To: Gaffer
My personal thought is that they can take that ethanol and shove it up their rectum.
I am in the middle of tearing down every one of my small engines (weed wackers, leaf blowers, chain saws) to replace the fuel lines DUE TO ETHANOL.
7 posted on
10/19/2016 7:46:03 AM PDT by
UCANSEE2
(Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
To: UCANSEE2
8 posted on
10/19/2016 7:48:59 AM PDT by
lacrew
To: UCANSEE2
My personal thought is that they can take that ethanol and shove it up their rectum. Haha! Kindred spirits... :0)
I cannot even begin to describe all the low life descriptions of its proponents are and the complete downside of ALL of it.
Nothing good or worthwhile comes from ethanol when there are other sources of fuel available.
14 posted on
10/19/2016 7:56:48 AM PDT by
Gaffer
To: UCANSEE2
They need to find a way to use ethanol other than burning it. Ethanol is much dirtier than gasoline per BTU, hence per mile driven.
16 posted on
10/19/2016 7:59:39 AM PDT by
D Rider
To: UCANSEE2
They need to find a way to use ethanol other than burning it. Ethanol is much dirtier than gasoline per BTU, hence per mile driven.
17 posted on
10/19/2016 7:59:41 AM PDT by
D Rider
To: UCANSEE2
Exactly...I just finished dealing with carburetor issues caused by using E-10 in a power washer. So the upshot of this story is that the Department of Energy has developed a brand new method of producing a faulty fuel additive that doesn't actually result in fewer "greenhouse gas" emissions, but only screws up the fuel systems of small engines instead.
Your tax dollars at work. ;-)
24 posted on
10/19/2016 8:05:20 AM PDT by
Milton Miteybad
(I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
To: UCANSEE2
And I have been using stabilized E10 in my (4-cycle) small engines for 15 years with no negative issues whatsoever.
31 posted on
10/19/2016 8:19:33 AM PDT by
NorthMountain
(Hillary Clinton: scheming, robotic liar.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson