 We cannot exist without you. |
Let's Git-R-Done! Monday is June!
Posted on 05/31/2015 12:22:28 PM PDT by Signalman
US investment in biofuels are to be expanded under proposals advanced by the US EPA.
Under the proposed rule announced Friday, the amount of ethanol in the gasoline supply would increase in coming years, just not as much as set out under federal law. That approach drew criticism from ethanol and farm groups that have pushed to keep high volumes of ethanol in gasoline.
Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton has called for a robust renewable fuels standard while campaigning in Iowa, host of the leadoff presidential caucuses next year.
…
In a bid to ethanol producers, the administration also announced Friday that the Agriculture Department will invest up to $100 million to help improve infrastructure for delivering ethanol to cars, such as fuel pumps capable of supplying higher blends of renewable fuel.
(Excerpt) Read more at wattsupwiththat.com ...
Ethanol bad
Butanol good
bio-algae bio diesel better
Why is it that the EPA makes rules? I thought we elected a Congress to make rules, not some bureaucratic agency that uses the rules to increase its own size and power.
Fossil based fuels...The Best.
Use food for food, other plants to eat CO2.
Nope, fossil based diesel is not as good as bio diesel. In fact, when you want to clean out your diesel engine that has been running #2 .... run some bio diesel. Usually one tank full is enough to clean the engine.
We cannot exist without you. |
Does this mean i’m still gonna have to put Sta-Bil in my lawnmower’s fuel tank to counteract the damage being done by ethanol?
Congress are extremely lazy and have given up most of their prerogatives. they need to be keelhauled and water boarded.
Look for alcohol free fuels. Sunoco makes race fuel that you can run in your lawnmower. $12/gal though....
This issue actually relates to the 17th Amendment (17A). And more about 17A shortly.
As mentioned in related threads, please consider the following about the EPA. To begin with, the Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Section 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide them from Congress, to clarify that all federal legislative powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in non-elected federal bureaucrats such as those running the constitutionally undefined EPA.
So Congress has a constitutional monopoly on federal legislative powers whether it wants it or not. But by delegating legislative / regulatory powers to non-elected bureaucrats, Congress is blatantly ignoring the constitutional statutes referenced above, wrongly protecting federal legislative powers from the wrath of the voters by doing so.
And what’s even worse about the EPA is this. The states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate intrastate environmental issues. So not only is corrupt Congress wrongly delegating regulatory powers to non-elected bureaucrats, Congress is delegating powers that it never had in the first place!
This gets us back to the 17th Amendment. More specifically, the Founding States had not only established the federal Senate, but had given the power to vote for senators uniquely to state lawmakers. This is because the Founders had intended for senators to protect their resective states in Congress by killing bills which not only steal 10th Amendment-protected state powers, but also steal state revenues associated with those powers.
The problem is that misguided state lawmakers later ratified 17A, foolishly giving up the voices of state lawmakers in Congress. So what happens now is that citizens go home after voting for their favorite federal senators and watch football, clueless to the following major constitutional problem. Voters don’t understand that corrupt senators are working in cahoots with the corrupt House to pass bills which steal state powers, such as the bills that have empowered the EPA, such bills also stealing state revenues associated with those powers by means of unconstitutional federal taxes.
Regarding unconstitutional taxes, the Supreme Court had put it this way.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
The bottom line is that 17A needs to disappear, along with a bunch of corrupt senators and EPA bureaucrats.
If the sheeple won’t eat GMO corn, then we’ll force them to put it in their cars. All Hail Monsanto!
Then again, if there is another use for it, all totaled it may not be the way to go.
“US investment in biofuels are to be expanded”
US SPENDING in biofuels are to be expanded
Fixed for accuracy.
And I wonder who is on the other end of this largess.
Congress? Whats a congress? What does it do?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.