IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/isu/genstf/201501010800001006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Econometric Analysis of Motorists’ Preference for Ethanol in Motor Fuel

Author

Listed:
  • Liao, Kenneth
  • Pouliot, Sebastien

Abstract

The second installment of the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS2) requires minimum blending of ethanol and other biofuels into the motor fuel consumed in the United States. The vast majority of gasoline consumed in the United States contains no more than 10 percent ethanol. This gasoline-ethanol blend is conventionally known as E10. The maximum quantity of ethanol that can be blended into the total motor fuel pool through E10 is commonly referred to as the E10 blend wall. The quantity of ethanol mandated by the RFS2 is now reaching the point where it is set to surpass the E10 blend wall.One solution to the blend wall is the consumption of gasoline blends that contain more than 10 percent ethanol such as E85, which contains no more than 83 and no less than 51 percent ethanol. On average, a gallon of E85 contains about 74 percent ethanol so each gallon of E85 consumed as a substitute for E10 increases aggregate ethanol consumption by about 0.64 gallons (EIA 2015). As such, ethanol consumption can exceed the blend wall if some motorists fuel with E85 instead of E10. However, E85 consumption in the United States has historically been limited, and it is not at the level needed to meet the expanded ethanol mandates.

Suggested Citation

  • Liao, Kenneth & Pouliot, Sebastien, 2015. "Econometric Analysis of Motorists’ Preference for Ethanol in Motor Fuel," ISU General Staff Papers 201501010800001006, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201501010800001006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/35261254-405c-4716-9232-890af2d847b0/content
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Corts, Kenneth S., 2010. "Building out alternative fuel retail infrastructure: Government fleet spillovers in E85," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 219-234, May.
    2. Bruce A. Babcock & Sebastien Pouliot, 2013. "Impact of Sales Constraints and Entry on E85 Demand," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 13-pb12, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    3. Pouliot, Sébastien & Babcock, Bruce A., 2014. "The demand for E85: Geographical location and retail capacity constraints," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 134-143.
    4. Bruce A. Babcock & Sebastien Pouliot, 2013. "Price It and They Will Buy: How E85 Can Break the Blend Wall," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 13-pb11, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    5. Unknown, 2014. "Department Publications 2013," Publications Lists 206935, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Jing & Stock, James H., 2019. "Cost pass-through to higher ethanol blends at the pump: Evidence from Minnesota gas station data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-19.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sébastien Pouliot & Kenneth A Liao & Bruce A Babcock, 2018. "Estimating Willingness to Pay for E85 in the United States Using an Intercept Survey of Flex Motorists," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(5), pages 1486-1509.
    2. Gabriel E. Lade & James Bushnell, 2019. "Fuel Subsidy Pass-Through and Market Structure: Evidence from the Renewable Fuel Standard," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(3), pages 563-592.
    3. Gabriel E. Lade & James Bushnell, 2016. "Fuel Subsidy Pass-Through and Market Structure: Evidence from the Renewable Fuel Standard," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp570, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    4. Gabriel E Lade & C -Y Cynthia Lin Lawell & Aaron Smith, 2018. "Policy Shocks and Market-Based Regulations: Evidence from the Renewable Fuel Standard," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 707-731.
    5. Bruce A. Babcock, 2013. "RFS Compliance Costs and Incentives to Invest in Ethanol Infrastructure," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 13-pb13, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    6. Liao, Kenneth & Pouliot, Sébastien, 2016. "Estimates of the Demand for E85 Using Stated-Preference Data off Revealed-Preference Choices," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 236107, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Christensen, Adam & Siddiqui, Sauleh, 2015. "Fuel price impacts and compliance costs associated with the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 614-624.
    8. Pouliot, Sébastien & Babcock, Bruce A., 2017. "Feasibility of meeting increased biofuel mandates with E85," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 194-200.
    9. Christensen, Adam & Hobbs, Benjamin, 2016. "A model of state and federal biofuel policy: Feasibility assessment of the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 799-812.
    10. Kim Loader, 2018. "Small- and medium-sized enterprises and public procurement: A review of the UK coalition government's policies and their impact," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(1), pages 47-66, February.
    11. Jacopo Arpetti & Antonio Iovanella, 2019. "Towards more effective consumer steering via network analysis," Papers 1903.11469, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2019.
    12. Jeremy Greenwood & Nezih Guner & Guillaume Vandenbroucke, 2017. "Family Economics Writ Large," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1346-1434, December.
    13. Mai, Nhat Chi, 2022. "Capital Raising and Management of Vietnamese Small and Medium Sized Enterprises after Integrating into Global Economy," OSF Preprints dv68m, Center for Open Science.
    14. Kate Golebiowska, 2016. "Are Peripheral Regions Benefiting from National Policies Aimed at Attracting Skilled Migrants? Case Study of the Northern Territory of Australia," Journal of International Migration and Integration, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 947-971, August.
    15. Andrew Cleves & Paul Dimmock & Neil Hewitt & Grace Carolan-Rees, 2016. "The TURis System for Transurethral Resection of the Prostate: A NICE Medical Technology Guidance," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 267-279, June.
    16. Oliveira, Victor & Frazao, Elizabeth, 2015. "The WIC Program: Background, Trends, and Economic Issues, 2015 Edition," Economic Information Bulletin 197543, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    17. Böhm, Sebastian & Grossmann, Volker & Strulik, Holger, 2021. "R&D-driven medical progress, health care costs, and the future of human longevity," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 18(C).
    18. Mehri , N. & Messkoub, M. & Kunkel, S., 2019. "Trends, determinants and the implications of population aging in Iran," ISS Working Papers - General Series 646, International Institute of Social Studies of Erasmus University Rotterdam (ISS), The Hague.
    19. Mahdi Gharaibeh & Ali McBride & David S. Alberts & Brian Erstad & Marion Slack & Nimer Alsaid & J. Lyle Bootman & Ivo Abraham, 2018. "Economic Evaluation for the UK of Systemic Chemotherapies as First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(11), pages 1333-1343, November.
    20. Paul Cheshire & Stephen Gibbons & Jemma Mouland, 2017. "Social Tenants' Health: Evaluating the Effectiveness of Landlord Interventions," SERC Discussion Papers 0219, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:isu:genstf:201501010800001006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Curtis Balmer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deiasus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.