Evers Wins Ethanol-Free Gas Victory

April 25, 2013

Sen. Greg Evers is applauding the passage of his bill that allows Florida consumers to choose gas that is ethanol free.

“The bill eliminates the unnecessary power of the government to force Florida citizens to buy and sell ethanol blended gasoline,” Evers said in a statement this afternoon. “It returns that power to the people and restores the power of the free market by giving consumers and retailers a choice regarding what fuel they wish to buy.”

But critics of the bill were equally displeased. The bill passage prompted a joint statement from a joint statement, Bob Dinneen, President and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association, and Tom Buis, CEO of Growth Energy:

“Today’s Senate vote was a pyrrhic victory for ethanol detractors. It substantively changes nothing because the state mandate was redundant. The federal Renewable Fuel Standard will still apply and, thankfully for consumers who will continue to see savings at the pump, ethanol and other renewable fuels will be sold in Florida,” the Renewable Fuels Association said in a press release. “All this bill has done is put politics and oil industry profits ahead of economic opportunity and jobs in the state. The only result of this legislation will be a loss of jobs and economic opportunity in Florida. Florida has made it clear — biofuels and the valuable jobs that are created in the renewable fuels industry are no longer welcome in Florida.”


30 Responses to “Evers Wins Ethanol-Free Gas Victory”

  1. Restore Freedom on June 9th, 2013 9:25 am

    Etanol program is supported by ill informed people.

    1.Effect on your car
    No auto manufacturer recommends the use of ethanol.
    Many void or limit warranties if you burn ethanol.
    Many videos showing harmful effects on all car parts coming in contact with ethanol are available.

    2.. Effect on Grocery Prices
    Pay attention to prices at the grocery store.
    Ethanol increases the manufacturing cost of virtually every item you purchase at the grocery story due to a. higher transportation costs and 2. higher raw costs of all grains, corn sugar as an additive, meat prices across the board (which are now at least double pre-ethanol prices. Many Americans struggle to afford food – as evidenced by almost 1/2 our population on Food Stamps.

    3. Effect on International Politics (developing nations)
    We are arrogant enough to burn corn in our gas tanks which has doubled and tripled the cost of food to all nations and devastate Third World nations that rely on grains to feed their populations. Most of their GDP now has to be focused simply on food which takes financial resources away from Health and education programs. No disputing that we are not seen in an increasingly negative light.

    4. Effect on the environment
    There is no carbon benefit to Etanol vs. Petrobased fuel. – factor in cost to plant and harvest corn, transport it to the ethanol plants and producing the liquid.
    And it takes 10 gallons of fresh water to produce one gallon of ethanol. Do the math and calculate what this means to our nation’s increasingly scarce fersh water resources.

    We need to eliminate the need for Middle East oil. Partner with Canada to deveop a North Aerican Energy partnership. Eliminate the need to send our Military men and women into harms way to defend world energy supplies.

  2. Brad Krohn on April 30th, 2013 11:57 am

    David: I do understand what you are saying. And I agree with you and others that consumers should have choices. Generally speaking, I too do not like mandates, and want to have freedom of choice. However, when it comes to biofuels, including ethanol, I make a personal exception. A mandate is necessary when it comes to the petroleum industry. Big Oil dictates our energy policy and buys our politicians. If Big Oil had its way, it would mandate our country use 100% petroleum all the time, at the expense of our national energy security, and at the expense of protecting access of oil reserves in the middle East. The ONLY way our country can get Big Oil to comply with an “all-of-the-above” energy policy and diversity in liquid fuel supply, which includes biofuels, is through a government mandate. Otherwise, Big OIl will cut out ethanol to maintain 100% marketshare and fuel monopoly – even if ethanol is 50 cents to $1 per gallon cheaper than unleaded gasoline. I am tired of Big Oil dictating our national energy policy, and hence, I support a government mandate in this case. Brazil got it right when they mandated ethanol as an outfall of the OPEC oil embargoes of the 70’s, and now ethanol is 50% of Brazil’s motor fuel supply.

