NEW GAS ?

[Dave@Moon]

Read more: EPA: More renewable fuels required - Robin Bravender and Darren Samuelsohn - POLITICO.com

Matt, I linked the same article. The difference is that the real reporters didn't put extra words in the man's mouth.

Edited December 1, 2010 by Dave@Moon (see edit history)

[MCHinson]

I know, that was my point... your article and the article that my friend sent to me had the same quote... And I find that quote interesting.... no matter which source it came from. Your negative comment on the first source does not change what he said.

[Dave@Moon]

Matt, I linked the same article. The difference is that the real reporters didn't put extra words in the man's mouth.

The point being that embellishing the comments of a scientist to appear to advocate something not stated is pretty much the calling card of groups like this. It's one of the easiest ways to build a manufactroversy ( manufactroversy - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com ).

Clearly one is well under way here on ethanol. If you're not able to spot it, you will be manipulated by it.

[MCHinson]

Dave,

I am not going to argue with you over this, but you might want to read each link... you will find that the multiple sources are all in agreement about what he said. Nobody is putting any words in his mouth. He said it. It is quoted the same by all. Just read the quote. It is interesting. Obviously Ethanol is not the answer. Hopefully the next ideas will be better than Ethanol.

[W_Higgins]

Ethanol is a farce and a boondoggle. People with practical experience see it (and nobody here has more of that on this topic than the Carbking). I see it in what comes through the shop now vs. prior to E10 being common here. It's not imagined. Anything that has to be subsidized has not enough merit to stand on its own. It's strictly a taking of money from taxpayers and giving it to the corn lobby because they couldn't concoct a successful free market way of doing it without government intervention.

Edited December 1, 2010 by W_Higgins (see edit history)

[Dave@Moon]

Dave,....

Nobody is putting any words in his mouth.

Uh, yeah.

".....he did say the future of transportation fuels should not involve ethanol."

What he actually did say that was the closest to this line of (you know what) was:

“Americans can drive their vehicles using agriculturally based fuels, but we are primarily focused on developing the new technologies that can supercede ethanol made from starches,”

Nobel Laureate Dr. Chu is one of the world's leading authorities and researchers into biofuels and the production of cellulosic ethanol. He is profoundly critical of corn based ethanol production, and rightly so (Who am I to argue with the world's premier expert on the subject?). His career since winning the Nobel Prize has centered on expanding research and use of biofuels to (in his words, again who am I to object?) mitigate against climate change, with a major emphasis on cellulosic ethanol as (again in his words) a "bridge fuel" to the future.

If it were an "ideal fuel", it wouldn't be a "bridge fuel".

He has been consistent in his work and statements for years, going back well before his appointment as director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and then DOE Secretary. The statements made on Monday, as much as CNS would like to twist them into something else, represent no change at all in his position or governmental policy.

It's refreshing to have men of science in charge of science, instead of businessmen/salesmen as has been the case recently. It can get confusing following their multi-faceted statements, however.

Edited December 1, 2010 by Dave@Moon
typo (see edit history)

[carbking]

I fail to see how this is insulting the Ford 6 in any way. It was a simple, economy engine.

And I agree completely. However, some take offense when one states that their personal vehicle does not have a high volumetrically efficient engine. I didn't think that you would, and you didn't.

I try to prefix such remarks with an apology before the fact.

On a personal note, I came home from northern Illinois by way of Iowa in a turbo-charged 1979 Ford Mustang Cobra about 15 years ago. I should have filled up before entering Iowa (I knew better) but simply forgot.

I stopped at several stations trying to buy gasoline before the gasoline gauge suggested that if I didn't want to walk, I had better put something in the tank. I bought the highest grade fuel I could get at a name-brand station.

Within 10 miles the engine started to internally hemorage! I had to turn off the A/C, and drop the speed (interstate) to 50 MPH to stop the detonation. Finally limped into Missouri, and found a gas station. Filled up with 93 octane gasoline. Within 10 miles, I could again drive the speed limit (65), but still couldn't use the air. Drove another 100 miles and filled up again. Now I could drive the speed limit (70 here) and use the air.

Now that we must buy garbage gas in Missouri, I have recalibrated the carburetor about 15 percent richer, and all is well (except fuel economy went from 28 MPG to approximately 18 MPG). Obviously, a lot of that is in the recalibration, but some is in the lower caloric content of the garbage fuel.

