the “AlGore” lightbulbs.

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 29th 2010 @ 11:35 am
  140. What may be happening is that E10 ignition requirements are outside many vehicle’s ignition system design parameters. Dr Chris Jacobs explained some interesting points in his books on ignition systems.

    When OEM engineers design ignition systems for an engine, they do it on the basis of several hundred dyno runs, plus an educated guess of what type of use and fuel the vehicle is likely to encounter. They develop an ignition curve and “spark profile” for the ignition based on this data. They generally shoot for an average 88- 93% ignition success rate, accepting the 7-12% misfire rate in favor of the overall odds.

    “Spark Profile” describes how energy is delivered over the duration of the ignition spark- whether it comes on strong at first, then tapers off, starts low at first, then rises, or remains at a constant level. Different engine conditions such as idle, acceleration, or cruise require different spark profiles- and so do engine modifications or fuel changes.

    When you modify an engine, all the OEM work goes out the window. The success of your modifications depends largely on how far you shifted the engine’s new ignition requirements from the factory’s design. It is entirely possible to have your ignition producing great looking sparks that only have an ignition rate of 75% or less- you’ll definitely notice that!

    I think this might explain why some vehicles have minimal problems on E10, while others exhibit a wide range of mileage and driveability problems. It also seems that somewhere between 5% and 10% Ethanol is a line that causes difficulties, as 5% has been used widely in gasoline for 20 + years with no apparent problem. Perhaps the EPA should be required to investigate and document ignition system effectiveness on fuel additives they wish to mandate- at their expense, of course. Further, they would have to compensate vehicle owners who suffer financial losses from reduced mileage or engine damage. You might see a rapid loss of interest in fooling around with basic gasoline.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 1st 2010 @ 3:35 pm
  141. Dave’s comments provide insight I did not have. Makes sense that different cars are affected differently as regards loss of MPG with E10. It’s difficult to account for changes in driving style, city vs. highway driving, and the actual percentage of ethanol in any given batch of fuel. Over 2 years and considering average speed between fill ups, I figure I lose 7 to 8% with E10 in a 2008 Nissan Rogue. Visit to find ethanol free fueling stations.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 2nd 2010 @ 1:22 pm
  142. I haven’t read all these comments yet but my experience has convinced me I get about 10% better mileage on Marine gas with zero ethanol. I can’t see any benefit in reducing dependence on perto fuel if it takes 10% more fuel to go the same distance using E10.So the corn growers win, the petroleum ind. doesn’t lose any sales volume and the consumer gets …..,you get it.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 4th 2010 @ 12:30 pm
  143. I just placed a call to US Representative Phil Hare (D)from Illinois. He informed me that EPA is currently testing a wide range of vehicles, comparing unleaded gasoline to ethanol. That is an initial step to determine if the EPA will test & publish results in the future.. . He referred me to a bill currently in committee that will specify labeling in fuel at the pump and in the distribution level.
    NOTE: I can not find anything in this bill that states what he told me on the phone.
    H.R.5778 — Renewable Fuels Marketing Act of 2010

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 4th 2010 @ 1:29 pm
  144. Since the government started this 10 percent (or so they say) ethanol in gasoline I feel this is just an extention to the Obama Cash For Clunker Program. A person with an older car fills up enough times with ethanol gas, soon the engine parts like fuel injections, carburetors and fuel pumps start to go and need replaced sooner than normal. I do not have the exspenceve tools nor do I have the technical knowledge to work on my own vehecle so, if I want to remain indepentant, my choice is to take it into the shop to have the parts replaced on my vehicle when they go bad. This can get very expensive. I do not trust this government style of leadership and feel this is just another one of those government back door schemes to con people into buying a new car whether they can afford to pay for it or not and don’t worry if you can’t the government will pay for it for you.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 5th 2010 @ 10:32 pm
  145. E10 far predates Obama.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 7th 2010 @ 8:35 am
  146. I remember when Gasahol first appeared. I think it was clear back in the 1970’s. We have been using it in our vehicles since the 1970’s with no problems, but I never checked my MPG until the last few years, so I didn’t know that it gave us less mpg until now.

    There is a gas station in Ayrshire, Iowa that still says Gasahol on the pump.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 7th 2010 @ 9:15 am
  147. To Jed, #145-Did you really read what I wrote? I think you truely did miss my POINT. Starting in July 2010 I could not find a gas station in town that did not sale 10% ethanol gas. If I wanted to cut my grass, weed and edge my yard I had to use this grap gas. I have had to replace the carburetor on my riding lawn moyer and my gas edger. I had to replace the fuel tank on my new push moyer. I also lost 2% gas mileage on my 14 year old truck. That was a very expenseve month. To be fare to your statement. You are correct this does predate Obama. My question to you is. Have you really thought about why the GOVERNMENT approved of this additive to gasaline that gives the illusion of saving money but ends up costing you more money and time in the long run????

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 7th 2010 @ 4:50 pm
  148. Yes, Laura, I have. In my state (Louisiana), it became impossible to avoid buying E10 during the early part of the decade, when Bush was in office. I don’t blame him (in particular) and you’d be wrong to blame Obama (in particular).

    The folks responsible for this are not some nebulous government cabal — it’s the farm belt, pure and simple. They’ve always wielded unreasonable clout, and this is just one of the most egregious things they’ve foisted off on us. Price controls, farm subsidies, and all manner of other pro-farming initiatives are equally representative of their power in Washington.

    I’m not a libertarian, and I’ve no problem with the government doing things from time to time to benefit us all, but this regulation does the exact opposite. It hurts all of us for the betterment of a *very* narrow segment of the population. This is a tax, a dangerous tax, a hidden tax, and a tax which weakens our entire economy and damages durable goods (gasoline motors) all to improve profits for corn producers by a modest sum.

    Our efforts to reduce protectionist trade policies amongst our trading partners have always been hamstrung by the one industry we have which refuses to play fair — agriculture. We complain when other countries artificially prop up their steelmakers, or oil producers, or any other segment, yet our own agricultural lobby continues to sit on lucrative government largesse.

    To overcome the farm belt will require widespread outcry at this absurdity — and this issue is neither a Republican nor Democrat issue. If we try and turn this partisan, we make getting that outcry all the more difficult.

    Or to put it another way, I don’t care what your other politics are, Linda — we’re on the same side here, so I hope we can work together to fix this. Party affiliation doesn’t matter — gasohol is wrong, and should be abolished. At a bare minimum, we need to have a choice at the pump, so that we aren’t forced to put a material which destroys our engines and engine components into those engines if we wish to operate them.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 8th 2010 @ 12:14 am
  149. Jed, Well said!! For the origins of the “Ethanol Scam”, see Greg Sheurich’s article in the ‘Energy Tribune, dated June 17, 2010. It states in part “The origin of ethanol as a national fuel source can be traced back to the national hysteria surrounding the oil shocks of the 1970’s. An enterprising Dwayne Andreas (then-chairman of ADM) managed to convince President Carter that a domestically produced fuel substitute could reduce or even eliminate dependence on foreign oil. Andreas managed to secure massive federal subsidies for both the production and consumption of ethanol – and a new “industry” was born, albeit one that would not survive off the omnipresent life-support of the federal government. Sadly, as can only be expected of a product that cannot compete on its own merits, ethanol has proven to be a success only as a case in corporate welfare, not as a viable form of alternative fuel.”

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 8th 2010 @ 8:27 am
  150. Hmm. I wrote a long comment about POET. It seems to have been deleted. Since then I see that NASCAR plans to use E15 next year. POET will oversee the relationship between the ethanol group & NASCAR.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 8th 2010 @ 9:45 am
  151. bobbydee, I looked up H.R.5778. I could not find any reference (searched) to ethanol in it.
    Re your last post, I don’t know what POET is. I’m not too surprised NASCAR would use fuel with ethanol. Note that since ethanol has oxygen in its chemistry (gasoline doesn’t), you can actually get more power from a given engine with fuel containing ethanol. However, the energy content of ethanol per gallon is less than that of gasoline, so you will get lower MPG with fuel that contains ethanol.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 8th 2010 @ 10:16 am
  152. POET has 27 ethanol plants in the midwest. They manage a few more and do consulting work for other producers. I have a relative employed at the Scotland SD research plant. has info about the industry. As I explained in the deleted post, POET is a leader in seeking out subsidies from states and the feds. They now want to federal government to build a pipeline to carry their product to the east coast. Currently ethanol can not be transported in pipelines because of the corrosive nature of the liquid.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 8th 2010 @ 11:44 am
  153. Ethanol is not a stable product it has a shelf life and go’s bad or degrade over a few weeks to a months time, so piping it will not be good if its piped from mid west to the east coast, The Ethanol is crap for cars and small engine’s, when it will be sitting for a week before you get it as gas form then when in your car will be there another week, so thats two weeks or more, then by the 3rd week the gas is bad,
    The All Go Green thing, I figured it all out, ITS THE GREEN MONEY BACKS< MONEY THERE MAKING from this.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 8th 2010 @ 12:09 pm
  154. I keep track of all mileage in my 2007 Toyota Camry. Recently my mileage has dropped considerably due to the availability of ethanol gas only.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 9th 2010 @ 11:27 am
  155. Jed, Thank You for responding back to my statement. Please forgive me if I misunderstood you from your statement. I read your statement and for the most part I agree with you. But, I do feel the Government could do alot more WHO EVER THE PRESIDENT is than they are doing. I feel this ETHANOL gas has been forced on the American people like it or not. The real question is???How can we change this and/or what is the answer to putting a stop to this GRAP GAS so I don’t have to worry about being FORCED to buy new a vehicle and new lawn equipment that I can not afford??? Does anyone really know the damage ethanol gas can cause to NEW VEHICALS??? This is AMERICA AND WE SHOULD HAVE CHOICES NOT ~ NO CHOICE.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 9th 2010 @ 1:14 pm
  156. Wikipedia has a summary of a bill passed by Congress and signed by W in 2007. Good read.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 9th 2010 @ 1:59 pm
  157. Bobbydee, you are correct, the “bill passed by congress”, was a VERY GOOD READ. Thank You

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 9th 2010 @ 3:00 pm
  158. I agree, Laura. I don’t really know what the solution is — maybe we should just go old-school, and write our Congressmen actual letters (as opposed to e-mail) on the subject.

