Ducati Monster Forum

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-11-20/html/2013-27827.htm  (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-11-20/html/2013-27827.htm)
I intend to go to this meeting and maybe a ride as well since the temps are going to be nice. IMHO this issue is important to all of us, but realize others my have a different opinion, the AMA has asked for support and I intend to do just that. - Gene

i'm interested in going.

Hotel info is in the link. I called them about parking, the valet will show you where to park if you are on a motorcycle, otherwise it is valet parking. Hearing starts at 9AM, I'll probably leave Chantilly at 7 to be there in plenty of time, anyone know how 395 is in the AM? or if it is better to go 66 to 110 to 1 into Crystal City? - Gene

Gene, I got the AMA alert the other day but already had a firm appointment for today down here. How did it go?

I'm putting together my thoughts tonight to share here and other forums. I should be able to post later tonight. - Gene

Sorry for the delay in reporting my attendance at the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) hearing on the proposed volume requirements of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) for calendar year 2014. I arrived on time and was directed to park in the front of the building. There was a total of 3 motorcycles that attended. Once inside I got some coffee, Starbucks in the lobby, and headed into the conference area. That had sign in for 3 groups, Media, Testifiers, and attendees. I signed in as myself, Title: “Motorcyclist”, Representing: “Motorcyclists”. The room was full and almost everyone in Suits, with Ladies wearing skirts or dresses, there was one row of young people wearing T-shirts “Food not Fuel”. When I signed in they handed me a piece of paper which turned out to be the registered list of people who were scheduled to testify. There were 24 “panels” of between 4-6 people, mostly 6. While some of the panels made sense Iowa Governor and other representatives from the State some panels were diverse/opposing points of view. At any rate it soon became obvious that 90% of the people to testify were corn growers, ethanol producers, or in some way reliant on revenue from the production and sale of ethanol. I saw no visible evidence of the AMA in attendance or testifying, I intend to send an inquiry to find out if they attended and if not why. This public hearing was about the fact that the EPA has lowered the amount of fuel containing ethanol required in 2014, apparently they did this because the amount of fuel being consumed has dropped significantly and their view is the market is saturated. So the vast majority of the testimony of the panels was to object to this reduction. There were some exceptions, one of which was  http://goodlatte.house.gov/ (http://goodlatte.house.gov/) who has a bipartisan bill to repeal the Ethanol Mandate completely:
Renewable Fuel Standard Elimination Act (H.R. 1461) http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1461?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%221461%22%5D%7D (http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1461?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%221461%22%5D%7D)  and the Renewable Fuel Standard Reform Act (H.R. 1462) http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1462?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%221462%22%5D%7D. (http://beta.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1462?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%221462%22%5D%7D.)
I have sent him a comment using a contact form on his web site, asking what I might do to support his efforts and also to ask him how to get Premium fuel set aside as ethanol free in the State of Virginia, have not heard back yet.
Speaking of Congressman there was one in attendance whose behavior calls into question his character and ability to serve as a US Congressman. I was seated in the 8th row of 10 rows at a point where I could see both the EPA panel and the testifying panel. The panels were seated in the front with ample microphones. Even though they had microphones some did not get close enough to microphone or spoke in a low voice so it was sometimes difficult to hear those speaking. Directly behind me 2 guys started carrying on a conversation, I let it go for a few minutes to see if it was just a brief conversation that would stop. When it became obvious that the conversation was not going to end anytime soon, I stood up, turned around and asked them if they could move their conversation to the back, there was about 50-75’ of open space behind the chairs, Thanked them and then sat back down. In 5minutes or so the conversations started again, this time a well dressed Lady sitting next to me turned around and asked politely if they could stop. The guy doing all the talking got very rude and said he was having a conversation and she should move closer if she was having trouble hearing. Well that really pissed me off, so I stood up, git in the guys face and told him if he didn’t stop or move the conversation to the back I was going to call one of the moderators over and have him escorted out. Things got quiet and I sat back down. About 10 minutes later this person was up front testifying and was introduced as Congressman from one of the Corn states – I could not believe it. I’m still in disbelief that a US Congressman would act the way he did.
I stayed at the hearing for 2 hours then headed into work, I did dial into the teleconference number several times throughout the day and the testimony was pretty much the same. It was all about money not one single person I heard mentioned cleaner fuel, lower emissions etc…. This issue is about big money, which of course was initially funded with large grants from the Federal Government.
At the end of the day I’m not sure if there is enough of us to fight this, it’s big money and big influence, but I do know that it does not mean we should not try. There is an opening with the elimination of the subsidies and now the lower volume requirements. You should care about this subject, not only because to the impact to our motorcycles but just the whole idea is wrong. While I will continue to press for a set aside of premium fuel in Virginia I will also ask my legislators why we are not pursuing more use of Natural Gas in fleet operations such as Taxis, Buses(Metro, School buses, Commuting buses), police.
-   Gene

Many thanks for taking the time and trouble! I'll circulate this around to my riding buddies in the Richmond area as well as motorcycle lobbyists and my VA Delegate who is senior, shares our mindset and represents a LOT of farmers with rotting tractors and implements.

Really appreciate your taking the trouble!  [thumbsup]

Gene

I had planned to make it but had to fly out of town for a family emergency. 

Shame there wasn't more representation of the motoring community and I'm surprised the AMA did not speak.

Thanks for the summary/update.  I applaud Congressman Goodlatte's bill, although it looks like it is languishing in sub-committee.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/12/epa-admits-the-ethanol-mandate-has-become-unrealistic/ (http://dailycaller.com/2013/12/12/epa-admits-the-ethanol-mandate-has-become-unrealistic/)

Wow, a ray of hope....