Jon.

[West Peterson]

I left Iowa in 1983. I was a (quite literally) starving graduate student, and didn't exactly hang out at the local CCCA meetings.

The closest local CCCA meeting would have been in Minneapolis. The Iowa Region was long-gone by then.

Now, back to the on-again/off-again attempt at changing people's opinions...

[MCHinson]

While I hesitate to bring this up again, and I find it unusual to find myself agreeing with Al Gore, what the heck...

U.S. corn ethanol was not a good policy-Gore | Energy & Oil | Reuters

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Interesting, Matt. When Gore says he "paid too much attention to the farmers in Iowa because I was about to run for President" really saying "I supported bad policy that has in fact added no environmental value but harmed the US economy for personal political gain."?? Imagine that. Shocking!

Now if only we could harness that hot air coming from him....

[Dave@Moon]

Interesting, Matt. When Gore says he "paid too much attention to the farmers in Iowa because I was about to run for President" really saying "I supported bad policy that has in fact added no environmental value but harmed the US economy for personal political gain."?? Imagine that. Shocking!

Now if only we could harness that hot air coming from him....

In 2005 in it's last season the TV show The West Wing devoted an entire episode to this. The Alan Alda character rather heroically stood by his convictions against ethanol in the finale. The episode was titled "King Corn" ( King Corn - The West Wing Episode Guide).

So it's not exactly a secret that Iowa getting to pick our Presidential candidates for us has influenced the development of ethanol disproportionately, and does so from every side of every aisle for a very long time.

That said, the development of ethanol is an evolving structure. It is not, and never has been, a final result of the process to have corn based ethanol as a permanent part of the American energy system. The goal is to have less destructive, more efficient sources of glucose and other sugars to ferment into fuel. That has been the stated goal of Dr. Chu for more than 10 years now, and is the stated goal of every responsible scientist working on this problem. Corn is an interim step.

...a bothersome, inefficient, unfortunately politically influential interim step.

Edited December 8, 2010 by R W Burgess
edited clerical errors (see edit history)

[Guest Silverghost]

Dave & others~

If world oil suppy is very limited~

And I believe it is ~

Why is the US burning-up millions of barrels of oil in stationary electric power generation plants.?

Seems like a big waste of limited oil reserves~

You can't put a ton of coal in your car trunk and drive around.

BUT you CAN burn coal in a fixed electric power plant ~

AND~~~

Save the Oil for our cars, trucks, etc~~~

If you don't want to burn coal or use atomic power~

And Solar & wind power will never meet all our needs~

Then we might as well go back to living in the dark without heat, AC, or electric power !

You can't have it all~

100% clean air & modern heat and electric power~~~~

And Internal combustion Auto and truck engines !

There are some very tough choices to be made~

We need to act now !

THER HAS TO BE A SANE TRADE-OFF~~~

Edited December 8, 2010 by Silverghost (see edit history)

[Steve_Mack_CT]

Agree we do need to be sensible but the US has come a long way and difficult choices have been made, not all nations are meeting standards we are. (thinking smokestacks here..) For examplemy two 2003 explorers have over 120K & 140K miles on them - still getting relatively good MPGs (virtually unchanged from new) and they are clean - very clean, according to our firendly emissions testing stations. In fact, any vehicle made in the last 10 - 15 years is incredibly clean compared to say, vehicles of just 20 - 25 years ago. That was not free by the way, anyone who has bought a new car in the past few years has "done their part". They still test and collect $$$ on my new cars (2008) which are barely broken in - silly but a lost argument...

What is unfortunate is that I agree with Gore's statement (ugh..) that this will be hard to turn back now, I guess we shall see what happens, somewhat encouraging that some of the pols are running from what they advocated now that the results are not so good, and neither are their records for pushing it!

I am not saying people should be careless relative to environmental issues, just that I am not drinking the Algore Kool-Aid, as there is probably Ethanol in it!!

Edited December 8, 2010 by Steve_Mack_CT (see edit history)

[W_Higgins]

I say this ethanol stuff is a boondoggle because all these issues can be hashed out in a lab. There's no need to subject the whole of the population to this to know whether or not it will work. Anytime the government subsidizes something, it means a handful of people are getting a lot of money that has been taken from us and given to them. Anything that has merit can function on its own.