  3. David on April 28th, 2013 4:30 am

    What people are forgetting is, it should be a persons choice if they want to use or not to use Ethanol products in their engines. Forget the cost issue. It should be your choice to fuel up with Ethanol free fuel if you wish. If you want to pay more or less, it should be a choice. Mandating is not a choice.Too much politics and people copy and pasting an argument. But its you choice.Nuff said

  4. David Huie Green on April 27th, 2013 10:21 am

    “1. Ethanol is cheaper by 36 cents / gal. “

    But contains half the energy per gallon as gasoline

    “3. Ethanol is high in octane, and has an octane rating of 113.“

    Which means it doesn’t knock in high compression engines, which for our current situation means nothing.

    “4. Gasoline with 10% ethanol has negligible to non-detectable loss in fuel economy. Its only at higher blends such as E85 where one will get a 10% – 15% loss in fuel economy.”

    Anytime you reduce the energy input, you reduce the energy output.

    “5. Big Oil is fighting the commercialization of E15 because the oil industry does not want to give up market share to ethanol.”

    Maybe, but you point out it reduces fuel economy.

    “6. In Brazil, where ethanol is made from sugar cane, all gasoline contains 25% ethanol, and conventional automobiles have no engine problems”

    Good stuff, and if we were buying Brazilian ethanol, worth considering. We aren’t.

    “7. Ethanol is an official fuel of the National Boat Racing Association, NASCAR, and Indy League Racing. It ought to be good enough for the family minivan.”

    Why? An official fuel means not THE official fuel, right? If it were used for rocket fuel, would that make it instantly good auto fuel?

    “8. One of the reasons we have an ethanol mandate is to create a level playing field with petroleum and to give ethanol fair market access.”

    Level the field by making up for the inherent failings of ethanol?

    Ethanol has many good features, but miles per dollar isn’t one of them.
    Nor is energy independence.

    David for truth

  5. fred on April 26th, 2013 3:06 pm

    @ Brad Krohn
    Interesting reading, but my own tests with my personal vehicles, driving the same route at the same speed with several tanks of both types of fuel yielded a 4 mpg drop using ethanol laced fuel. In my wife’s car, it was 6 mpg. In my vintage Mustang, I had ethanol fuel in it, and it literally dissolved fuel hose from the inside, causing it to collapse and stop the engine from fuel starvation. It’s second rate fuel, and I will not use it if I have a choice. The two sides of this issue will never agree, but I just hope to always have the choice to avoid that stuff.

  6. Brad Krohn on April 26th, 2013 11:32 am

    Folks, many of you have bought into the lies and misinformation on ethanol propagated by the petroleum industy. 1. Over the past year, the wholesale price of ethanol on the CBOT has been 50 cents to $1 lower than the wholesale price of unleaded gasoline on the NYMEX. Today, the wholesale price of ethanol is $2.45 per gal vs. the wholesale price of unleaded gasoline which is $2.81 / gal. Ethanol is cheaper by 36 cents / gal. Translates to nearly 4 cents / gal reduction in price for gasoline blended with 10% ethanol. 2. Ethanol receives NO government subsidies – neither at the producer level, nor at the blender’s level. The ethanol blender’s tax credit expired at the end of 2011. 3. Ethanol is high in octane, and has an octane rating of 113. When ethanol is blended at the 10% level, it raises the octane of gasoline by 3 points, so a gasoline with 84 octane can be increased to 87 octane by adding 10% ethanol. Ethanol is a low cost, economic source of clean octane. 4. Gasoline with 10% ethanol has negligible to non-detectable loss in fuel economy. Its only at higher blends such as E85 where one will get a 10% – 15% loss in fuel economy. 5. EPA has approved the use of 15% ethanol (E15) for all vehicles 2001 and newer. However, Big Oil is fighting the commercialization of E15 because the oil industry does not want to give up market share to ethanol. 6. In Brazil, where ethanol is made from sugar cane, all gasoline contains 25% ethanol, and conventional automobiles have no engine problems. Brazil has mandated the use of ethanol since the 1970’s. All gasoline stations also sell 100% ethanol as well. 50% of Brazil’s motor fuel supply is ethanol. 7. Ethanol is an official fuel of the National Boat Racing Association, NASCAR, and Indy League Racing. It ought to be good enough for the family minivan. 8. One of the reasons we have an ethanol mandate is to create a level playing field with petroleum and to give ethanol fair market access. All I know is that I want my fuel dollars to go to the American farmer and not overseas to countries that are hostile to us. Corn ethanol may have a positive energy balance of only 2.3-to-1, but I will take it any day over paying the Middle East.

