# ***Ethanol Mandate Repeal Bill signed***



## jigmaster (Oct 27, 2007)

Governor Rick Scott, signs HB4001 into law just a couple hours ago today!!! Florida, now joins a handful of other states also repealing this federal mandate! Thanks to those of you who helped fight the fight by contacting our State representatives in favor of passing this ethanol mandate repeal. This has been a 3 year battle for me personally since my fuel study. I can now stop posting like a political whacko...


----------



## PlaneToSea (Jul 27, 2012)

More Information - http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2013/4001


----------



## startzc (Feb 4, 2013)

Glad to hear it, I just became a FL resident but I sent him my .02


----------



## Catchin Hell (Oct 9, 2007)

:thumbup: Excellent... I signed and posted the BoatUS repeal link, but I assumed nothing would come of it. Glad to see someone is listening. Wonder when we will begin to see the effects of the repeal?


----------



## Sailing_Faith (Mar 11, 2009)

Catchin Hell said:


> :thumbup: Excellent... I signed and posted the BoatUS repeal link, but I assumed nothing would come of it. Glad to see someone is listening. Wonder when we will begin to see the effects of the repeal?


Wow, I signed it too... Amazed it went through.


----------



## Ron19 (Jan 8, 2009)

Catchin Hell said:


> :thumbup: Excellent... I signed and posted the BoatUS repeal link, but I assumed nothing would come of it. Glad to see someone is listening. Wonder when we will begin to see the effects of the repeal?



I signed it as well. 


I'm not 100 % on this, but I think its supposed to go into effect 1 July.


----------



## dockmaster (Sep 27, 2007)

So does that mean....July 1 2013 stations quit selling ethanol fuel?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Forum Runner


----------



## BlaineAtk (Jun 8, 2010)

Wirelessly posted

That's awesome, I signed as well an glad to see it go!


----------



## jigmaster (Oct 27, 2007)

*As*



BlaineAtk said:


> Wirelessly posted
> 
> That's awesome, I signed as well an glad to see it go!


Far as the law effect goes usually it is July 1st as this writing is a month and counting away. The way other states have done it is designation a pump or two as pure gas. We should also see a markedly reduction in the cost as well.


----------



## Mike W (Jul 11, 2011)

jigmaster said:


> Far as the law effect goes usually it is July 1st as this writing is a month and counting away. The way other states have done it is designation a pump or two as pure gas. We should also see a markedly reduction in the cost as well.


Thanks for the info on the status of this bill...hopefully this will be some much needed good news for all of us anglers. 

But I must ask you this: how do you figure it will lead to a reduction in cost of ethanol free fuel? My guess is that they'll simply leave the price as it is or even increase it's price to offset the price they'll have to spend in order to install the new pumps/tanks to hold only ethanol free fuel...unless there are provisions in the bill about this. Hopefully not, but just something that came to my mind.


----------



## -WiRtH- (Feb 24, 2009)

Thank God.


----------



## Realtor (Oct 1, 2007)

Mike W said:


> Thanks for the info on the status of this bill...hopefully this will be some much needed good news for all of us anglers.
> 
> But I must ask you this: how do you figure it will lead to a reduction in cost of ethanol free fuel? My guess is that they'll simply leave the price as it is or even increase it's price to offset the price they'll have to spend in order to install the new pumps/tanks to hold only ethanol free fuel...unless there are provisions in the bill about this. Hopefully not, but just something that came to my mind.


I bet the price increases, for the simple reason as this is an excuse to raise the price. at 10-15% because the "straight gas will replace the 10-15% ethanol. One thing out, put the other in.....


----------



## johnsonbeachbum (Oct 1, 2007)

The Florida bill mandating ethanol or not mandating it was redundant as the federal rule will prevail. Every station was allowed to sell ethanol free gas if they so desired.
Theoretically the sales could only be for non-highway uses.
Now that is no longer the rule, well in July or whenever this end-of-mandate goes into effect.
It will now be up to the retailer to decide if there is enough in potential sales to spend the dollars to install another tank which would be a minimum if they were to convert an existing pump. Or if they quite selling another grade in order to use an existing tank.


