Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    1:38 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: E15,seriously now? Back to Topics
RecklessFire

Sophomore Author
Dallas

Posts:207
Points:342,675
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 6, 2013 10:54:15 AM

How can anyone actually support this cr*p? Seriously! Auto folk have known for a long time what it does, and now the studies can be seen far and wide that this blend does irreparable damage to both old and new vehicles.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,195
Points:21,880
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2013 8:09:20 AM

Ten percent of our domestic fuel supply is ethanol. Do you like paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, now? If the refineries had to compensate for that amount of fuel, price at the pump goes up significantly. In addition, if demand for corn decreases, farmers, simply, will grow less corn. Price for corn will not be affected that much. The impact corn price has on your food prices is also minimal. In the products made from corn, corn represents a very small portion of the product cost. Higher fuel price is going to affect your grocery bill, much more than corn will.

Do the math for yourself. A bushel of corn weighs 56 pounds and sells for $7. You know what you pay for a box of corn flakes that is measured in ounces. It's not a tough one to figure out.
Profile Pic
EvergreenON
Champion Author Ontario

Posts:2,331
Points:893,255
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 3, 2013 7:55:21 AM

Stop Ethanol production corn is food not gas
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,342
Points:3,832,775
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2013 7:35:54 AM

"Stop burning our FOOD and prices for food will come down! "

Baloney! Stop using ethanol and farmers will plant less corn. They aren't farming for charity, they will plant what they can sell.
The biggest factor in price increases of food is the price gasoline and diesel, and eliminating ethanol sure as heck isn't going to cause the transportation cost of food to drop.
Profile Pic
ScottAdams5
Champion Author New York

Posts:2,157
Points:698,360
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Mar 1, 2013 7:25:15 AM



Don't use this E15 fuel! Stop burning our FOOD and prices for food will come down!
Profile Pic
jacksfan
Champion Author Lincoln

Posts:2,572
Points:1,272,615
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Feb 12, 2013 11:35:10 AM

Filled up again last week with E-15. Works great!

Evidently, RecklessFire has no qualms playing reckless when it comes to the facts. Then again, that's the MO of the Anti-Ethanol(TM) Crowd, right, shocky?
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 3:01:15 PM

As I pointed out before, the ethanol minimum usage mandate is a safety net for the ethanol and corn producers and has little concern for consumers other then to force them to use a product a majority of them don't want...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 2:59:11 PM

No, I think that if a product is worthy, then it will find a niche in the market place.

A product that can't compete will rely on measures like propaganda and mandates to "encourage" and force people to buy it, much like ethanol is doing now...

[Edited by: Shockjock1961 at 2/11/2013 2:59:31 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 2:46:21 PM

The fact that you do not see the connection between the two statements indicates you have no interest in changing the status quo of oil's monopoly.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 2/11/2013 2:46:41 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 2:42:53 PM

Exactly what does my wishing if I had an FFV or not have to do with the minimum usage mandate?
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 2:27:29 PM

Shockjock, there will likely come a day when you will wish you had an FFV. Maybe not... but maybe. I'd rather have an FFV than one that limits choices and options.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 2/11/2013 2:28:33 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 2:07:13 PM

"I support truth, not mandates"

LOL!!

And yet you just admitted you support the mandate that is being claimed to be a "safety net"...

The only safety net it provides is to the ethanol and corn producers not the consumer...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 2:05:33 PM

Why would anyone put a fuel in after the warranty expires that would have violated the warranty in the first place?
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 12:12:39 PM

Most cars on the road are out of warranty, moot point.

And you know why they don't want you putting E-15 in your car OUT of warranty? Because at that point it will extend the life of your engine and fuel system!

I have never said I favored the RF standard shockjock. It's designed as a safety net whether I support it or I don't.

I support truth, not mandates.



[Edited by: Hannie59 at 2/11/2013 12:14:30 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 11:56:10 AM

"But you know what? If I owned a new vehicle, one who's powertrain was covered under a manufacturer warranty that I wanted the maker to honor, and they state that using E-15 will VIOLATE THE WARRANTY, there's no way I would put it in my car. Period. The studies, the government, the Corn Lobby can all say it's safe. IT DOESN'T MATTER. If the car companies void car warranties if you use it, it's a dead product."

EXACTLY!

Which is the reason I won't use it in my vehicles...
Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 11:54:02 AM

"Don't mandate that anyone use ethanol (And as far as individuals go, I am still not forced to). As far as a renewable fuel standard, that is a safety net so that we don't get caught as a nation at a disadvantage."

So what you are saying is don't mandate the use of ethanol, but mandate it as a safety net?