[Guest gunjeep444]

I put a few gallons of Aviation gas in my 56 Buick when I fill it up. Station there keeps some for guys with old cars.

[ted sweet]

and what effect will that have?

[jdome]

To clarify something Silverghost brought up, we do not generate electric in the US for the utility grids with oil products. It sort of raises the back of my hair when I hear a "political scientist" make the false claim that solar and wind power will lower our dependence on foreign oil. Utility grid electric generation and dependence on foreign are separate issues.

Up until the 70's we used to burn fuel oil for steam to electric generation but many of those plants ran dry and dark during the oil embargo. The Gov't already legislated an end to oil generation and subsidized the cost of conversion to other fuels by 1980. Natural gas was the most effective conversion at that time.

There are a lot of private "stationary" generators used for back up when the normal line power fails at hospitals and private and public buildings, etc. These run on a number of fuels like gasoline, diesel, LP gas or piped in natural gas. I can tell you from experience that ethanol has been a real problem. The stuff can spoil in as little as 3 months to the point that the unattended, automatic start systems can't start the engines. California and other agencies are now trying to regulate these machines but I think there actual use is inconsequential.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

To clarify something Silverghost brought up, we do not generate electric in the US for the utility grids with oil products. It sort of raises the back of my hair when I hear a "political scientist" make the false claim that solar and wind power will lower our dependence on foreign oil. Utility grid electric generation and dependence on foreign are separate issues.

Up until the 70's we used to burn fuel oil for steam to electric generation but many of those plants ran dry and dark during the oil embargo. The Gov't already legislated an end to oil generation and subsidized the cost of conversion to other fuels by 1980. Natural gas was the most effective conversion at that time.

There are a lot of private "stationary" generators used for back up when the normal line power fails at hospitals and private and public buildings, etc. These run on a number of fuels like gasoline, diesel, LP gas or piped in natural gas. I can tell you from experience that ethanol has been a real problem. The stuff can spoil in as little as 3 months to the point that the unattended, automatic start systems can't start the engines. California and other agencies are now trying to regulate these machines but I think there actual use is inconsequential.

Roughly 6% of the electricity generated in the U.S. is currently being generated via oil fired generating plants. Some 8% of power generated in New York is from oil fired generating plants. Many generating plants built since the 1970s have the option of being either coal fired or natural gas fired.

Jim

Edited December 13, 2010 by Jim_Edwards (see edit history)

[carbking]

Here is an interesting link as to source fuel for electic generation.

Electric Power Monthly - Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy Source

If I did the math correctly, electric generation from petroleum liquids in 2009 was 0.6 percent (less than 1 percent).

Jon.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Here is an interesting link as to source fuel for electic generation.

Electric Power Monthly - Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy Source

If I did the math correctly, electric generation from petroleum liquids in 2009 was 0.6 percent (less than 1 percent).

Jon.

That would be correct as a percentage of all sources of power generation in the U.S. in 2009, but does not express the percentage of KWs produced by the fuel in relationship to all other means. In any event the total amount of oil being used to generate electricity is virtually minuscule to the whole.

[rocketraider]

There are very few dedicated oil burners left, mostly in the Northeast Corridor. Coal plants have to start on fuel oil or natural gas and can usually carry up to about 10% output burning strictly oil/gas before switching to coal.

Most gas turbines are fueled by natural gas now. All new construction is. Jets, as we in the biz like to call them, can be pretty thirsty when burning #2 fuel oil.

[Dave@Moon]

It sort of raises the back of my hair when I hear a "political scientist" make the false claim that solar and wind power will lower our dependence on foreign oil. Utility grid electric generation and dependence on foreign are separate issues.

How about when a real scientist makes the "false" claim?

Renewable electrical generation most certainly will lower dependence on foreign oil. Not by ending electrical generation using oil, but by replacing end uses of oil. The Chevy Volt is a perfect example, as is my heat pump (which replaces my oil furnace with outdoor temperatures above 25 degrees in my "hybrid" home heating system. A new electric furnace will do exactly the same as soon as my oil furnace bites the dust in a few years.) As much as 10% of our personal transportation energy use is expected to be from electrical sources in 10 years. Much of that energy will be derived from renewable generation sources, and even more will derive from increasing electrical energy conservation measures.

(Keep on buying those c.f.l.s!!! )

There are no "seperate issues" with energy consumption. It's just a matter of thinking outside the box.

