this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2026

90 points (100.0% liked)

News

36773 readers

2605 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

EPA approves sale of higher ethanol fuel to try to lower gas prices (abcnews.com)

submitted 13 hours ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

33 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Wednesday that it would temporarily allow widespread sales of a higher ethanol gas blend in a move that they hope will tamp down consumer prices that have soared since the Iran war began.

The sale of E15 is typically discontinued in the summer because it can contribute to harmful air pollution.

Not all are convinced the move will substantially lower gas prices. E15 isn't available in all states and some places don't have the necessary infrastructure or enough of a supply of ethanol to ramp up use, said Kenneth Gillingham, a professor at the Yale School of the Environment who studies the impacts of transportation regulations on prices, emissions and consumer welfare.

top 33 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago

Just replaced a fuel hose that was 5 years old but had rotted though. It’s because of ethanol.

[–] Splendid4117@piefed.social 51 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Plus, higher ethanol content in fuel reduces its energy density, so while this will certainly reduce prices, it will make people buy gas more often. Meaning.. Not a great fix.

[–] bitchkat@lemmy.world 5 points 9 hours ago

I accidentally put E85 in my van when I was driving cross country after buying. My efficiency went to shit and was getting about 150 miles on a tank (20 gallon) compared to the 300 miles I was getting the rest of the trip,

[+] Alk@sh.itjust.works -8 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (2 children)

I'm actually fine with sabotaging the effective range of gas cars to make EVs slightly more attractive haha

Edit: If a mild opinion like this gets the downvotes wait till you all hear my opinions on car ownership in general lmao

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think everyone switching to electric cars is the best possible solution. Think of all the waste, there are plenty of older cars that are in running condition.

Although, maybe if there was a market for affordable electric conversions then that would be best.

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 2 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Emissions from building a EV is from memory less than the emissions from continuing to run an ICE car after only a few years. And rapid adoption would encourage more renewables into the grid and in homes further increasing the EV advantage.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 4 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Would that extend as far as mining, battery construction, and (probably) shipping components around the globe?

[–] vividspecter@aussie.zone 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Usually these sort of studies include embodied emissions including all of the inputs that go into building the car. This article here: https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/

focuses on new-to-new comparisons, but if you subtract the embodied emissions of around 8M tonnes of CO2 for the model 3, it looks like the break even point using the US electricity supply in 2021 is around 4.5 years. And that is probably a bit conservative given that:

The energy supply has gotten cleaner since then
It is compared to a Toyota Corolla which is a quite efficient petrol car (although bulkier SUV EVs etc would come out worse too so it depends)

Of course, it also depends on how much the car is used. If you use a used ICE car extremely infrequently the crossover point will be later.

Here's a research article I have gotten around to reading yet but you may find interesting: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S095965262300269X

You might have to go to annas-archive and the like to get the content however.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago

Nearly 14k miles is a lot for people in some locations. This is more or less what I was talking about. OP was throwing out random (trust me bro) figures, but the numbers I've seen are more nuanced, like these.

My point was basically that I thought their assertions were rather naive. I like the idea of electric, but not necessarily what I've seen out of the tech rn.

I'd also be curious how things worked over the life of the vehicle, and not some arbitrary tipping point early on in the x axis.

Battery replacement is usually going to be far more significant than 14k miles, but will have to happen. A standard carolla or camery can run for fucking ever with modest investment in care. All the care in the world won't protect you against batteries going belly-up.

[–] lobo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, after all gas needs to be extracted distilled and shipped around the globe every time you fill up. Only to be burned at 20-30% efficency.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago

That isn't the same. I didn't ask about electricity (that would fuel the vehicle). I was pointing out that, among other things, batteries require mining in very specific locations, shipping raw components to where batteries will be built, building them, and shipping them to their destination.

Apples to apples (insofar that it is possible), my dude.

[–] Alk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Yeah I know it will barely make a dent. But I think making them just a little tiny bit more attractive is a good thing. Speed up the adoption, cultural acceptance and general acceleration of technology ever so slightly.

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 5 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

What would make it seem more attractive to me, is more safety testing, less consumerism, less ads, less surveillance, less nazis, and less money going to fascists.

[–] a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Lower price, too.

[–] Alk@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Oh I'm explicitly not talking about tesla here. But yes, those are all good points that I agree with.

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Giving money to fascists includes Toyota/Lexus/Subaru, Ford/Aston Marton/Lincoln/Land Rover/Mazda, GM/Cadillac/Chevrolet/GMC/, Volkswagen/Audi/Porsche/Lamborghini and the other companies that are either donating to fascists directly or are helping them materially in other ways.

[–] Canonical_Warlock@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

Electric cars aren't unattractive because they're electric cars. They're unattractive because they cost 1/4 the cost of my house and come preenshitified with subscriptions. If I could afford an electric car I would get one. Let me know when you see one selling for under $5k.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Polestar exists. Buy used. You can get a great EV for less than 30k regularly and less than 20k depending on your needs and deal shopping.

Those prices are an absolute steal in today’s car market.

[–] Alk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

I'm referring to the market of people who can already afford one, but choose not to because of various reasons like range, charging speed, politics, charging availability, etc. I never said the only reason they're unattractive is anything specific. But anything that helps them get in the mainstream consciousness will eventually help things like mass production, research, and market share, which will also help price and overall technology improvement speed. $5k electric cars may come in the future but nothing relating to ethanol in gas will directly cause those to appear and before that happens EVs in general need to become more accepted and more adopted.

[–] DBT@lemmy.world -1 points 8 hours ago

Comments like this make EVs less attractive. Not the shitty range of EVs, the dipshit attitude of EV owners/fans.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. I’m not trying to buy a new car just because gas all the sudden became less efficient. I’m trying to keep the same vehicle for as long as possible.

You’re either rich, dumb, or don’t pay any bills of your own.

[–] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 14 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

This country will do anything except harvest the power from that big yellow ball in the sky.

[–] Gates9@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 hours ago

This country is a fuckin death cult

[–] Alk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

The what? I'm not familiar with any yellow ball in the sky. You mean when corn gets really tall? That shit can make so much ethanol.

[–] HootinNHollerin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

But trump said we don’t need anything from anyone and we already won the war…

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 15 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Remember, more than 10% ethanol is not advised by most manufacturers and may harm your engine.

If this is implemented, it would be better to find ethanol free providers.

[–] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Realistically most vehicles made after 2010 have ethanol safe components and fuelling systems that can handle the change in energy density of E30. I'd still try to avoid it though

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 0 points 11 hours ago

whats kinda funny is people put heet in their cars in winter near me.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Ethanol, made from corn, fertilized with…?

[–] orclev@lemmy.world 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Wait, you think there was any thinking involved in getting the US into this mess? Nothing going on in Trump's head counts as thinking. If he got any dumber he'd qualify as a vegetable.

[–] Blackfeathr@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

That's an insult to vegetables. At least veggies are good for you.

[–] FartsWithAnAccent@fedia.io 5 points 12 hours ago

"FUCK YOUR ENGINE, LOL!"

-EPA I guess

[–] Gerudo@lemmy.zip 2 points 10 hours ago

If this is basically back winter blend pricing, then what, like 15 cents cheaper? It's not that drastic.

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 11 hours ago

strange. e15 and e85 are available year around near me from what I can tell.