http://finance.yahoo.com/news/US-Sai...&asset=&ccode=

Corn-based Ethanol is garbage. it doesn't even make sense to make them with Corn.

Most of us already hate that 10% junk in our gas and now they want 15% ?

man, I hate this place.


update : 1/22/2011

too late, gotta love morons and lobbyist and idiots in the government

http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011...-in-auto-fuel/

*sigh*

Update : 2/10/2011

Please "Like" This page ! SAY NO TO ETHANOL !!!!!

 

The 10% already probably causing some of the carbon problems. EPA allows 15%... yea same EPA that says it safe to eat the Shrimp and swim in gulf.

 

Even crappier gas mileage with no discount in gasoline prices whatsoever. Yeah!

 

You would think that all of the major american auto companies telling the EPA don't would it would mean something...such as: it's bad for the cars...don't

 

I really don't mind using ethanol for all those dull people who drive corollas and such, but they should maintain a parallel supply of gasoline with no ethanol for those who don't want it or drive cars with high performance engines.

 

It's been 15% out here for a long time.
Just call it E85 and pretend your car is faster.

 

hahahaha Well it is safe. Not like those EPA suckers will swim there so yea its safe for them. lol



NYC has been using 10% for a long *** time and a lot of people still hate it. *sigh*

 

when the fuel line rubber starts melting and catch a fire. oh yeah its faster, night rider style. ****.

 

"Ethanol producers such as Archer Daniels Midland Co. have pressed the EPA to raise the limit. Opponents, including a coalition of oil companies, automakers and advocacy groups, say adding more ethanol may damage car engines, boost food prices and hurt the environment."

Never thought oil companies would be on the "good" side. Bloody hell, it's the EPA, it's their job to figure out if we NEED more ethanol, not satisfy the ethanol producers.

 

Sometimes, I feel like I'm the only person in IL that understands just how dangerous ADM is in the long run.

 

wrong, WE should be the ones decide if we want garbage Ethanol or not. NOT EPA.

We don't like no f-ing Ethanol. It decrease mpg = longer trips = more gas wasted. So how does this help the environment ?


but sadly this is how this country works now, Government just decide everything for us. Where is our rights?

Of course those oil companies gonna say no, cuz the more Ethanol in the mix, the less oil they use = less money goes into their pockets.

As for Auto markers, they do concern that more Ethanol might harm their stuff + its hard to "proof" that its the Ethanol that cause all those problems = in the end they might have to take all the warranty claim cost.

mind u, NONE of them gives a **** about food prices nor the environment. They just want money.

Just like MMO with their Genetically modified seeds. Nobody knows they're a big *** monopoly and they actually suing farmers that never even use their seeds. Their reason is the farm next to them use their seeds and somehow some of them "transferred" to their farm so their corps contains their "patented" technology. Use our seed or we will sue your *** till u drop. sad.

 

heres what doesn't make sense to me. They put that in the gas to reduce pollution, because they figure well your burning less fuel. In order to go the same distance though we have to burn more fuel because our fuel mileage has gone down. So there way of reducing pollution is adding something to the fuel that reduces fuel mileage so we have to burn even more fuel to get there?

and on a side note vashgs are you comming on the 24th:P https://www.rx8club.com/gulf-rx-8-forum-32/dfw-cruise-october-24-a-205185/

 

2 groups of ppl are happy about Ethanols.

First is Lobbyist that works for ADM

Second is tree huggers

I don't think I need to explain the lobbyist part.

Tree huggers, they love whatever that "looks good on paper" oh my god it drops emission by 10 % oh yes thats all we cared. they never looked at the part that to reach the same distance the car has to burn another gallon or 2 of fuel which increase the consumption by another 10%. and the report stops there, cuz if the report have "it also increase green house gas emission by X% " those ******* will be pissed and start printing **** on top of IBM/HP roofs again.

 

Admittedly, ethanol is better than MTBE. However, it's focus is being shifted from oxygenate additive to primary fuel source which is just... retarded.

ADM Exec: "Hang on! I've got a way to save the farms AND make us money! We'll burn our food in our gasoline!"

 

It reduces the world's food supply. Either by directly siphoning off corn in the US, or diverting agriculture to sugar cane elswhere. That starves out populations in third world countries. Less people means less of a load on the environment.

Not a plan that stands up to moral scrutiny, but at the top level that's how it works.

Ken

 

I am bumping this because I just read this:

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...514_058678.htm

Older article but now that they are bumping it to 15% WTF are we supposed to do?

 

I don't know about everyone's area, but the Shell station by my house advertises Zero Ethanol in the gas. That's where I go.

 

I am going to have to look around more closely now.

 

Being ours is a "farm" state, it is mandated by state law that we have at least 10% ethanol.

 

That sucks... i am glad i'm not in your boots!

 

It makes me think ---- Is Ethanol the cause of Rotary Engine failure.

but anyway, NY is a "go green wannabe" state and idiots running the NY government been pushing all these stupid Ethanol crap. I guess the Ethanol lobbyist gave them a lot of money ... I mean err donations ?

Its all 10% here and I hate it a lot. if they go 15% and my car dies or something funky happens. Im so gonna sue.

on the original article.

That simply means it WILL increase air pollution. and what exactly is "unacceptable" ? no one knows.

what a bunch of bs.

This just shows the government will do whatever it takes just to fulfill their foolish "goal"

*sigh*

 

There are three things the federal government can do to prop up a particular product or market.
1. Mandate a product be used
2. Impose tariffs on importation of the same product.
3. Subsidize products.

To my understanding, ethanol is the ONLY product on the market that had all 3 conditions. If ethanol was truly a worthwhile product then it would not need these conditions to survive.

 

Hmm, let's see...

Only 60% of the energy content of gasoline, takes more energy to produce than it produces (therefore, makes more pollution that it abates), can - at best - only replace 12% of the demand for gasoline (and only if all corn production is diverted to ethanol production), forces the entire food market to readjust, driving up the cost of all goods, is hydrophillic, so it destroys anything it comes in contact with that can corrode, has been a primary driving force in the deforestation of the Amazon, etc.

Lets throw tax money at it so that Iowa is happy so that my presidential bid has legs since that is where the primary is held...

 

If only they would switch to sawgrass for the production of alcohol. Or, allow the use of the oil shale deposits so we don't have to use alcohol at all.

 

Don't you guys get a "choice"?? at the moment we do..

I tried 20 bucks in my late fathers 323, did not like it, really, it felt like the tyres needed air...that feeling.

Never tried it on my 8, only use highest RON here, Now $1.40 a litre or $5.50 a gallon!!

The 10% E Crap they have here is like 2 cents a litre cheaper or 9 cents a gallon.