[Guest Silverghost]

I know of a fair number of oil only electric generating plants in PA and NJ today ! There are several near my PA home and NJ vacation house ! The BL English Atlantic City Electric generating plant was actually converted from coal to oil in the 1970s !

There used to be a mountain coal outside~

Now train tankers bring in the fuel oil instead of coal !

Because of our government's great wisdom we all will all be dealing with the problems, and high cost of clean-up & health issues that the government once mandated MTBE gasoline additive has caused in contaminating our nation's ground drinking water.

This nasty government mandated chemical actually dissolved our underground fiberglass gasoline station storage tanks~~~

So now does ethanol !

In fact it is far worse !

I know many boat owners whose fiberglass gasoline

tanks have actually started to dissolve from the inside out because of ethanol !

Check out any marine web forum for insight into this severe safety issue !

And you thought DDT and PCB s were bad !

What I want to know~

Why is there not more long term lab testing done before the federal government mandates all these nasty fuel additives ?

MTBE is now today a far worse underground water pollution problem for the entire US underground drinking water system.

And how about the now popular practice using Fracking or fracturing of underground rock formations for the release on trapped natural gas?

In some areas of the US folks can actually LIGHT the natural gas that Fracking hasreleased in their well water at the tap !

NOW~

What do YOU have to say about Federal Government mandated & Government caused MTBE contamination ~~~DAVE & others ???

We all need to think more about adding these fuel additives before we do more harm & car damage than good !

Everyone here wants a cleaner environment~

We also don't want to create more future health issues~

An above all, since this is an Antique auto forum, we want to be able to actually drive and enjoy our old autos without having their older fuel systems totally ruined by new fuel additives and ethanol also.

Before more dangerous and damaging chemicals are put into our nation's gasoline supply we need more real-world, real auto testing before any government approval or mandates !

Edited December 14, 2010 by Silverghost (see edit history)

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

May I suggest that Political type discussions and comments not get into this site any more than they have. We all have personal opinions regarding environmental issues, and most particularly as they may relate to our chosen hobby; but let's not ruin this site by getting into discussion that will inevitably become ugly. Let's just accept the fact someone believes your or my position makes us a full blown moronic idiot, and you probably are.............

Jim

[W_Higgins]

True leaders of true causes do not enrich thjemselves from the cause, nor do they base their arguements on half truths and lies.

THAT is one of the best quotes I have read in a long time!

[Dave@Moon]

Already, used Hybrids sell for far less than other cars of the same year, and what is the output of any 3-5 year old battery?

First of all, the resale value thing is WAY off. Prius resale values took a small hit earlier this year with the bogus unintended acceleration scare (bogus for the Prius, that is. The non-hybrid Toyota models probably did have a problem of some sort.). That said, Prius resale values fell only enough to still be better than almost everything else on the road. If you want to think that not having the car go up in value as you drive it off the lot is bad, as was the real-world case for Priuses for about 4 years, that's fine.

However there are more hybids than the Prius. Other hybrids continue to command resale values far in excess of conventional cars. Because....

The batteries, and the hybrid system in it's entirety, is essentially a permenant, maintenance free system. None of the components wear any worse than other components from conventional cars. In fact you are VASTLY more likely in a hybrid to need a new engine than a new metal-hydride or lithium-hydride drive battery.

As soon as someone starts talking about batteries wearing out on a hybrid, you know thay have no experiences with them. Hybrids DO NOT have giant Die-Hards running them. Progress has been made, and electric powering of cars, either hybrid or directly, is here to stay without ANY doubt.

Edited December 13, 2010 by Dave@Moon
forgot important words: "is bad" (see edit history)

[Dave@Moon]

Because of our government's great wisdom we all will all be dealing with the problems, and high cost of clean-up & health issues that the government once mandated MTBE gasoline additive has caused in contaminating our nation's ground drinking water.

This nasty government mandated chemical actually dissolved our underground fiberglass gasoline station storage tanks~~~

MTBE was not "mandated" by anybody. It was approved against the advice of EPA scientists as an oxygenate in gasoline by the Federal govt. under extreme political pressure from the friends of Haliburton, who owned a proprietary synthesis patent for it. SInce it was the least cost alternative, it was elected.