    I don’t know how it is these days, but when I was a kid, I visited the Senator from my state (mostly meant a group of us met with his aides) and they told us that the most influential thing the Senator got was letters from constituents, because so few constituents took the time to write. (Most people just sign petitions, or at most, call). So, for every letter they got, they assumed there were hundreds of other people who felt the same way who hadn’t written.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 9th 2010 @ 6:34 pm
  159. Ethanol is capable of producing higher octane than gasoline, but engine controls need to be tuned to take advantage of it. Flexible fuel cars tuned to burn either gasoline or E85 are doing just fine or even better with E10 than with MTBE, and might will do even better with E15. If your car is from before the gas changeover to E10 and does not have flexible fuel capabilities, you probably do get lower miles to the gallon.
    You know that if NASCAR is using it, your car can go fast with it, but that still leaves the mileage question.
    At some point, I’d rather eat corn than burn it. I’m sure there is a great loss of energy in the conversion. Maybe finding a better source of ethanol is the real solution.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 22nd 2010 @ 1:49 pm
  160. Two things most folks are not aware of: 1. The EPA specifies pure (no ethanol) gasoline for the emission and mileage tests car mfrs. use to pass emission standards and get fuel economy ratings. 2. The government has not published actual mileage data for either E10 or E15. Talk about hypocrisy. But at least Al Gore has come out and renounced ethanol.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 23rd 2010 @ 3:00 pm
  161. Ethanol is good, if you like to kill your car off. and its green. and I don’t mean to save earth but Green money.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 24th 2010 @ 2:27 pm
  162. Bought a new SUV in Colorado and mileage was steady 18-23 mpg with pure gas. Moved to New York, and mileage is down to 12.5-16 mpg using E10. That’s 30% down.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 4th 2011 @ 1:20 am
  163. I bought a new Mazda CX-7 my milage back and fourth to work averaged 24 mpg after useing the ethanol blend I am down to 19.5 mpg. We are at the mercy of the government when it comes to fuel. Is it not amazing the government regulates telephone, nutural gas, electric, but they have never regulated OPEC or any oil company’s? I wonder why this is?

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 16th 2011 @ 11:35 am
  164. First:
    OUR government cannot regulate OPEC! OPEC is a consortium of oil producing nations, and not within the jurisdiction of the United States!
    Regulation IS THE PROBLEM! If ethanol were voluntary, it would be O.K. If you choose to use ethanol, knock yourself out! The product would not be popular and would fade away. I don’t beleve that government has any business telling us what fuels to use at all!

    Example: when telephones were de-regulated, the price of service fell dramatically. More features popped up and compettition produced a better product.

    (loosely quoting the great Ronald Reagan)
    Government is NOT the answer to every problem, and most often is the SOURCE of the problem!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 16th 2011 @ 4:29 pm
  165. Well said.

    If the ethanol tax breaks went away, so would ethanol.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 17th 2011 @ 3:56 pm
  166. I could not agree more with what is said. A great quot ” Government is at it’s best when it governs the least” (Thomas Jefferson)I recieved the best performance and milage from the good old fuel called ethel; you just can not find this any more. One question I have is why is O.P.E.C. called a cartel?

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 18th 2011 @ 9:05 pm
  167. “In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem”.
    -Ronald Reagan-.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 19th 2011 @ 9:22 am
  168. I drive a chevy truck with already poor fuel economy. For years I have always reset my trip meter to zero when I fill my tank. Bought my truck in 2003 and – until recently – got 280 mi./tank in the city and about 325 mi./tank highway. In the last year or so I have noticed a steady decline. Now, Jan. 2011, I am getting 230 mi./tank. For those keeping score at home, that’s an 18% reduction in fuel economy. That number is staggering with a vehicle that already had a sorry mpg rating. cites a recent change to mpg ratings in 2008 and lists the reasons being: acceleration and fast driving, using AC, and cold temperatures. Those things affected mpg since the car was a car. It says nothing about ethanol. Government propaganda. They don’t want you to know you’re losing fuel economy.

    The bottom line: I’m paying for a full tank, but I’m getting 2.5 less gallons of gasoline. It’s frustrating that I can’t find a station that will sell a lower ethanol blend, or better yet, straight gas. I live in NC an it’s one of the states that doesn’t require gas stations to post the ethanol content on the pump. What a farce.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 23rd 2011 @ 3:51 pm
  169. I just found a station that sells 100% gas, it is a Phillps 66 convenience store. I will be buying my fuel there. I have a question for anyone that may know the answer. I was told from a manager at one station that if the station would switch to ethanol blend the government would give them a 3% disount on their fuel; is this true?

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 23rd 2011 @ 4:57 pm
  170. Josh, Visit
    Looks like there are many stations selling gas without ethanol in your state. I am happy to pay 7% more for pure gasoline as it gives me 7% better MPG.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 23rd 2011 @ 5:02 pm
  171. THe link gives a summary of ethanol laws, state by state.
    Most of the gas stations in Illinois, label everyone of the pumps as
    “May contain up to 10% ethanol” At Sam’s Club in Iowa, the fuel delivery truck driver told me that 87 octane contains no ethanol. That pump is not labeled so it MUST contain less than 1%. Sams charges $.16 more for 87 than 89 octanes.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 23rd 2011 @ 6:46 pm
  172. Here in Florida all grades have stickers saying ” contains up to 10% percent” and “contains 10% or less”
    so far I see all grades with Ethanol the 87,88,89,91,92,93 at a gas station in Orlando Fl all has Ethanol, and the gas rating on the pump Needs to be checked cause my car sputters at times like it has water in the gas, if it has any water in the gas the Rating on the pumps are not correct.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 23rd 2011 @ 6:54 pm
  173. I went to a marinas for gas for my boat they have non ethanol marked on the door so they say, but I have tested it to have 1% to 2% Ethanol, now now I don’t know if they know it or not, but its in it. I really would like to see a choice of non-ethanol at the gas pumps.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 23rd 2011 @ 7:08 pm
  174. For the last couple of yrs I’ve been chasing imaginary engine bugs. When I bought my car in 2005 my honda civic 4dr lx was getting 34-36mpg combined. I drove from houston to dallas once, slowed down the pace and hit 40mpg. I really never put 2 and 2 together but I was soon down to 29-31 mpg after the e10. During that time I drove myself crazy trying to find that lost 5mpg. I tried airing my tires up, plugs, pcv valve, air filter, injector cleaners, minimal weight in car, driving habits, timing belt, oil changes, etc. No change at all. Ethanol is a great fuel for a engine designed for it (alcohol racing engine). As a general rule of thumb a alcohol engine requires twice as much fuel to produce the same amount of power. At the same time it will foul oil and coolant if it comes in cotact with either. The only real pro is a cooler engine. Alcohol is known as a solvent, even on marine type expoxies. Those of you that know those epoxies mean business. If that’s the only solvent for something that is so “bulletproof”, what will this govt. moonshine do to some of the sensitive sensors and components? Just my $.02 and some food for thought.

    P.s. don’t buy into all of the miracle “boost your mpg” products.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 30th 2011 @ 1:57 am
  175. I have written to my congressman and senator about the ethanol boondoggle 2 years ago and was told it is a good thing. They wont or cant see that the resultant loss in MPG means that to go the same distance with ethanol gas you will still use the same amount of regular non ethanol gas which means we are not saving any oil in this country and the ethanol is driving up our food costs and the subsidies to the ethanol companies is contributing to our deficit

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 26th 2011 @ 4:17 pm
  176. We the people has gone out the window. The great people of this country really have no say with the descions our law makers put on us. I have been buying my fuel at a station that still sells 100% gas. I have increased my milage by 3mpg. The greed for money and power far exceeds what is morally right to do.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 27th 2011 @ 8:00 am
  177. @Warren Norman: I doubt “the Government” will offer the station operator a 3% (or any) discount, but non-blended fuel does cost more. My (last) local non-ethanol station is currently asking for customer feedback while studying a switch to blended fuel. Their supply cost is approximately $.14 higher per gallon for straight gas, and they must pass that higher cost on to the customer. I gladly pay the higher cost for both of my vehicles, and judging by the feedback I saw in their book, the majority of their customers feel the same way.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 12th 2011 @ 10:05 am
  178. I gladly pay $0.20Cents or 0.30cents more for regular gas to be in my car.
    but the government has to make the gas a dollar cheaper by subsidizing it like they did with ethanol, and make the gas go to $3.20 a gallon. instead of the 4.20 a gallon for non ethanol gas.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 12th 2011 @ 12:32 pm
  179. @Tom: The $1/gallon subsidy is on the ETHANOL, not the blended. It comes up to more like $.10 per gallon subsidy, since each gallon of blended fuel contains 1/10th gallon of the subsidized ethanol.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 14th 2011 @ 2:12 pm
  180. I drive every month in my 2008 Sonata from Seattle to kalispell Montana. When I purchase 10% Ethanol on the drive over I get 25 MPG. I am able to buy ethanol free fuel in Montana and on my return trip I get 33-34 MPG.

