Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    9:03 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: They just won't stop the false claims! Back to Topics
Hannie59

All-Star Author
Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 10:56:41 AM

Read any stories about renewable fuels lately in mainstream media? Bet they're bad ones.

Here we look at the latest chapter in the "death to all renewables" propaganda war.

If you are a reader of The New York Times, you might have noticed this story recently, leading with "A glut of ethanol in the gasoline supply is threatening to push up prices at the pump...".

Accordingly, you may well be primed for a shock wave of gasoline price increases and prepared to declare jihad and commit violence on ethanol producers for causing it.

Well, let me save you some upcoming prison time on mayhem charges. The wholesale price of gasoline jumped 43 cents from January to February. The impact that ethanol is having is, ahem, about $0.007.

STOP being fooled, ethanol bashers! You have been made a fool of by oil with your belief of this stuff. It's all been proven wrong, yet again.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/19/2013 11:02:11 AM EST]
REPLIES (newest first) Topic is locked
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 5:48:31 PM

I am really tired of proving anything to you. Your intelligence is questionable, your logic non exsistant, your business acumin zero and you love for ethnol against anything else laughable. You post open ended statements like "prove your claim" and don't even have the curtosey or ability to even explain what you feel I need to explain.

Your dependence on others to think for you is evident in your continued inability to do so. Call me a shill all day long but once again I remind you to look in a mirror because you are the biggest ethanol shill I have ever come across. You will ignore facts, pick and choose the arguements you will respond to and completely ignore anything other than the issues you can whine about over and over again. Look at the biggere picture the US government will give over $16 billion in energy subsidies in 2013 and 20% of then will go to fossil fuels. That means renewables get the rest or 80% of $16 billion and as I have shown most of that is in tax treatments available to all manufacturing concerns in the US including ethanol producers. When I explain this you call it spin, when you quote a link from the ethanol sources you call it a fact. Well no it's a subject that both sides are putting their spin on. I admit that but you don't. Other subjects like the foriegn tax credit you have stopped talking about at all because the last link you posted did not even include it. I point that out, you don't respond to it. You run back under your mantra of spin, spin, oil shill.

I put my experience out there, I make my own points and don't rely on others. You have given no qualifications, no explaination of experience and the most you have ever said about yourself is when I challenged you that you get deductions on your personal tax return you replied "W-2 and rent" Unable to even grasp the simple concept that you receive a personal deduction of $3,400 and a standard deduction. That simple statement told me a lot about you and what it told me is you don't understand much.

I am at this point putting you on ignore because thats the best way to deal with people like you.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 3:47:56 PM

brerrabbitTX wrote: "Once again krzysiek_ck you post links, other post links but based on your answers you never read the links. In the article linked above it clearly states:..."

Wrong proof. Concentrate more on the first part of your "claim".
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 3:04:07 PM

"I always claimed that Big Oil Shill motto is

spin, half-truths, and lies

and your posts prove it 100%."

And I was always taught that whenever you point your finger at someone else be careful because three fingers are point back at yourself.

Spins, half truths, lies? That train runs both ways friends. The ethanol groups can do it every bit as well as you say the oil industry can.

Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 3:00:41 PM

"brerrabbitTX wrote: "I know krzysiek_ck likes to play small ball and laser focus on issues and the $104.4 million in taxpayer money is not going to ethanol, but again you have to look at the big picture and governmental money to all renewable motor fuels."

Where is the proof to your "claim"?

Posted for the second time

Once again krzysiek_ck you post links, other post links but based on your answers you never read the links. In the article linked above it clearly states:

"Sapphire’s crude farm is funded by more than $350 million in private and public monies, including a $50 million Energy Department grant and a $54.4 million loan guarantee from the Agriculture Department."

This is a direct quote from the article you clearly did not read.

Again whinning and saying the same thing 20 times does not mean you have won an arguement, it means you fail to understand what was said and refuse to read anything that is not from one of you pet sources.

Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 9:35:39 AM

brerrabbitTX wrote: "Since I will not tell you who I work for I will not show you a list of ethanol projects funded by my company, however the information is readily available for those who are willing to look. You however are not willing to look and therefore will claim "victory" because I won't provide you a link. Whatever."

