(Nebraska Ethanol Board) The Nebraska Ethanol Board (NEB) today announced the publication of the interim report for Phase II of the E30 Demonstration. The project is demonstrating the viability of E30 fuel (a blend of 30% ethanol and 70% gasoline) in non-flex fuel vehicles. Phase I was conducted in 2019, and the ongoing Phase II began in 2023. So far, the 94 State of Nebraska light-duty vehicles involved in Phase II have collectively driven more than 215,000 miles on E30 fuel. The research team, from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, has found further evidence of the conclusions from Phase I: E30 is safe and effective for non-flex fuel vehicles, and E30 is economically viable for broader consumption.
“The results in the interim report are very encouraging,” NEB Executive Director Ben Rhodes said. “While we’re not surprised to learn that non-flex fuel engines can safely utilize E30, it’s still exciting to see the data demonstrate that fact. Plus, the report makes it clear that E30 is far cheaper than E10, which we know is thanks to the inclusion of more ethanol. This price advantage comes with a fuel economy gain for some vehicles on E30 compared to E10—a groundbreaking result—or only a very small reduction that is more than covered by the cost difference. These are all strong signs that mid-level ethanol blends like E30 are a prime long-term option for the world’s transportation energy needs.”
Currently, E30 fuel is only approved for flex fuel vehicles, but the demonstration has specific approval from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to test E30 in non-flex fuel vehicles.
The interim report analyzes data from several key different aspects of vehicle and engine performance, including short- and long-term fuel trim (STFT and LTFT), downstream oxygen (O2) sensor voltage, diagnostic trouble code (DTC) count, fuel economy, engine coolant temperature (ECT), catalytic converter temperature (CT), and throttle parameters. All analysis indicated that engines remained within safe operational margins while using E30.
The interim report highlights the results drawn from data collected by the onboard diagnostic (OBD) tracker connected to each involved vehicle. The vehicles are split into two groups: one control group using E10, and an experimental group using E30, with both groups designed to maximize diversity in vehicle makes, models, years, and engine types. This expands the demonstration beyond the scope of Phase I, which studied a much more limited set of vehicles.
Key results from the Phase II interim report:
· LTFT distributions shift upward and widen under E30 while STFT and downstream O2 sensor behavior remain stable, collectively indicating that modern engine control unit (ECU) strategies effectively manage E30 fueling through long-term adaptation without compromising real-time fuel control or emissions after-treatment.
· For vehicles 2020 – 2024, the average fuel economy for vehicles operating on E30 was 20.75 miles per gallon (MPG), compared to 22.03 MPG for vehicles on E10, a reduction in fuel economy of only 5.8% for E30, which is more than offset by E30’s 16.3% price advantage.
· For vehicles 2003 – 2019, the average fuel economy for vehicles operating on E30 was 17.08 MPG, compared to 15.81 MPG for vehicles on E10, an E30 mileage advantage of 7.5%.
· The average price of E30 in Nebraska was $2.70 per gallon, while E10 averaged $3.22 per gallon, resulting in a 16.28% price advantage for E30.
· No vehicles in either group exhibited coolant temperatures exceeding critical thresholds, indicating that E30 is thermally compatible with modern engine cooling architecture and does not induce abnormal heating or cooling behavior.
· The increased CT observed with E30 enhances catalyst performance without inducing thermal overstress.
· Although the E30-fueled vehicles exhibited higher throttle angle values, all readings remained within safe operational margins, indicating that drivability and engine responsiveness were not compromised.
· Long-term durability testing of E30-fueled vehicles confirmed that the increased throttle activity did not accelerate actuator wear or induce throttle-body fouling, reaffirming the mechanical robustness of current systems under mid-level ethanol operation.
“With a year’s worth of data still to be collected and analyzed, the interim report is clear evidence that Phase II of the E30 Demonstration is moving in the right direction,” Rhodes said. “The report validates all the hard work done so far, and it generates momentum for the remainder of the project. Today’s publication of the interim report marks an important step toward the long-term goal of widespread E30 adoption and use.”
The full interim report can be read here. A final report is expected in late 2026.
The Nebraska Ethanol Board works to ensure strong public policy and consumer support for biofuels. Since 1971, the independent state agency has designed and managed programs to expand production, market access, worker safety and technology innovation, including recruitment of producers interested in developing conventional ethanol, as well as bio-products from the ethanol platform. For more information, visit www.ethanol.nebraska.gov. READ MORE
by Sean Reilly (Politico Pro Climatewire) The move opens the door to revise a suite of rules clamping down on heat-trapping emissions, especially from the industrial and transportation sectors. -- EPA has taken its first public step toward revisiting the landmark 2009 determination that underpins most of the agency's climate regulations.