    Enough is enough. What a scam!

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 14th 2011 @ 7:40 pm
  181. Mark McIntire

    I dont think you ready my post, I said the Government should subsidize the regular gas like they did for Ethanol fuels, the Ethanol subsidies is about 50Cent for ethanol fuels however I was not talking about that. what I was saying was instead of paying 4.25 a gallon for non ethanol gas they should pay in a 1.00 of subsides to make the price more affordable to a recovering economy and be 3.25 a gallon
    thats what I was talking about, I don’t know what you were talking about.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 14th 2011 @ 9:58 pm
  182. Both my Chevy (2000) S-10 and 1997 (V8)Silverado Pick up truck hand book says it can use upto 10% Ethonol but its not sutiable for hauling and to switch to a non ethonol blend fuel. I have notice on my 1997 Silverado when I do add “Regular” gas (without ethonol) I get a 21 mpg from a 15 mpg using the 10% ethonol with in the same range and travel speed of 64 mph. My S-10 (4cyl)with 10% does 24 MPG and regular gas I get 28 to 31 MPGs as it changes on different trips tried. On both trucks I dont have any cargo or trailers being pulled while doing these trips, just asif you were out on a trip from Orlando to Daytona Beach.
    Another notice I have with ethonol blend gas in my silverado, I get a check engine light and it reads to be bad or low emissions from the Catolitic Converter, but when I run the non-ethonol blend gas, AKA regular gas the light turns off and no code is active in the OBD2 computer, when I recheck the code. I also with the dianostic tool ran a emissions test with the regular (non ethonol) gas the emissions pass with flying colors. The oxygen sensors or some other features are effected with the E-10 blend fuel, my thoughts that the stations have more than a 10% rating for the use in my truck(s) can handle.

    With the older vehicles out there that need to use regular gas should have a choice to run in in their vehicles. You dont see a leaded gas station serving gas for a unleaded only vehicle or a Diesel fuel only for a unleaded fuel only vehicle. So why an ethonol fuel at any level only in a “UNLEADED GAS ONLY” vehicle. Diesel has three types offered, off road, sulfer, non sulfer blends and now bio diesel so thats four types. Why not gas until all gas only vehicles are replaced by Flex fuel or electric cars (This would be my vehicle of choice, 100% electric).

    you dont see a air plane put diesel fuel in the tank, or gas instead of jet fuel, the reason its not made for it. This is my point ETHONOL in a GAS ONLY Engine is not made for it. And to any person that is going to say “Ethonol is good and clean for the environment !!” I agree to that to the point that if the engine is designed solely for that specific blend of fuel then it is good to use, like the E-85 flux fuel engines. 🙂

    But for a regular burning gasoline engine to put it into is not good at all. Yes I do believe in what was said above that Govenment has power over the “We the People..” and we are now the slaves to the state.

    Thank you for reading my take on ethonol gas in my trucks and the opinion I have on this fuel.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 15th 2011 @ 10:05 pm
  183. I am traveling from N. Illinois to Florida Keys. I have a list of pure gas locations installed on my GPS. I shall see if the information is reliable.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 16th 2011 @ 12:35 pm
  184. Good luck. You won’t find any in the state of Florida unless you fuel up at the marinas and pay over $6 per gallon.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 16th 2011 @ 4:43 pm
  185. I have a 2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee- My first 2 months I have used 89 Octane gas…and was getting about 20.5 MPG – I thought I would try the E85 since it was .50 cheaper a gallon – result: 15 MPG..needless to say it actually cost more per mile than the gas! Unless it is more than .60 per gallon cheaper…but even then I don’t think I would use E85 unless I absolutely had to because the pick up seemed reduced and it was a hard cold start.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 28th 2011 @ 7:59 pm
  186. On a recent highway trip in my 2008 Rogue, counting only fill ups with average speed between 54 and 63 MPH, I got 28.4 MPG with fuel having 10% ethanol. However with pure (no ethanol) gasoline, I got 30.2 MPG — a 6.25% improvement. (MPG based on miles/gallons.) If you want better mileage, contact your legislators and demand an end to the ethanol scam.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 24th 2011 @ 10:52 am
  187. We had a great vacation. On the way to Florida, I filled up at Non-ethanol pumps several times. Our little Scion XD averaged 43mpg on pure gas and 40 and 41 on ethanol. There was not as big of difference as I was expecting. In Florida gas is labeled as 1% to 10% as someone mentioned. We drove from Miami to Key West several times on the overseas highway where speed limits are 45 or 55. The car made 40 to 43 sometimes, but twice I filled up at CITCO, the milage dropped to 35 MPG both times. This country really needs a truth in fuel legislation. We really need to know the exact ethanol content at each and every pump. We also need the EPA to conduct mileage tests on new cars, with and without ethanol blends.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 25th 2011 @ 11:20 pm
  188. My mileage (2003 Toyota Camry) had been going down lately, and finally got down to 23 mpg. I switched to CFN fuel where locally I can get it w/o ethanol. My mileage is back up to 30 mpg where it uaually is for city driving with two 100 mile highway trips per month. I pay 7 cents more per gallon for this good fuel, and get 7 extra miles per gallon – that is a penny a mile for these extra 7 miles per gallon. We are the first country in history to “burn up” our food supply!

    Comment by Anonymous — May 18th 2011 @ 8:42 pm
  189. The mileage dip is even more pronounced in older cars, where there are no modern electronics constantly monitoring and correcting fuel, spark and timing. I can’t tell you how many vintage and collector car owners were scratching their heads, trying to figure out what was wrong with their engines. Nothing at all, it’s the poor fuel quality, relatively speaking.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 25th 2011 @ 12:50 pm
  190. I drive a Toyota Tundra, when I fill up I can drive about 200 or more miles with my first half tank of pure gas. With the ethanol crap, I can only travel about 150 to 160 on the same amount of fuel. Ethanol is garbage and should die.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 1st 2011 @ 9:16 pm
  191. we all forced to live with it the Use of Ethanol that is, nothing we can do, but just to take it in our tanks.

    I tired to protest ethanol but no more, they will get to you if you do, so just live with it like I did.


    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 1st 2011 @ 9:57 pm
  192. Iowa ethanol industry wants to up % to 15%. My new Weed Eater says that more than 10% is not gasoline. The use of E15,E20 or E85 will void the warranty.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 1st 2011 @ 10:28 pm
  193. That’s what my new Lawn mower has too, not to exceed 10% will void warranty if more then 10%,

    its the same for a Car, my uncle’s 2010 Eclipse 4 cyl handbook has not to exceed 10% ethanol or will avoid warranty,, Yes it does say to use oxygenates blends fuels to lower co2 but the new test show that 2007 and newer can take a 15%, but what if it causes damage to the car?(Engine, fuel system or sensors) do you pay for it? or will the car company pay for it?

    most of the newer cars has metal gas tanks but some older in the 90’s has some type of plastic fuel tanks and rubber fuel hoses, so I don’t think they can use a above that 10, should not use any in my mind at all.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 2nd 2011 @ 12:02 am
  194. i drive a 1997 toyota camry le 2.2 4 cyl – i am very conservative driver – i have refined my driving to get 36 to 37 miles to a gallon which i had to do when the gas shot up in 20008 – that was when i decided to switch to a circle k in Kiethville LA to save money and i was totally unaware there was any difference between e-10 and non ethanol gas – i did not know what e10 was

    i was watching my gas mileage closely trying to squeeze every mile i could out of gas by improving my technique was a major necessity as gas was nearing 4 dollars a gallon – the circle k near where i work in kiethville la had gas at 3.91 – where i bought at at j j’s fasttrac in mansfield it was 3.96

    so i tried that gas at circle k for 2 weeks that year and yes i noticed the pumps had E-10 stickers on them
    1st fill up i got 32 miles to a gallon

    next fillup i got 28 mpg

    next fillup i got 26 mpg

    it got to 22 on the next – i thought my tank was leaking so i checked it no gas smell – so i thought someone was stealing gas out of my car so i locked it

    i filled up 1 last time at that circle k and drove home i came back the next day and the guage was almost exactly where i filled up the day previous and i had to get gas after just driving a total of 90 miles and fill up – normal i drive about 210 miles or more and fill up – it checked in at 18mpg

    i switched back to my station i had been using close to my home and had used for about 10 years which is j j fastrac in Mansfield La – there was some increase in gas milage about 28mpg – it took a total 5 fillups for my car to get back to normal – someone i talked to told me it was the ethanol in the gas and i did not use it again the CIRCLE K had and has a E-10 STICKER on their pumps

    i wondered if it was true so this last MAY 2010 i decided i would see if that was a fluke – it wasn’t

    THE GAS MILEAGE DROPPED and i immediatly stopped due to that and a fear it might be ruining my engine if all they say is true

    non ethanol gas stations are rare here now – i am lucky there still several around and i have a list from an online source that has their locations

    you can find some for your state – here is the one for louisiana –

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 1st 2011 @ 10:59 pm
  195. Get a Nissan Leaf. no fuel at all matter of fact no Ethanol at all too. 🙂

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 2nd 2011 @ 8:19 am
  196. Good for Tom, I work at a car dealer and yes the Nissan Leaf is good, and would take us from oil but it will also use energy to charge it, but much cheaper then the up coming 150 dollar a barrel for Crude,
    but even I can’t afford a new car or a Leaf and I work, and for the other person to being rude is uncalled for, and he is unrealistic in making a Nuclear power car,

    I can tell you what is realistic is the old steam engine’s to bad they don’t make them again now with the technology he have today is better then the 1900’s.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 7th 2011 @ 7:41 pm
  197. I am looking for a class action lawsuit against providers of Ethnol.