  7. Henry Coe on April 25th, 2013 10:38 pm

    Ethanol can be used as an alternative to gasoline and could help reduce America’s dependence on imported oil. In early 2007, President George W. Bush announced his goal to reduce U.S. gasoline consumption by 20 percent in 10 years. Furthermore, the 2007 federal energy bill sets a goal that the U.S. will produce 15.2 billion gallons of renewable fuels annually by 2012 and 36 billion gallons by 2022. In addition to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), ethanol production also benefits from federal tax credits.
    In addition to federal policies encouraging ethanol production, relatively low grain prices and high crude oil prices contributed to the industry’s growth. In January 2007, corn sold for $3.05 a bushel, although by March 2008 increased demand for corn to produce ethanol had driven the price up to $4.83 a bushel, a 58 percent increase in just over a year.
    Like all industries, ethanol production can spur job growth and increase local tax revenues. Ethanol production can contribute to local economies.

    From http://www.window.state.tx.us/specialrpt/energy/renewable/ethanol.php

    As far as folks referring to the Alternative Fuels crowd, I’m not sure it is a crowd because largely people are uninformed or misinformed when it comes to energy policy and having a long term strategy. Oil lobbyist and advertising sponsors push information that only supports the interest of Oil because they care more about Oil profits than having an energy policy for alternative fuels. They drive the market.
    Ethanol does cause higher or hotter combustion and older small engine are not designed to dissipate the added heat. As was mentioned, there are fuel additives and places to buy ethanol free fuel.
    Having worked in small engine repair, I doubt it would be an issue for most consumers. For commercial small engines and or boat motors, if there is a problem it should be spotted during regular maintenance. i.e, checking spark plugs.
    You can blame ethanol if you want, but running a lean oil mixture in a 2 cycle engine will cause problems with ethanol free fuel also. If you want to know how your engine is running, check the spark plugs. Learn the difference for how spark plugs wear and you will save money by avoiding high dollar repairs.

  8. huh on April 25th, 2013 8:29 pm

    Lets take it a huge step further and stop the corn subsidy! We have no need for it! Let us have real sugar in our products again.

    Ethanol fuels should be an option, but a cheaper option

  9. Elissa on April 25th, 2013 8:02 pm

    Having solved all other problems plaguing Florida like unemployment, health care issues and other more pertinent problems, finally the concern of no ethanol in gas will be resolved by this inane bill.

  10. Mike J. on April 25th, 2013 12:05 pm

    Those of us with classic cars have been told by experts that we need to avoid ethanol gas or put in a stabilizer additive. When I am able to, I’ve been to the BP branded store at I-10 and Scenic Hwy. Last time I was there, they had one pump on the north side labelled for non-ethanol gas.

    The renewable fuels crowd does not think of classic cars whose fuel systems deteriorate with E10 ethanol gas and require replacement of fuel lines and carburettor parts much faster than before. E15 will be even worse for us and bad for modern cars also. All we are asking for is a choice. Apparently the renewable fuels crowd is afraid of competition. Too bad they think it can only happen by a law pushed by government.

  11. David Huie Green on April 25th, 2013 11:43 am

    “Anyone else who can show me how they managed to get the government to do that, please, step up.”

