sometimes a few strategic failures can dissuade govt from mandating products, like ethanol, that the auto makers and the fuel companies don t want or need. I don t like ethanol either, but brazil seems to make it work.
@wesw
The ones in the file marked " Nixon tapes" ?
Why is working on detergent packages for fuels a big deal? Basic engine design is determined by octane, and fuel injection calibration by ethanol content. Everything else (like detergent packages) is much smaller details. Please tell me what I’m missing.
bingo!!!
@wesw You weren’t really inferring that the car companies deliberately designed in a failure just to make it look like they weren’t in cahoots with the oil companies? And my Governor was Jesse Ventura but I don’t think even he would go that far.
no I was inferring that they may have designed in a failure BECAUSE they were in cahoots with the oil companies and neither wanted ethanol added, and neither did i
if you don t think that boardrooms of big business will go to extremes to manipulate the market you may be a bit naive
Not to change the subject from socialized car manufacturing back to Tesla...
How is that changing the subject, exactly?
Last time I looked, Tesla showed a net loss from selling their cars. Selling those cars, though, netted them “cap-n-trade credits” that they sold, at a profit, to companies that didn’t quite meet their CAFE targets all by themselves.
Now, I’m actually somewhat tolerant of CAFE targets…but objectively, you’d have to admit that, seeing as ALL of Tesla’s profit comes from government incentives, the current setup is at least “kissin’ cousins” to "socialized car manufacturing.
Additives in gasoline is not a “good” only proposition with no consideration for their negative effects. Additives, especially if the are metal based have to be part of a scenario where you weigh the bad against the good they cause. Is the oil industry in tune with all the different manufacture requirements and the effects on motors in general ? No. It is a cooperative effort. Of course automobiles and oil companies who supply the fuel work closely together and pay close attention to what each is doing. To think not is to assume that a sailor pays little attention to the weather man.
Well, not that I really want to get into it but I think you have to put the Feds in the mix as maybe the prime mover. Just as an example it was the Feds that were proposing a higher ethanol percentage for gasoline that would destroy outboard engines. It was the marine industry that fought it tooth and nail and don’t know that they won yet. Now maybe the Feds and the ethanol industry were in cahoots which is certain possible, but it sure wasn’t Exxon and Evenrude pushing the change. Same thing with small engines. Small engines had and still are having a heck of a time with the current gasoline mix mandated by the Feds. It wasn’t something the oil companies and Briggs came up with.
I have had my share of dealing with the ravages of ethanol. In my experience, small motors suffer for several reasons. First, they are routinely left in storage where the effects get worse. Secondly, they are literally not designed to deal with ethanol when some are twenty to thirty years old and have sensitive carburetors instead of self cleaning fuel injection. Lastly, most of us take few precautions to deal with the previous two reasons.
“Now maybe the Feds and the ethanol industry were in cahoots which is certain possible”
I’d say it’s beyond possible
It’s highly probable
The ethanol industry is incredibly powerful
Gotta watch ADM and Cargill etc,I say do away with lobbying,believe or not big retail even keeps us from getting class C fireworks in VA,eg: Never underestimate the power of a lobby-Kevin
It’s difficult to keep up with this thread. 22 replies overnight. Wow.
@db4690 absolutely. The ethanol industry (read: corn farmers) is very much in “cahoots” with government, in that any politician in a corn state that doesn’t support ethanol is going to have the entire farm lobby out to derail their chances for (re)election.
Gore admitted as much, saying of his (now regretted) support for ethanol, “One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee, and I had a certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa because I was about to run for President.”
@shadowfox
"The ethanol industry (read: corn farmers) is very much in “cahoots” with government, in that any politician in a corn state that doesn’t support ethanol is going to have the entire farm lobby out to derail their chances for (re)election. "
If by “cahoots” you mean they have a strong lobby that like oil, automotive etc. advocate for their interest, ahh yahhh. of course. If “cahoots” you mean they have more influence then any other lobby who advocates either with or against the “corn farmers”, we need “clarification”. Throwing names (Gore) out to focus blame on needs perspective.
Their influence in general is the same as anyone and is determined by the size of their wallet. It’s money, lobbies and political donations and voting blocks. Now, if you are in favor of “other” corporations having unlimited financial influence as decreed by our conservative supreme court, why should you deny corn farmers and their interest these same rights ?
I don’t like ethanol in my gas either. But, don’t blame it on the “corn farmers” without knowing if the petro interests also supported it too. Personally, I don’t have a clue. But when the other political side had control and an oil interest derived administration, since 2005 when ethanol was introduced into gasoline, I saw no major legislation barring ethanol then either. A POX on everyone ! Blame Gore et al. sure…blame everyone else too. It’s times like this, being Independent of thought has distinct advantages.
