E15 Ethanol Protest

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

Originally Posted by Rich

Can we somehow outlaw this crap in NH?

If only we could! Nobody down there thinks this through before they implement it and we the people end up paying through the nose for it forever.

RE: the article linked by PCMC; one quote from the article,

The biofuel industry and administration officials immediately criticized the research as flawed.

There's a big surprise..... The study disagreed with their claims so it MUST be flawed!

And another,

Later this year the company is scheduled to finish a $200 million-plus facility in Nevada, Iowa, that will produce 30 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol using corn residue from nearby farms. An assessment paid for by DuPont said that the ethanol it will produce there could be more than 100 percent better than gasoline in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.

Could be being the key words here!

Let's face it, we're going to get screwed in this no matter what!

[SAB1]

And this was in the news again yesterday......ethanol emissions worse than plain gas.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...oline-n1826957

[Descant]

It may be possible to ban E-15 in NH, but it is a lengthy process. In 2006, the legislature banned the sale of Methyl tri-Butyl Etheline (sp?). MtBE could not be sold after January 1, 2007. Recall this is the stuff the EPA forced into gasoline to make It burn cleaner and enhance air quality. The catch was, when you spill it or it leaks into the ground, it contaminates ground water. Dozens of contaminated wells around the state.

I certainly support clean air and water. We build our tourist based economy on them* as well as our own quality of life, but I think the EPA needs to slow down a bit sometimes.

*Oh yeah. And cheap booze.

[salty dog]

Unfortunately it would seem that coming of E15 is inevitable. As wolfeboro_baja states, we're all going to be screwed into this. EPA has approved it; 12 states are now selling it (including here in Mass) and EISA has increased the volume of blended fuels from 9 billion gals (in 2008) to 36 billion gals by 2022. Yikes and away!

[Happy Gourmand]

E15 is good for you, just ask the gubmint. And don't pay any attention to the real facts!!

[Wolfeboro_Baja]

If you want to try to save recreational boating from the E15 ethanol mandate, PLEASE follow this link! Thank you!!

End the Ethanol Mandate

[dave603]

These protest go directly to your state senators, and is not what I originnaly posted.
It's important to also fill out this protest letter to both your state senators.


Thanks For pointing out the new link W_B.

[Diver Vince]

Done and I urge all who read this forum to do the same.

[Rich]

I received a reply from Senator Ayotte:

Thank you for contacting me regarding our nation's ethanol policy. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you may know, on June 20, 2013, Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) introduced the Renewable Fuel Standard Repeal Act (S. 1195), which was referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. If enacted, S. 1195 would repeal the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) RFS. You may be pleased to know that I am a cosponsor of S. 1195.

Additionally, on December 12, 2013, Senator Feinstein (D-CA) introduced the Corn Ethanol Mandate Elimination Act of 2013 (S. 1807), which was referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. If enacted, S. 1807 would amend the Clean Air Act to terminate the corn ethanol mandate included in the RFS.

I strongly oppose our nation's erroneous ethanol policy and will work to repeal its misguided use of taxpayer dollars. Our nation's energy policy has subsidized domestic ethanol production for nearly four decades. Congress mandates ethanol's use through federally directed markets and the RFS, subsidizes its production through tax credits, grants, and loans, and protects it from competition through tariffs.

Although I am not a member of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, please be assured that I will continue to work toward ending our nation's flawed and costly ethanol policy.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. As your Senator, it is important for me to hear from you regarding the current issues affecting New Hampshire and our nation. Please do not hesitate to be in touch again if I may be of further assistance.

Keep up the pressure, and urge your friends around the country to do the same.

[Happy Gourmand]

I got the same response. Good to know there are bills to eliminate ethanol already in place. Now, just to get the Congress to act positively on them.

[upthesaukee]

Looks initially like there may be some bi-partisan support, which I hope will be good for passage.

[Rich]

Congresswoman Shea-Porter isn't quite on the same page. Her reply is a bit different:

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 1462, the Renewable Fuel Standard Reform Act. I appreciate your thoughts on this issue and welcome the opportunity to respond.

I agree with you that the guidelines set by the 2007 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) may produce gasoline that is unsafe for many motor vehicles. I was encouraged when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the agency tasked with overseeing the implementation of the RFS, released new regulations in November of 2013 that will lower the minimum biofuel production requirements. By lowering the minimum requirement, gasoline producers will not need to introduce high-ethanol content gasoline beyond the E10 fuel that is currently considered safe for most four-stroke engines.

While I support the provisions in H.R. 1462 that would ease the unrealistic expectations for biofuel production, I would not support the section of this legislation prohibiting any gasoline that has an ethanol rating higher than E10. Though I agree that a higher rating should not be mandatory, many newer vehicles and "flex-fuel" engines operate safely on higher-rated gasoline. Owners of these vehicles should be able to purchase E15-E85 fuel. The EPA has a set of mandatory guidelines that includes prominent warning labels and dedicated fueling hoses to prevent misfueling, and so this option can safely be made available to those who wish to purchase this fuel.

H.R. 1462 was referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee. While I am not a member of this committee, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind should this legislation come to a vote in the House of Representatives.

[Descant]

I got that letter from CS-P too. I'm not sure where she stands. I have not heard from Sen. Shaheen.

Excerpted from the ermail from Sen. Kelly Ayotte:


I strongly oppose our nation's erroneous ethanol policy and will work to repeal its misguided use of taxpayer dollars. Our nation's energy policy has subsidized domestic ethanol production for nearly four decades. Congress mandates ethanol's use through federally directed markets and the RFS, subsidizes its production through tax credits, grants, and loans, and protects it from competition through tariffs."

She's the best.

[dave603]

I got the form letter first from Sen.s Sheen, Ayotte and Cng. Kuster.
The only really response I did receive later was what others seem to have gotten From Kelly Ayotte.
So as with all the responses we have seen here, we still need to push some people apparently.

[tis]

Shea Porter has a lot to learn. She obviously doesn't have engines that won't run on the E10 if they are not used every day.

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by tis

Shea Porter has a lot to learn. She obviously doesn't have engines that won't run on the E10 if they are not used every day.

Engines don't have to be run everyday if they use E10...where did you get this information from?

[dave603]

Originally Posted by Rusty

Engines don't have to be run everyday if they use E10...where did you get this information from?

I don't know where TIS got the information from, but from personal experience, my small motors have gotten trashed from it. Even ones that get run quite a bit.