Kiss the Earth GREEN

Comment

Comment by david epps on November 23, 2008 at 1:31pm

Hugh said
"There is plenty of work to do to get alternative fuels in common use.

I looked at the links that Luis provided. On the Flextek site, they have some pretty interesting info about how Flex-fuel vehicles may not be all that different. In which case, EPA and CARB have perpetrated a fairly massive fraud.

CARB lost most of its credibility in CA when it backed off on emission standards and gave the auto industry a pass on their agreements to introduce cleaner fuel vehicles. Now it seems that body may have conspired with the auto makers to prevent ethanol conversion kits into the market.

This is the sort of shenanigans we can't allow. If it's true, those in charge at CARB should be fired for cause and prosecuted."

Your above post showed me that you wanted to get to the bottom of this ethanol thing. But after consideration you turned around and called me an internet troll, an uncontrolled emotional outburst on your part.

Now you come back and site a CATO document 2 years old and quoting some sort of numbers for a subsidy after you actually found the current document but misread. H.R. 2419.

Then you cite as further evidence some propaganda from a far left leaning web site that has zero credibility as a factual source of anything except counters and propaganda.

And then the US News & World Report merely reports the situation, wacko environmentalists are applying pressure not concerned informed working citizens like you or I.

So stand on you own,
stop with the irrelevent propaganda of tobacco and AIDS,
stop quoting old document nor misquote new documents
stop using ad hominem attacks
stop calling motives into question without proof
stop blaming an internet server for serving up independent sources

You have drank the cool aid and think with the left side the wrong side of your brain. I would recommend some life training. http://www.moretolife.org/


No we don't need 234 Billion gallons.
I repeat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If we converted approximately 14% of the US fleet to CNG, ethanol, or propane we could eliminate all imports from the Persian gulf.
If we converted an additional approximately 7% we could eliminate all imports from Venezuela.
The primary tenant of conservation is making do with what you have available.
Made in American and CA ethanol is available. Do not buy a damn thing that is imported.

Comment by Hugh Hemington on November 23, 2008 at 12:37pm

Here are the links -- obviously knowing how to use the link tool works better.

Cato Institute

zFACTS site

and the US News & World Report link

Comment by Hugh Hemington on November 23, 2008 at 12:34pm

11 billion gallons? We used over 234 billion gallons of gasoline & Diesel last year. How is 11 billion somehow worthy of our embrace?

How is it logical that if corn producers and farm-state legislators can perpetuate a farce long enough, it becomes legitimized by it's age or volume? Following that logic, we should embrace tobacco because there are a lot of smokers, and AIDS because there are a lot of HIV-infected people. More of something bad doesn't make it better.

Ethanol is subsidized at $1.08 to 1.38 per gallon. Petroleum subsidies account for a third of a cent per gallon. If ethanol requires over 300 times the subsidy to be competitive, even after many years of production, it isn't a viable option. US auto makers "can't compete" because of their labor costs, but no one is suggesting the government should kick in half of every employee's pay so they can (not yet anyway).

The military spending that protects world oil commerce also protects all other world commerce, including agriculture (corn). "Charging" gasoline for the war is like charging corn for all the roads and rail lines from Colorado to Vermont.

I see in the "TOP 5 Flex Fuel Conversion Kits Are?" thread that you bought a conversion kit from "Dave". If "Dave" is David Epps, then he obviously has a personal financial stake in ethanol. I would submit that the genuine viability of ethanol may be of less concern to him than selling conversion products, and he'll sell more kits if ethanol keeps receiving subsidies, regardless of its viability. So naturally, he attacks anything that calls that viability into question.

The website he posted here is run by an ethanol lobby. Not exactly a neutral source. You wouldn't go to the tobacco lobby to get the truth about smoking would you?

On the other hand, I'm not selling anything. Whatever really works for our country is fine with me. I've already got the car and the pump, so any rebates that come up won't help me, and I fuel at home, so more stations would be nice, but they won't put any money in my pocket.

Here are two non-lobby sources you should look at:
(an article from the CATO Institute)


(and another site I've been reading quite a lot on all kinds of energy topics)


If you're running E85 with a conversion kit and it's working for you, congratulations. You've got a sweet deal, made sweet by the taxpayers. Enjoy it. I try to take advantage of the municipal CNG sites that sell fuel at a low price when I can. Everyone looks for a bargain. I understand your support for ethanol, and Dave's.

Here's another article I found in US News & World Report -- the linked articles are pretty good too.

Comment by Nathan Campbell on November 22, 2008 at 4:43pm

Current ethanol production is currently over 11billlion gallons per year so it is time for us to start to embrace it. - Ethanol Locations
Most of the energy put into making corn ethanol comes from natural gas based fertilizers. Ethanol really is the answer to replacing foreign oil. To those who are concerned about soil fertility, don't try to solve the problem until I get my environmental soil science degree. I'll gladly take the money.

