It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Great Ethanol Scam

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2009 @ 12:19 AM
link   

First, the primary job of the Environmental Protection Agency is, dare it be said, to protect our environment. Yet using ethanol actually creates more smog than using regular gas, and the EPA's own attorneys had to admit that fact in front of the justices presiding over the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in 1995 (API v. EPA)
source


Found this article, and decided to share it. This is very eye opening. Ethanol isn't what it's cracked up to be but the use of it is still being pushed. Why? Lobbyists. I haven't researched the facts presented in this article, but after reading this i plan to. If all the facts are straight, this is an outrage.


TA




posted on May, 16 2009 @ 01:07 AM
link   
Never underestimate the power of a lobby, the corn lobby is one of the biggest.

Washington politics as usual!

Good find, star and flag



posted on May, 16 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Third, all fuels laced with ethanol reduce the vehicle's fuel efficiency, and the E85 blend drops gas mileage between 30% and 40%, depending on whether you use the EPA's fuel mileage standards (fueleconomy.gov) or those of the Dept. of Energy.


How can a substance that decreases fuel efficiency be "better for the environment?" It's not:


The new push to get a 15% ethanol mandate out of Washington is simply to restore profitability to a failed industry. Only this time around those promoting more ethanol in our gas say there's no scientific proof that adding more ethanol will damage vehicles or small gas-powered engines. With that statement they've gone from shilling the public to outright falsehoods, because ethanol-laced gasoline is already destroying engines across the country in ever larger numbers.


So, they want to destroy our current cars for no particular reason other than appeasing ethanol lobbyists.


TA



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 02:57 AM
link   
This has been well known for about ten years now (well, not well known, but known by enough people that it should be a dead issue). Go back to the 2000 primaries. Bill Bradley and John McCain opposed earmarks. Bradley went and talked to the corn farmers and had a "change of heart." McCain stuck to his guns, and refused to back ethanol. In Iowa Bradley received 35% of the vote and came in a distant second to Al Gore, in the Democratic Primaries. McCain was absolutely crushed in the Republican primaries, finishing with 5% of the vote and finishing behind (get ready...): George W. Bush, Alan Keyes, Steve Forbes, and Gary Bauer. McCain's straight-talk was admirable, but note the fact that he hasn't been President for the past eight years.

Politicians are professional vote-getters. Some of them have great intentions, but their only professional incentive is to get as many votes as possible.

[edit on 17-5-2009 by theWCH]



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
Awesome find! Im somewhat of a mechanic, and what ive also learned abuot ethanol is.. if corn goes upin price, so with gas and milk. Ethanol decreases mileage..that is a stone cold fact. Any mechanic will tell you, the use of ethanol is a mystery. Now, as for them pushing 15%...ethanol, fact , is corrosive. Not only does it reduce mileage, it slightly speeds up corrosion on the enigne. At 15%, a little more, will decrease mileage and add corrosion a tad bit more. That kinda adds,..ecoomy near shambles + 15% ethanol= yuo must buy new car quicker. Well yuo dont have to buy a new ar, just replace the parts..usually in the case like this, it would be yuor gas tank, and the filler neck, that would be first to corrode...most people are brainwashed to spend thousands on anew car, rather than maintain thier invetment, all over a simple little thing usually.
I dont know what the effects of 15% ethanol would do to todays cars. SOme of fords models, have flex line fuel..they can run that gas they use is brazil E84 i think its called...but you cannot use it in an engine designed to run on fossil fuel..the engine would literally gblow its gaskets and pistons up.
I remember reading a while back, about yesterdays fuel and todays..while E85, gets a good reputation actually, as a vey good modern cleaner buring substitute..it was Henry ford..his engines ran on alcohol. One day, thugs from rockefeller appraoched Henry ford, and basically siad, yuo will be using OUR fuel, or yuo wont be making any cars at all. That is why today, we have octane ratings and using an oil and Toluene, Benzyne cocktail, as opposed to running alcohol which was said to be like 98% polltion free,a nd was CHEAP!



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 03:41 AM
link   
That angers me, the governemnt said that..they found no significance in engine corrossion or mileage reduction,..that is a LIE. Why si it 99% of mechanics think otherwise goverment?
here is a cool website, www.bobistheoilguy.com
ANYTHING you ever wanted to know abuot oil, additives, how its made, processed, ect you can find and its free memebrship. Look under news, or make apost and ask a question in fuels section. or do a search on ethanol, and see what the oil engineeers,, yes oil engineers think..
My theory, for a while now, is that their forcing us to use ethanol, so we have to buy a new, unsafe, plastic, imported no less, piece of garbage,a t FULL retail, at least until diesel has switched over to soemthing like E85 or hydroen or something. Thier way of messin with us, the oil comapnys would make enormous revenue(aka steeling, remember its summer, thier starting to price gouge now).. SHELL is the worst of these, next to Exxon.
I refuise to buy exxon, 2 reason..their ga make my car detonate(bad gas ) and the oil spill in alaska back in 1989..i am wiliing to bet,t hey knew the captain was a drunk. And shell..shellis considered top tier gas...they use twice the minimum additives in gas, per EPA law. Te faft is, its impossible for every gas tank to have an equal amount of additive..and with every mechnic i ever read abuot..using one gas to another...their was NO physical or visual differenc in carbon buildup between citgo gas and double the additive Shell gas. They all had equal carbon deposits, based on 60,000 mile engine teardown. The point? Shell is major corporate, and you pay the extra $$ for that additive at. their gas pumps. Again, its another way to ripp off the customer.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 03:52 AM
link   
The whole point of this is..ethanol guarantees you wil be back at the gas pumpp faster, spending more cash..in turn, that made exon/mobil form multi millionaires, to corporate billionaires,at the law obiding citizens expense.



posted on May, 17 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
Another key point is that it drives up the cost of a food source.

www.bloomberg.com...

Corn is a basic food staple necessary for survival in 3rd world countries, it really shouldn't be going in our gas tanks!



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join