EPA Just Declared War On Millions of Car Owners

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Aazadan

The trouble is there is a huge amount of gas taxes leveed. They just spend it on anything and everything... other than 'infrastructure'.

It depends on where you live I suppose. Where I live the gas tax has remained at 28 cents/gallon for the past 11 years, and for the 12 years prior to that it was 22 cents/gallon. In addition to the federal rate of 18.4 cents/gallon.

Where I live, the DoT is so under funded that the roads are literally crumbling to gravel, there are roads where more space is taken up by the depressions from pot holes than by pavement.

originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: xuenchen

Can you show the milage connection? How big of difference will it be?

Mileage, percentage of Ethanol is all moot if the amount of Ethanol is over the manufacturer's reccomendations, so if Toyota says a 15% ethanol content will damage the engine, then your warranty is snookered....simple as that.

Toyota, who produces the bestselling car in America (the Camry), said:

“Moving from E10 to E15 represents a 50% increase in the alcohol content of the fuel compared to what the vehicles were designed to accept…Accordingly, Toyota cannot recommend the use of fuel with greater than E10 (10% Ethanol) for Toyota vehicles currently on the road."

So it seems E15 means 15% added, and there is only 10% of vehicles that can use that rating in the US.

To add, it seems there are restrictions as to when E15 can be sold, seemingly not in high summer, and also restrictions on what vehicles can use it, and certainly not HGVs. Some countries have mandated the use of Ethanol, usually a fairly low amount, but not so in some areas.
As for choice in the US, the novelty there is that, in the few stations that sell it, the blending is done at the point of sale, that's not so bad then...I think?

a reply to: neo96

They are going to start putting boxes in peoples cars to charge them per mile. California is one of the main testing grounds of the UN Sustainable Development Agenda. The endgame is to get everyone on mass transit and do away with cars except for the super rich.

California is Asking 5,000 Drivers to Pay by the Mile as a test run to implement statewide. No more gas tax, a box that logs miles and probably tracks your location.

SB 350 — proposes 50-percent fuel cuts for Californians!

The Democrats tried to pass a bill last year to cut fuel use by 50%. No gas, no cars.

This is what the America will unfortunately probably look like if they get their way.

America2050
Everyone will be in mega regions taking mass transit, living in sustainable stack and packs. No need to leave the bubble the controllers planned for them.

originally posted by: markosity1973
Buy a diesel. Problem solved.

And FYI , new diesel powered cars like my SUV are LIGHT YEARS ahead of the cantankerous, smokey, noisy slow old things of the past.

This is a good plan. Much better than ethanol.

a reply to: Violater1

I never said it wasn't in the gas? So call me ignorant when you are putting words in my mouth, funny.

Nothing of what you said was about its affect on smaller engines which is what that post was about.

Oh it and this issue goes back to Bush, read up on it.

its just so sad it has to come to this

after the '73 "shortage" brazil decided to make it mandatory that all fueling stations offer diesel, ethanol and gasoline, and they have a GM flexfule vehicle plant there, and they let the market prices fight it out

why are americans so stupid ?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: Aazadan

The trouble is there is a huge amount of gas taxes leveed. They just spend it on anything and everything... other than 'infrastructure'.

It depends on where you live I suppose. Where I live the gas tax has remained at 28 cents/gallon for the past 11 years, and for the 12 years prior to that it was 22 cents/gallon. In addition to the federal rate of 18.4 cents/gallon.

Where I live, the DoT is so under funded that the roads are literally crumbling to gravel, there are roads where more space is taken up by the depressions from pot holes than by pavement.

You can THANK the church of climatology for declining tax revenue.

That push for more fuel efficiency means LESS gallons used per day.

That is when they are not diluting it with food.

a reply to: harvestdog

" I am tired of wholly unqualified people planning the direction of this country"

EPA employees unqualified ?
But, but, but they have degrees in green leftist basketweaving bullcrap and while in college, they did all kinds of protests and #.

They know just as much as REAL STEM graduates....sure......

originally posted by: neo96
You can THANK the church of climatology for declining tax revenue.

That push for more fuel efficiency means LESS gallons used per day.

That is when they are not diluting it with food.

You can thank increasing CAFE standards for contributing to the US being energy independent now and our air quality improving.

If you base taxes on gas sold as your usage metric though, reducing fuel requirements will eventually lead to declining tax revenues in the long term. In the short term however you can market the tax savings as a reason to buy into the new technologies.

Next we'll probably move to a mileage based system and I would bet that improvements to companies like Uber alongside bigger cars for that purpose will push us to ride sharing systems (think fancier taxis) for day to day business as an approach to mass transit that works for more rural areas. And again, we'll be able to market tax savings as an incentive to use the technology.

originally posted by: markosity1973
Buy a diesel. Problem solved.

And FYI , new diesel powered cars like my SUV are LIGHT YEARS ahead of the cantankerous, smokey, noisy slow old things of the past.

