Decided this needed its own thread in an effort to get more action/visibility.

AMA is trying to get support rallying behind a bill prohibiting the Administrator of the EPA from authorizing the use of gasoline containing greater than 10 percent ethanol in certain vehicles.  Please go through this site and show your support.

http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=51059636&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id]

Already did when I got the email alert, also posted on XR1200 forum. - Gene

Thanks DRKWNG 

done!

Done!

Quote from: twolanefun on July 06, 2011, 09:28:15 AM
Already did when I got the email alert, also posted on XR1200 forum. - Gene

Good deal Gene.  Thanks for passing it on over there as well. 

I just hope people realize how important this is, it's not just our plastic tanks, but many a wrench has stated that the FI doesn't like this stuff either. And we are up against a powerful lobby and industry group, our voice is important in the debate. Putting politics aside the OEMs need time to react and we the consumers need products that have been designed to use the stuff.

BTW if you are not a member of the AMA please consider joining, it's really the only consistent voice we have, while I don't always agree with the position, because of my membership(a looong time now) I'm am always aware of the issues and have some place to go to point out new issues. To me it is sad that while we have 11 Million bikes registered in USA, we only have 300K members of the AMA. - Gene

There are several additional issues that could be brought up.  Namely that the creation of ethanol is 'energy negative' meaning that it requires more energy to manufacture it than it liberates.  It is also a 'crop' and arguably that land could be used for reducing our growing food prices etc.

Not to mention the obvious that it simply eats up our vehicles, their seals, and affects their longevity (and thus has us paying for vehicles more frequently).

Done! And thanks for the heads up on the topic

Done


And heard a story about it on NPR this morning - lots of negative feedback about E15 from mfgs.
going to the sponsor of the bill

Last line of story stated " E15 won't harm any vehicle made after 2001"

Done

The small engine manufacturers are all over this as well.

Quote from: hillbillypolack on July 06, 2011, 02:59:22 PM
There are several additional issues that could be brought up.  Namely that the creation of ethanol is 'energy negative' meaning that it requires more energy to manufacture it than it liberates.  It is also a 'crop' and arguably that land could be used for reducing our growing food prices etc.

Not to mention the obvious that it simply eats up our vehicles, their seals, and affects their longevity (and thus has us paying for vehicles more frequently).

side note, it's 1:1.3 (1 unit of energy used to produce 1.3 units) for the us because we use corn... but for brazil, i believe it's a 1:8 ratio as they use sugar cane which is ridiculously better for making ethanol than corn.  corn is in fact the worst choice to use to make ethanol.

and already sent the email

Wait, so people actually support the government telling stations what they can and can't sell?

Sorry, but I can't jump on the Socialism bandwagon.  I don't like E15, but I hate government telling companies that they can't sell something even more.  The proper way to address the issue is to stop ethanol subsidies, then it'll resolve itself.

Quote from: Scissors on July 07, 2011, 03:56:10 AM
Wait, so people actually support the government telling stations what they can and can't sell?

Sorry, but I can't jump on the Socialism bandwagon.  I don't like E15, but I hate government telling companies that they can't sell something even more.  The proper way to address the issue is to stop ethanol subsidies, then it'll resolve itself.

Comments like this get threads locked.

No politics please.

enjoy that length and modified email, Pete Sessions!

In other news, military is investigating non-food, non-fossil fuel alternatives.  largest domestic single buyer of fuel, so they got some weight. their end goal is 'cost-efficiency': if it ain't as cheap, it ain't a solution.  currently looking at inedible mustard variant that is used in crop rotation. pretty cool according to me.