The difficult thing here is that even though the EPA no longer thinks the 15% mandate is smart / doable / etc., the phase in to higher amounts of ethanol is law. Right now getting any law changed is, shall we say, difficult. Lets hope for the best.

The irony, if I understand it correctly, is that the law states that a certain number of gallons of ethanol had to be used by gasoline producers by year 20xx in order to reduce the amount of gas being used. However the recession, increased auto efficiency and cost of oil has resulted in less gas being burned anyways - so the goal was achieved but in a different way.

Irony #2: One reason for the law was also because we wanted to reduce out dependency on foreign oil. Well, the U.S. just started producing more crude than we import last month thanks to fracking, etc. :)

Pretty much you have it correctly summarized. IMHO we have more than a small opening that is getting bigger by the day. This issue made the news this AM on several stations, now is the time for all of us to start banging on this issue with our legislators. - Gene

At the very least, the EPA's statements do seem to give lawmakers some cover to do something about existing legislation and would be worth mentioning in any correspondence with one's Rep/Sen.

Beyond that, perhaps the EPA could use its tendency towards extra-legal rule-making for good for once.  ;D [evil]  (For the record, that's mostly a joke and I am not looking to threadjack this into a debate on executive branch malfeasance or lack thereof)

I have a truck that runs on E85 and I cant find any! I have a bike that should only use gas and I cant find any! If ethanol was such a great idea, then why not have two fuel standards. Gas without ethanol and E-85?

You should go out of your way to try some E-85. My 2003 car "can" run on it (by law) but... My son bought a car last year which is optimized for E-85, not just compatible. He tried some. Got 20% less mileage although it was 10% cheaper than E-10 Premium at the same location. Even THAT car does best on Pure Gas BTW.

IMO E-10 should only exist in high polution metro areas where it substitutes for fuel which used to be formulated with MTBE which was pulled due to health concerns in ground water. Otherwise, sell both Pure Gas and E-10 at actual cost and let the market decide!

Exactly! And FWIW I would be willing to pay extra for premium non-ethanol blend. - Gene

Chevy Chase has e85 but I totally agree.  Oz has mix - at - the - pump ethanol so you can select what grade u want.  Alas.   Not here.

Just got this update. I've deleted the source so that nanny won't pregnant dog.  8)
________________________________________________________________________________

Federal Bill of Interest to Motorcyclists

February 5, 2014
The Motorcycle Riders Foundation reports that the United States House of Representatives has passed a bill that would end a federal subsidy for biofuel blender pumps in rural areas. The measure passed by a vote of 251-166.  The Senate is expected to vote on the matter next week and there is little that those in support of the subsidies can do to reinstate the money. President Obama is expected to sign the legislation into law.

Putting an end to these subsidies will likely result in less biofuel blender pumps in the market place and therefore less E-15 fuel.  As most of you know, E-15 is gasoline that is blended with 15% ethanol.  Obviously that is a 50% increase in ethanol over the standard E-10 that most of us are used to seeing and using.  There are questions regarding how E-15 will affect engines, especially smaller ones.  The Motorcycle Industry Counsel claims that E-15 could affect engine durability and deterioration.  Further, if your motorcycle is damaged by E-15, you have no legal recourse.   Passage of this bill should be welcome news to all motorcycle riders.

I pregnant doged when you plugged the name of an attorney/business, and the legislation that entity was advocating.

Quit being a pompous ass.   

EPA Acknowledges Ethanol Damages Engines
Courtesy of American Motorcyclist Association
Monday, April 21, 2014


American Motorcyclist Association
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has publicly acknowledged that ethanol in gasoline can damage internal combustion engines by increasing exhaust temperatures and indirectly causing component failures, the American Motorcyclist Association reports.

The EPA statements are found in a rule proposal issued by the Federal Trade Commission regarding a new label for pumps that supply fuel blends high in ethanol.

According to the EPA, "ethanol impacts motor vehicles in two primary ways. First ... ethanol enleans the [air/fuel] ratio (increases the proportion of oxygen relative to hydrocarbons) which can lead to increased exhaust gas temperatures and potentially increase incremental deterioration of emission control hardware and performance over time, possibly causing catalyst failure. Second, ethanol can cause materials compatibility issues, which may lead to other component failures.

"In motorcycles and nonroad products [using E15 and higher ethanol blends], EPA raised engine-failure concerns from overheating."

These EPA statements, contained in the FTC document, back the long-held position of the AMA.

"The American Motorcyclist Association has fought the distribution of E15 fuel blends in an effort to protect motorcycle and all-terrain vehicles from the damage that ethanol causes," said Wayne Allard, AMA vice president for government relations. "Now the EPA acknowledges that ethanol itself is harmful to emissions hardware and other components on all motor vehicles. It is time for the federal government to pause, take a hard look at this product and change its entire approach to ethanol in fuels."

E15 is a gasoline formulation that contains up to 15 percent ethanol by volume.

None of the estimated 22 million motorcycles and ATVs currently in operation can use fuels with blends higher than 10 percent ethanol. Doing so could void the manufacturer's warranty, in addition to causing damage to the vehicle.

The AMA applauded the EPA's decision in its proposed rule to roll back the requirement for wider distribution and use of E15 under its Renewable Fuel Standard.

The AMA also is concerned about the continued availability of E10 blends and E0 fuels -- gasoline with zero ethanol content -- if E15 is allowed to permeate the marketplace.