Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Jan. 18, 2013 | 2 a.m.
Congratulations are in order to the Sun for the column Sunday written by University of Alabama professor Andrew Morriss revealing how the ethanol lobby is picking our pockets even though we are using ethanol fuel in our cars. He mentions that ethanol fuels are damaging to a car’s fuel system. The E85 blend available in most areas is OK to use in most newer cars that are flex-fuel designated; otherwise, they are very damaging to the fuel lines, reduce lubricants’ effectiveness and reduce gas mileage. He failed to point out that as early as last year, an E15 blend was ...
Obama's EPA SUPPORTS BIG OIL PROFITS.
51 summer and winter blends
Another bright idea from the Government's EPA that backfired. Just like Lisa Jackson's use of a bogus name and email account. The latter resulted in her resignation. The former hurts Americans in the pocket book.
CarmineD
This has a more humane reason to be against the 45 per gallon subsidy.
"Although most experts recognize the important role biofuels play, they often underestimate their effects. Many of them misinterpret the economic models, which understate the degree to which biofuels drive up prices. These models are nearly all designed to estimate biofuels' effects on prices over the long term, after farmers have ample time to plow up and plant more land, and do not speak to prices in the shorter term. Commentators also often lump all sources of crop demand together without recognizing their different moral weights and potential for control. Our primary obligation is to feed the hungry. Biofuels are undermining our ability to do so. Governments can stop the recurring pattern of food crises by backing off their demands for ever more biofuels."
http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...
Carmine D
This wasn't the EPA's doing.
This was a mandate was given to us by the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The Act mandated that we had use 75 billion gallons of ethanol by the end of 2012.
As you know, gas usage in the country has fallen. To meet the mandate, they either have to readjust the amount of ethanol mandated or increase the blend.
Congress did what it does best when it is controlled by republicans. It protected the business interests. The ordered the EPA to certify that E85 was safe to use.
Ethanol has been a boondoggle from the get go. It replace MTBE after the EPA was forced to certify that chemical, even after the testing showed it was a known carcinogen.
You only have to look one place for our messes. The congress of the United States.
Carmine is correct. EPA is hardly a "transparent" agency, despite Obumma's proclamations.
After a fill-up, how much E85 is left over in the pump/hose for the next guy to use and ruin his engine?
Ethanol was a big payoff to the farm belt states. Corn based ethanol is a boondoggle. Tremendously inefficient to produce. Surgar cane based ethanol, on the other hand, is efficient to produce. We need to substitute or forget ethanol entirely. Of course all the "welfare queens" in the farm belt will complain!
Motorsports et al:
"As if our current ethanol requirements are not enough, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has upped the amount of ethanol that can be blended into gasoline from 10 percent to 15 percent for vehicles of model year 2001 and newer. Some American consumers are astute enough to recognize that their mileage per gallon of gasoline declined with the 10 percent blend currently in use, thereby increasing the frequency of fill-ups. Now that trend will be increased if EPA has its way. Ethanol is 34 percent less efficient than gasoline, does little to decrease our greenhouse gas emissions, is heavily subsidized, and has been accused of increasing food prices both directly and indirectly through livestock feed costs.
The EPA's decision made in October 2010 to allow a 15 percent blend of ethanol into the gasoline mix for model year 2007 and newer cars seems to be motivated largely by politics since that decision was made before the 2010 election where candidates in Midwestern corn states could tout the decision to voters. A further evidence of the politics involved is witnessed by the House of Representatives voting 286 to 135 to block the EPA from using federal funds to implement the increased ethanol volume in gasoline in the continuing resolution to keep the government funded while the fiscal year 2011 budget is being debated.
Among those opposing the E15 implementation are the
National Automobile Dealers Association and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers who fear that E15 will damage older cars whose owners mistakenly use E15, that service repairmen could misdiagnosis engine problems by not realizing that the wrong fuel was used, and that damage could occur to the engine, catalytic converter, vehicle diagnostic tests, and/or the check engine light.
Engine Products Group who represent carmakers and manufacturers of small engines for boats, snowmobiles, and lawnmowers who fear damage to their products.
Food industries who fear that increased corn demand will...." [you can read the rest if you like.]
If Hollywood/Oscars gave awards for creative regulatory overreach [like the head or the agency using a bogus email account for business], the EPA would sweep the field.
CarmineD
"and Rusty and Carmine are nowhere to be found. Let that help you figure out who is right." @ Motorsports
I can't speak for Rusty, but can conclude that he is obviously a genius.
CarmineD
We need to get rid of the ethanol gas....