HR 5180 to limit ethanol to 9.7% in fuel



The reason for this proposed law is because current law requires a certain volume of ethanol to be blended, regardless of gasoline sales volumes. The gas volumes are lower than expected, so the current law would require greater than 10% ethanol in gas.


I looked at the map. It says Haffners carries it (Nashua, Milford). Only place nearby me is Hampton or Plum Island airfields. You can’t fill up a car there since it’s aviation fuel that isn’t taxed for road use.

I was surprised to see it’s not mandated by law in NH. The key seems to be that there are federal subsidies that support it.


You can thank GWB II and the GOP congress.:grin:

the Act increases the amount of biofuel (usually ethanol) that must be mixed with gasoline sold in the United States to 4 billion US gallons (15,000,000 m3) by 2006, 6.1 billion US gallons (23,000,000 m3) by 2009 and 7.5 billion US gallons (28,000,000 m3) by 2012;[3] two years later, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 extended the target to 36 billion US gallons (140,000,000 m3) by 2022.


Yeah and Nixon gave us the 55 mph speed limit too. More reason to dislodge the GOP/DFL establishment. No need to get into a listing of what nasty stuff each side has done-it hasn’t been pretty. The thing is though that this stuff is normally not written by politicians but by the hired agency staff that are not accountable to anyone and have their own personal career objectives. Especially on the rule-making implementation side of the laws. Like usual there is always an argument to make for everything, like encouraging energy self-sufficiency, but then the law of unintended consequences takes over.

How to unravel it? Starts with the top but then I always found severe budget restrictions helps to weed out all the extraneous stuff.


Ethanol was a nice try when it was introduced, we should look for any way to keep from relying on foreign sources of fuel. But corn is not the most efficient way of making ethanol, but the strong corn lobby makes it hard to change. Switch grass, sugar cane and some others are much better, but you can’t grow them everywhere like corn. Indirectly the govt is forcing us to use ethanol in mandating that about 10% of fuel used have ethanol. The suppliers have no choice but to push E10 gas. This bill prevents that % from being increased. I like George’s idea of letting the consumer buy the blend they want. As long as the price / mpg made sense I would buy some ethanol fuel. But that makes sense and we are dealing with the govt. so we have no hope for that.


Ethanol free gas is illegal for over-the -road use in NH. It is available for boats (marine use), and for off road and race vehicles.

The ethanol free gas doesn’t include the 18c/gal gas tax charged for over-the-road use. The tax’s purpose is allegedly to support highway maintenance and projects. Farm equipment, marine equipment, and other equipment that does not go on the roads do not affect the cost of maintaining roads, so it’s allowed to use the untaxed fuel, which is also the fuel without ethanol.


If ethanol isn’t used to increase the octane rating, what will be used? Among the reasons it is used are low cost and it is environmentally friendly. We don’t want to go back to dangerous substances like MTBE.


How much more will gasoline cost if this freedom to choose other octane enhancers is allowed? Those enhancers will have to be qualified safe environmentally. I’m skeptical that it would work without raising the cost substantially, but I’m willing to listen to facts on the subject.


Politics is the biggest player in ethanol


The oil field and corn field were married politically when oil was struggling against a political storm from many fronts. With the advent of gasohol midwest corn states became bed partners with oil states and the wheels were greased with regard to oil politics. Oil and corn got the gold and we got the shaft.


Jt, you’ve made a good point to which I have no ready answer. :confused:

Rod, I consider ethanol to be 100% politics. I’m not sure there are even any 85% stations in my area. It’s legal, but there’s no demand. I don’t know personally anyone who owns a flex-fuel vehicle. The percentage of people that want it is miniscule.

It is possible that in some other countries the market may be far different, I don’t really know. But in my circles, nobody wants 85%. Or even 15%.


I dunno, I question that political analysis. It’d take more than ethanol to make Minnesota a swing state. I think Teddy Roosevelt was the last GOP candidate Minnesota ever went for. I haven’t looked though but its heavily left wing and the whole rural population is only half with the other heavy metro. Same thing with South Dakota. I think George McGovern was the last DFL they went for.


Prove it. Everything I can find shows only seven states have laws requiring it be sold in that state. NH is not one of them. The EPA mandates a certain volume (percentage) be blended with ethanol or other biofuels but it is not a law in NH. Cite a reputable resource supporting your assertion…


…or he could simply cite the statute that makes it illegal. That might be easier.

I was thinking of asking Mountainbike to cite the statute, but I didn’t want to be argumentative.


I know many. Almost every full size GM or Fied SUV and pickup sold here is flex fuel. Last I checked we have 1 85% ethanol fuel station in NH.


TT, I have absolutely no intention of proving it to you.
Or of proving anything else to you, for that matter.


Alright, at least everyone knows that when you say something to refute others (2x in this instance), you have no intention of actually backing it up or even admitting it might be wrong. If that’s how you want to be perceived, no skin off my back.

For those that actually care, here are references refuting that statement-


I don’t understand why not. You seem so sure about the legal status of ethanol-free fuel in NH. Why should it be any trouble to cite the law to which you’ve already repeatedly referred?

Can anyone who claims to be knowledgeable about the issue cite the relevant statute? I’ve tried, unsuccessfully, to find it online.

After discovering how often misinformation gets spread, I tend to not take legal advice from gas station attendants (unless they can cite the relevant statute) because they often misunderstand or misapply what they see and hear. You know how the grapevine works. By the time a rumor makes to our ears, it often bears no resemblance to the truth, or even to the original rumor.


I did a little Google research regarding NH’s requirement of ethanol-blended fuels. I haven’t yet found anything that requires it state-wide, but I did find the following:

From the U.S. Energy Information Administration (June 16, 2016): “The state … requires reformulated motor gasoline blended with ethanol to limit ozone formation in the populated areas of southeastern New Hampshire.”

And from the NH Dept. of Environmental Services (2013): “In New Hampshire, the use of RFG is part of the State Implementation Plan (SIP), the state’s written strategy to reduce ozone in the four southeastern counties of Merrimack, Hillsborough, Rockingham and Strafford counties.” They define RFG (reformulated gas) as fuel that “conforms to pollution reduction requirements established by the EPA…[which] may include some level of ethanol that is an oxygenate…”

“Conventional” gas is also available in NH, which NH defines as “gasoline that does not meet pollution reduction requirements.” This conventional gas may also contain ethanol.

So it seems only four NH counties require ethanol-blended gas, or more specifically RFG, which may contain ethanol.


My boss recently told me there is a Florida law that requires newly purchased state-owned vehicles to be flex fuel vehicles that can handle E-85. Rather than take his word for it, I’ve been searching online for the relevant statute. Now I’m beginning to wonder if this was just a rumor too.


That could be true, though according to the USEIA, “Florida has repealed its requirement that all motor gasoline be blended with ethanol”. I don’t know how that affects state vehicles.

I found this for NH:

“State law requires the use of a biodiesel blend in state vehicles unless the blend costs more than all-petroleum fuel”.

No mention of flex-fuel or E85.