    Have a 2002 Dodge 3500 flat bed. Before Ethnol got 14mpg hauling a 28′ trailer over 8 states. With 5% Ethnol dropped to 12mpg (no trailer). With 10% Ethnol dropped to 9 mpg.

    With Chain Saws, Small Engines, Lawn Mowers I have been required to provide much higher maintenance.

    As a business I can write off this cost, which helps. As an individual one has to EAT the cost.

    The above is real. I have the receipts to prove it.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 8th 2011 @ 6:53 pm
  198. I think I know why E10(E*) hurts mpg so badly. Ethanol is a polar molecule. Gasoline (a mix of octane, hexane, etc) is not polar. One H2O molecule will collect about 6-10 Ethanol molecules around it, creating a “clump” separated from gas. If you add about 1% H20 to E10, all the Ethanol will group around H20, and will separate and sink to the bottom of your tank. But if only .5% H20 gets in, it will give you a LOT of clumps. It is VERY hard to keep .5% H20 out of Ethanol or E10. When clumped gas burns in your cylinder, I suspect that the clumping causes a burn of the clumps at a lower (Ethanol burn) temp, whish is not hot enough to ignite the gas molecules. Thus, the burn of gas itself is retarded by the early burn of the ethanol+H20 burns, and does not really happen until aftr your piston has started its travel away. That means that the “big boom” gas burn happens too late in the cylinder travel to transfer all its energy – so we get only 70-80% of the gas power. Thus, bad mpg!

    NASCAR carried out this experiment for us recently – inadvertently. Someone got the bright idea of running race cars on E10 instead of gas or pur ethanol. They ran very poorly! So the gas refiner (I think Chevron) made a special truck that sealed against ANY H2O, and made special fuel loaders that sealed against ANY H2O – and the cars ran ok.

    Note that the government requires that the gas refiners mix in Ethanol and guarantee that there is NO MORE THAN 1% H2O. So our government prevents full separatation of Ethanol+H2o, but not performance-killing “clumping”.

    You are welcome, America! Now let’s do something about this disaster!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 15th 2011 @ 10:56 am
  199. Nice post Dr. I will add that NASCAR now uses E15. Your post explains that very well. We know the reason that NASCAR uses ethanol was sponsorship dollars the industry pays to them. Their fuel is marketed by Sunoco.
    My 1996 Dodge Ram runs OK on E10, it’s just poor MPG. The truck is parked in a heated garage. I wonder if I would have drivability problems if it was parked outside here in Northern Illinois.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 15th 2011 @ 11:10 am
  200. You used to be able to add 2-3 oz of industrial strenght acetone to 10 gal of gas and increase your mileage by 4-6 mpg or more. With the ethanol being added to the gas now this negates this benefit.

    Here is how to turn the tables on the government and now get even better mileage with the E10 gas.

    Get some naphthalene only moth balls. Naphthalene is already in gas and diesel fuel. Take two of them and tap them to powder on a rag. Spoon 1 and 1/2 into a small jar of gasoline.

    Find a health food store that sells 35% food grade hydrogen peroxide. Add 23 millimeters of it to your mix, shake it up and add that to the equivalent of 5 imperial gallons of gasoline.

    Hydrogen peroxide when blended with ethanol mixes completely and produces a superior fuel. Your making
    a very inexpensive octane boost. You are turning the tables by getting even better mileage than you did with the old regular gas.

    Sally’s Hair care supply sells hydrogen peroxide by volume. 40 volume is about 12% hydrogen peroxide. It has a lot of stabilizers in it because it sits on the shelf for a long time.

    This would benefit our situation but I haven’t experimented with it yet to be able to report any results. I’m going to start by adding 23 millimeters of it and go up from there. The water in the hydrogen peroxide is completely emulsified by the ethanol in the gas. Each city or town has a couple of Sally’s franchised locations.

    A pinch of potassium permanganate will improve the results even more but I don’t know what percentage to add yet.

    I have yet to consult with my chemist.

    Report your results here.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 11th 2011 @ 3:20 pm
  201. WTF, are you insane? 35% hydrogen peroxide added anywhere near gasoline would make the mother of explosions — NOT an improvement in fuel economy! Adding a powerful oxidizer to a fuel? Are you out of your damned mind??

    Acetone is B.S. as a fuel additive, and has ROUTINELY been debunked as the same. Mothballs to the fuel tank don’t do ANYTHING, and at the VERY least, you’d want to just add napthalene — because your car doesn’t run on solids.

    I don’t mind stupid, bad ideas for fuel economy, but some of the things you’ve suggested are downright dangerous. What’s more, we’ve just explained, AT LENGTH, in this thread how it’s the presence of water which causes the mileage to implode with E10. So your solution is to add MORE WATER in the form of a hydrogen peroxide solution? You’d cause some of the gasoline to oxidize with the h202, while the rest would watch nasty little water globules form, surrounded by moisture-hungry ethanol. Just what *I* want in my gas tank — partially oxidized fuel cut with some water-and-ethanol globs. Perfect for clogging fuel filters and retarding combustion.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 22nd 2011 @ 2:37 am
  202. I read here some people tells the science behind Ethanol, In short it has Water in it and some other things that eats metal or plastic parts, and when the engine compresses the Fuel mix, the Air has water as moisture so when the ethanol and air compresses water forms in the compressed gas, this can make a car stall. I think! for sure getting lower mileage,

    Its very humid in Florida no wonder why you find Marinas with non-ethanol gasoline. just an thought I had. hey not bad heay.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 22nd 2011 @ 9:51 am
  203. Ive been told that running lawn mowers and such is difficult to do with the 10% stuff. Mine seem to run better with just straight unleaded which you can still get in Texas.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 24th 2011 @ 6:18 pm
  204. At the gas station, I was filling my gas cans with pure. A professional landscaper was filling his cans with E-10. I asked him. He says all his equipment runs OK with it. I still use the pure in my truck and mowing equipment…Around here, E-10 has always been 10 cents cheaper. Many stations now are 12 to 15 cents. Sam’s Club is 16 cents in Iowa.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 24th 2011 @ 6:28 pm
  205. The problem with e10 with seasonal equipment is that e10 doesn’t store well, it “clumps” in the tank. It is also corrosive. If you leave e10 in your boat, rv, or mower over winter, you could have problems come spring.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 24th 2011 @ 9:37 pm
  206. Like Mike said, the problem is storage — which is why professionals shouldn’t have problems. They’re running the gas they put in almost immediately. Us regular joes, who may have the same tank of gas in our mower or weedwacker for weeks at a time, can destroy the engines by then running ’em with that water-logged gas. The longer the gas sits, the more humidity it is gonna pull from the air, and the more skanky it will become when you try to use it. Anyone who immediately burns through their gas will be relatively safe with E10. It’s the tanks of E10 sitting in driveways and garages which become engine killers.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 25th 2011 @ 10:03 am
  207. I bought some gas yesterday at the pump its light yellow and hazy not clear at all, but the boat gas is darker and its clear can see right through it, the ethanol one you cant see through it its hazy and its new gas from the gas station, so is it water in it?

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 25th 2011 @ 7:27 pm
  208. Nickel, I live in Hawaii and in a very unscientific study with my own car ~4 years ago, I determined that the non-blended (pure) gasoline gave me a 14.4% improvement in mileage. In my case that meant a savings for my personal checkbook, I was LESS dependent on foreign oil using the pure gasoline, and I was pumping less carbon dioxide into the earth’s atmosphere by using pure gasoline. So, in my opinion, the government’s mandate to use 10% Ethanol Blend has actually triple-whammied all of us – 1) It’s more expensive, 2) Makes us more dependent on foreign oil, 3) and is more harmful to the environment.
    I have just started a similar study in order to control my variables better this time.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 22nd 2011 @ 11:20 am
  209. Ethanol burns cooler than gasoline, this causes the drop in mileage. The hotter the burn the more power produced which relates to more MPG.

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 8th 2011 @ 11:25 am
  210. So the fact is Ethanol reduces your mpg. Right? So why are we using it? If you get 10% less mpg and you have 10% Ethanol, then WHY???? Isn’t that like selling nickels for 5 pennies?

