Go Granholm - Page 2 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 29th, 2006, 01:55 PM   #21
vr
Senior Member
 
vr's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: NotMichigan U.S.A.
Posts: 3,679
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

I bet people clamoured similarly when leaded fuel was going away.

And when gubment squeezed your great grandparents for all those nifty copper wires hanging from the trees.
vr is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old August 29th, 2006, 01:58 PM   #22
Icemanii
GLFWDA Land Use Committee
 
Icemanii's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: 48085
Posts: 5,233
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elfoozo
I bet people clamoured similarly when leaded fuel was going away.

And when gubment squeezed your great grandparents for all those nifty copper wires hanging from the trees.
How much tax money was spent converting over the pumps? I still own 3 vehicles that could run on leaded fuel. Have to buy additive for them.

I'm not against them having the alternative fuel, just don't want my money to pay for gas station owners to get richer. Let them pay for it themselves. I don't plan on having a vehicle that burns it, so don't want to pay for it. Sorry.
Icemanii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 01:59 PM   #23
USMC 0369
Livin in Cal-tuckey
 
USMC 0369's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA
Posts: 852
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemanii
Well, if you are in Twenty Nine Palms where I think you might be, you have the job now that we all thank you for. Way things are going, stay in. I don't think it will much matter who is in office, the state is going down fast. Need to get the House and Senate to act, it is not a one person show in Government.
Gotta retire soon... so no choice on the staying in part. Buddies say go to the Chicago suburbs to be a cop, but I want to come home... gonna need a job. I hear ya on the hiarchy of Gov't needs to act, but Michigan needs to refocus on a new industry I think. Automaking is moving to Canada and Mexico, cheaper labor.

Soon, border patrol will have to keep the Americans in the country!
USMC 0369 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:00 PM   #24
FORD FLARESIDE
Ohh, that's gonna' hurt
 
FORD FLARESIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-09-06
Location: Comstock Park
Posts: 21,903
iTrader: (24)
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Default

The 92 model year was the second year of production for the Multiport Fuel injection.......they still hadn't added all the plastic parts in the fuel system like they did in the late 90's. Everything is made out of steel.
If I was going to have a problem with E85, I would have had it before now.

Don't get me wrong, I think E85 is a good way to go, (that's why I'm trying it out in a non daily driver) I'm just not willing to pay for research and development through tax money, especially when I've been paying for it in the price of gasoline for the last 25 years.

The last time a canadian skank stuck her hand in my Pocket, she cost me a couple hundred in medical bills.

Run from her man, be safe.
FORD FLARESIDE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:01 PM   #25
Lothos
KD8GKB
 
Lothos's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-17-05
Location: .5 past lightspeed
Posts: 6,506
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via ICQ to Lothos Send a message via AIM to Lothos Send a message via Yahoo to Lothos
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemanii
How much tax money was spent converting over the pumps? I still own 3 vehicles that could run on leaded fuel. Have to buy additive for them.

I'm not against them having the alternative fuel, just don't want my money to pay for gas station owners to get richer. Let them pay for it themselves. I don't plan on having a vehicle that burns it, so don't want to pay for it. Sorry.

Exactly my position of it. If anything I would fine any station that did NOT put an e-85 pump in under the situtations where the tanks are changed ( every 6 years? ), pumps replaced, or station built/rebuilt.
Lothos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:03 PM   #26
USMC 0369
Livin in Cal-tuckey
 
USMC 0369's Avatar
 
Join Date: 08-27-06
Location: Twentynine Palms, CA
Posts: 852
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemanii
How much tax money was spent converting over the pumps? I still own 3 vehicles that could run on leaded fuel. Have to buy additive for them.

I'm not against them having the alternative fuel, just don't want my money to pay for gas station owners to get richer. Let them pay for it themselves. I don't plan on having a vehicle that burns it, so don't want to pay for it. Sorry.
Hey, ya know what.... you're right. The oil companies have posted INSANE, INSANE profits for the longest time. In the BILLIONS of dollars, let them pay for the damned new pumps. What's $250,000 compared to a 30 BILLION dollar profit?