----------



## jigmaster (Oct 27, 2007)

*The*

Language in the Original mandate was misleading. As far as switching over no changes to tanks or pumps will need to be made. Along with the ethanol mandate the EPA required that all pre- existing tanks be switched to double walled tanks. stations that could not afford to pay the 100k cost usually went under or quit selling fuel all together or opted for smaller above ground tanks supplying non blended fuel but usually at a higher price which was mostly the delivery cost involved. 87,89 non blended is already available at the rack where they add the ethanol as blended fuel. Minus the ethanol, pure Gas should be cheaper. I would look for a major chain to get on board totally with non blended if not Mom -n pop stations would be a good option.


----------



## jpark76 (Feb 26, 2009)

As far as I understand the new law it does not mandate that stations have an ethanol free pump it just states that stations are not required to have ethanol in their gasoline.

I think that this is very small step in the right direction but really does nothing to make stations have fuel without ethanol. The reason being is that fuel with a E10 blend is going to be cheaper for them to buy and sell than non-ethanol blends. If the law mandated that stores gave that option to consumers then maybe it would be more effective. In my opinion.


----------



## jigmaster (Oct 27, 2007)

*We*



jpark76 said:


> As far as I understand the new law it does not mandate that stations have an ethanol free pump it just states that stations are not required to have ethanol in their gasoline.
> 
> I think that this is very small step in the right direction but really does nothing to make stations have fuel without ethanol. The reason being is that fuel with a E10 blend is going to be cheaper for them to buy and sell than non-ethanol blends. If the law mandated that stores gave that option to consumers then maybe it would be more effective. In my opinion.


. 

Can if,well, and maybe but all day long. Fact of the matter is "we" the people along with Governor Scott, including other honest politicians, got rid of a communistic forced mandate. This was a huge step in the right direction... hopefully one that other states will follow as well. We can bitch about cost of Fuel, Food, clothing and housing in another forum. This was huge!!!


----------



## johnsonbeachbum (Oct 1, 2007)

jigmaster said:


> Language in the Original mandate was misleading. As far as switching over no changes to tanks or pumps will need to be made. Along with the ethanol mandate the EPA required that all pre- existing tanks be switched to double walled tanks. stations that could not afford to pay the 100k cost usually went under or quit selling fuel all together or opted for smaller above ground tanks supplying non blended fuel but usually at a higher price which was mostly the delivery cost involved. 87,89 non blended is already available at the rack where they add the ethanol as blended fuel. Minus the ethanol, pure Gas should be cheaper. I would look for a major chain to get on board totally with non blended if not Mom -n pop stations would be a good option.


Isn't ethanol cheaper than pure gas thanks to tax dollar subsides?
Thus pure gas diluted with ethanol should also be cheaper than pure gas.
At least until the subsides run out.


----------



## Randy M (Jul 8, 2012)

johnsonbeachbum said:


> Isn't ethanol cheaper than pure gas thanks to tax dollar subsides?
> Thus pure gas diluted with ethanol should also be cheaper than pure gas.
> At least until the subsides run out.


That was the argument when the Government pushed this down our throats. One of the problems with that is the Ethanol industry is just as greedy as the oil companies and that is why E-10 is always within a few pennies of the cost of pure gas. When you factor in the inefficiency of it it actually costs more.


----------



## jigmaster (Oct 27, 2007)

*It*

Costs twice as much to produce ethanol as to pure gas volume for volume. Not to mention it's low energy output and damaging effects. Hands down Ethanol had good intentions but it's a very bad idea. The other issue with Ethanol is it involves converting food crop and farm land into Fuel. With our nations hunger and worldwide starvation this is highly immoral and unethical and should be outlawed... We have uncovered enough Oil in the Bakken oil fields to last us the next 3 centuries at our current use. "Going green energy" should focus more on wind and solar. Problem is it's kind of hard to harness wind and sun rays there buy making people buy it while getting rich. I say we start medicating the Left wing radicals. It may be the only way to stop the nonsence!


----------



## mrwhatts (Jun 15, 2013)

This is real good news! I would hate to figure out how much ethanol has cost me in repairs and lost fishing trips. All my lawn & garden tools had trouble too. Thanks to people posting on here where to find real gas! Now I wont have to drive as far.