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 8th 2011 @ 11:40 am
  211. Ethanol makes your engine hotter, does not run cooler that is bull’s poop talk, for one thing your engine has to work harder to run, If you don’t believe me buy non Ethanol gas and E10 put in your car for a month and test the difference, the non-ethanol will run smoother, MY 1992 Nissan I have been using NON Ethanol gas and my car is a 4cly, and I get 47MPG yes 47MPG with the same car I tested the Crap E10 gas which was tested to have 19% Ethanol got 50% Less gas mileage around 27 to 29 highway


    PS this is my Opinion, don’t send me any neg feedback or messages of that nature I will delete them. sorry.

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 8th 2011 @ 12:58 pm
  212. I used E85 when I lived in Minnesota. The E85 was cheap but lasted only 65% of the amount that E90 did. I believe it was 15% unleaded and 85% Ethanol. But the 85%Ethanol fuel was MUCH cheaper per gallon. I’m pretty sure it evened out. Now in Minnesota there’s corn in every direction you look, so maybe that’s why it was so cheap. On that note, it’s nice to see Americans using their own products. On the other hand, it made a very strong fuel smell come into the cab every time I used it. That put me off, so I’m back to regular unleaded.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 4th 2011 @ 3:31 pm
  213. Your e85 was so cheap because the government pours money into it to make its price artificially low.

    Crop subsidies make for wasteful and unnatural market conditions — as well as making it difficult for us to negotiate trade agreements because other countries point to the b.s. way we prop up our farmers as an example of our protectionism. We can’t exactly complain when they subsidize their heavy industry, when we’re doing the exact same time to giant corporate farming concerns sucking at the welfare teat.

    Free trade helps America, but we can’t get free trade because pig headed farming concerns demand, and receive, government handouts no matter which party is in power.

    Worse yet, mandates like the e10 initiative, which force ethanol-contaminated gasoline onto the rest of us poor bastards serve as a tax benefiting farmers at the expense of *everyone* else which actually costs us more than if the government would simply tax us 10 percent on every gallon of gas and send the cash directly to farmers. By, instead, forcing us to buy ethanol from those farmers, we spend the same money but it costs us *extra* in the form of damage to our fuel systems, and fuel economy results which are, at times, even worse than if we’d simply taken that ten percent ethanol, removed it from our fuel tanks, poured it on the ground, and lit it on fire.

    Ethanol is an abysmal fraud where a tiny minority of the country benefits at enormous cost to the vast majority of us.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 4th 2011 @ 6:02 pm
  214. Good news. A station in a neighboring town is now selling pure 87 octane AND E-10 87 octane for the same price. He just gained a steady customer for the pure….My local Casey’s started putting 10% Ethanol in the 87 octane as well as the 89 octane. Their 87 get worse mileage than their 89 octane.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 4th 2011 @ 8:15 pm
  215. I Love PURE Gasoline, I got 47 mpg, and I have to say two things, ETHANOL SUCKS!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 4th 2011 @ 8:21 pm
  216. Looking at the accurate map of ethanol-free gas stations on the website, there is a tendency for larger cities NOT to have ethanol-free gas stations. Even in the southern U.S., where viewing the map from an overall distance shows a higher concentration of ethanol-free gas stations, southern larger cities, specially away from the ocean, marine & airport facilities, have few & sometimes NO ethanol-free gas stations.
    It is quite obvious that 10% ethanol gasoline is the only gasoline facilities for a very large percentage of Americans, despite some states having many hundreds of ethanol-free gas stations. There are no ethanol-free gas stations in all of southern California & only a handful in northern California. No ethanol-free stations in Houston, Austin, Fort Worth, or San Antonio, TX, nearly none in Portland, OR, Seattle & Tacoma, WA, Denver, Albuquerque, Chicago, Washington D.C, Baltimore, Boston, NYC, Philadelphia. In the dense ethanol-free southern states, there are no such stations in Birmingham, AL, Montgomery, or Atlanta, Georgia, Richmond, Virginia….. The list is big & continues on.

    Ostensively, 10% ethanol blends are to cut imports of foreign gas into the U.S. However, if mpg from 10% blends drop 5% & higher for a large percentage of vehicles using 10% ethanol blends, the political policies to use 10% ethanol blends fail to cut imported gas stocks much at all.

    There seem to be some methods which may or may not raise mpg for those people using 10% ethanol blend gasolines if your vehicle is missing the sweet spot of efficient combustion. Re-jetting the fuel injection system may help. Since ethanol has higher octane than 100% gasoline, possibly a re-timing could help. I’m sure the mechanics here will also have other ideas.

    However, the best way to avoid mpg drops & the 10% ethanol blend blues is to use 100% gasoline, for which gasoline engines were made to run efficiently AND WITH WHICH the EPA RUNS ITS MPG RATINGS FOR EVERY BRAND OF GASOLINE VEHICLE.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 5th 2011 @ 5:26 pm
  217. Can’t re-jet or change timing on any car for the last 25 years. Nice catch on the southern cities though.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 5th 2011 @ 11:58 pm
  218. Looking solely at the cost outlay between the two choices, the result is negligible.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 15th 2011 @ 5:17 pm
  219. Give me pure gas or give me Death!!!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 15th 2011 @ 6:09 pm
  220. Uhm, no, Gerry, it isn’t even remotely negligible. But thanks for throwing in your two cents without reading the thread.

    That’s awesome.

    If you’re not much of a reader, I’ll throw you a bone and hook you up with a couple of the more pertinent bits of data, like:

    1) Some users suffer a 10%, or greater, decline in fuel efficiency when using E10.

    2) Some users have to rebuild engines, replace fuel systems, replace fuel filters, etc., because of ethanol — which certainly isn’t a negligible expense, and since it’s a *variable* expense depending on the cost of each system, to suggest that it would always equal a hypothetical cost benefit to ethanol is completely absurd. Especially since there’s no cost benefit to ethanol for most people. Even with the subsidies, most people find, at the absolute best, that ethanol barely breaks even on a cost-per-mile-of-fuel basis.

    3) While those breakeven, or nearly breakeven, people may exist, there are a *ton* of us who don’t break even. Not even remotely even. Even ignoring repair expenses, we pay far more per mile to travel with ethanol contaminated gas.

    Kinda why this thread exists. But, again, thanks for jumping in without so much as a cursory glance at the ground we’ve already covered. After all, we were probably just saying a bunch of stuff because we wanted to fill space, right?

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 15th 2011 @ 6:26 pm
  221. How does using more gas help the environment? My Prius goes from 42-44 average in summer to 37-39 in the winter. The very slight lowering of pollution does not compensate for the higher consumtion of fuel, which means more pollution.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 22nd 2011 @ 11:37 pm
  222. I have a 04 civic ex. I check mpg’s regularly with every fill-up. I maintain my car (oil change, etc) and always keep my tires properly inflated. Prior to E10 (87 octane), i would consistently get 32 mpg. After E10(87 octane), my fuel efficiency dropped to 30 mpg. Recently I started using 89 octane, because several local gas stations don’t blend the 89 octane with ethanol. After 3 fillups, I am once again getting 32 mpg.

    Additionally…although the 89 octane costs more per gallon, the increased efficiency provides a lower total cost. For example, today’s gas price was $3.30 for 87 (E10) gas and $3.50 for 89 octane. Assuming 30 mpg (87-E10) and 32 mpg (89)…the total cost to drive 400 miles would be $44 for 87-E10 and $43.75 for 89.

    I’m sticking with 89. Better fuel economy and lower cost. Done.

    The E10 blend is a sham.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 23rd 2011 @ 11:51 am
  223. I am so glad I found this site. I became aware of the coming Alcohal problem years ago, when Cessna sent me a letter stating that the government was trying to mandate adding methonal to Av-gas. Aviation engins are thouraghly tested for performance through all parameters and Cessna went back and tested with the new fuel and came to some startling conclusions. A 10% mixture would completly void all of the performance data in the books and would result in a power loss of over 20%. Literally people would die because of this, and the aviation industry managed to keep this crap out of their fuel. What a travesty this has been to our country! We are now burning more gasoline at a higher price than we would have been and not to mention all of the fuel, time, fertilizer etc expended growing the corn to produce a product that literally is a total waste.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 27th 2011 @ 1:27 pm
  224. Here it is folks. All your loss in mileage and woes with burning corn gas finally comes full circle. Not only are you burning crappy fuel and paying high government subsidies for that privilege, but all our conservation and so on has allowed the US to become a fuel exporter. So, the next time someone tosses out the argument of it “will reduce our dependence on foreign oil”, this USA Today article shows just what the energy dealers are really up to. Lose mileage, lose tax money, create more pollution and use our food for fuel. Yup, sounds like a win, win for the American people to me.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 1st 2012 @ 11:51 am
  225. Lost gas milage with Ethanol fuels is a fact. I drive alot, all on the same road, at the same speed. 55 miles each way to work and back. I have a new Honda Civic and go from 38mpg to 34.XXmpg when I run the 10% Ethanol mix. This has been proven by repeated calculations by me and by the onboard computer.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 29th 2012 @ 7:17 am
  226. The 45-cent blending tax credit for ethanol expired Jan 1st, and gas prices have already jumped 10 cents per gallon in Maine. Expect to be at $4 per gallon by summer.

    Since it’s an election year, it’s time to make tthe politicians an offer they can’t refuse- get rid of the ethanol blending requirement, or we the people will get rid of them…

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 9th 2012 @ 1:52 pm
  227. I didn’t think the subsidy would ever go away. Surprised I didn’t know about it till now.