The need to get members of 2 political parties to vote for the Clean Air Act Ammendments created the MTBE mess.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

The batteries, and the hybrid system in it's entirety, is essentially a permenant, maintenance free system. None of the components wear any worse than other components from conventional cars. In fact you are VASTLY more likely in a hybrid to need a new engine than a new metal-hydride or lithium-hydride drive battery.

As soon as someone starts talking about batteries wearing out on a hybrid, you know thay have no experiences with them. Hybrids DO NOT have giant Die-Hards running them. Progress has been made, and electric powering of cars, either hybrid or directly, is here to stay without ANY doubt.

I guess that explains why GM is struggling to get battery packs that they can warrant for 100,000 miles or Nissan doesn't warrant batteries for more than 60,000, Toyota doesn't warrant for more than 120,000 miles, and Tesla warrants for only 36,000 miles, unless the buyer is willing to put out an nonrefundable 12 grand for a battery pack replacement at 7 years.

They'll all be happy to know you have pronounced their hybrid and battery powered vehicles as a "Permanent, Maintenance Free System." Kool-Aid anyone?

Edited December 13, 2010 by Jim_Edwards (see edit history)

[Dave@Moon]

I guess that explains why GM is struggling to get battery packs that they can warrant for 100,000 miles or Nissan doesn't warrant batteries for more than 60,000, Toyota doesn't warrant for more than 120,000 miles, and Tesla warrants for only 36,000 miles, unless the buyer is willing to put out an nonrefundable 12 grand for a battery pack replacement at 7 years.

They'll all be happy to know you have pronounced their hybrid and battery powered vehicles as a "Permanent, Maintenance Free System." Kool-Aid anyone?

How long does a Toyota Prius battery last? How much does it cost to replace one? - Yahoo! Answers

Since the car went on sale in 2000, Toyota has not replaced a single battery for wear and tear.

I'll take the sour grape flavor!

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

How long does a Toyota Prius battery last? How much does it cost to replace one? - Yahoo! Answers

I'll take the sour grape flavor!

Give us all a break! A two year old statement on Yahoo from some totally unknown individual with no expressed qualification is not exactly accurate information. Even better is the "Wear and Tear" statement. Batteries don't suffer wear and tear they just become incapable of retaining or accepting a charge over time regardless of the technology.

And by the way, Toyota has indeed replaced battery packs under warranty by their own admission and readily state that the battery system is designed to last the life of the automobile (whatever the hell that ambiguous statement means).

Now do we want to discuss the disposal issues regarding the three main types of Lithium Ion batteries and the fact of some types of Lithium Ion batteries represent an environment hazard and must have a CDD device connected to them to fully discharge them before they are disposed of in any manner?

[Dave@Moon]

Gee, Moonie, you would think I didn't check the bargain basement price of old hybrids on Ebay before I posted, but I did. Also, Yahoo Answers is not a peer review site. Darn, Moonie, you forgot to mention the strategic metal aspect of the batteries, and that the components come from areas of the planet with considerable conflict. Forgotten too is the aspect that air conditioning and cars running any distance on electric power are not compatible. Also, the billions in non-existent federal money supporting these programs should be considered.

While in Austin, TX for Thanksgiving I did see and watch a Tesla on the streets. But, in my opinion, if individuals want to participate in these venues, they should do it without federal subsidies. But then, the real difference between conservatives and liberals is that conservatives spend their own money, while liberals spend other peoples’ money.

All of that has been hashed over here time and time again. It bores everyone including me. I'm not going to waste energy rehashing it. There are just too many people who confuse the inability to accept new information with conservatism, and treat the term like it's their football team.

[Dave@Moon]

Now do we want to discuss the disposal issues regarding the three main types of Lithium Ion batteries and the fact of some types of Lithium Ion batteries represent an environment hazard and must have a CDD device connected to them to fully discharge them before they are disposed of in any manner?

More rehash of ideas that can't be changed. For instance everyone truly interested in this knows these things (drive batteries) are too valuable when spent for anyone to throw away, and they have been since the beginning.

The real facts exist. You don't need me to find them for you.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

More rehash of ideas that can't be changed. For instance everyone truly interested in this knows these things (drive batteries) are too valuable when spent for anyone to throw away, and they have been since the beginning.

The real facts exist. You don't need me to find them for you.