The move marks an introductory and pivotal step for the Trump administration to rewrite the foundation of a suite of rules that aim to clamp down on heat-trapping emissions, especially from the industrial and transportation sectors.
EPA on Monday sent the proposed rule, titled “Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and Motor Vehicle Reconsideration,” to the White House regulations office for a routine review, according to a notice posted on a government tracking website.
While the proposal’s contents were not made public, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin had targeted the endangerment finding in a list of planned regulatory rollbacks released in March.
At a congressional hearing in May, he suggested that the original Obama-era finding was flawed because it failed to consider the harm done by each of the half-dozen greenhouse gases deemed dangerous because they contribute to global climate change. READ MORE
Related articles
Excerpt from Aiken Gump: EPA faces scientific and legal barriers to challenging the endangerment finding.
First, scientific data on the impacts of GHGs on climate change has only increased since the original 2009 finding. Scientists can more readily link impacts attributable to anthropogenic climate change and the relative contributions of different sources for those impacts, undermining arguments that emissions reductions in one jurisdiction will not meaningfully “contribute” to addressing global climate change.9
Second, any decision against the findings would be immediately challenged in court. The findings have been upheld against various legal challenges over the years, with the Supreme Court declining to hear challenges to it as recently as December 11, 2023.10
Nevertheless, recent landmark decisions in the Supreme Court have demonstrated a willingness to deviate from precedent in matters of environmental regulations and otherwise. If challenged, these potential legal proceedings will present opportunities for engagement for environmental and industry groups to file amicus briefs or join likely challenges from Democratic states. READ MORE
Excerpt from Policy Integrity: EPA made the 2009 Endangerment Finding following the Supreme Court’s determinations that greenhouse gases are “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act. The Supreme Court further clarified that “[i]f EPA makes a finding of endangerment, the Clean Air Act requires the agency to regulate emissions of the deleterious pollutant from new motor vehicles.” Consistent with this obligation, after making the 2009 Endangerment Finding, EPA then proceeded to issue regulations to limit greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, and later from power plants, landfills, aircraft, and the oil and gas sector. Many of EPA’s greenhouse gas regulations, alongside the 2009 Endangerment Finding itself, are now in the crosshairs of EPA’s reconsideration.
EPA’s March 2025 press release emphasized that when EPA made the Endangerment Finding in 2009, the agency did not consider the costs of future regulations that would limit emissions. That’s true—but it is not evidence that regulatory costs went unconsidered. To the contrary, EPA considered regulatory costs when the relevant statutory provisions indicated they should be considered: at the time it issued the various regulations limiting greenhouse gas emissions from particular sectors. As explained in this issue brief, this approach is required by the law and best practice.
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to assess regulatory costs when setting emission standards, not when making an endangerment finding that underlies the regulations. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA first makes a scientific judgment regarding whether certain emissions “endanger public health or welfare” (a.k.a., an endangerment finding). For emissions meeting that criterion, EPA then separately issues emission standards. The courts have made clear that cost is considered only at the stage of issuing specific standards to limit emissions. The plain text of the Clean Air Act compels this approach, and Supreme Court case law further affirms this understanding of the text and appropriate practice. READ MORE
Excerpt from Politico Pro: The EPA’s proposal to reconsider its 16-year-old bedrock finding on the dangers of greenhouse gases is now in the White House’s hands — a move that sets the stage for a broad attack on a wide range of federal climate regulations.
Details on the proposal are still unclear, but it is expected to significantly weaken — if not revoke outright — the agency’s 2009 declaration that greenhouse gases endanger human health. That in turn would free EPA from the legal obligation to regulate climate pollution from most sources, including power plants, cars and trucks, and virtually any other source.
The EPA submitted its proposal (Reg. 2060-AW71) to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs for review on Monday, according to the agency’s website.
The rule is styled as "Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and Motor Vehicle Reconsideration Rule" — indicating it may revoke the agency's tailpipe emissions standards for vehicles at the same time it undoes the endangerment finding. That would free automakers from having to comply with Biden-era rules that Republicans have argued amounted to a de facto electric vehicle mandate. Restoring auto industry jobs through deregulation is a main pillar of Administrator Lee Zeldin's EPA agenda . READ MORE
Excerpt from Inside EPA: EPA has sent to the White House for final review a proposed rule walking back the landmark GHG endangerment finding and vehicle emissions standards -- confirming expectations that the agency would combine its endangerment finding reconsideration with a vehicle rule repeal even as the regulation’s exact scope remains unclear. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) received the proposal, titled “Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding and Motor Vehicle Reconsideration Rule,” on June 30. EPA’s planned rollback of the greenhouse gas endangerment... READ MORE
If Europe is serious about decarbonizing transport, we should be encouraging more biofuel use, not less. -- Dickon Posnett, President, European Biodiesel Board READ MORE