Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:26 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: All Things Ethanol > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Open Fuel Standard introduced in House of Representatives Back to Topics
krzysiek_ck

Champion Author
Illinois

Posts:8,456
Points:1,383,085
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Jul 3, 2013 8:23:38 AM

"The bill requires increasing amounts of new automobiles to operate on non-petroleum fuels, starting with 30 percent in 2016 and reaching 50 percent in 2017 and beyond. Existing technologies, including flex fuel vehicles, ethanol, natural gas, hydrogen, biodiesel, plug-in electric and fuel cell vehicles, are allowed by the bill. In addition, it includes a catch-all category for new technologies. “The Open Fuel Standard Act will allow all fuels, including traditional gasoline, to compete for the American consumer, lowering the price of fuel, and strengthening our energy and national security,” said Ros-Lehtinen. “… The Open Fuel Standard is an immediate and effective way to strengthen national security, lower the cost of fuel, and requires no expenditure from the federal government. Providing new cars with flexible fuel capability would cost around $100 per car and provide huge dividends to the consumer.”"

Open Fuel Standard introduced in House of Representatives
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,243
Points:22,760
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Jul 25, 2013 9:16:54 AM

Do you have any proof of your claims, borsht?
Profile Pic
aRBy
All-Star Author Grand Rapids

Posts:590
Points:357,260
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Jul 22, 2013 11:08:43 PM

I fully support the OFS.

The OFS is NOT a mandate. It eliminates the mandate that allows cars to burn ONLY petroleum-based gasoline refined to 3 specific ANSI standards (Regular, mid-grade, and Premium grade).

I will GLADLY eliminate the Renewable Fuels Standard in exchange for the Open Fuels Standard any day!
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,477
Points:837,710
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Jul 22, 2013 3:40:25 PM

Ethanol Use Creates a Spike in Global Food Prices

• Overall, the RFS program led to higher prices for staple foods all over the world. By some estimates, up to 70 percent to 75 percent of the increase in food prices was due to biofuels and the related consequences of low grain stocks, large land use shifts, speculative activity and export bans.
• The spike in food prices, coupled with the global economic crisis, halted and even reversed the long-time trend in reducing malnutrition.At the turn of the 21st century, biofuels appeared to be a solution to mounting concerns over greenhouse gas emissions, climate change,
skyrocketing fuel prices and dependence on foreign energy. When Congress passed the Energy Policy Act (EP Act) in 2005 with a renewable fuel standard (RFS)
provision mandating that producers add ethanol to gasoline, it is unlikely that lawmakers thought the act would increase hunger and social unrest in
the world's poorest countries. However, unintended consequences frequently accompany even the most well-intentioned policies, says Sherzod Abdukadirov, a research fellow with the Mercatus Center.
Perhaps the most unexpected consequence of the policy has been its impact on worldwide food prices.

• The U.S. fuel industry relied heavily on corn ethanol to comply with the RFS requirements. The resulting demand drastically increased the price for corn globally, not just domestically.
• As corn prices skyrocketed, farmers switched to corn production from production of other cereals, which reduced the latter's supply. At the same time, consumers substituted less expensive rice and wheat for corn. This substitution increased demand and prices for wheat and rice, staple foods across many regions in Africa and Asia. http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=23262
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jul 9, 2013 11:08:08 AM

I just love the "Limbaugh created" nonsense of Shockjock1961 and ScottAdams5. This is about ethanol. Not politics.

You want to get every ditto head on board with your BS, just make it an issue of "big government" when this term has alot more importance than ethanol in the fuel supply. You people who cry ghovernment and just ignore facts are ridiculous. I don't like the government any more than you, but I do like things that are good for this country. A big oil monopoly has held us back for a century because of the following:

1. Caused hundreds of trillions in taxpayer costs and American lives for supporting these interests in areas of the world we don't belong.
2. A fuel, called Gasoline, which is INFERIOR to renewable ethanol, has had a monopoly on your life , this country, and the economy for 100 years.
3. I do not like the fact that the above monopoly has been GIVEN to oil through their PURCHASE of 60% of our government, tax breaks and a government given monopoly for gasoline. Time for the market to be opened up guys, in a fair way. The product and industry you love has killed millions upon millions through it's filth. And they can't even be truthful about the situation. All I want is fairness in the marketplace. You folks promote a monopoly under the evil guise of a claim of fair market. How can you htry to have it both ways?