“…vehicles equipped with aluminum fuel delivery pipes (fuel rails). Ethanol fuels with a low moisture content will corrode the internal surface of the fuel rails.”
A company I worked for designed a motor fuel alcohol distillation system which, as you know, must produce ethanol with low moisture content. The builder of the final product tower asked if aluminum trays (internals) could be used. All known data said it could. That tower ran for a few weeks and failed; the internals had collapsed down to the bottom. Thus the effect on aluminum was discovered by this company. When was this? Cuba - 1957.
@dagosa (Btw, there’s an a, not an o, in my handle - not that I mind, but if you want to grab my attention, @shadowfox won’t alert me)
You’re making an assumption that I must reject:
if you are in favor of "other" corporations having unlimited financial influence as decreed by our conservative supreme court
I am absolutely not in favor of such and am somewhat surprised that you would get that notion from what I posted here or anywhere else on this site.
But, don't blame it on the "corn farmers"
There’s plenty of blame to go around. The corn farmers are one of the instigators because they were looking for new markets for their corn because corn wasn’t selling for very much and they wanted to make more money. Once ethanol came around, aha! there’s the new corn market. And it worked. The price of corn went up, because land that used to grow food corn now grew ethanol corn, and so there was less food corn on the market, ergo up went the prices.
I also blame the government that caved to this profit-seeking enterprise. Not that I have anything against profits, but I do object to profits that come as a result of government mandated harmful additives to gasoline.
I further blame the entire agricultural sytem (farmers and government) for creating a situation in which overproduction of corn carries little to no financial risk for the producer. A factory that makes too many smart phones ends up with a pile of smart phones and lost money. A farmer who produces too much corn ends up with a guaranteed income per bushel from the government. This created a corn glut, which dropped the market price of corn, which sent farmers out looking for other markets for their corn, such as corn syrup in almost everything in the grocery store, and ethanol.
And for the record, I wasn’t trying to focus blame on Gore. I’m focusing blame on politicians - because politicians from both sides of the aisle feel enormous pressure to make the midwest farmers happy, as it is very hard to get elected without their support.
@shadowfax with an A, ;))
I am making no assumptions one way or another, other then to expand on the idea that if you are going to say that a faction is in"cahoots" with the govt. just to make things more profitable for one faction, it needs to be put into perspective. What does being in “cahoots” mean ? I get the impression that it means they are doing some thing for their own self interest without the interest of the public at large in mind. Politicians feel no more pressure to make farmers happy then they do any other voting block who is now allowed to donate any amount of money to individual campaigns. It has no more power then the “oil lobby” or any other faction. I do get a negative connotation from the word “cahoots” when we don’t get, that other factions like oil, labor and other lobbies need to support such legislation to get it past as well.
Yes, using Gore as a focus name when he deserves the same credit/blame for continued legislation as the Bush administration for this continued practice is important to include in the discussion too. Now, blaming the farmers and the govt. for this continued practice when environmental groups supported this effort, labor supported this effort and a plethora of other groups as well. IMHO, it’s the lack of education and initiative for better alternatives should be a bigger focus.
Even though I don’t like the practice, even though I think something else should be done, in light of the initial reason, lead pollution, later MTBE, what is the alternative ??? I could blame the oil industry for not coming up with an alternative and be just as valid. My point is, the blame game needs equal time which I don’t think we are giving, to all the other industries that supported this effort, including those who did not come up with a better solution. You know, we should blame auto makers and small engine makers too because flex fuel motors have negligible problems with pure ethanol, methanol and about any other (ol) you want yo come up with, burn cleaner and, have no need for petro what so ever. If every car was flex fuel ready, the oil companies would have a definite reason to worry. This seems like a worth while alternative.
If ever car was flex fuel ready, the oil companies would have a definite reason to worry.
I disagree. You get less energy out of ethanol-laced gasoline than you get out of gasoline, and you’re still using gasoline, which means the oil companies are still making money. This means you end up back at the gas pumps more often than if you were using normal gasoline.
Also, flex fuel engines can only run up to 85% ethanol - the rest must be gasoline, so “no need for petro whatsoever” is a misstatement. (Yes, I know they can run 100% in Brazil, but that’s different - they’re running hydrous, not anhydrous ethanol there, and they don’t have to worry about starting cars in freezing weather)
Oil companies? WE should worry about increasing ethanol use, we’re already using about HALF our corn crop for ethanol. The impact on the food supply is undeniable, and, as an analyst from the EU said, “A crime against humanity.”