Ducati Monster Forum

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= (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  [thumbsup]

done!

Done!

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.

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.

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.

yeah, on a purely environmental front, the cellulosic ethanol production methods make a lot more sense.  once perfected, it can basically turn any kind of plant into ethanol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulosic_ethanol (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulosic_ethanol)

When I fill up away from MKE, I can pay for premium 100% gasoline, my bike runs about 30 degrees cooler and idles much smoother. The E10 is already bad enough!

Done!

The subject of the thread is a call for political action ("...rallying behind a bill..."), but fine.  I'll refrain from further comment.    [beer]

i think the call to action is to avoid a situation where we HAVE to use E15, rather than one where the stations can't sell it. i also think that in this case it is about consumers speaking out about a product they don't want to use.

Yeah, but the way "the world works" would be subsidies/credits/benefits making it less cost-efficient not to use this, end result of no more regular gas at most stations.  :-\

Sent an email.  Thanks for the heads up on this!

Just an FYI

Ethanol is a great fuel

For engines DESIGNED to use it

It's been used in PURE form for almost 25 years in Brazil.  You smell it everywhere, the exhaust is different.  E100 is the MOST common motor fuel in Brazil for cars.

But our cars and bikes are not designed for it. 

But as a fuel, it is fine.  Just like diesel is a better fuel than gasoline (has more energy), gasoline is a better fuel than ethanol (in terms of energy) but if the ethanol is cheap (E100 is around $1/gallon in Brazil) and it is environmentally neutral, AND you have engines designed for it, who cares?

I for one would LOVE to see E100 cars being sold and E100 available at the pump if the conditions above are met (cheap, env neutral, engines available).  Sell it alongside G100 gasoline and D100 diesel.

i agree, completely, with that and i just want to make sure my vehicles ('modern', 'dated', 'classic' or 'antique') can stay on the road with regular maintenance rather than substantial overhauls.   

i don't know that can be guaranteed -- look at what's happened with all the cars requiring leaded fuel.  Most of the older ones that relied on lead to eliminate predetonation have simply died off, or are only used on weekends and are dying a slow death.

I don't think anyone can guarantee a vehicle fuel will remain available forever, but I do think we can be smart about how we administer them and offer substitutes where possible.

i just want to be able to ride the ol' ducbomination900 for awhile...


i got no problems with dropping a 'new fuel' big honkin' crate motor in a hotrod, i'm no purist, but I have trouble imagining a retrofit kit to make the wide variety of [looking exclusively at gasoline] engine configurations in powersports. Two-stroke, 4-stroke, various head designs, fuel pump type, fuel injection/carburation, fuel/air manifold configuration...

There are certainly people who are anti-change 'wholesale', because they like things the way 'they are'.  I don't think I'm quite there - but some things in a changed form are less appealing.  I have trouble getting excited about electric cars or motorcycles - even in the racing environment - because they are missing the sounds and smells. I'd go so far as to list those in "things I like about motorcycling" along with rush of speed, leaning to turn, 'thrill' of exposure, better parking, blah blah blah.

So.... I'm all for improvements/changes to combustion that will only somewhat reduce (rather than eliminate) some of the things I enjoy about motorcycling. Just need it be workable for my ol' carbonster900 or don't push gasoline off the market (essentially) making my bike nothing more than a garage decoration.  (i'd be pleading hard to get one of them brought inside and put on display at that point).

Good point!

My Flex-Fuel Tundra works great with an ethanol concentration up to 85%.  But of course its designed that way.  I tested my old lawnmower on E85 a few years ago and the only noticeable "initial" difference was that it ran much hotter.  I didn't keep the E85 in there long enough to find out what it does to the internal fuel system but it's probably not good.

Here in NY, we have 10% ethanol in our fuels.  Its bad enough what the E10 does to my small engines and boat.  It seems like its only going to get worse with E15.  The E85 is already available to vehicles that are equipped to handle it so just leave it at that!

while this is an older thread, the topic is the same:


(http://americanmotorcyclist.com/images/ama_logo_small.jpg)House Committee action on bill to require EPA to seek independent scientific analysis on the effects of 15 percent ethanol
Urge your Representative to support today!  http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=54681921&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id] (http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=54681921&queueid=[capwiz:queue_id)

On February 7, 2012, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology will vote on H.R. 3199 (http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/bills/?bill=54681731), introduced by Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (http://amacycle.capwiz.com/bio/id/639) (R-WI) on October 14, 2011. This bill would require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to seek independent scientific analysis on the effects of 15 percent ethanol blend (E15) gasoline.