Mine is smooth, extremely quiet, incredibly torquey and economical to boot. Plus it doesn't make the great clouds of smoke people are accustomed to - it has a filter to collect particulates and periodically burns them off in a special bake cycle.

And now here's the real kicker that will surprise everyone. My make and model car is also available with a 3200cc petrol engine. I am powered by a 2.0 diesel. The difference in 0 - 60 time is just 0.5 seconds at 9.5 and 10.0 respectively!

Well, let's be honest about the DPF, (diesel particulate filter) First off it does the job, it stops the smoke, very clean and burns off the particulates..but it does not suit every style of driving. I have a XJ Sovereign V6, sometimes I do a lot of miles, while there are periods in between of just tootling about, and a month of that is enough to build up the carbon in the fliter and so get an amber warning for filter being full, clearing that is easy enough, a 15/20 minute race at high revs in a low gear is enough to do the job, although you actually use quite a bit of fuel in doing so.
If you don't do the above after the amber warning, you will soon get a red warning as the filter will be choked and you will stop as your exhaust is simply blocked. A few trips to Jaguar with same problem, and they will walk away with any warranty, and tell you your driving style does not suit the vehicle. Other than that, the system works well, although untlmately the DPF will need replacement at some time.

a reply to: syrinx high priest

This is the best part about this, the free market has decided that ethanol added in is cheaper so going back to pure gas would be more expensive for the everyone.
But yet the OP is going on and on about the poor and how this affects them...

Cars have been running on this for decades, if you take care of your car this isn't going to be what causes it to die.
Now if you don't, sure it might compound it.

Rumors circulating Obama wants the cash for clunkers program started again !!

originally posted by: xuenchen
Rumors circulating Obama wants the cash for clunkers program started again !!

Outside of questionably saving the auto industry, cash for clunkers only created massive amounts of waste. People who have the money to spend on new cars, aren't the people driving 2001 and earlier models right now.

a reply to: Aazadan

How did I make a poor decision? I bought my Torino and I bought a Honda hybrid around the same time. My wife drives the Honda daily, and I my Torino.

I paid 1200 bucks for the Torino, 21000 for the hybrid. 10 years and a combined 409,000 miles later, which do you think is worth more?

(Hint) look up the resale value of a 12 year old hybrid with 250,000 miles on it.

Meanwhile, the 47 year old motor and tranny in my Ford just keeps putting the tires to the pavement. The hybrid could never accomplish that.

a reply to: Bobaganoosh

You're the one upset you won't still be able to use it. It has been obvious since we started using ethanol blends in the first place that we would shift to using higher amounts in fuel over time. If you wanted to continue to drive the car past the point where that happens, perhaps you should have bought something else.

Or perhaps you made a bad decisions, because the free market only functions on the idea that consumers don't know any better and will make bad choices. Now you'll have to rebuy the same product (another car).

not just your car but your riding mower will be trashed too.check your riding mower manual it says do not use gasoline with more than %10 ethanol.if you use gasoline with more than %10 ethanol it voids your warranty.

a reply to: Aazadan

You are talking out of your ass.

The "free market" should provide unadulterated fuel to consumers who require it for the health of their vehicles, instead of the state sponsored terrorist act of "shifting" consumers to buy into the planned obsolescence $hit vehicles they sell today.

Free market offers "choices" for supply and demand. It does not funnel everybody into the same cookie cutter format.

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
a reply to: Aazadan

You are talking out of your ass.

The "free market" should provide unadulterated fuel to consumers who require it for the health of their vehicles, instead of the state sponsored terrorist act of "shifting" consumers to buy into the planned obsolescence $hit vehicles they sell today.

Free market offers "choices" for supply and demand. It does not funnel everybody into the same cookie cutter format.

Any sane market has regulations on products, that's how you as a consumer can have confidence they're safe and of a certain minimum quality.

a reply to: boncho


Ummm...ethanol is a solvent...it cleans the residue from your fuel tank and lines and sends it...through your filter into your engine...It also only has an optimal shelf life from the date of manufacture at the refinery until phase separation of the suspended ethanol...of 90 days...In humid environments this shelf life drops to approximately two weeks...(think boating)...

What happens then...?

The ethanol settles to the bottom of the tank just above the H2O layer where it is then forced at 30 psi by your fuel pump...along with the H2O (hydroscopic property of alchohol) and residue sludge where it overwhelmes your filtration system causing it to fail...Contaminants then clog your fuel injectors...dry rot rubber o-rings and dissolve aluminum parts from the inside out...

I work in the boating industry...the Coast Guard was instrumental in having marine fuels that contained ethanol removed from the supply...where previously it had been mandated...

It appears the number of "rescues" had increased dramatically due to the use of ethanol fuels...as a cost and lifesaving measure the mandate was overturned and now marinas and over the road fuel stations sell ethanol free 91 octane fuel...






YouSir

a reply to: Aazadan

Is that what we have today? A "sane" market?

If that is the case, then I believe both you and it are quite the opposite.