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 7/9/2013 11:13:30 AM EST]
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,477
Points:837,710
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Jul 9, 2013 11:02:14 AM

WhiskeyBurner says "regular fuels would still be available. "

They have already wiped out 'regular fuels" They just redefine regular fuel.
It is practically impossible to by 'regular gasoline, E0 in California and many other states.
So this is a pragmatic lie!

It's like declaring there are no cockroaches in Florida, they are officially called Palmetto bugs.
How can you mandate and increase in the consumption of something people don't want. answer, make what they want unavailable. and give the new stuff the name of what they want.

we do not need government to manage our lives, for political reasons.
Profile Pic
ScottAdams5
Champion Author New York

Posts:2,294
Points:744,835
Joined:Jan 2012
Message Posted: Jul 9, 2013 10:34:49 AM

Big government turning into MEGA-GIGANTOR government!
Profile Pic
WhiskeyBurner
Veteran Author Illinois

Posts:450
Points:15,855
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Jul 8, 2013 6:40:22 PM

dassfg, regular fuels would still be available, this would just make flex fuel vehicles even more widely available to the new car buying pubic, then they, as well as curren flex fuel vehicles will become available on the used market in years to come. You could still burn regular gas or diesel in flex fuelers if you so desire.

Chazzer, look into Teddy Roosevelt, chances are that you wouldn'thave liked him, his monopoly busting made this look like nothing.
Profile Pic
Chazzer
Champion Author Nevada

Posts:18,911
Points:3,947,305
Joined:May 2002
Message Posted: Jul 8, 2013 9:40:25 AM

There goes the government again ... sticking their dirty finger or nose into everything they shouldn't!
Profile Pic
dassfg
Champion Author Fort Worth

Posts:2,561
Points:1,120,420
Joined:Mar 2011
Message Posted: Jul 8, 2013 9:35:42 AM

sounds like everyone must purchase a new auto to run on the new fuels -- hummmmmmm ... what is wrong with that picture
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jul 4, 2013 9:22:14 AM

Merteiman,

You are in a different conversation here. The bill krzysiek_ck is referring to does not ban gas, dictate any type of blended, or any fuel in particular. It has to do with opening the market to fuels that burn alternative fuels.

You will always have gasoline that you love so much as long as crude oil can be accessed. It's just that now, some regulations may force them to compete as opposed to a monopoly they have today, which they gained by buying off everyone including the government.
Profile Pic
MertieMan
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:17,569
Points:3,555,610
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Jul 4, 2013 8:18:56 AM

It will be a lot longer than 2016 on this proposal as there are plenty of other vehicles left on the road that can't burn this type of gasoline.
Profile Pic
WhiskeyBurner
Veteran Author Illinois

Posts:450
Points:15,855
Joined:May 2013
Message Posted: Jul 3, 2013 11:40:12 PM

Yes, how horrible of our government to try and break a monopoly by mandating that we the motoring public can buy vehicles that aren't restricted to burning only one type fuel..........THE CROOKED BASTARDS!!!!!!!!!!!
Profile Pic
Hannie59
All-Star Author Appleton

Posts:964
Points:24,300
Joined:Apr 2010
Message Posted: Jul 3, 2013 5:05:27 PM

borsht,

This bill requires that vehicles be dual fuel if I am not mistaken, and does not specify any fuel in particular. Just opening the maarket up a bit.

[Edited by: Hannie59 at 7/3/2013 5:07:27 PM EST]
Profile Pic
borsht
Champion Author Oakland

Posts:3,477
Points:837,710
Joined:Aug 2012
Message Posted: Jul 3, 2013 3:33:20 PM

Don't you just love it, when the government knows whats best for us?

It' like the story of the IRS visiting this company and the receptionist calls the CEO and tells him the IRS is here and he's here to help us out.

The corn lobbyist are earning their price.

Again how is this competition when it is a mandate to force the percentage of use?

If you like this write your congressman.
If you don't like it write your congressman
Post a reply Back to Topics