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 9th 2012 @ 6:26 pm
  228. We have a choice in my town to buy E10 or pure gas. But the stations are charging up to 20 cents more per gal. On E10 I get 35 mpg on pure I get about 41. This is 50% highway.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 3rd 2012 @ 11:17 am
  229. When gas was $3.00 I figured 25 cents more for pure was the break-even point in our 2010 Scion. I have a GPS list of stations that sell pure. Last year I found many stations in the South were selling pure for 30 cents more. After a few times, I decided not to go out of our way for pure gas. However I did find a few that did not sell any ethanol.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 3rd 2012 @ 11:55 am
  230. Bobby dee…… Like you, I figured 25 cents extra per gallon for 100% pure gas was the break-even point. With accurate 10% ethanol blend or 100% gasoline records, our 3 cars get 7-8%, 7-8% & 6% better mpg using 100% pure gas. Also, all 3 cars run smoother, quieter, & with a trace extra power. We don’t have to shift down as much while ascending hills. I have one station selling 100% pure gas at a very competitive price, altho other stations sell it at 10 to 15 cents higher.

    Using 100% pure gas is both like having an extra gallon of range & extra capacity in your gas tank, without installing a bigger gas tank or using more gas!

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 21st 2012 @ 12:57 pm
  231. Wow. I just bought a new car. Its an 2004 v6 mustang. I owned one in 2004 for a few years then traded it. My average MPG at 75% hwy and 25% city was 26mpg. Now running the E10 the best i can get is 22mpg! I didnt know about thus issue until i recently found a E0 station and decided to try it. I got my 26mpg back! I drive 90 miles a day! This will save me about $50 a month! The E0 here in Arkansas is only $ .10 more than the E10. A worthy investment in my opinion!

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 28th 2012 @ 1:53 pm
  232. We just returned from a 5000 mile trip, touring Florida and Georgia & Alabama mostly. FL requires some ethanol in all grades. Tom Thumb delivers more MPG than Shell or Citco… On this trip I feel that I was ripped off twice by stations in AL & GA, that claimed pure gas in the 87 octane. My MPG was the same as when I use E10. Perhaps it is a coincidence that both times the stations did not offer pay at the pump, and that the store clerk was of Indian or Pakistan heritage.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 28th 2012 @ 3:13 pm
  233. With accurate 10% ethanol blend or 100% gasoline records, our 3 cars get 7-8%, 7-8% & 6% better mpg using 100% pure gas. Also, all 3 cars run smoother, quieter, & with a trace extra power. We don’t have to shift down as much while ascending hills.
    My mpg increases above, switching to 100% pure gas, have been during the colder winter months here in northern Washington state. With the warming months, I can now state that our 3 cars have mpg increases of 8%, 7-8% & 6%. We’ll see if any further mpg increases occur as the warmest summer months approach (& maybe longer drives-if the gas costs will stop jumping).

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 6th 2012 @ 12:20 am
  234. I would love to try the 100% test. I’m in Southern CA. Does anyone know how to get 100% gas here?

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 6th 2012 @ 8:25 am
  235. I was getting 22-25 City / 30-33 Highway in my 2006 Acura TL. Now with 10% ethanol, I’m getting 15 / 25, sounds like we’re getting robbed by our own government. Are you really that surprised?

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 14th 2012 @ 11:00 am
  236. This blog site has serius issues. Some things post, others not. Wmails have new postings, the link in the email doesn’t show the post, you cannot edit once you have made your post, if it shows up at all!

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 14th 2012 @ 12:00 pm
  237. This blog site has serious issues. Some things post, others not. Wmails have new postings, the link in the email doesn’t show the post, you cannot edit once you have made your post, if it shows up at all!

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 14th 2012 @ 12:00 pm
  238. I first noticed a drop in mileage when ARCO put an ethanol blended gas in the marketplace. This was over 35 years ago and no one knew about the change. I commented on the change in mileage to my local ARCO gas station owner and he responded weeks later about a new additive they were testing.

    If your car has a tachometer and a constant mpg reading try this eye opener. Set your cruise control at a highway cruising speed that brings your tach closest to 2000 rpm and glance at the mpg. You will note that with no change in road conditions your tach can climb 500 rpm with accompanying reduction in mileage. I am beginning to think that I am witnessing separation of the ethanol from the gasoline which is resulting in higher engine revs due to contaminate fuel. Check it out. It is bad enough that we have to buy the stuff but separation could call for costly engine repairs.

    Comment by Anonymous — Apr 19th 2012 @ 8:49 pm
  239. Matt says:
    After E10(87 octane), my fuel efficiency dropped to 30 mpg. Recently I started using 89 octane, because several local gas stations don’t blend the 89 octane with ethanol. After 3 fillups, I am once again getting 32 mpg.
    litesong says:
    Our 3 cars’ mpg have raised after switching to 100% ethanol-free gasoline.
    One car in particular is very similar to your car’s mpg increase. Using 10% ethanol blends, our Dodge Caliber averaged 31mpg(a diligent feather footer considering the Caliber had an EPA highway rating of 27). However, with the switch to 100% ethanol-free gasoline, Caliber is now averaging 33mpg.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 12th 2012 @ 8:29 pm
  240. At the end of May now, mpg increases of our 3 cars are 8.3%, 7.8% & 5%. Our Pacific Northwest refineries are down due to a fire & other maintenance routines, thus our terrible gas prices are in the $4.30 to $4.45 per gallon range! It has been so good to discover 100% pure gasoline & get rid of the inefficiency of ethanol. At least, our sky high prices have been reduced by 30cents even considering my station’s slightly higher price for 100% pure(ethanol-free) gasoline. Also, considering the extra smoothness, quietness & a trace extra power, needing less downshifting to ascend hills, means more driving pleasure & knowing the engine is using the gasoline it needs, not ethanol.

    Comment by Anonymous — May 30th 2012 @ 4:03 pm
  241. I have a high mileage 1997 V6 sedan and I have checked my fuel economy consistently after every fill up for years. Before E10 was introduced in my area I was getting about 23 mpg average (combined city/highway). Once E10 was introduced (Same driving style, same route to work every day) I now get 18-19 mpg so my fuel economy has dropped 17-21%.

    My car has about 200,000 miles on it and also never leaked oil before. About a month after E10 was introduced my car started leaking oil out of every seal in the engine. Now it leaks about a quart per month through the valve cover gaskets, oil pan, main seal, rear seal, etc.. I’m guessing the ethanol in the gasoline cleaned out the sludge in the seals in my engine and now it leaks all over.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 7th 2012 @ 4:55 pm
  242. litesong Says:

    With accurate 10% ethanol blend or 100% gasoline records, our 3 cars get 7-8%, 7-8% & 6% better mpg using 100% pure gas. Also, all 3 cars run smoother, quieter, & with a trace extra power. We don’t have to shift down as much while ascending hills.
    litesong(update-April 6th, 2012 at 12:20 am:)
    My mpg increases above, switching to 100% pure gas, have been during the colder winter months here in northern Washington state. With the warming months, I can now state that our 3 cars have mpg increases of 8%, 7-8% & 6%. We’ll see if any further mpg increases occur as the warmest summer months approach (& maybe longer drives-if the gas costs will stop jumping).
    litesong(further update-July 3, 2012)
    After switching to 100% ethanol-free gasoline last September, mpg in our 3 vehicles have settled to 8.5%, 7% & 5%. Since an oil refinery fire drove our gas prices to outrageous levels(while the country’s prices dropped), the station selling 100% ethanol-free gasoline that I really liked for its low price has failed to come down like ALL OTHER gas prices. It is now selling 100% ethanol-free gasoline for 23 cents more than cheap 10% ethanol blends! I think pressure is being put on the oil industry to add more ethanol to the nation’s oil supplies. By raising the price of 100% pure gasoline, that will force people to buy more 10% ethanol blends, increasing the amount of ethanol in gasoline supplies.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 3rd 2012 @ 11:31 pm
  243. i want to share this, my 2007 v6 toyo se was running extremely poorly, cutting out when i pulled into traffic, i found a station that sells pure gas and it was night and auto feels like i am behind the wheel of a nastycar…my gas milage has jumped up..the power i experience from pure gas is unbelieveable..the gov and these thugs that own ethanol selling us a load of crap and making ours cars run poorly…i started out with the first tank of pure gas using premium, yesterday i filled up with regular..if you can find pure gas for your auto it will make you think you driving a high performance roadster..but hey do not take my word for this..go to and look to see where you can purchase puregas…it will only cost you one tank full and if you not satisfied, nothing lost..ethanol is killing our auto engines and yet the epa is allowing these thugs to rob us by having us buy more gas…

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 4th 2012 @ 3:39 pm
  244. You can thank the corn lobbyist for the so called gasohol that cost more to produce than any so called savings! If you are burning more fuel, then you are also using more pure gaoline in the mix too just to use the stuff! I conducted my own test in the same 1996 ford with a v-8, same road, same weather etc… my mileage varied over 3 miles per gallon better with pure unleaded not to mention it ran better and had more power when going up hills etc… If people were to start lobbying to stop the forced use of ethanol based fuel because of a very provable cost factor/waste factor all of us would save some money! I cannot even buy it in Texas where I live and did my testing while visiting Oklahoma!