You brought them up yet you try to spin it as I "not willing to look" to look for them. The only thing you are proving here is that you are the Big Oil Shill that came here with his/her little agenda and will do anything to "claim victory". I always claimed that Big Oil Shill motto is

spin, half-truths, and lies

and your posts prove it 100%.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 3/24/2013 9:36:34 AM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 24, 2013 9:16:17 AM

brerrabbitTX wrote: "krzysiek_ck has stated in another thread flat out that the big oil companies are greedy hence one of the reasons they should lose their tax treatments."

Yes, in my personal opinion Big Oil is greedy and for sure they don't need tax subsidies.

brerrabbitTX wrote: "I know krzysiek_ck likes to play small ball and laser focus on issues and the $104.4 million in taxpayer money is not going to ethanol, but again you have to look at the big picture and governmental money to all renewable motor fuels."

Where is the proof to your "claim"?
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 6:20:22 PM

It can be summed up in two sentences. This is a 30 sec video, watch if you care about your country, economy, and getting screwed:

This is why you are seeing a smear campaign on E-15. Not because it is bad, but because it is good. And they don't want you having the better choice.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/23/2013 6:22:22 PM EST]
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 4:55:04 PM

"My intent wasn't to label as a shill, but to put forth the presumption of knowledge of the oil companies tactics by one whom may be involved in the industry."

I did not respond to this earlier but wanted to now. Yes I work for an oil company, yes I have worked in the energy industry for over 31 years. However I can tell you this without reservation. I am at a mid level position within a very large company and involved with a lot of things in the retail fueling industry and can say without reservation I have never once heard about or been involved with any discussions concerning discrediting ethanol in any way.

It is inevitable that the current climate we do business in dictates that based on current law, regulations and rules we have to deal with it we are expected to continue operations and stay competative in the market while showing fair return to our investors. That statement can be made of anyone who works in corporate America, including those who work for ethanol companies. Over the years and to a public who only cares about the price of fuel we as the fueling inductry have had to deal with different formulations of fuel based on EPA standards, the introduction of ULSD, ethanol blending, the introduction of Bio diesel, and the reality that the price of oil has increased dramatically in the world in which we live.

The average consumer as indicated on these boards (mostly general gas talk) think that everything we do is to make more money. Well not always. Introduction of EPA regulations for seperate winter and summer blends of fuel, some of which are far above previous requirements required refinery redesigns, as did the ultra low diesel standard. The introduction of ethanol blending required the construction of ne tanks at every terminal, in line blending requirements, additional rail spurs and truck racks and dock lines to handle the ethanol. Seperate tanks for bio diesel products, blending capabilities etc. Each and every change comes with two major requirements, time, and money.Yes oil companies make more money because the price of oil is up. However understand that there are thousands of participants in this industry who do not explore and produce oil and natural gas. Flint Hills, Valero, and Tesoro are three very large companies that participate in the market from refinery to retail pump. The increase oil prices have hurt their businesses as well.

When you hear information that you want to say is false or lies coming from the oil industry you need to also consider that some of the feedback relates to the two issues I listed time and money. It takes time to build the infrastructure and it takes money to pay for it. Overall the industry is gearing it's self up for more bio fuel and ethanol. The problem is it's not happening fast enough for those who believe in ethanol at all costs. As we rush to that end what is to say a major break through in another area will look even better than ethanol? What if that solution is as good and say cheaper than ethanol? If we have run down one path and are to heavily invested in one over another then will we want to shift gears again, write off the money spent and head in another direction?Do as I do, temper everything you read from either side, consider the source, follow the money and ask yourself does it make sense.

Case in point, congress decided to include oil companies in the list of manufacturers that would qualify for section 199 tax credits albeit at a lower rate than others. The intent was to increase domestic oil production. Well since we will have more domestic oil in the US than we have in the past 25 years this year, increasing into the future, it would seem that congress got what they wanted. But now everyone wants to spin the 199 credits into subsidies for oil companies.



[Edited by: brerrabbitTX at 3/23/2013 4:59:45 PM EST]
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,329
Points:790,620
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 3:32:59 PM

Ethanol is not a good choice for a fuel; because engines have not been designed for it.
But Ethanol from corn is as stupid as it gets!!
From corn, It requires more energy to make a gallon of ethanol than you get back for it.
If you want ethanol, beets are the way to go. much more efficient.
You actually get energy leverage out o beets.
Finally, California is starting to invest in sugar beets for fuel. Beets will not compete energy against food.
beets are more efficient in using water than is corn. And you get considerably more energy per acre.http://news.yahoo.com/calif-farmers-team-convert-beets-140258652.html
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 2:49:43 PM

My apoligies Hannie, I should not have included you in the statement. krzysiek_ck has stated in another thread flat out that the big oil companies are greedy hence one of the reasons they should lose their tax treatments.