Thanx Iceman, sometimes I forget the little things.
USMC 0369 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:04 PM   #27
Lothos
KD8GKB
 
Lothos's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-17-05
Location: .5 past lightspeed
Posts: 6,506
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via ICQ to Lothos Send a message via AIM to Lothos Send a message via Yahoo to Lothos
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FORD FLARESIDE
The 92 model year was the second year of production for the Multiport Fuel injection.......they still hadn't added all the plastic parts in the fuel system like they did in the late 90's. Everything is made out of steel.
If I was going to have a problem with E85, I would have had it before now.

Don't get me wrong, I think E85 is a good way to go, (that's why I'm trying it out in a non daily driver) I'm just not willing to pay for research and development through tax money, especially when I've been paying for it in the price of gasoline for the last 25 years.

The last time a canadian skank stuck her hand in my Pocket, she cost me a couple hundred in medical bills.

Run from her man, be safe.

Aren't the interconnectors between components plastic/aluminum though? Also, I'm pretty sure the ECC didn't have the programming capability to adjust timings and such for that high of an octane fuel.
Lothos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:10 PM   #28
FORD FLARESIDE
Ohh, that's gonna' hurt
 
FORD FLARESIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-09-06
Location: Comstock Park
Posts: 21,903
iTrader: (24)
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Default

Aren't the interconnectors between components plastic/aluminum though? Also, I'm pretty sure the ECC didn't have the programming capability to adjust timings and such for that high of an octane fuel.

Nope all steel,..........and if the ECC requires reprograming, you will have to tell my truck because it runs fine on it.
Although the truck does have a chip, and a few other modifications, but they were all done before the E85 went in.
The only problem that I have noticed, is that letting off the throttle to quickly around 5000rpm, will stall it. (found that out when I hit the mud wall at the end of a run)
FORD FLARESIDE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:14 PM   #29
ScOoTeR
hoo dat. wat.
 
ScOoTeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-09-05
Location: Howell
Posts: 21,579
iTrader: (36)
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FORD FLARESIDE
Aren't the interconnectors between components plastic/aluminum though? Also, I'm pretty sure the ECC didn't have the programming capability to adjust timings and such for that high of an octane fuel.

Nope all steel,..........and if the ECC requires reprograming, you will have to tell my truck because it runs fine on it.
Although the truck does have a chip, and a few other modifications, but they were all done before the E85 went in.
The only problem that I have noticed, is that letting off the throttle to quickly around 5000rpm, will stall it. (found that out when I hit the mud wall at the end of a run)
E85 requires higher flow injectors to flow the amount of fuel necessary to run properly and probably does not have the capability to adjust the fuel delivery as such.

Not saying you can't do it (because you ARE), but it isn't the best utilization.
__________________
@clarkstoncracker
ScOoTeR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:16 PM   #30
vr
Senior Member
 
vr's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-04-05
Location: NotMichigan U.S.A.
Posts: 3,679
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemanii
just don't want my money to pay for gas station owners to get richer. Let them pay for it themselves. I don't plan on having a vehicle that burns it, so don't want to pay for it. Sorry.
Do you really think it's the gas station owners getting rich?

I'm not saying I agree that it's right for taxpayers to pay for it. But obviously it's going to happen unless the common people start taking offices.
vr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:17 PM   #31
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,955
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawierider
show me another fuel source that takes less energy to produce, distribute and consume....................
e85 is not cheap to produce, distribute, or consume...

Quote:
*snip*
Thus, a gallon of ethanol requires roughly $.75 of corn. That may seem like a compelling cost structure for an alternative fuel– especially when compared to this week’s crude oil price of $1.40 per gallon. But E85’s ancillary costs are far higher. First, ethanol is more expensive to produce than gasoline (i.e. it takes more energy to make fuel from corn than oil, and energy ain’t cheap). Second, thanks to the phaseout of octane-enhancing MBTE gasoline additive, demand for ethanol far exceeds supply. Third, ethanol’s transportation costs are astronomical.


Unlike petroleum-based gasoline, ethanol is too corrosive for existing pipelines. That means E85 has to be transported by truck or train. Unfortunately, America’s trains are busy hauling billions of tons of coal from mines to power plants. The railroads are adding locomotives as fast as manufacturers can build them (bet GM’s sorry they sold their locomotive business), but they’re all dedicated to moving a material that provides a larger, steadier business that's less hazards than schlepping ethanol. So, for now, E85 distribution is pretty much restricted to trucks.


