Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article



1 posted on 08/27/2002 9:38:00 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: All
I'm constructing a special Michelle Malkin ping list.

Post to this thread if you'd like on or off (easier for me than Freepmail). Thanks.



2 posted on 08/27/2002 9:52:45 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
I wonder what will happen when they/we start buying the ethanol cheaper through NAFTA from Mexico and South America...More subsidies?
3 posted on 08/27/2002 9:57:36 PM PDT by lewislynn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Victoria Delsoul; Pokey78; JohnHuang2; MeeknMing; rdb3; mhking; BOBTHENAILER; Marine Inspector; ...

    

Michelle
Malkin
Growl!





5 posted on 08/27/2002 10:12:50 PM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
yep yep yep
10 posted on 08/28/2002 2:41:55 AM PDT by Cacique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
After 2012, this anti-free market maneuver would guarantee ethanol a growing fixed share of the country's fuel consumption every year, no matter what consumers actually demand or what better methods of reformulating gasoline come along.

Here's where the problem is. The government shouldn't be supporting the production of ethanol, corn growers in the Midwest or anything else.

It's a lousy fuel, so what? Just force the consumer to use it. The sad thing is that these kinds of maneuvers diminish innovation. If the government didn't butt in, throwing money around, maybe, just maybe, with some research and potential for economic success, scientists might come up with a good alternate fuel source.

11 posted on 08/28/2002 2:55:58 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CheneyChick; vikingchick; Victoria Delsoul; WIMom; one_particular_harbour; kmiller1k; Snow Bunny; ..
((((((growl)))))



14 posted on 08/28/2002 5:56:18 AM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
'Times, they are a changin.'
15 posted on 08/28/2002 6:12:36 AM PDT by Free Vulcan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
malkin bump!

btw, it breaks my heart to see good ethanol burned.

16 posted on 08/28/2002 6:13:04 AM PDT by glock rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
I think I'll give this to my congresscritter.
18 posted on 08/28/2002 6:56:47 AM PDT by CPT Clay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Torie; Miss Marple
I recall seeing the two of you discussing ethanol on another thread the other day, so I thought I'd call your attention to this article.



19 posted on 08/28/2002 7:19:20 AM PDT by Sabertooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
Personally, I think there is a VERY real future for ethanol, but it's not right now. People need to understand that we do not have the infrastructure in place to make ethanol affordable at this time.
22 posted on 08/28/2002 7:46:03 AM PDT by realpatriot71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
Just a few things:

There is no reason an automobile engine that runs well and cleanly on ethanol or ethanol mixtures cannot be produced.

The cost of gasoline may eventually increase to the point where it is economical to replace it with ethanol.

The environmental issue is secondary to the supply issue, if shortages eventually occur.

Industry can be shortsighted, needing outside scrutiny and guidance.

The current gas-engine-based production infrastructure naturally discourages alternatives to gasoline.
25 posted on 08/28/2002 8:13:34 AM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
it also increases emissions of volatile organic compounds and nitrous dioxide

Better call Greenie Klaxxon.....

33 posted on 08/28/2002 9:16:12 AM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
"Ethanol is good for our economy, it's good for our air," President Bush asserted earlier this week

I'm pleased to agree with him.

38 posted on 08/28/2002 9:36:57 AM PDT by apochromat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
Ethanol increases the volatility of gasoline, which increases evaporative emissions while vehicles are simply parked in the sun. It also increases NOX emissions from the tailpipe, and would exacerbate an already difficult situation of meeting air quality standards in California. Plus, there are transport issues on the west coast: How to get ethanol from the corn fields of Iowa to California. It can't be piped.

The Ca. Air Resources Board has been opposed to the use of ethanol in California reformulated gasoline, but perhaps they've softened their opposition with the known polluting effects of MTBE on groundwater. Union 76 stations have removed MTBE from their gasoline, but they may be using another ether, ethanol-based ETBE. Not sure. Whatever the situation, ethanol is not a panacea for clean air, and is primarily pushed by the politically-well-connected ADM.

39 posted on 08/28/2002 9:55:06 AM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
This is a case of American corn farmers vs. Canadian methanol producers (a main ingredient of MTBE). But the pollution of MTBE in groundwater forces alternatives, which may make (eventually) ethanol (or ethanol-based ETBE) competitive.
42 posted on 08/28/2002 10:01:48 AM PDT by My2Cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Sabertooth
I didn't notice anything in the article you posted regarding MTBE. (Admittedly, I scanned the article I am at work,,, and suppose to be working ;~/)

MTBE's are used as an oxygenate in fuels. MTBE's are a known carcinagen and have been found in drinking water supplies in CA. I believe it was primarily drinking water supplies that used resivors (sp) for storing the water. I cannot document this fact, but it stands to reason. I do not intend to imply that all of CA's drinking water is laced with MTBE.

Ethanol is the cleanest, least expensive alternative oxygenate.

I understand your point about ADM, and it is well taken. However, there is a health related issue that must be acknowledged and addressed.
68 posted on 08/28/2002 12:12:43 PM PDT by Iowa Granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson