Today the Show-Me Institute released a new case study about Missouri’s requirement that gasoline sold in the state must contain a minimum level of ethanol. Responding to a study by The Missouri Corn Merchandising Council that touted hundreds of millions in savings for Missourians, case study authors Justin Hauke and David Stokes point out that the inclusion of additional factors, such as the cost of ethanol subsidies and the decreased energy output efficiency of ethanol-blended fuel, means that Missourians will see a net loss of nearly $1 billion in the next 10 years.
From the case study:
Ethanol mandates will not solve Missouri’s energy problems. Contrary to the results implied by the MCMC study, ethanol mandates will not translate into fuel savings for Missouri consumers. In contrast, Missouri consumers can expect to pay more because of E-10 legislation than they would have paid otherwise.
Hauke also addressed ethanol mandates recently in this blog, noting that these subsidies hinder Missouri’s efforts to eliminate "excessive, job-killing revenues" from the state budget.
The full case study can be found on the Show-Me Institute website.