To those you can justify putting down ethanol because of subsidies(hugh) realize this:
The "subsidy" is actually a blenders tax credit. It costs less to pay for this then we paid to subsidize corn ten years ago.

The Brazilian ethanol tariff is only in place to offset the blenders credit, which Brazilian ethanol also qualifies for. No reason to subsidize the foreigners.

Gasoline is also subsidized. Oil companies receive billions of dollars worth of free military protection, as well as billions of dollars of tax credits. Ethanol needs to be subsidized as well to compete.

Comment by Tai Robinson on November 22, 2008 at 10:44am

Hello friends of American Fuel Vehicles. Below is our latest creation. this is a game of milimeters and our vehilces outperform by miles. This is the vehicle we were going to offer to Mr. T. Boone Pickens so he would not have to be driven around in his Escalade on gasoline, when he so rudely turned off the microphone during the SLC town hall meeting.

Too bad for you Mr. P. I am sorry you are still using gasoline and jet fuel for your transportation requirements.

Drive Clean - Declare Energy Independence

Thank You!
Tai Robinson
www.AmericanFuelVehicles.com
801-201-7370

Comment by david epps on November 21, 2008 at 2:41pm

You said "
They aren't showing because there aren't any approved for CA. It's not a conspiracy by the show promoter."
You said
"Now it seems that body [CARB sic]may have conspired with the auto makers to prevent ethanol conversion kits into the market."
Sounds complicit to me.

But hell the reason kits aren't in the show is because that would be a pretty blatant display of "civil disobidience"
Kits are an underground product. Reminds me of the 60's and other underground products.

Comment by david epps on November 21, 2008 at 2:40pm

Yes, Yes, Yes! You have a shadow of doubt. You were almost there Hugh.
Somebody is/has perpetrated a fairly massive fraud and that could be the EPA and CARB.
I think not the EPA, they just do what the law says and are pretty apolitical.
CARB I don't know about.

The way the dynamic works on the republican side
is that US industry is getting squeezed by high NG prices
The way the dynamic works on the democrat side
is that US utilities are getting squeezed by anti-coal global warming crowd.
So that squeezes the legislature from both sides
so that leaves nothing for CNG in vehicles side.

This is why I conclude that the US has got to reduce electrical consumption to free up NG.
and Pickens concludes to free up NG electrical generation use wind mills.

1. Demonstrate for conversions, with these squeeze plays picketing is the only recourse.
2. Spend your money for energy efficiency in your home not todays PV
and Join http://push.pickensplan.com/group/ariazonaagainsttodayspv
and Join the technical Aspects of the Pickens Plan. http://push.pickensplan.com/group/technicalaspectsofthepickensplan
3. And don't waste money on todays PV http://push.pickensplan.com/group/solarpower/forum/topic/show?id=2187034%3ATopic%3A1216444

We squeeze from two sides,
not giving the utility companies a break by not buying todays PV.
not giving the automobile companies a break by not buying new automobiles.

Comment by david epps on November 21, 2008 at 2:40pm

Convert the 244 million US fleet to CNG, ethanol, or propane, NOW!!!!!!
Hell one conversion would allow all three alternative fuels plus gasoline.
Ethanol and gasoline mix.
CNG and propane are compressed gases.
Add compressed gas tank, regulator and tubing for the gases
change the ECU software to adjust the fuel mixture.
add a selector valve for liquid or gases
and you are good to go for 100,000 miles.

You won't be allowed to change the subject.
With a last gasp ad hominem attack.

Who is the troll?

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts
controversial - YOU are wrong is controversial
inflammatory - YOU are inflamed by zfacts
irrelevant - YOU are closed minded to the alternative approach to energy independance.
off-topic messages - YOU are off topic with your ad hominem attack.
with the intention of provoking other users into an emotional response - YOU are emotional having a hatred for ethanol.
or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion - YOU are disruptive by using ad hominem attack in this discussion

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

It didn't change the subject. I merely showed that you resort to fallacious arguments. PS zfacts are zcrap. They give you facts and a plethora of dooms day clocks wrapped in a lot of propaganda.

Comment by Hugh Hemington on November 21, 2008 at 12:46pm

Yeah, I read a lot of material on the RFA site. Other info is on zfacts.com.

Your suggestion that we "must" picket the auto show because conversions aren't showing made me realize I've been feeding a troll here.

They aren't showing because there aren't any approved for CA. It's not a conspiracy by the show promoter.

I don't have any more to say on the ethanol issue. Troll on.

Comment by david epps on November 21, 2008 at 9:28am

Hugh
I am a info junky.
Please feed my habit and give at least one link that I can start looking for what you saw
thanks

I noticed that my links of all those ethanol reports didn't parse to the post well
here is the source for all of them

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/resource/reports/index.php

david

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last