----------



## Brohammer (Nov 5, 2011)

*Ethanol costs*



Mike W said:


> Thanks for the info on the status of this bill...hopefully this will be some much needed good news for all of us anglers.
> 
> But I must ask you this: how do you figure it will lead to a reduction in cost of ethanol free fuel? My guess is that they'll simply leave the price as it is or even increase it's price to offset the price they'll have to spend in order to install the new pumps/tanks to hold only ethanol free fuel...unless there are provisions in the bill about this. Hopefully not, but just something that came to my mind.


Actually, the cost should drop as the regular gasoline can be used in the same systems that handle ethanol. All that will need changing is the signage..
But we will probably get shafted again by our wonderfully bureaucratic leaders with another lie about why it "should" cost more.


----------



## paxton (Jan 30, 2012)

jigmaster said:


> Far as the law effect goes usually it is July 1st as this writing is a month and counting away. The way other states have done it is designation a pump or two as pure gas. We should also see a markedly reduction in the cost as well.


 
 Anyone seen this happening?


----------



## Baker8425 (Jul 2, 2012)

Wirelessly posted

Nope! But I did pay $4.06 a gallon for non-ethanol gas the other day!! And $4.20 the week before for ethanol free...


----------



## sailor (Oct 29, 2007)

Baker8425 said:


> Wirelessly posted
> 
> Nope! But I did pay $4.06 a gallon for non-ethanol gas the other day!! And $4.20 the week before for ethanol free...


I paid 3.75 two weeks ago in Panama City. Way cheaper then any place I've ever seen.


----------



## whalerjon (May 7, 2010)

I sure wish we would see more ethanol-free gas around here. I'm not sure that Shell in GB still sells it but its tough to trailer a boat in there. I drive to the Pure station out past the zoo. I have a new powerhead, thanks to ethanol. Not to mention lawn mower and trimmer rebuilds. 
I did mention to the guy at Valero, near Shoreline Park, how much he could sell if he had it. He didn't seem interested.

BTW, yes, I am aware of the puregas website.


----------



## johnsonbeachbum (Oct 1, 2007)

Brohammer said:


> Actually, the cost should drop as the regular gasoline can be used in the same systems that handle ethanol. All that will need changing is the signage..
> But we will probably get shafted again by our wonderfully bureaucratic leaders with another lie about why it "should" cost more.


The existing equipment can be used.
But only in they are willing to eliminate one grade of corn gas that they are selling now.


----------



## dockmaster (Sep 27, 2007)

So what effect has this ethonol repeal had? For all the hype, is none a good answer?


----------



## Aqua Therapy (Jul 25, 2010)

Done my own fuel economy tests on my vehicles and have determined that ethanol gives me about 10% less mpg. Thus leads to being nothing more than a diluter/ filler. Never has made any sense to me. I still have a hard time with the non ethanol being around a $1.00 more per gallon at most stations I see. should be more around 40 cents more per gallon. Total hogwash. I watch the gas prices closely with my trailered boat being a 150 gallon tank. The only non ethanol pump in gulf breeze jacks up the gas price immediately when a barrel of oil on market goes up. Then I see ethanol gas drops 50 cents over a period of a month and he drops non ethanol price maybe 10 cents. Total monopoly system. I have complained many times. Ethanol has cost me many problems on my outboards and small engines before I switched to non ethanol. I can't help but laugh when I see these big wigs working for the companies on t.v. talking about how great ethanol is for our vehicles. One guy actually was stating increased horsepower and mpg. What was he smoking? So I am glad to see any progress being made.


----------



## Chapman5011 (Mar 7, 2013)

Is the ethanol that orange crap that collects in my fuel filter. If so..... See ya later ethanol.i will get the non ethanol if it's not 4.20 a gallon.
I change fuel filters twice a year and it seems like it isn't enough.


----------



## jim t (Sep 30, 2007)

I think the feds can hold road improvement funds from a state that doesn't comply with ethanol regulations.
I'll bet FL gets in line again shortly,

Tourism from out of state and and all.

Jim


----------



## Randy M (Jul 8, 2012)

jim t said:


> I think the feds can hold road improvement funds from a state that doesn't comply with ethanol regulations.
> I'll bet FL gets in line again shortly,
> 
> Tourism from out of state and and all.
> ...


I wouldn't be so sure about that. Louisiana has been selling non-ethanol for quite some time and the roads are no better or worse than Floridas. BTW non-ethanol over here is only about 10 cents more than ethanol, currently the non-ethanol is $3.04 where I buy it.


----------

