Comments on: EPA’s New Ethanol Ruling Could Make 42 Million Automobiles Cleaner But Raises Sustainability Issues

By: And54y

And54y — Mon, 13 Feb 2012 14:44:00 +0000

I have an Ethanol Ford taurus thatruns on e85. Stock it got 13 to 21 mpg city/hwy on e85 and 18/25 on e10. After Installing Platinum plus 2 + plugs and new 8 millimeter spark plug wires Also changing to synthetic oil from conventional upped the mileage to 35 hwy on gas. And 17 city with 25 hwy e85. I never run e10 in the city so I don’t know what I would get. Highway mileage dropped recently because I put a new set of tires on that are stickier – lost 2 miles per gallon. Yes I wish I could buy ethanol made from crop waste. I also wish there were hybrids that ran e85…. all I can do is hope…

By: Johan Melchior

Johan Melchior — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 13:18:55 +0000

Blaming biofuels for food price increases is a long standing misconception, promoted in part by Big Food and other corporate interests. You mention the 2008 World Bank report claiming that biofuel pushed grain prices. Well, in July 2010 the World Bank released a new report that reversed their earlier claims and concluded: “the effect of biofuels on food prices has not been as large as originally thought […] the use of commodities by financial investors (the so-called ”financialization of commodities”) may have been partly responsible for the 2007/08 spike”. I.e. speculation, not biofuels, were to blame for the food price hikes. You can read the World Bank report here http://bit.ly/anqdEd

By: Mridul Chadha

Mridul Chadha — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:51:04 +0000

Corrected — ‘Growth Energy’ for ‘Green Energy’. I, however, did not mention them as an ‘environmental group’ I simply called them an ‘activist group’.

By: Art Shervs

Art Shervs — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 21:37:49 +0000

This article has a couple of mistakes. First, it was Growth Energy, not Green Energy, that petitioned the EPA. Second, Growth Energy is NOT an environmental group. They claim to be a
‘proactive group committed to the promise of agriculture and growing America’s economy through cleaner, greener energy” (taken from their website)…a closer look at their members list, and one will see all their members are in the field of or related to ethanol production, so they are basically a front group lobbying for ethanol co’s. Any environmentalist should know by now that ethanol, especially from corn, is no more environmentally friendly than oil. The run off from its production pollutes water, the process of manufacturing it uses fossil fuels (negating any benefits from burning it), and it competes with agriculture for available crops. Labeling it as a green energy source is like labeling chewing tobacco a healthy alternative to smoking.

By: A Linde

A Linde — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 21:34:31 +0000

There must be a mechanism to put a cap on prices for certain commodities. Yeah, I know, I know – you will say “free market” and all that. But hey, we’re all tightening the belts now; and situations like these need extra measures, so, cap seems like a very sensible thing to do. There is plenty of unused land out there – let them grow corn but control their prices!

Besides, 75% is a huge exaggeration. I mix with guys who use shelled corn to heat their homes. Yes, corn has gone up in price since 2001 but certainly not by 75%.

By: majortom1981

majortom1981 — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 20:23:42 +0000

I don’t understand how this helps my car gets 10 percent less fuel economy with the 10 percent gas. when i get my gas out of state with non ethanol gas my gas milage goes up 10 percent. So how does making this worse by making it 15 percent help anything?