As far as misinformation goes, it cuts both ways as I have continually said. Oil companies want to stay in business, ethanol companies want to gain business and make no mistake for all of the noble statements the botoom line is just that the bottom line. They all want to profit from their enterprises.

Also I have mentioned and continue to mention other alternatives but you guys are fiercely ethanol. How about something like this?

Not ethanol but do you support this

Also note, it is Tesoro (one of the bad guys) buying this product, and from the article:

"Sapphire’s crude farm is funded by more than $350 million in private and public monies, including a $50 million Energy Department grant and a $54.4 million loan guarantee from the Agriculture Department."

Yes those are not direct ethanol subsidies, they are renawable fuels subsidies or grant from government. And that to produce less than 100 barrels a day.

I know krzysiek_ck likes to play small ball and laser focus on issues and the $104.4 million in taxpayer money is not going to ethanol, but again you have to look at the big picture and governmental money to all renewable motor fuels.

Also many link to Boehner the Democratic Senators comments on big oil tax breaks as krzysiek_ck did and a key compoonent of that link is that oil companies with the tax breaks have added no new production. Well as I always say about links, check the source, check the date because anyone using that link dated 2011 complaining about no new production should look at this:

Crude production exceeds imports

Now how is it not spin when someone uses an artcle from 2011 to justify their arguement when data from two days ago shows the exact oppisite.



[Edited by: brerrabbitTX at 3/23/2013 2:52:20 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 1:32:09 PM

Now who's misquoting??? I could care less about greed! It's the dishonesty and promotion of falsities as truth of the oil companies brerrabbitTX, greed is irrelevant. They don't play FAIR, and rely on propaganda to keep their monopoly.

Same tactics that the tobacco industry used for decades. Criminal scandals, bribery, and corruption.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/23/2013 1:37:22 PM EST]
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 12:42:19 PM

Since I will not tell you who I work for I will not show you a list of ethanol projects funded by my company, however the information is readily available for those who are willing to look. You however are not willing to look and therefore will claim "victory" because I won't provide you a link. Whatever.

The reality is this, much to the dismay and displeasure of yourself and Hannie59. You claim oil companies are greedy. Well if you define greed as wanting to stay in business, continue to employ over 9 million people in the US, be profitable for their shareholders, and pay more in taxes to the federal govermment than any other sector of business in the US, then yes they are greedy.

That drive to suceed, or greed as you would call it drives oil companies to invest and do research into all alternative fuels. Goes back to the idea they want to stay in business. They spend money reseaching LNG, wind, solar, ethanol, biofuels, additive formulaions for the new mandated bio fuels etc. They do so because they want to stay in business. They own billions if not trillions of dollars of capital assets that can be repuposed to support the next fuel, whatever it may be. They have the financial resources to be a leader in fuels and want to continue to do so. So hate them all you want, say they don't fund research all you want, but the relaity is in the future chances are very good that the majority of fuel buyers in this country will continue to buy their motor fuel whatever it is from stations sourced by the major oil companies that exist tody. It's not a monopoly, but rather an oligopoly. Look that one up.


[Edited by: brerrabbitTX at 3/23/2013 12:44:57 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 12:36:16 PM

brerrabbitTX... I feel I have been blunt but still civil. Apologies if I called you out inappropriately.

My intent wasn't to label as a shill, but to put forth the presumption of knowledge of the oil companies tactics by one whom may be involved in the industry.



[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/23/2013 12:39:39 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2013 9:58:18 AM

brerrabbitTX wrote: "No my company did not "funded" CRC. They do not fund studies to determine whether E-15 can or should be used. What they funded and continue to fund is research into the production of ethanol. They have spent money of biomass ethanol production, ethanol production from algea and other sources. Read some annual reports from big oil companies and you will see they are commiting money to renwable fuels and energy."

As already asked, please provide a list of ethanol studies funded by your company. Please provide the links as well. I'm very interested in learning more about your company's funded research.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 3/23/2013 10:00:34 AM EST]
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 11:04:08 PM

"Did your company funded CRC, Inc. E15 study? Let's see a list of ethanol studies funded by your company."

