End of Autogas?

[David Lesher]

The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
even in areas that do not have smog issues.

Is this the end of autogas?
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[Doug]

At the nearby airport where we can buy mogas, the owner gets 91 octane
from a local supplier BEFORE any auto additives are added. I assume he
will be able to continue to do so. Although I own stock in Exxon, I
think this energy bill is the worst legislation I have ever seen come
out of Congress, and I hope if it passes in it's present form that
Bush vetoes it (I doubt he will as it is supported by many of the oil
companies). The alchohol requirement is only part of the bad things.
Where are the liberal, soak the rich, penalize the oil companies
LIBERALS when you need them? (many liberals voted for it).

David Lesher > wrote in message >...
> The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
> even in areas that do not have smog issues.
>
> Is this the end of autogas?

[Alexi]

"Doug" > wrote in message
om...
> At the nearby airport where we can buy mogas, the owner gets 91 octane
> from a local supplier BEFORE any auto additives are added. I assume he
> will be able to continue to do so. Although I own stock in Exxon, I
> think this energy bill is the worst legislation I have ever seen come
> out of Congress, and I hope if it passes in it's present form that
> Bush vetoes it (I doubt he will as it is supported by many of the oil
> companies). The alchohol requirement is only part of the bad things.
> Where are the liberal, soak the rich, penalize the oil companies
> LIBERALS when you need them? (many liberals voted for it).

Kind of funny how the Bush/Cheney supporters stop sucking up real quick when
the legistration affects their own little world.

Don't like paying a little extra for avgas to support your FBO?

Autogas should be renendered useless for aviation use, illegal even. Maybe
someday we'll get clean hydrogen running engines that will eliminate the
need for burning petro.

Would have had themt a long time ago if it wasn't for the special interest
lobbies and the Cheney/Bush types!

Alexi


> David Lesher > wrote in message
>...
> > The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
> > even in areas that do not have smog issues.
> >
> > Is this the end of autogas?

[[email protected]]

Alexi > wrote:


> Kind of funny how the Bush/Cheney supporters stop sucking up real quick when
> the legistration affects their own little world.

> Don't like paying a little extra for avgas to support your FBO?

> Autogas should be renendered useless for aviation use, illegal even. Maybe
> someday we'll get clean hydrogen running engines that will eliminate the
> need for burning petro.

> Would have had themt a long time ago if it wasn't for the special interest
> lobbies and the Cheney/Bush types!

> Alexi

The question to which I have yet to hear an answer from the hydrogen
advocates is, since it takes more energy to produce hydrogen than you
can get from burning it, where do you get the energy to produce the
hydrogen in the first place? Reactors on every corner? Yeah, that will
be real popular.

Alcohol has the same problem plus there not being enough land in the US
to produce enough to replace gasoline. So we replace Saudi oil with
Mexican and Argentinian corn and put a reactor on every corner?

As for being clean, any engine that uses air to supply the oxidizer
produces oxides of nitrogen no matter what the fuel.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove -spam-sux to reply.

[Javier Henderson]

"Alexi" > writes:


> Kind of funny how the Bush/Cheney supporters stop sucking up real quick when
> the legistration affects their own little world.
>
> Don't like paying a little extra for avgas to support your FBO?
>
> Autogas should be renendered useless for aviation use, illegal even. Maybe
> someday we'll get clean hydrogen running engines that will eliminate the
> need for burning petro.
>
> Would have had themt a long time ago if it wasn't for the special interest
> lobbies and the Cheney/Bush types!

Wow.

Me, I prefer autogas because the engine in my Skylane won't foul
plugs on it.

As for supporting the FBO at my home base, his pricing practices
leave much to be desired, so ...

-jav

[C J Campbell]

"David Lesher" > wrote in message
...
|
|
| The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
| even in areas that do not have smog issues.

This requirement was a rider attached by Daschle. The GOP accepted it or the
bill would have been filibustered like all of Bush's judicial appointments.

So, the GOP is condemned for not compromising, then condemned for accepting
a compromise.

[C J Campbell]

"Alexi" > wrote in message
...
|
|
| Would have had themt a long time ago if it wasn't for the special interest
| lobbies and the Cheney/Bush types!
|

Since the ethanol rider was attached by Daschle as a sop to his constituency
(Archer-Daschle-Midland, or something like that), I fail to see how you can
blame this on Cheney/Bush special interests. This is a Daschle special
interest, pure and simple.

[Peter Gottlieb]

I condemn the whole lot of them.


"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
>
> Since the ethanol rider was attached by Daschle as a sop to his
constituency
> (Archer-Daschle-Midland, or something like that), I fail to see how you
can
> blame this on Cheney/Bush special interests. This is a Daschle special
> interest, pure and simple.
>
>

[Doug]

The bill is PORK. And it has a LOT of pork for a lot of constituents.
Both parties are to blame here. It is just plain a bad piece of
legislation.

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message >...
> "David Lesher" > wrote in message
> ...
> |
> |
> | The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
> | even in areas that do not have smog issues.
>
> This requirement was a rider attached by Daschle. The GOP accepted it or the
> bill would have been filibustered like all of Bush's judicial appointments.
>
> So, the GOP is condemned for not compromising, then condemned for accepting
> a compromise.

[Gene Kearns]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:44:27 +0000 (UTC), David Lesher
> wrote:

>
>
>The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
>even in areas that do not have smog issues.
>
>Is this the end of autogas?

It affects marine as well as aviation interests. A really bad idea.

According to the news I heard, it has to be sold nationwide because
each gallon will be subsidized by your tax dollar to the tune of $.53.
It will cost more to produce that the gallon of gasoline it is
replacing. Only winners here are the corn-belt states that will be
paid to produce something that nobody really wants(or perhaps, can
use).

[Michael Houghton]

Howdy!

In article >,
C J Campbell > wrote:
>
>"David Lesher" > wrote in message
...
>|
>|
>| The GOP's energy bill will require ethenol in gasoline, apparently
>| even in areas that do not have smog issues.
>
>This requirement was a rider attached by Daschle. The GOP accepted it or the
>bill would have been filibustered like all of Bush's judicial appointments.

*ahem*

....like four of the most contentious appointments (as opposed to the one
hundred sixty eight (IIRC) that have been approved).

Hardly "all".

Bad radical. No biscuit.
>
>So, the GOP is condemned for not compromising, then condemned for accepting
>a compromise.
>
Eh? You make no sense.

yours,
Michael


--
Michael and MJ Houghton | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly
| White Wolf and the Phoenix
Bowie, MD, USA | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff
| http://www.radix.net/~herveus/