To watch a live webcast of the markup, click here (http://science.house.gov/markup/full-committee-markup-hr-3834-hr-3199).

"The EPA's decision to allow E15 into the marketplace will impact every American who owns a car, lawnmower or boat," Sensenbrenner said. Automakers insist that using E15 will void warranties, lower fuel efficiency and cause premature engine failure. In off-road engines, the effects can even be dangerous for users.

"There are serious concerns that the EPA used only one Department of Energy test and rushed E15's introduction into the marketplace," Sensenbrenner said. "This test was limited in scope and ignored a plethora of evidence – albeit inconvenient evidence for the EPA – that shows E15 gasoline has a negative effect on engines."

The new E15 gasoline formulation may appear at a fueling station near you and you need to be careful where you use this new fuel blend. That is because the EPA, in October 2010, approved E15 for use in model year 2007 and newer light duty vehicles (cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles). In January 2011, it added model year 2001-2006 light duty vehicles to the approved list.

Riders should pay attention to this list because no motorcycles or ATVs are currently listed.

The American Motorcyclist Association (AMA) is concerned about E15 because it burns hotter than gasoline that contains a lesser amount of ethanol. In engines not designed to dissipate that extra heat, damage in the form of premature wear can result. Although this is a concern in all motorcycles, it's particularly problematic for air-cooled engines found in many bikes. Moreover, use of E15 may even void the manufacturer warranty.

Since the approved list includes many light-duty vehicles in use today, refineries, distributors, and fueling stations may choose to offer primarily E15 gasoline because of this action by the EPA. This should concern all motorcyclists and off-highway enthusiasts since this may affect the availability of gasoline with less or no ethanol (E10 or E0).

We need your help to pass H.R. 3199. You can find contact information for your Representative at AmericanMotorcyclist.com > Rights > Issues & Legislation, then enter your zip code in the "Find your Officials" box. A prewritten e-mail is available for you to send to your federal elected official immediately by following the "Take Action" option and entering your information.

In a previous AMA alert, Representative Sensenbrenner also introduced H.R. 748 (http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/bills/?bill=40097506). This bill would prohibit the Administrator of the EPA from authorizing the use of gasoline containing greater than 10 percent ethanol in certain vehicles. For more information on H.R. 748, click here (http://capwiz.com/amacycle/issues/alert/?alertid=51059636).

Again, the AMA urges you to write your Representative today and ask them to support H.R. 748 and H.R. 3199.

For a detailed analysis of this issue, including access to related documents, please sign up to be an AMA Defender member at AmericanMotorcyclist.com/membership/join (http://www.americanmotorcyclist.com/membership/join). Defender members who sign up to receive Action Alerts automatically receive the detailed analysis.

If you are an AMA member, thank you for your support. If you aren't a member, please consider joining. More members means more clout and your support helps the AMA fight for your rights – on the road, trail and in the halls of government. To join, go to AmericanMotorcyclist.com/membership/join (http://www.americanmotorcyclist.com/membership/join).

The refiners are not going to offer E15 until somebody absolves them of liability.

I hope that becomes the truth

Perspective:

Brazil:

48 mil vehicles and about 10 mil on E100 (20%)
6 billion gal of Ethanol used per year for internal use
17 mil acres devoted to that E100 production

USA

260 mil vehicles
138 billion gal gas used per year
442 mil acres of cropland total

Assume a very rough estimate of the same 20% of vehicles were converted to E100 and equal useage of gas per vehicle and the USA would need to devote 18% of our total cropland for ethanol production.  Sweet! Can't wait!


Rough numbers derived from available figures on teh interwebs in about 10 min during my lunch break.

