AAA Poll on E15

AAA has already made up its mind about increasing amount of ethanol allowed in gasoline to 15 percent, but they want to know what you think.

The headline for an article posted by the automotive organization last week reads “Bailout Blend: Bad for Your Engine?” and proceeds to bash ethanol as being bad for consumers.

“How would you feel about a fuel additive that could cost you more money and screw up your engine? If the ethanol industry has its way, that’s just what you might get,” they begin, calling an increase to E15 “a bailout for the ethanol industry that may come at the expense of drivers.”

At the end of the one-sided article, AAA asks for your opinion. “Do you think adding E15 to the nation’s fuel supply is a good idea? Log onto and take our poll.” Not surprisingly, the poll is running two to one against E15. Maybe it’s because the article doesn’t say anything about the EPA findings that ethanol is better than conventional gasoline when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, reducing them by at least 20 percent. AAA says, “Producing ethanol is an energy-intensive process that still results in greenhouse-gas emissions. It won’t save the planet as it still produces pollutants.” It may not save the planet, but it can help cut greenhouse gas emissions by cutting at least some of our gasoline use.

As far as engine issues and mileage concerns, Brazil runs up to 25% ethanol in its cars with no problems, and they consider energy independence to be more important than a few less miles to the gallon.

*post update*
If the link to the poll in the post doesn’t work, try the link in the AAA article. Apparently after you vote, you can’t go back to that link at all, so I can’t get the poll link to add to this post.

0 thoughts on “AAA Poll on E15

  1. Can’t get anything more pure and clean for your car engine than 200 proof alcohol, in fact it’s so clean it’s used for wiping mirrors on our communication and weather satellites. Try wiping a GOES weather satellite mirror with 87 octane, NASA would have a cow.

  2. Here’s the antidote:
    By simply adding the EPA registered Shellbourne Fuels’ Catalyst , 60-70% of emissions are cut. This exceeds all government mandates. (1 OZ treats 20 Gallons.)
    This catalyst causes increased BTU’s in the combustion chamber to make this happen.
    A second result is ~10-15% reduction in temperature at the tail-pipe.
    Bonus is the power gain that has been lost through the addition of biofuels that typically reduce BTU’s and reduction of sulphur.
    With diesel, there is a 6-8% increase and gasoline, 12 -15% increase, in MPG, every time.
    Even the packaging outstrips any competition in value, saving, superior construction, innovation and authenticity.
    Oh: it does not harm the engine. It simply makes the fuel combust more efficiently.

  3. Your link for the poll doesn’t work for me. I’ve been using E30 to E50 for up to 9 years depending on the vehicle. Oldest and longest is a 1992 Toyota 4×4 on E50. No problems so far so I think E15 is a no brainer.

  4. All E-0 22.3
    All E-10 22.1
    All E-20 23.1
    All E-30 21.6

    Why not compromise by giving the consumer a choice of E-10, E-20 or E-30? You can see on the pictures (might need to zoom in) that not only will the consumer have the option of regular gasoline, but lowering the cost per gallon driven without having to go all the way to E-85. I am told that more and more new engines will like the octane (remember ethanol is 113 octane) but the lower mid level blends can be priced under regular due to the tax credit the gasoline blender gets and as my old Volvo mpg shows, all the blends seem to be very competitive on an mpg basis compared to the drop off you get with E-85. Let’s let our US refineries run US and foreign oil today, and focus, as a significant start, on backing out the imported gasoline we drive on and keep the these dollars in the US.
    It would be a great start for both the economy and the environment.
    P.S. My Volvo is non FFV with 195,000 miles. I have been running various blends for 4 years. The car door seals have come lose, but the engine runs fine.
    Eric Mork

  5. It is a known fact that alcohol is corrosive. What about the harmful effects to the environment? Run off from nitrogen fertilizers have chocked the life out a large area in the Gulf of Mexico two hundred miles long where the Mississippi empties into it. No marine life exist. The demand for corn is going to skyrocket causing much greater costs for corn. The demand from corn is increase at a much higher rate than the farmers can produce.