The bottom line is clear: E85 production is dependent on a crop whose costs are more or less fixed at a permanently high level. E85 may be eco-sexy and an all-American source of fuel (provided you discount the petrochemical products used to fertilize and insect-proof the corn crop and power the vehicles that harvest, process and haul the corn around), but its current production costs make it an economically dubious alternative to “cheap” gas. And that’s without considering the fact that E85 yields about 20% less “bang for the buck” than gas. Unless the price of gas soars another dollar or so, or increased supply drops the price of ethanol by a like amount, E85 will struggle to provide a cost-effective alternative to its imported competition.



The fundamental economics of the E85 business ensure that the fuel is– and will remain– a product whose future depends more on politics than the “free market.” Of course, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. If we’re serious about energy independence, the US government could intervene to make E85 more viable. Uncle Sam could build a national network of E85-compatible pipelines, or remove taxes from E85, or add taxes to gas, or end corn subsidies, or, well, lots of things. Meanwhile, the people who’ll benefit most from E85 are the people who move the raw materials to the ethanol plants and the finished product to the consumer.
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:18 PM   #32
jeepfreak81
81 inches of fun
 
jeepfreak81's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-10-05
Location: Lennon, Mi
Posts: 12,267
iTrader: (22)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to jeepfreak81 Send a message via MSN to jeepfreak81 Send a message via Yahoo to jeepfreak81
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemanii
How much tax money was spent converting over the pumps? I still own 3 vehicles that could run on leaded fuel. Have to buy additive for them.

I'm not against them having the alternative fuel, just don't want my money to pay for gas station owners to get richer. Let them pay for it themselves. I don't plan on having a vehicle that burns it, so don't want to pay for it. Sorry.
Gas station owners make their money on the stuff in the shop, not on the fuel.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clarksinca
Hey, ya know what.... you're right. The oil companies have posted INSANE, INSANE profits for the longest time. In the BILLIONS of dollars, let them pay for the damned new pumps. What's $250,000 compared to a 30 BILLION dollar profit?

Thanx Iceman, sometimes I forget the little things.
This would be nice, but it's the station owners that take the hit, their real income comes from the product in the store on the shelves, not the fuel.
jeepfreak81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:18 PM   #33
FORD FLARESIDE
Ohh, that's gonna' hurt
 
FORD FLARESIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-09-06
Location: Comstock Park
Posts: 21,903
iTrader: (24)
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Default

I am running 30's instead of Stock injectors, maybe that is why it runs so well on it.
FORD FLARESIDE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:18 PM   #34
84Scrambler
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Lansing
Posts: 5,943
iTrader: (8)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to 84Scrambler
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kawierider
show me another fuel source that takes less energy to produce, distribute and consume....................
Quite simple if you do some research. Corn requires a huge amount of "farming" to produce. It takes a lot of energy in the form of tractors to plant it, fertilize it, spray pesticides, fertilize it again, pick it, shell it, transport it, etc...

There are other crops that require extremely small amounts of "farming" to produce. These crops are basically planted and ignored until they are harvested. It takes very little energy to produce them.

Think of it like this. If you invest $1 at 0% interest, you will only get $1 back in the future. Same way with corn into ethanol. If it takes 100 "units" of energy to produce a crop capable of producing 100 units of energy, what have you gained? Nothing. That is the problem with ethanol, among many other issues, like transportation. Ethanol can not be shipped over any distnace by pipeline, unlike traditional fossil based fuels. That means that it must be trucked or shipped by rail. That uses even more fuel. It just isn't economically efficient, nor is it energy efficient. You have to consider the entire production/supply chain, not just the end product. Yes, it is eliminating 85% of the fossil fuels at the pump, but it requires a lot more energy to get it to the pump to start with. Unfortunately the agriculture lobby has persuaded the government to go along with the ethanol plan, even though there are better, more environmentally friendly, and economic plans out there.

One specific crop is sawgrass. It produces a higher energy output than corn, requires much less energy to grow, but doesn't have a large and very wealthy economic sector pushing for it in congress. Think what this explosion of ethanol is going to do for the farming sector? New tractors, more farm jobs, bigger grain corporations, etc... It's all about the $$$, not the environment or energy efficiency. We've been sold a barrell of bullshit and the average consumer is happy as hell about it. In essence the government figured out a way to tell the US population to go to hell in such a way that they enjoy the trip and can't wait to go back again.