No my company did not "funded" CRC. They do not fund studies to determine whether E-15 can or should be used. What they funded and continue to fund is research into the production of ethanol. They have spent money of biomass ethanol production, ethanol production from algea and other sources. Read some annual reports from big oil companies and you will see they are commiting money to renwable fuels and energy.

Hannie59,
You might not want oil companies to have a hand in the bio fuels market but here is where the wheels totally come off your arguements. Who else has the network, the pipelines, the terminals, the infrastructure and the capital to roll biofuels out to the greater market?

I understand your passion but at the same time if you want to see bio fuels grow there are huge questions to be answered. How is it going to work? Who's gonna pay for it, what is it going to cost? The ethanol industry has never answered those questions, they just keep fighting for a slightly bigger piece of the pie and the RFA gives it to them ach year.

Lastly I noticed no comment on calling me out as an oil shill on a thread I am not on. Thus far you have been civil in discussions but obviously I am annoying you with my posts but you choose not to call me out directly. I don't mind when other posters call me out. It does not bother m at all. Discussion is good, sharing ideas and beliefs are good. Wen can have civil discourse without being an ass and in the process hopefully learn something from one another.
Profile Pic
giwan
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:1,636
Points:220,595
Joined:Aug 2009
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 5:05:28 PM

Ethanol may not be the cause but it is still a problem looking for a solution
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 3:28:11 PM

brerrabbittx...

What I would like to see is diversity. I do not want your industry to own biofuels when they become commercially viable. I want them to have to COMPETE with bio. They on the other hand, want their ownership of energy unchallenged.

The public is not buying E-85? Why do you suppose that is? Maybe it's all those bought and paid for oil patch news stori... ahem, propaganda pieces. If the sell it, they insure it's failure intentionally. Don't have to be a rocket scientist to see what they have done is to INTENTIONALLY DISCREDIT it.

Look at my thread about looking THROUGH the smokescreen. Most people don't have the time to find the truth. They need people like me to summarize it but not obscure it.

I'd like to see gasoline in the mix, both derived from biomass NOT owned by BP and the like, selling side by side with the toxic, non renewable that is gripping the market and won't let go.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/22/2013 3:35:49 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 1:55:48 PM

brerrabbitTX wrote: "Oil companies are investing in renewable energy all the time. My company has big investment is wind, solar, and LNG. They have and continue to fund ethanol research as well."

Did your company funded CRC, Inc. E15 study? Let's see a list of ethanol studies funded by your company.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 3/22/2013 1:57:43 PM EST]
Profile Pic
brerrabbitTX
Champion Author Houston

Posts:1,404
Points:24,925
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 1:03:39 PM

"brerrabbitTX KNOWS it,..... . They KNOW what is going on and will continue to shill for this deception until all alternatives are squashed in the public eye"

Hannie59, really? You come to a thread I havn't even posted on to call me a shill when you have had the opportunity to call me a shill places where I would have seen it much easier.

I have never said ethanol is bad for your car. I have never said that it was an inferior fuel. In fact I have said on numerous occasions I have no problem with ethanol. I have no problem with any alternative fuel. What I have said and it has been completely ingnored is that rather than scream big oil is stopping ethanol, be productive and explain how we get to the ethanol nirvana you dream of. Realistically the fueling industry cannot blend enough ethanol with gas this year to meet the RFA mandates. They will have to dip into surplus RIN's from past years. Next year the mandate increases and no one is sure where the needed RIN's come from. You will say as you have before you just need to sell more E-15 and more E-85. There is only one problem with that. The consuming public does not want to buy it. The major oil company I work for has roled out E-85 offerings in multiple markets and at this point I have to tell you that the public is not buying it.

Sure you say it's because the oil companies have a major smear campaign to discredit ethanol but the reality is who sells more ethanol to motorists in this country than anyone else? Those pesky old big oil companies you hate so much.

Oil companies are investing in renewable energy all the time. My company has big investment is wind, solar, and LNG. They have and continue to fund ethanol research as well.

But you still see it all as anti ethanol. It's not, it is more about economic posturing.

Here is the reality. From where we are today to get to where I am guessing you want to be several things need to happen. First if we wind up at an all E-85 market in the US, where does all that ethanol come from? Second how do we deliver the ethanol to market? Today roughly 95% of the ethanol sold in this country moves by water, rail or truck. Pipelines are the cheapest transporters by far. Third, how do we get the necessary tankage at the distribution points across the country to handle the large amounts of ethanol?