I think there is a word for that...
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 11:01:45 AM

Talon, I argee with that post for the most part, but you are not thinking like most of the anti ethanol dunderheads that post here. Don't mandate that anyone use ethanol (And as far as individuals go, I am still not forced to). As far as a renewable fuel standard, that is a safety net so that we don't get caught as a nation at a disadvantage.

I speak out for E-15 because there are so many stupid comments regarding, specifically, damage which are blantant lies. As well enormously exaggerated claims of mileage losses. And E-15 has been used as the catalyst for the largest propaganda movement in United States history by the API.

FFVs and E-85, (and to a lesser degree, blender pumps with E-0 included)is really where all the muscle of Growth Energy ought to be going right now. The API will still find ways to smear it, but at least that way the two fuels have a way to compete. As opposed to the wierd relationship they have now. And don't forget the oil companies were the primary beneficiary for the E-10 blender's credit because that credit in itself went to them. Only incentive for ethanol there was the oil companies are buying it.

Thanks for adding your 2 cents Talon.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 2/11/2013 11:07:30 AM EST]
Profile Pic
TalonKarrde
Rookie Author Des Moines

Posts:9
Points:280
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 9:51:36 AM

If the CRC (supposedly unbiased) is actually doing the research, I am not sure I care who funds them. I mean, if they were simply "making up" research to make Growth Energy happy (or any sponsor), the oil companies would have "sponsered" research that Ethanol not only destroys your engine, but makes your cat shed hair and makes all the days cloudy a long time ago and the CRC would have posted proof of that.

You can argue for or against E15 all you want, at the end of the day, nobody's putting in the pumps. I live in Ethanol country here, and I haven't seen a single E-15 pump yet.

Profile Pic
Banjoe
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:8,461
Points:1,224,255
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 9:40:12 AM

The issue seems to seems to be that any honest research becomes suspect as soon as it's funded by any party with an agenda.

That's as sad as discounting Hannie59's real life results because they were all positive so he's obviously biased.

That's too bad as there is likely a lot of excellent people providing valuable research results that just gets tossed into the garbage.
Profile Pic
TalonKarrde
Rookie Author Des Moines

Posts:9
Points:280
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 9:33:07 AM

E15 was nothing more than a way to get over the blend wall that farmers were hitting IMHO. I think they saw themselves getting to the top of their market.

I don't honestly think E15 will damage any of the engines (2001 and newer?) that the government did their testing on. I don't think it would damage any NEW car that's NOT FFV. It certainly wouldn't damage a vehicle designed to run E-85.

But you know what? If I owned a new vehicle, one who's powertrain was covered under a manufacturer warranty that I wanted the maker to honor, and they state that using E-15 will VIOLATE THE WARRANTY, there's no way I would put it in my car. Period. The studies, the government, the Corn Lobby can all say it's safe. IT DOESN'T MATTER. If the car companies void car warranties if you use it, it's a dead product.

I am in favor of E-85, FFV's and Ethanol made from corn stover, metropolitan waste, Sorghum, Energy Beets, Prairie Grass etc, and even corn if not mandated.

End the mandates, encourage Flex-Fuel vehicles. Let the markets decide. Subsidize the research into better Ethanol production processes, but don't force percentages of Ethanol production. Also eliminate all the "hidden" subsidies for Big Oil. I'm talking about the tax breaks going back a 100 years.


[Edited by: TalonKarrde at 2/11/2013 9:35:00 AM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 9:12:09 AM

wildwill001, good find.

Let me rephrase my statement and let me do it based on claims by CRC, Inc.

"The Coordinating Research Council, Inc. (CRC) is a non-profit corporation supported by the petroleum and automotive equipment industries."

"CRC’s function is to provide the mechanism for joint research conducted by the two industries that will help in determining the optimum combination of petroleum products and automotive equipment."

These statements clearly state the obvious.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/11/2013 9:13:42 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,195
Points:21,880
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 8:31:37 AM

"As asked many times before: Does Growth Energy and the RFA sponsor (pay for) research programs performed by the CRC? Yes."

So, what. I worked for a major drug manufacturer. We directly funded research by independent concerns, just as the ethanol producers and gasoline producers are doing. We would support researchers at major universities for their quality work and the results are published in major medical journals. No difference here.

What part of the protocol is flawed?
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 11, 2013 7:27:42 AM

Page 18 under Acknowledgements in report 661. "This project was sponsored by Growth Energy, the Renewable Fuels Association, and the Coordinating Research Council (CRC)."

As asked many times before: Does Growth Energy and the RFA sponsor (pay for) research programs performed by the CRC? Yes.

"So, how much?" Doesn't matter.

Thanks, wildwill001 for helping me set the record straight.