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 23rd 2012 @ 12:26 pm
  245. I went to my local car dealers, dodge, vw, Chevrolet, Nissan, I found all the cars t tested to have an engine power lag compared to my car which I use non-ethanol, and some cars are the same in engine size to my car but they have engine power. One example is the 2012 vw beetle I4 174hp a beautiful car but it lags badly when giving car gas to pass, my car is A 2.4L 4 cyl 150 hp,my mpg is 39, the vw is a 2.5 I5 174 hp, the gas miles in computer was 29, invert sure if the vw had pure gas it would get 39 or 40 mpg +

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 23rd 2012 @ 3:31 pm
  246. In the news
    >WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has rejected a challenge to Environmental Protection Agency decisions allowing an increase in ethanol content in gasoline.

    In a 2-1 ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said trade associations of engine manufacturers, food producers and petroleum producers did not have standing to sue because they failed to show that their members are harmed by the EPA action.

    In two decisions, the agency approved the introduction of a gasoline blend of up to 15 percent ethanol for use in light-duty vehicles from model-year 2001 and later. The national gasoline supply is largely a blend with 10 percent ethanol. Ethanol producers, who sought the 15 percent option, say the ruling keeps a pathway open that could enable ethanol demand to expand.<

    WOW. The ethanol industry are always looking for ways to grow, even if it ruins a few thousand engines.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 18th 2012 @ 12:07 am
  247. another factor to consider:

    Aug 12, 2012 (Reuters) – Gasoline prices in the United States rose over the past two weeks, driven partly by supply disruptions and a drought-induced rise in ethanol prices, a widely followed survey showed on Sunday.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 18th 2012 @ 12:58 am
  248. E10 and E15 is mandated by the EPA and US GOVT. fuel companies don’t want it.

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 13th 2012 @ 11:53 am
  249. Having a Prius which once got 50mpg I now get 41mpg. Having read all the statements, we have forgotten one thing—that is what it is doing to the price of our food. This corn business which is subsdised by the Government Also ranchers and farmers are paying more because of the shortage of corn, which in turn they have to pay more for food to feed their cattle, chickens making the prices go up on eggs, milk, meat etc. I live in a state where they tax food, so my food bill goes up so does the tax I pay. So we are getting a double hit. Not to mention the land use and the water it takes to produce a small amount of this so called gas!!!

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 4th 2012 @ 11:08 pm
  250. I just moved to the midwest from the east coast and seen 89 octane 10% ethanol prices were about 20 cents cheaper than 87 octane gas so I decided to try it.. big mistake, noticed loss of performance and more than 20% loss in fuel economy; my 6-banger pontiac usually gets around 28mpg, it’s now barely getting 200 miles per tank and it’s a 12 gallon tank..

    This is unaceptable!

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 5th 2012 @ 8:12 pm
  251. Wait!!!! was Ethanol suppose to make us oil dependent ? And reduce co2? If your car gets less mpg would it increase co2 and make us use more oil? (gas)

    Comment by Anonymous — Nov 5th 2012 @ 8:26 pm
  252. You should all try using smaller diameter tires (they add a small gear reduction to compensate for the lower torque output of the engine) and maybe try changing your driving habits as if you were driving a car with a weaker engine, which you basically are with ethanol in the mix. Using e10, I still get my cars rated mpg of 30 for highway, + or – a mile; sometimes lower, but never under 25, if my job takes me to the city streets. Driving to NYC from Columbus, I got 35 mpg, 5 higher than stock. If I can do that with a non-hybrid, non-ffv car with an automatic transmission, then there’s no reason noone else can’t.

    Comment by Anonymous — Dec 10th 2012 @ 7:48 pm
  253. Actually it is worse that that, they say not to use e-15 in any vehicle older than 2012 because it actually damages the car and will void the warranty.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2013 @ 4:09 am
  254. We can bandy this about forever but to what end? I am a 56 year old mechanic. My specialty, if you want to call it that is engines. I have rebuilt well over 1000 engines in my lifetime and up until say 4 or 5 years ago, all the rebuilds were due to age and wear. Over the past recent years my work load has predominately changed to small engine rebuilding since that is what is coming into the shop. I live in Maine so snowmobiling is a cash cow sport. Cash cow I should say. I see more burned up engines than you can imagine. These are fairly new sleds and always with the same damage. Melted pistons and spun bearings on the crank. The pistons are aluminum and when the sled sits for any period of time, the ethanol separates out and sits on the bottom of the tank. When the sled runs, it picks up the straight ethanol. It is not the temp. that ethanol burns at specifically, it is the lack of cooling that it supplies to the pistons when the new charge is drawn in. These two stroke machines rely on oil in the fuel to lubricate them. The ethanol essentially washes away the lubricant on the crank and bearings causing a run dry condition. You don’t have to let the sled sit too long to have this separation occur either. If you buy gas at a low volume outlet, that is a store that really doesn’t sell all that much gas, the gas you are getting could be already old and separated. This fuel just does not belong in these engines. When people are out in the woods in the winter, they rely on these machines to get them home. To be stranded say 20 miles out in the woods in 10 degree weather is not a good situation. Complaints about mileage is a fine thing but in the case of the snowmobile, it is actually a safety issue. Meanwhile, I keep on rebuilding all these engines. I will not warranty any repairs since just because it is all new, doesn’t mean it won’t happen again. And it does. Just my nickles worth.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 3rd 2013 @ 9:02 am
  255. Davenport Iowa BP station. State inspectors found that both 87 octane and 89 octane pumps had the exact same 89 octane gas. Iowa stations, including this one, sell 87 octane at ten cents higher price. Both grades at this station say “May contain up to 10% ethanol.”
    Station owner says nothing illegal, it is a marketing decision. Authorities in Des Moines say the statute is not clear on this, but because both grades meet minimum requirement, no penalties will be assessed.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jan 11th 2013 @ 12:15 am
  256. I have a Blazer with a 4.3l 6 cylinder, and a Jeep with a 4.0l straight 6. Both vehicles before 2008 when 10% ethanol gas hit the market got 300 to 330 miles per tank, depending on highway or stop and go. For the last 4 years my Blazer has been getting 240 to 280 miles per tank. My Jeep around 280 to 300 per tank. The problem is that the ethanol doesn’t burn hot enough in the engine and causes carbon build up in your injectors and intake. It also clogs up the fuel filter and catalitic converter quicker. I take very good care of my vehicles. Oil changes every 2500 miles, tire rotation and inflation. Injector cleaner every 4 fill ups and so on. Advice from someone with alot of mechanical know how. Ethanol ruins any combustion engine slowly like Cancer. If you use products like Sea foam cleaner in your engine it will help with restoring performance by cleaning out the carbon, but make sure to disconnect your catalitic converter first. Use 93 octane or better in your tank, BECAUSE IT BURNS HOTTER.Or look online to find the nearest gas station near you that still sells gas without Ethanol. If you hear your car ticking it’s because of the lower grade fuels not exploding and burning off the ethanol. Bottom Line? Use synthetic oil, change your fuel filter every 5000 miles, clean out the intake with a top end cleaner, use a higher grade gasoline and add octane buster to make it burn hotter, and check your tire pressure once a week. You can add a chip that will mix your air and fuel mixture better, but they don’t really work unless you take your vehicle to a Dyno testing place and reprogram the computer, for the best results. Oh yeah!! If you put a K&N filter type air filter on your engine, make sure to cover it with a pair of nylon hose(Panty Hose) because they allow to much dirt in your engine. Ethanol distroys engines without understanding how they work. I hope this helps people take care of their vehicles. If you have any questions I’m at [email protected].

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 18th 2013 @ 7:08 am
  257. It is posts like this that turn knowledgeable individuals away from this blog. Ethanol blended gasolines are well understood to be a poor substitute to offset the fuel cost. But posts like this are actually an embarrassment.
    There is nothing in your post that adds any value. These are all unscientific fabricated ideas that you personally think work. Well they don’t. Ethanol DOES NOT BURN HOTTER. It actually is an artificial octane booster with no BTU benefits. So it burns COOLER.
    If you like to change your oil using 1970s technology and change it at 2500 miles, then go for it. 10,000 miles is the frequency of modern engines and oils. K&N air filters with stockings or not, do not make ANY change in fuel economy unless you are using a carburetor. If an air filter is 90% clogged the fuel economy will be no different than if it was new. The difference would be performance, nothing else. The computer controls the fuel mixture regardless of air flow (or lack of).

    A Mechanical Engineer

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 18th 2013 @ 8:13 pm
  258. I blasted Sean at his yahoo address. No response so far. I agree with Ringo4422

    Comment by Anonymous — Feb 18th 2013 @ 8:53 pm
  259. All I know is that I drove from West Dundee IL to Milwaukee WI from 11pm – 1 am, with windows 1/3 of the way down, 55 degrees F. I refueled in WI and had 26 MPG. (typical for HWY miles) 105 mile trip with 4 gallons.

    I drove home (reverse trip as stated above) from 10 am to 12pm, with windows all the way down, 85 degrees F. I refueled in IL and had 32 MPG. 105 mile trip with 3 gallons.

    This is a 2002 Mustang GT, with 150,000 miles.

    I am not sure I want cleaner emissions, after all I drive 5 miles to work these days. I would rather have the MPG, especially at $4.30 a gallon.