    The actual subsidy was addressed elsewhere but regarding the increased price of corn, if you mandate ethanol be used in gasoline, you mandate the materials used to produce ethanol be used. You increase the demand for corn by that mandate until such time that ethanol is produced from other sources (such as sugar cane or potatoes).


    Aaron Smith*
    Dept of Agricultural and Resource Economics
    UC Davis
    Ph: 530‐752‐2138
    email: adsmith@ucdavis.edu
    “U.S. energy policy now mandates that about 15 percent of global corn production be converted into ethanol for fuel use. We use a structural VAR to estimate the dynamic effect on corn prices of the quadrupling of corn‐based ethanol production since 2005. Our model allows for ethanol production to affect corn prices not only by increasing current corn demand, but also by raising the demand for inventories. We estimate that corn prices were about 30 percent greater, on average, between 2006 and 2010 than they would have been if ethanol production had remained at 2005 levels.”

    It is noteworthy that the report includes the following:
    “It is highly questionable whether ethanol produced from corn makes the U.S. less dependent on fossil fuels, and whether ethanol achieves the environmental goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Moreover, ethanol may do little to reduce the large percentage (about 60 percent) of U.S. fuel that is imported. First, fossil energy is an input to ethanol production; it takes about 0.8Btu of fossil fuels to produce 1Btu of energy from corn ethanol (Searchinger et al. 2008).”

    So for energy savings, ethanol ain’t the solution.

    David answering question
    and for better solutions

  12. fred on April 25th, 2013 10:25 am

    @corn farmer in jay:
    Sir, the subsidies for ethanol corn production are well known and reported. The subsidy expired, but it did happen, and was $.45 per gallon, if memory serves. You may not have gotten included in the funding, but it did happen.

  13. fred on April 25th, 2013 9:15 am

    @WalnutHillRoy –
    Thank you for making the point so succinctly and completely. You and Mr. Green confirm the comparative testing I have done in my vehicles already. Many people are lured by the apparently cheaper price at the pump, not realizing that the cost per mile is much higher due to reduced mpg, and the subsidies these companies get from the gov’t. Corn makes much better whiskey than fuel.

  14. Karen McLendon on April 25th, 2013 8:56 am

    Here is a great article to read regarding the difference in fuel mileage of ethanol vs. 100% gas.


    Thank you Senator Evers for fighting for the passage of this bill!

  15. corn farmer in jay on April 25th, 2013 8:42 am

    Walnut Hill Roy – you are very wrong in assuming that the gov’t subsidizes corn or fuel in ethanol production. Anyone else who can show me how they managed to get the government to do that, please, step up.
    My harvest is strictly controlled as far as set costs because the margins are small enough as is, and getting smaller each year.
    Meat costs did not rise because of ethanol production either. Please do some honest research (i.e. talking to those of us who actually farm for a living) before making such statements please.

  16. wiseguy on April 25th, 2013 8:29 am

    Regarding the part “loss of jobs and economic opportunity in Florida” by the bill’s opposition anyone please search the internet for refineries OR gasoline/ethanol blenders in Florida. You should find that there are none.

  17. Greg on April 25th, 2013 7:38 am

    Our company fleet of trucks has lost a considerable amount of fuel mileage since the ethanol free gas became unrealistic to pursue for vehicles that are not in the same area every day….
    And we have a lot of trouble with small engines as well.

  18. Walnut Hill Roy on April 25th, 2013 7:32 am

    The ten cents a gallon more will be much more than offset by increased fuel mileage. Most people don’t realize that the ethanol mandate is reducing the fuel mileage that cars and light trucks get, is hurting many older and marine engines and is driving up the cost of meat due to the increased cost of corn. Let’s also not forget that the ethanol fuel is subsidized by the government and you know where their money comes from.