Profile Pic
nighthawk91
Sophomore Author South Dakota

Posts:134
Points:79,650
Joined:Feb 2003
Message Posted: Feb 10, 2013 9:50:23 PM

I can easily support it. In fact, I just added 4g of e85 to 9g of e-10 in a NON FFV 2001 Century. Have been doing it for over a year with no performance issues and mileage comparable to straight gas.

One byproduct of ethanol is distillers grains. This is fed to cattle, hog, sheep.

So corn is still going into the food supply. ;)

Profile Pic
Shockjock1961
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:23,798
Points:2,793,665
Joined:Apr 2006
Message Posted: Feb 9, 2013 10:20:57 AM

"That's the American way."

It is?

Funny, I see no federal gasoline minimum usage mandates
I see no federal diesel fuel minimum usage mandates
I see no federal candy minimum usage mandates
I see no federal paper minimum usage mandates

However I do see an ethanol minimum usage mandate and there is even a minimum usage mandate for cellulosic ethanol, a non-existent fuel that the Feds fine the oil companies for not using...
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 9, 2013 9:18:18 AM

RedRider1OK, I agree "Game over..."

You have made an erroneous statement and failed to prove it.
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,042
Points:3,330,685
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 9, 2013 3:14:17 AM

Looks like red is having problems again.
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 11:06:25 PM

"You made this claim. So, how much?"

You would need to check with CRC as I've stated many times before. Game over...
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 10:46:01 PM

RedRider1OK wrote: "The point is, regardless if the study has started or not, Growth Energy and the RFA have sponsored (paid money) to CRC to commission and perform a study on E-15 driveability."

You made this claim. So, how much?

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/8/2013 10:46:52 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 10:15:43 PM

RedRider1OK wrote: "Continuing to blow smoke...."

Still pathetic. If this is the best you can do I feel sorry for you.
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 9:50:23 PM

Continuing to blow smoke...."You have made an erroneous statement that I am asking you to prove."

I do not work for the CRC nor did I make up this statement:

"Sponsorship for this test program is being provided by Growth Energy
and the Renewable Fuels Association, with a project start anticipated in
February 2013. "
Last sentence page 62

Why don't you do as I have asked before, Prove the source (not me) wrong by providing a link or proof that shows us otherwise or continue to do as you've been doing all along....blowing smoke
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 9:26:15 PM

RedRider1OK wrote: "Did you miss reading the last paragraph copied directly from CRC?"

Did you? You have made an erroneous statement that I am asking you to prove. Once more, how much?

RedRider1OK wrote: "No I didn't make anything up, I provided the proof. "

You are quoting an advertising for something that does not exist from the source that was already proven unreliable and you call it proof. Pathetic.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/8/2013 9:30:11 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 9:12:30 PM

"Prove it. How much? Are you simply making this up?"

Did you miss reading the last paragraph copied directly from CRC?

"Sponsorship for this test program is being provided by Growth Energy
and the Renewable Fuels Association, with a project start anticipated in
February 2013. "

If you still have a problem with it, then contact them or prove them wrong by providing information (a link) showing otherwise. No I didn't make anything up, I provided the proof. Let's see you do the same or continue to blow smoke.

Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 8:54:37 PM

RedRider1OK wrote: "The point is, regardless if the study has started or not, Growth Energy and the RFA have sponsored (paid money) to CRC to commission and perform a study on E-15 driveability."

Prove it. How much? Are you simply making this up?

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/8/2013 8:55:42 PM EST]
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 8:50:47 PM

Krzysiek, you missed the point. The point is, regardless if the study has started or not, Growth Energy and the RFA have sponsored (paid money) to CRC to commission and perform a study on E-15 driveability. Therefore; your original remark "Can you tell me whose interests is CRC, Inc. serving?" in this instance it would be Growth Energy and the RFA. If you have any information (a link) that Growth Energy and the RFA have not paid into the CRC for this study, please provide it or your argument is over.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 6:46:38 PM

emtrob2012 wrote: "thank you US GOVT...but corn is for food, not gasoline"

How long did it take you to come up with this?
Profile Pic
emtrob2012
All-Star Author Myrtle Beach

Posts:978
Points:163,030
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 5:51:18 PM

thank you US GOVT...but corn is for food, not gasoline
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 11:50:51 AM

RedRider1OK wrote: ""I have posted here first." That's a good one."

I see you are still getting confused when a fact is presented to you. Classic.

RedRider1OK wrote: "I posted a link to a CRC ethanol sponsored driveability study about E-15."

If have not, simply because it does not exist. What you have posted is an advertising about a possible study. You don't even know if this so called study started or not.

On the other hand, I do understand that providing actual facts is not your strongest suit.
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 11:35:34 AM

"I have posted here first." That's a good one.

I posted a link to a CRC ethanol sponsored driveability study about E-15.