    What about the reports of ethanol from corn produces nitric oxide which is 4 times more damaging than CO2. There is another study that shows that formaldehyde gas is also released into the atmosphere which is damaging to the lungs.

    I am more worried about the environment and people and spending money on things that don’t work. It is a big farce to make some people rich. We will spend trillions of dollars and just trade one set of problems for another.

    We need to be more innovative int our methods of transportation.

  6. Cindy, thanks for bringing up this important topic. I work for the AAA national office and just want to provide a little more input about AAA’s position. AAA supports efforts to develop alternative fuels that are cleaner, more efficient and that provide a realistic alternative to petroleum-based fuels. In comments filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) last year, AAA recommended that additional testing be done on the impact of E15 to ensure it does not damage vehicles, increase NOx emissions, or negatively impact fuel efficiency. (See complete text of comments here: E15 should be studied thoroughly and completely to ensure all such concerns are fully resolved before ethanol concentrations are increased. Our primary concern is always for the well-being of the American motorist.You can read more about AAA’s position here:

  7. E10 has screwed up rubber items on my plane ,lawn equipment etc not to mention other problems. Instead of E15,E20 etc Lets achieve better MPG,utilize natural gas,build electric vehicles and invest in other solutions ie shipping freight by rail road which could considerably reduce emissions and our use of foreign oil.Bailing out the ethanol industry is not an appropriate solution to our imported oil problem.

  8. Pingback: Vilsack Anticipates Approval of E15 - Domestic Fuel

  9. Pingback: Automotive » Vilsack Anticipates Approval of E15

  10. Pingback: Vilsack Anticipates Approval of E15

  11. its just another way for these company to save money while passing the buck on to the consumer … the people are the ones thats gonna pay, literally and when u start having engine problems , and start getting less mileage while paying more at the pump, who do you think will be hurt after all of this crap

  12. What a focus on fuel efficiency and CO2 emissions does not cover is the incredibly bad effect the raising of corn and soybeans for fuel has on the environment and on the world in general. 1. The kind of monoculture that raising corn for fuel entails requires intensive use of fertilizer and motorized equipment, both of which foul our water and our air. The production of ethanol creates more CO2 than it saves as a fuel. 2. So much land has been taken out of food production to produce fuel that food production has been cut, tripling basic food prices throughout the world, causing hunger and contributing to political instability. 3. The burning of vast forests in the Amazon basin and throughout Asia to grow crops in response to the increased demand and higher prices generates vast amounts of CO2.

    Until we produce ethanol from non-food crops, ethanol is a scourge on the planet and speeds up global warming.

  13. e10 is bad enough, anyone with a pre-2000 motorcycle who has been stranded on the road in cold weather can tell you. The phase separation is terrible, it causes engines to run rough if at all. special additives are a must at the owners expense, this on top of fuel and government taxes really add up. the drive to even higher levels of alcohol in gas is terrible and driven mainly by corn growers who profit.

  14. Corn is food, not fuel. When we talk about ethanol, we must make the distinction between corn based ethanot and other bio fuels.

    Corn based ethanol is simply not a good alternative to other energy sources. It is bad economic policy, bad energy policy, bad food policy, bad foreign exchange policy, and bad agriculture policy. Here are some of the reasons why.

    Ethanol is not an economically competitive product. Ethanol has been available at the pump since at least the late 1980’s. It has never been priced at a level which enticed consumers to buy it. In those years it was always at least 10 cents per gallon higher than gasoline. With the exception of E85, I have never seen it priced at less than gasoline. If ethanol and gasoline were available side by side at the pump today, ethanol would be the higher cost product. The wholesale price of ethanol, before blending, is often as much as 60 cents per gallon higher than gasoline.
    ………………………….edited for excessive length………………………………
    Ethanol mandates should be repealed. Ethanol should compete at the pump like any alternative fuel. At the very least, pumps should be labeled to indicate the content of the fuel. I used ethanol in my pickup before it was mandated. I was a corn producer and I supported the cause. I might use it again if I thought it was an economically viable product, good for the country and for corn farmers. In the mean time, I and many other informed people, resent being forced to use ethanol.