Keeping in mind that the solution to all these problems cost money, estimated to be in the billions of dollars. Who is gonna pay for that? Well ultimately the consummer or it will not be done. So regardless of the benifits of ethanol, the relatively lower price and people like yourself's support of it, the vast majority of fuel buyers in this country want one thing. Lower prices. If ethanol becomes the primary motor fuel in this country then prices will have to increase for quite a while before the economic benifits will be seen. The start up costs will drive the price up.

I would really like to know what your feelings will be when we start rolling out significant volumes of alternate fuels for transportation if the fuel is not ethanol. WIll you still be upset if the alternative is LNG, or CNG, or hydrogen? If the oil comapnies go that direction will you still be upset?


[Edited by: brerrabbitTX at 3/22/2013 1:09:00 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 12:23:07 PM

ggg452 wrote: "Corn is for food...not fuel."

Why not both?
Profile Pic
ggg452
Champion Author Manitoba

Posts:4,220
Points:942,420
Joined:May 2012
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 11:18:19 AM

Corn is for food...not fuel.
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,329
Points:790,620
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 10:43:31 AM

Kerosene is a great fuel. And it is very friendly towards steel and other metals. It is not corrosive as is ethanol and water.
It is a little denser than gasoline, but less dense than diesel.
It could be a universal fuel for cars ,trucks busses and Jet turbines.
Another beauty of kerosine is that it is readily made from biomass, coal or petroleum.
Here are a few facts from the Wikipedia on kerosene.

In the mid-20th century, kerosene or tractor vaporising oil (TVO) was used as a cheap fuel for tractors. The engine would start on gasoline, then switch over to kerosene once the engine warmed up. A heat valve on the manifold would route the exhaust gases around the intake pipe, heating the kerosene to the point where it was vaporized and could be ignited by an electric spark.
In Europe following the Second World War, automobiles were modified similarly to run on kerosene rather than gasoline, which would have to be imported and was heavily taxed. Besides additional piping and the switch between fuels, the head gasket was replaced by a much thicker one to diminish the compression ratio (making the engine less powerful and less efficient, but able to run on kerosene). The necessary equipment was sold under the trademark "Econom".[21]
During the fuel crisis of the 1970s, Saab-Valmet developed and series-produced the Saab 99 Petro that ran on kerosene, turpentine or gasoline. The project, codenamed "Project Lapponia", was headed by Simo Vuorio, and towards the end of the 1970s, a working prototype was produced based on the Saab 99 GL. The car was designed to run on two fuels. Gasoline was used for cold starts and when extra power was needed, but normally it ran on kerosene or turpentine. The idea was that the gasoline could be made from peat using the Fischer–Tropsch process. Between 1980 and 1984, 3756 Saab 99 Petros and 2385 Talbot Horizons (a version of the Chrysler Horizon that integrated many Saab components) were made. One reason to manufacture kerosene-fueled cars was that in Finland kerosene was less heavily taxed than petrol.[22]
Kerosene is used to fuel smaller-horsepower outboard motors built by Yamaha Motors, Suzuki Marine, and Tohatsu. Primarily used on small fishing craft, these are dual-fuel engines that start on gasoline and then transition to kerosene once the engine reaches optimum operating temperature. Multiple fuel Evinrude and Mercury Racing engines also burn kerosene, as well as jet fuel.[23]
Today, kerosene is mainly used in fuel for jet engines in several grades. One form of the fuel known as RP-1 is burned with liquid oxygen as rocket fuel. These fuel grade kerosenes meet specifications for smoke points and freeze points. The combustion reaction can be approximated as follows, with the molecular formula C12H26 (dodecane):
C12H26(l) + 37/2 O2(g) ? 12 CO2(g) + 13 H2O(g); ?H° = -7513 kJ
In the initial phase of liftoff, the Saturn V launch vehicle was powered by the reaction of liquid oxygen with RP-1.[24] For the five 6.4 meganewton sea-level thrust F-1 rocket engines of the Saturn V, burning together, the reaction generated roughly 1.62 × 1011 watts (J/s) (162 gigawatt) or 217 million horsepower.[24]
Kerosene is sometimes used as an additive in diesel fuel to prevent gelling or waxing in cold temperatures.[25]
Ultra-low sulfur kerosene is a custom-blended fuel used by the New York City Transit to power its bus fleet. The transit agency started using this fuel in 2004, prior to the widespread adoption of ultra-low sulfur diesel, which has since become the standard. In 2008, the suppliers of the custom fuel failed to tender for a renewal of the transit agency's contract, leading to a negotiated contract at a significantly increased cost.[26]

Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 10:14:31 AM

The oil companies are trying to kill the RFS. They started with blatantly false claims of engine damage that were proven wrong in court. Now they (refiners) have played on emotion by lying about the price of gas being high BECAUSE of ethanol RFS. Your elected officials buy it because oil holds the cards as to what your gas will cost you PERIOD. No supply and demand applies in this monopoly. WAKE UP PEOPLE. Stop regurgitating all the BS.

brerrabbitTX KNOWS it, tdioiler KNOWS it. shockjock1961 KNOWS it. They KNOW what is going on and will continue to shill for this deception until all alternatives are squashed in the public eye. They all want the stranglehold to continue and care nothing of truth or reality.


[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/22/2013 10:17:20 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Daurel
Veteran Author Indiana

Posts:341
Points:37,310
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Mar 22, 2013 10:02:52 AM

tdioiler
Your facts are BS.
Know a guy has a restored T runs on about anything that will burn. Just adjust the two jets on the carb.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,142
Points:2,800,895
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Mar 21, 2013 10:45:02 AM

tdioiler hypocritically says "Silver, I don't have to give you squat. You don't back up your claims."
I usually do back up my claims. The one you cite was in response to an unsubstatiated claim, but this NBC article
Renewable energy has an icon: Henry Ford says "A century ago, Henry Ford's Model T was the first flexible-fuel vehicle, running on gas, ethanol or both, and the automaker foretold the future when he said fuel could be gotten from fruit, weeds, sawdust, or anything else that could be fermented."

Lets see if you can back up any of your claims.
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,332
Points:3,832,325
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Mar 21, 2013 2:06:27 AM

The Model T was the first commercial flex fuel vehicle, and it had a carburetor with adjustable jetting, to allow gasoline or ethanol, or a mix.
You can't judge mileage, or comfort, or smooth running of ANY car of early vintage by today's standards.
It was designed to use ethanol which Henry Ford believed was the "fuel of the future".
It was also capable of running on just about any liquid that burns.

Henry Ford's first Model-T was built to run on hemp gasoline and the CAR ITSELF WAS CONSTRUCTED FROM HEMP! On his large estate, Ford was photographed among his hemp fields. The car, 'grown from the soil,' had hemp plastic panels whose impact strength was 10 times stronger than steel; Popular Mechanics, 1941.
Rudolf Diesel, the inventor of the diesel engine, designed it to run on vegetable and seed oils like hemp; he actually ran the thing on peanut oil for the 1900 World's Fair.

Food for thought:
1 - Ethanol is a highly efficient fuel. A study by the Institute of Local Self-Reliance in the US found that using the best farming and production methods, "the amount of energy contained in a gallon of ethanol is more than twice the energy used to grow the corn and convert it to ethanol".

2 - The US Department of Agriculture says each BTU (British Thermal Unit, an energy measure) used to produce a BTU of gasoline could be used to produce 8 BTUs of ethanol.

3 - The non-profit American Coalition for Ethanol says ethanol production is "extremely energy efficient", with a positive energy balance of 125%, compared to 85% for gasoline, making ethanol production "by far the most efficient method of producing liquid transportation fuels".

[Edited by: rumbleseat at 3/21/2013 2:08:08 AM EST]
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 11:25:54 PM

tdioiler, don't you know that prohibition was funded by ROCKEFELLER???? He pushed it through the government to squash alternatives to petroleum. Sadly, not much has changed. He funded a group under the guise of "christian women" with what today would be a billion dollars! He did it so people couldn't get alcohol for their cars! Nothing at all to do with consumption of alcohol at all. Check your history.

Prohibition WAS the oil industry. Sadly, their tactics are the same today!

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 3/20/2013 11:30:19 PM EST]
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 11:11:19 PM

tdioiler wrote: "Silver, I don't have to give you squat. You don't back up your claims."

Someone sounds very hypocritical.

[Edited by: krzysiek_ck at 3/20/2013 11:12:08 PM EST]
Profile Pic
tdioiler
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:1,014
Points:730,500
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 11:08:50 PM

Silver, I don't have to give you squat. You don't back up your claims.