And you responded:

"Please provide the link to the research you claim is sponsored by RFA. It does not exist, does it. I love how Big Oil Shills always come up with their "facts".

I did and you keep ignoring the facts and my question back to you. "SHOW ME THE LINK WHERE THE RFA AND GROWTH ENERGY IS NOT FUNDING THE CRC STUDY ABOUT E15 DRIVEABILITY."?

Simple question. Now for the answer...
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 11:15:20 AM

Guys, driveability is not very relevant. I have had no driveability issues ever on any type of fuel and a I have said before I have pushed the ethanol WAY above recommendations. If growth energy is funding a driveability study, I see it as a waste of their time. Maybe it's because they know it will come out fine.

Growth Energy needs to be focusing on blender pumps IMO that run from E-0 to E-85 with mid blends in between. And put all their muscle into PROMOTION of the great fuel E-85 is. Their obsession with E-15 just makes them more vulnerable to the API and their scare tactics.

The API study is just bashing and scaring to protect a monopoly. Neither the API nor the auto manufacturers care about a car with 100,000 miles on it nor the owners of that vehicle.

What you need to look at is WHY are either of these two groups funding either of these studies. One to protect a monopoly and one to defend itself against false scare tactics.



[Edited by: Hannie59 at 2/8/2013 11:17:30 AM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 11:13:47 AM

RedRider1OK wrote: "Simple question; prove me and the CRC wrong! That's all you have to do, nothing else."

It does not work this way. I have posted here first. If you don't agree with what I have written prove me wrong. So far you are failing to do so miserably.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/8/2013 11:14:17 AM EST]
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 11:08:23 AM

You and Goldi cannot produce anything to prove the CRC Ethanol supported study is false; therefore you two must continue blow smoke. This really shows your true colors.

As asked before: "SHOW ME THE LINK WHERE THE RFA AND GROWTH ENERGY IS NOT FUNDING THE CRC STUDY ABOUT E15 DRIVEABILITY."

Simple question; prove me and the CRC wrong! That's all you have to do, nothing else.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 8:27:38 AM

RedRider1OK wrote: "Krzysiek, since you seem to have some sort of answer to everything. Show me the link where the RFA and Growth energy is not funding the CRC study about E15 driveability."

Before one of your posts was simply pathetic. This one is pathetic and desperate.
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,042
Points:3,330,685
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2013 3:39:32 AM

I wouldn't pay much attention to red, for he is the king of whoppers. Never has had the facts on his side.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,147
Points:2,803,245
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 9:47:17 PM

Someone is making $$ trying to sell more gasoline.
Someone is making $$ trying to sell more diesel fuel.
Someone is making $$ trying to sell more candy.
Someone is making $$ trying to sell more paper.
Someone is making $$ trying to sell more (fill in the blank).

That's the American way. Do you prefer a communistic or socialistic way?
Profile Pic
Z03
Sophomore Author New York

Posts:216
Points:104,390
Joined:Dec 2012
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 9:27:52 PM

Someone is making $$ trying to sell more ethanol.
Profile Pic
RedRider1OK
All-Star Author Oklahoma City

Posts:953
Points:26,190
Joined:Mar 2008
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 9:27:37 PM

Krzysiek, since you seem to have some sort of answer to everything. Show me the link where the RFA and Growth energy is not funding the CRC study about E15 driveability.

Here's the link proving you wrong again. See page 62 for the second time.
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 9:20:51 AM

And Goldseeker, it is one of several reasons that your vehicle is going strong at 140K. Not the only one I'm sure, but the ethanol is helping keep the engine and lines from gunking up with tar from the dinosaur fuel. :) Same thing on my 2 non FFVs. All miles between E-20 and E-40 splash blended and going along great with no engine or fuel problems ever.



[Edited by: Hannie59 at 2/7/2013 9:22:33 AM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 8:13:32 AM

RecklessFire wrote: "Science much? It's impossible to have the "exact same effect" with a different chemical composition; even the energy potential and products of combustion are not the same."

Do you? Do you understand that gasoline contains more than 150 chemicals? How come you do not whine about gasoline causing any problems?

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/7/2013 8:14:17 AM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,321
Points:1,338,855
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 8:09:59 AM

RedRider1OK you still don't get it, do you.

I understand that you are used to using lies and speculations as "facts" and you are confused about this piece of information. Let me explain it to you. You are taking a piece of speculation, since you don't even know if the study started or not, and trying to pass as a fact. The only problem is that the source of information does not have a good track record at all.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 2/7/2013 8:10:44 AM EST]
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,042
Points:3,330,685
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 7, 2013 3:02:28 AM

Quit your crying, E15 is not mandated anywhere. As for me I use E20-E30 and it works just fine in my 140,000 mile plus vehicle.
Post a reply Back to Topics