Not rehashing anything, but you seem to relish every opportunity to bring your personal environment thoughts into any thread giving you an opportunity to so so. Considering this hobby is not about the environment and in fact to some degree flies in the face of espousing anything having environment considerations one has to ask why you pursue the hobby and perhaps even question whether you actually are involved in the hobby. Maybe you are just one of those people who enjoys frequenting forums just to stir things up.

There are plenty of political and environment forums on the web where you can express your feelings without bringing them here. Just google Al Gore if you don't know how to find them.

[Larry Schramm]

Here are two items that everyone might find of interest. First is this Reuters article on Al Gore and his new position on Ethanol. A sell out to get votes, who cares about the science and the resulting increase in food prices.

U.S. corn ethanol was not a good policy-Gore | Energy & Oil | Reuters

Second is that the lithium used for batteries has one country in the world is in one country that is not real western friendly. I have heard that from 35% to 90% of the worlds commercially available is in Bolivia. Here is an article from the BBC that puts the number at 50%.

BBC NEWS | Business | Bolivia holds key to electric car future

These are some things to think about.

Edited December 13, 2010 by Larry Schramm (see edit history)

[dep5]

Not rehashing anything, but you seem to relish every opportunity to bring your personal environment thoughts into any thread giving you an opportunity to so so. Considering this hobby is not about the environment and in fact to some degree flies in the face of espousing anything having environment considerations one has to ask why you pursue the hobby and perhaps even question whether you actually are involved in the hobby. Maybe you are just one of those people who enjoys frequenting forums just to stir things up.

There are plenty of political and environment forums on the web where you can express your feelings without bringing them here. Just google Al Gore if you don't know how to find them.

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you. I too am sick of reading the man-in-the-moon's political posts, nearly 10,000 of them. Why is this permitted? Any one else would have their posts deleted. HMN is another greenie that cavalierly pollutes the environment with their unwanted subscription postcards falling out of each issue.

[W_Higgins]

Just google Al Gore if you don't know how to find them.

Speaking of that -- how did that masseuse make out with that situation? She's the last person I know of that admits to googling Algore.

[Dave@Moon]

Why is this permitted? Any one else would have their posts deleted.

Because I post facts, not opinions (my own or others). Go back and read them dispassionately.

It can be, well........inconvenient.

It also helps the hobby to know the real story and the real facts, not what people want to be true. It doesn't mean that someone is anti-car to be pro-fact. In fact most of us realists. It just doesn't show sometimes.

[Dave@Moon]

Second is that the lithium used for batteries has one country in the world is in one country that is not real western friendly. I have heard that from 35% to 90% of the worlds commercially available is in Bolivia. Here is an article from the BBC that puts the number at 50%.

BBC NEWS | Business | Bolivia holds key to electric car future

These are some things to think about.

That is very interesting. Maybe it will help drag the Bolivian government into the 21st Century. It can't help but be good for the poor people of Bolivia.

It also illustrates why rechargable batteries are not an environmental hazard like oil or uranium. Lithium is and will be far to valuable to dipose of in the future, and (like large metal-hydride batteries) lithium-hydride batteries will be a virtually 100% recycled commodity for the foreseeable future.

[Guest Jim_Edwards]

Speaking of that -- how did that masseuse make out with that situation? She's the last person I know of that admits to googling Algore.

Not well from what I hear. Seems she got ticked over his attempting to pay her with Carbon Credits instead of cash.

[jdome]

If electric cars will replace foreign oil it is a mute point as to whether it is renewable sourced electric or coal for that matter, except that the Primaries don't start in West Virginia and there are no subsidies or mandates for coal, and GE is not lobbying for coal generators.

Al Gore admitting that ethanol is a mistake is long overdue but it won't put an end to the politicized energy legislation silliness any time soon. If you have been watching congress hash out the tax bill they've tacked on another $200 billion of pork(and climbing) just to buy votes to keep the tax rates as they are. Included are more ethanol and other renewable subsidies. And one of the co-sponsors of the CFI bulb bill admits that that was a mistake too and he plans to work next year to repeal it - if it buys him the chair of the House energy committee. Just another Gore phony but in the other party.

By my math, if we are using 40% of the corn crop for E10 it will take 60% to transition to E15. And 100% to go to E25 if we're foolish enough to go there. Some other new bridge fuel using green waste requires more tax money for a new series of refineries and another decade of field testing on our automobiles before we (the Gores of the world) discover the faults of that new fuel.