    Can I get a Hell-Yeah.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 18th 2013 @ 9:32 pm
  260. I have a decade of mpg records comparing 100% gasoline to 10% ethanol blends, that show 8%, 7%, & 5% increases in mpg, in favor of 100% gasoline. Other vehicle reports here have even greater departures from ethanol. My engines run smoother, quieter & with extra low rpm torque, such that hills are ascended with less down shifting. I was going to switch one of my cars to fuel injection to smooth its slightly rough running. With the use of 100% gasoline, the car no longer needs fuel injection. Gasoline engines are designed & built to burn 100% gasoline. Ethanol engines are designed & built to burn ethanol, like higher compression ratio INDY cars. The EPA pushes ethanol into our fuel supplies because it says one pollutant is reduced. If the EPA accurately assessed its poor engine performance, ethanol would not be considered a chemical to reduce pollution.

    Found this article showing improper mixing percentages of ethanol to gasoline supplies. I was not surprised. The ethanol industry’s policy is to pump as much ethanol into american gas supplies as possible & it is scamming america, both legally & illegally.

    To match my decade of records, is my recently purchased 2013 Hyundai Elantra, knowing the mpg bad mouthing by many leadfooters was wrong, despite those leadfooters winning court cases with the help of the EPA. Using 100% gasoline(ethanol free), my Elantra is averaging 39.5mpg, with the last 6 of 8 tanks, 40mpg or more. No hypermiler, here. Top tanks have been 43 & 43.5mpg….. without tanks being used within hours of continuous highway driving, which give cars their highest mpg. Elantra is not diesel, turbo-charged or hybrid….. just a gasoline engine. But Elantra has the widest rear seat shoulder room of any similar car getting near 40mpg.

    The scam & drainage of american gasoline stocks by the worthless ethanol is a tragedy that grassroots drivers are calling the ethanol industry on…… & ethanol loses.

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 8th 2013 @ 6:54 pm
  261. Ethenol is horrible for your vehicle, the environment, & does not reduce our need for foreign oil. These are lies told by Monsanto & government officials that are bought & paid for by Monsanto. The joke is Americans feel that there is a difference between republican & democratic politicians but, they are all figure heads for the chemical companies that poison us & then force us to buy their poisonous food & fuel products. Welcome to democracy in the year 2013.

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 18th 2013 @ 8:20 am
  262. In Eastern Iowa $ western IL, 87 or 89 w ethanol, choice will disappear. 87 octane will always contain 10% ethanol. For my lawn mowers I have signed up with local co-op to burn 91 octane pure.

    Comment by Anonymous — Sep 18th 2013 @ 8:45 am
  263. Bobby Dee……. In truth, “ethanol in gasoline” industry is the one on the ropes. People are beginning to see that ethanol DOESN’T burn properly in a low compression ratio (9:1 to 12:1) gasoline engine. Ethanol needs high compression ratio(16:1) ethanol engines to burn properly. Listings for E0(ethanol-free) stations at have increased over 5% since late May 2014 & is now at 8427 sources. If the EPA will get out of the way, there will be 10,000+ listings in a little over a year, with great growth beyond that!

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 27th 2014 @ 1:00 pm
  264. Good news, as of 2014, at least in Iowa, it is fairly easy to find 100% gas. I can usually find 100% gas within a 3 station search. Look at the pump to see if one is marked ethanol and one is not. If both are labeled 10% ethanol, or poorly marked, I drive on thru and go the the next station till I find one that is non-ethanol. Stations sometimes advertise no ethanol. There is a demand for 100% gas, apparently. Amazingly, this is happening in the heart of corn country (Remember Iowa = corn, Idaho = potatoes) . The station owners must see people drive thru more and more till they find the gas they want. I haven’t used ethanol in probably 6 months. If I had to I would get 1 gallon of ethanol to make it to the next non-ethanol station, but so far no problems.

    Happy again 🙂 my 2008 Prius is finally back up averaging 47.5 to 51.5 mpg with 100% gas (41 to 43 mpg with 10% ethanol). 30 cents more per gallon or about 9% more, but in return I get 12 to 25% mpg improvement. I almost got a 500 mile tank in July, I probably could have made it to 500, but chickened out at 479 miles on one tank.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 27th 2014 @ 1:27 pm
  265. Now the bad news: A side effect of ethanol that we never expected is that Monarch butterflies might be extinct in our lifetime! The population was 1 Billion, now it is 33 million (that is a huge huge percentage drop). How, you ask, can ethanol cause Monarch’s to disappear? Monarch caterpillars feed and reproduce exclusively on milkweed, and milkweed has been eliminated from farm fields because of the high use of round-up herbicide, glyphosate. Farmers now raise mainly genetically modified GMO soybeans and corn that is unaffected by roundup treated soil. Farmers spray their fields with glyphostate (round-up), which kills everything, GMO soybeans and corn grow and nothing else, no weeds, including no milkweed. This started in 1997, and increased so much that there are hardly any milkweed left and no habitat for Monarchs to reproduce. Monarch population shrunk a shocking 59% just in the last year. Think about it, how many Monarch butterflies have you seen this year? Think back to when you were a kid, they were everywhere.

    To make matters worse, crop land in the Midwest has reached record highs, because of the demand for corn ethanol. Rents are up, prices are up, so acres that used to be idle and had milkweed, are now being farmed and have no milkweed.

    3 things you can do to help.
    1) Stop using ethanol
    2) Buy organic foods and especially organic soybeans 3) Plant milkweed in your yard or garden. Find seeds that are native to your state here: or search for milkweed project or free milkweed seeds.

    Comment by Anonymous — Aug 27th 2014 @ 1:56 pm
  266. listed 7400 sources for E0(ethanol-free) in early October 2013. Presently, there are 8607 listings, a jump of 16.3%. There will be 10,000+ listings by 2016, if the EPA will stop its bought & paid-for Ethanol industry propaganda.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 14th 2014 @ 12:58 am
  267. Great news!

    I drive thru the gas pump and look for the 10% Ethanol stickers that we have in Iowa. If there are 3 stickers, I keep driving, if there are 2 stickers that means they have a pure-gas option (one without the sticker). Stations are noticing more like me who drive thru looking for pure-gas, and they also notice sales of pure-gas are increasing. If they haven’t they are not paying attention.

    Some states, like Minnesota, do not have 10% Ethanol stickers on the pumps, because unfortunately, Minnesota got scammed by the ethanol hype, and passed a law that all gas in MN is required to have 10% ethanol, shame on you Minnesota for cramming this down your states throat. Read about Minnesota’s ethanol law here:
    So, if you are driving thru MN, fill up in Iowa or top your tanks up in any of the states on either side of Minnesota.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 14th 2014 @ 10:15 am
  268. I last posted in January of 2013. I am back. I recently purchased a 1993 Corvette loving the mid C4 cars. Low miles, clean as a whistle black beauty. I live in Maine where pure gas is rarer than hens teeth. Just not really available unless you go to an airport 100 miles away. To cut to the chase, I was loving the car and driving it here and then when it developed a skip. Fairly bad at idle and under load both. After much diagnosing and code reading I determined that I had a shorted fuel injector. Before I could replace the injectors, I lost still another one. Same symptom as before. Hard skip except now, with two cylinders misfiring, the car was a mess. So, I researched and found that ethanol eats the insulating coating off the injector windings and hence they short out. 1993 was not designed for this solvent laced fuel. A full set of new Blue Demon injectors (500.00) and it is running as new again. Thank you Mr. Government. I wish I could feed this car some real gas. How can you build a car for 100 years to burn a certain fuel and then just mandate some other inferior/incompatible fuel that creates all kinds of problems for the owner? This is bullsh*t!

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 14th 2014 @ 11:13 am
  269. Previously & several times, I said that was adding so many 100% ethanal-free(E0) gas stations, that they should have 10,000 E0 station sources by 2016. With the present whiplash 10% ethanol blend(E10) price plunge & now skyrocketing prices, a very wide price gap of 30% to 40% has opened between E0 & E10. Tho E0 stations continue to increase(now 9066), it might become tight, ascending to 10,000 E0 sources by the beginning of 2016.

    Comment by Anonymous — Mar 7th 2015 @ 3:36 am
  270. now lists ~9560 ethanol-free gasoline(E0) sources, less than 5% to 10,000. An Hawaiian law (waiting for governor’s signature) just stopped ethanol blending in that state. Florida, which did the same, dramatically increased its E0 sources. Nationally, the Feinstein bill is working through Congress to end ethanol blending.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jun 26th 2015 @ 1:37 pm
  271. I have a 2007 Ford Expedition and I noticed with E10 I get worse mileage. In order to get 17-19 mpg I have to burn 91 octane or find a place that sells non- ethanol gas. I get on a trip 288-300 miles on a tank with e10 blend and with regular gas I can get 344 to 350.

    Comment by Anonymous — Jul 2nd 2015 @ 10:11 am
  272. Grassroots has ~10,140 E0 sources, compared to gov’t supported & pushed E85, which may not have 3000 sources. Drivers know what their low 87 octane, low compression ratio(9:1 to 11:1) gasoline engines need & it isn’t ethanol. It is 100% ethanol-free gasoline. Also, vehicle emissions exams are given excellent ratings, when E0, without ethanol, is used in their vehicles.

    Comment by Anonymous — Oct 15th 2015 @ 6:21 pm

Leave a comment

Because rates and offers from advertisers shown on this website change frequently, please visit referenced sites for current information. This website may be compensated by companies mentioned through advertising, affiliate programs or otherwise.