Recently, the EPA denied the Texas Governor’s request for a waiver on E10 RFG. (Read the story here). I’m all for changes to help the environment, but I DO NOT THINK E10 RFG actually helps things. I want to put aside the argument of rising corn prices as a result of adding corn based ethanol. That argument is not of concern to me. I want to submit the idea that E10 RFG is less efficient than regular gasoline, even other re-formulated gasoline variants. I have been keeping detailed mileage logs on my car, based on fuel type. Many other hypermilers do as well (click here to read). I have found that E10 RFG gets about 12% less miles per gallon than other gasoline I’ve used lately ((7.8 RVP, MTBE-No Increase) -which you can find in most Texas counties (like McClennan County -Waco). The interesting thing is that if you consider the change of burning 10% less fossil fuel, you should see a 10% drop in economy (at worst). BUT, in the real world, it turns out to be a 12% drop in economy. If a driver drives 15,000 miles per year (in a car with fuel efficiency similar to my 2001 Accord), that turns into a difference of nearly 50 more gallons of gasoline being needed. In a car like my Ford Explorer, the difference goes to 100 gallons. I think you can see the implications. If E10 RFG requires more fossil fuels to be burned, then it actually results in MORE POLLUTION!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *