E85 hurts fuel economy too much for that to make sense in a "zero carbon by 2035-2045" timeline. The Ford Taurus from the 90s would get 12.8 mpg on E85 in city

E85 hurts fuel economy too much for that to make sense in a "zero carbon by 2035-2045" timeline. The Ford Taurus from the 90s would get 12.8 mpg on E85 in city driving, vs 18 mpg on gasoline. Plus, additional ethanol production would drive up food costs even more. California's gas is already E10 (and they'd probably go higher if it wasn't illegal federally).