BTW, Jobs Act 2004 also gave plenty of tax breaks to NASCAR track owners and tax credits for all sorts of manufactures. Only prohibition I saw was the SUV tax credits (and those needed to go).

So where's your claim the Ford Model T actually ran well with Ethanol? State your facts. I already don't trust your words.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,142
Points:2,800,895
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 10:55:25 PM

tdioiler, can you provide any proof to your claim, or is this just another false claim?
Profile Pic
tdioiler
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:1,014
Points:730,500
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 10:31:24 PM

The second alternative fuel for the Ford Model T was kerosene. Ethanol was too expensive and became unavailable during prohibition. It would run on it, but as a distant cousin to gas and kerosene.

And it did not run well on ethanol. About as bad as kerosene in fact.
Profile Pic
OceanArcher
Champion Author Mississippi

Posts:8,180
Points:1,906,200
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 10:01:53 AM

I'm not happy with ethanol-laced fuels, and will use E0 fuel every chance I have
Profile Pic
rumbleseat
Champion Author Winnipeg

Posts:25,332
Points:3,832,325
Joined:Oct 2002
Message Posted: Mar 20, 2013 4:08:02 AM

"OK go buy some gas without the ethanol and see watch your MPG's go up"

Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt.
We travelled out of province to a wedding a couple of years ago. The fills we got in the areas that did NOT have E10 in every pump were the fills that gave us the WORST mileage figures on the whole trip, both ways.
Thank goodness it wasn't a winter trip, it would have been necessary to purchase gas-line antifreeze at those fill-ups.
Profile Pic
bigdan390
Rookie Author Cleveland

Posts:21
Points:200,845
Joined:May 2011
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 11:55:25 PM

Ok, think it is a great idea to use ethanol. But it does have some real issues. The 2 biggest are:

1) Uses farm land to create the fuel via crops. Most fertilizer is derived from Oil, it is a petrochemical.

2) We just don't have the infrastructure to produce enough Ethanol to replace gasoline.

Should we work towards it? Sure, lets us it wherever and whenever we can. But by itself it is not going to replace oil. Even at the 10% level. We just use too much oil.
Profile Pic
Sneakers55
Champion Author Houston

Posts:61,986
Points:2,671,320
Joined:Nov 2005
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 11:45:00 PM

On Mar 19, 2013 8:01:25 PM, tdioiler wrote:

>I think the markets have spoken. Kill the program until
>we have a vehicle that works well with the stuff.

My 2012 Ford Escape works just fine with E10.
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,142
Points:2,800,895
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 10:54:19 PM

"go buy some gas without the ethanol and see watch your MPG's go up"
They just won't stop the false claims!

"this is not a fuel it is a drink"
They just won't stop the false claims!

"it is driving up food prices"
They just won't stop the false claims!

"cost more for feed for cows so beef price is up along with every food is made from corn or by product"
They just won't stop the false claims!

"The only one's this does any good for is the farmers by keeping the price of corn up"
They just won't stop the false claims!
Profile Pic
handymanherb
Sophomore Author Orlando

Posts:118
Points:343,500
Joined:Dec 2006
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 10:29:46 PM

OK go buy some gas without the ethanol and see watch your MPG's go up, this is not a fuel it is a drink, it is driving up food prices,cost more for feed for cows so beef price is up along with every food is made from corn or by product.

The only one's this does any good for is the farmers by keeping the price of corn up

[Edited by: handymanherb at 3/19/2013 10:32:01 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SilverStreaker
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:14,142
Points:2,800,895
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 10:04:56 PM

tdioiler says "Kill the program until we have a vehicle that works well with the stuff."

The first mass produced car in the world (Model T) worked well on it. My 2000 Ford Winstar and 2003 Honda CRV works well on it. They just won't stop the false claims!
Profile Pic
tdioiler
Champion Author Detroit

Posts:1,014
Points:730,500
Joined:Jul 2011
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 9:01:25 PM

I think the markets have spoken. Kill the program until we have a vehicle that works well with the stuff.
Profile Pic
goldseeker
Champion Author West Virginia

Posts:23,037
Points:3,329,460
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 7:11:15 PM

"spin, half-truth, and lies." Ditto! and they have been doing it for over 100 years.
Profile Pic
krzysiek_ck
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:8,311
Points:1,337,405
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Mar 19, 2013 6:44:03 PM

Good question Hannie59. Big Oil Shill do not have limits when it comes to

spin, half-truth, and lies.
Topic is locked Back to Topics