And the price of beef along with so many things sky high.  Still waiting on hydrogen.   ;D

I'll be dead and ground up into biofuel by the time Hydrogen comes around to viability as a transportation medium.  Then again maybe that's the ticket for the alternate fuel problem; people!  Hey it worked for Soylent Green.

Congress dumped the tariffs on Brazilian ethanol, which means (hypothetically) we could get E100 fuel in the US for around $2/gallon if we had E100 cars.  They use the far more efficient cane ethanol which grows much faster and is basically a weed there.

Ethanol is a fine fuel for an engine designed for it.  I would happily pay $2/gal for a small car that got around 30 mpg versus paying $4/gal for gas/E10 and getting the same mileage.

That weed is still a plant that needs to be cultivated ergo still takes up crop/agriculture land.  Rainforest/CO2 sink. Food. Cheap autofuel.  Pick two.

Thankfully down here in Australia the powers that be have reversed their mandate on E10 now
making it not compulsory . [clap]
A fuel that is not good for a lot of older cars which we have a lot of here and gives poor milage return was
un wanted by the public, not to mention why the make the beast with two backs are we growing crops to fuel cars  [bang]
 ASSmazing a government that actually listened to the public . [laugh]

The local ethanol producers had shot them selves in the foot by raising prices thinking
they were going to cash in.
The price here for E10 has gone up so much it was almost level with 91 our lowest octane fuel
so with reduced distance delivered from it there is no reason to run it.
The outlets for fuel have now wasted a lot of money on setting up the stations to deliver a fuel no one wants
sucked in  ;D they have been ripping us off for years with price spiking and fixing above the recommended price.
The pessimist in me says they will no doubt recoup their losses by raising the prices again to cover their wasted investment.

Response from Zoe Lofgren D-CA:

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 748, to prohibit the EPA from authorizing the use of gasoline containing greater than 10 percent ethanol. I appreciate that you took the time to share your thoughts with me.
I understand your concerns with the use of gasoline blends that contain more than 10 percent ethanol, such as E15. You may be interested to know that the House Science Committee's Energy and Environment Subcommittee held a hearing on July 7th on "Hitting the Ethanol Blend Wall: Examining the Science on E15." As a senior member of the Committee, please know that I will keep your comments in mind as we continue to assess the potential effects of E15.
Again, thanks for being in touch. If I may be of assistance to you or your family, please don't hesitate to contact me.


Linky:

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-112hhrg67254/pdf/CHRG-112hhrg67254.pdf (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-112hhrg67254/pdf/CHRG-112hhrg67254.pdf)

Still has to read the whole thing above.

House panel blocks sale of E15.  For what it's worth.

"The Science Committee in the House of Representatives has a approved a bill that would prevent the Environmental Protection Agency from allowing the use of gasoline with a higher ethanol content without additional study.

According to The Detroit News, the bill was sponsored by Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wisconsin and passed 19-7 along party lines after numerous groups spoke out against E15. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the American Petroleum Institute, the Friends of the Earth, the Milk Producers Council, the American Bakers Association and the National Turkey Federation all pushed for further E15 study.

Last year, the government estimated more domestic corn was used for ethanol than to feed farm animals, and opponents of ethanol argue E15 would only lead to steeper food prices across the country.

Congress just recently ended a 30-year tax subsidy on corn-based ethanol and put a stop to tariffs on the fuel imported from Brazil. The subsidy alone reportedly cost taxpayers $6 billion annually. All told, Congress has awarded the ethanol industry $45 billion in subsidies since 1980. "

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/09/house-panel-blocks-sale-of-e15/ (http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/09/house-panel-blocks-sale-of-e15/)

Certainly messed up the outboard on my sailboat.

"Valero Energy Corp., which produces more than 1 billion gallons of ethanol annually, more than any other company in the U.S. aside from Archer Daniels Midland Co. and Poet LLC, said it has no intention of selling E15 at any of its 1,000 company-owned retail fuel stores. “Because E15 has not been approved for use in all engines and hasn’t received warranty protection from engine manufacturers, we can’t guarantee its performance and we won’t sell a product we can’t guarantee,” said Bill Day, executive director of media relations for Valero. Some Valero-branded fuel stations are independently owned, however, and Day said those stations can choose to offer E15, but they would have to locate the dispensers under a separate canopy."