  19. David Huie Green on April 25th, 2013 7:28 am

    Assuming $3.20/gallon of 90% gasoline 10% ethanol, the energy per dollar would be about the same with $3.37/gallon of 0% ethanol.
    Which is to say ten cents more per gallon gets you energy slightly cheaper.
    The additives needed to avoid knocking might be nasty, though.

    David for CNG

  20. Jane on April 25th, 2013 7:23 am

    THANK YOU so much Mr. Evers! This is long overdue for our state!!!!

  21. EJ on April 25th, 2013 6:59 am

    Is that not what FREEDOM in AMERICA is all about.? YOUR ability to choose. Not something forced down your throat by Nanny.

  22. bill on April 25th, 2013 6:58 am

    Turning Monsanto corn into ethanol is better than eating that “Frankenfood”. Still I’m glad that now I have a choice. Oh wait, I’ve always had a choice, I could go the Parade at Jackson and New Warrington and get “no ethanol gas” all along. I put it in my ‘85 Caballero and lawnmower. It is better fuel.

  23. tim on April 25th, 2013 6:50 am

    So Mr. Bob Dinneen and Mr. Tom Buis think that the only way renewable fuels can make it is to have no competition! They must be offering a pretty poor product. Thank you for giving me an option my boat and lawn mower will be very pleased.

  24. 429SCJ on April 25th, 2013 6:43 am

    Thank you Mr Evers.

  25. Roger Elliott on April 25th, 2013 6:23 am

    Ethanol containing gas is terrible for small engines. I have had numerous small engine repairs as a result of using ethanol fuel. I appreciate Senator Evers’ efforts to give me a choice. I have been driving to Alabama to get non-ethanol fuel for my small engines. I am all for bio-fuels, but ethanol in gas is not cost effective from all the research that I have read.

  26. fred on April 25th, 2013 6:21 am

    Thank you Mr. Evers!

  27. Mark on April 25th, 2013 6:16 am

    “biofuels and the valuable jobs that are created in the renewable fuels industry” What a joke! These jobs are not self-sustaining. If not for being propped up using our tax dollars they would crumble like a house of cards. The only people making money from this are the shyster’s who spew global warming and climate change. I say Phooey! Thank You Mr. Evers you the Man. Now go back to work on Constitutional Open Carry!

  28. Mandy on April 25th, 2013 5:31 am

    I would gladly pay 10 cents more per gallon. Last year we had to have every o-ring in our boat motor replaced because the ethanol had damaged them so badly. 1200$ later our boat runs again, and we have to drive well out of our way to the one store in town that sells ethanol free “marine” fuel.

  29. niknak50 on April 25th, 2013 4:00 am

    The same old liberal rhetoric when it comes to people having a choice, “oil company profits”. The only real jobs ethanol fuels create are mechanics jobs. Ethanol at 10%
    is devastating to any gas powered engine, but especially small engines, and has wrecked havoc in the automotive world.
    Rumor has it the feds want to up the percentage to 15%, yep, that will for sure create jobs!

  30. Safebear on April 25th, 2013 3:28 am

    I’m currently in Nebraska and people here have a choice between ethanol or not. The non-ethanol is 10 cents per gallon more than the ethanol. I’m glad I had a choice.

Have a comment on this story?

We welcome your comments on this story, but there are some rules to follow::

(1) Be Nice. No comments that slander another, no racism, no sexism, no personal attacks.

(2) No Harrassing Comments. If someone says something bad about you, don't respond. That's childish.

(3) No Libel. That's saying something is not true about someone. Don't do it.

(4) Keep it clean. Nothing vulgar, obscene or sexually related. No profanity or obvious substitutions. Period.

(5) NorthEscambia.com reserves the right to remove any comments that violate our rules or we think to be inappropriate. We are not responsible for what is posted. Comments may not appear right away until they are approved by a moderator.

(6) Limit your comments to the subject in this story only, and limit comments to 300 words or less. Do not post copyrighted material. Comments will not be added to stories that are over 30 days old.

(7) No posts may advertise a commercial business or political group, or link to another commercial web site or political site of any kind.