Last edited by 84Scrambler; August 29th, 2006 at 02:21 PM.
84Scrambler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:20 PM   #35
Icemanii
GLFWDA Land Use Committee
 
Icemanii's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: 48085
Posts: 5,233
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elfoozo
Do you really think it's the gas station owners getting rich?

I'm not saying I agree that it's right for taxpayers to pay for it. But obviously it's going to happen unless the common people start taking offices.
NOt as rich as the gas companies, but certainly not poor either. If there wasn't good money to be made, they would be selling them off. Even if they are not, why does my tax money have to pay for a private business owner to upgrade his equipment. Like ClarkinCa stated, the oil companies have made billions in profit, let them subsidize the changeover.
Icemanii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:24 PM   #36
Icemanii
GLFWDA Land Use Committee
 
Icemanii's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: 48085
Posts: 5,233
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepfreak81
Gas station owners make their money on the stuff in the shop, not on the fuel.



This would be nice, but it's the station owners that take the hit, their real income comes from the product in the store on the shelves, not the fuel.
So these little stations like the Clark station by my house that sells minimal product are losing money? Sorry, have a hard time believing that. If they were not making money on the fuel, they would just run stores.
Icemanii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:26 PM   #37
FORD FLARESIDE
Ohh, that's gonna' hurt
 
FORD FLARESIDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-09-06
Location: Comstock Park
Posts: 21,903
iTrader: (24)
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Default

Umh......one big question and PLEASE! correct me if I am wrong, but isn't sawgrass that pretty little plant that grows around in and near Wetlands, and Sand dunes!
I believe that it is a protected species. But I could be wrong.

I can just see it now, a farmer plants his whole crop in sawgrass, and DEQ arrests him for driving his tractor through protected plants when he goes to harvest it.
FORD FLARESIDE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:27 PM   #38
RyeBread
Catch the wave
 
RyeBread's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-08-05
Location: Fenton
Posts: 7,955
iTrader: (2)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icemanii
NOt as rich as the gas companies, but certainly not poor either. If there wasn't good money to be made, they would be selling them off. Even if they are not, why does my tax money have to pay for a private business owner to upgrade his equipment. Like ClarkinCa stated, the oil companies have made billions in profit, let them subsidize the changeover.
again, the topic of oil companie's record breaking gross profits comes up.

any idea what their actual profit margin is? No, the oil companies are not doing themselves good PR by giving a retiring CEO, a 400 million dollar golden parachute, but with profit margins in the 6-7% range, and literally trillions invested in their companies, I can't really blame the big oil companies for doing all they can to insure a steady supply of gasoline gluttons for their stock holders well being.

sorry, but if I had literally trillions invested, and/or to invest, I'm not so sure that being an oil company, with such modest margins and relatively high risks is where I'd sink my money. in fact, the stock prices of the oil companies seemingly increase at a larger percentage...
RyeBread is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:29 PM   #39
Lothos
KD8GKB
 
Lothos's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-17-05
Location: .5 past lightspeed
Posts: 6,506
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via ICQ to Lothos Send a message via AIM to Lothos Send a message via Yahoo to Lothos
Default

E-85 will really become cost efficient once other products capable of being used become available mainstream to ethanol producers. Swale grass, highway grass clippings, corn byproducts, etc... Straight corn ethanol isn't very efficient alone, but ethanol in and of itself ahs great potential to come down in cost.
Lothos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2006, 02:30 PM   #40
Icemanii
GLFWDA Land Use Committee
 
Icemanii's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: 48085
Posts: 5,233
iTrader: (16)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RyeBread
again, the topic of oil companie's record breaking gross profits comes up.

any idea what their actual profit margin is? No, the oil companies are not doing themselves good PR by giving a retiring CEO, a 400 million dollar golden parachute, but with profit margins in the 6-7% range, and literally trillions invested in their companies, I can't really blame the big oil companies for doing all they can to insure a steady supply of gasoline gluttons for their stock holders well being.

sorry, but if I had literally trillions invested, and/or to invest, I'm not so sure that being an oil company, with such modest margins and relatively high risks is where I'd sink my money. in fact, the stock prices of the oil companies seemingly increase at a larger percentage...

What is this minimal profit in dollars? Sorry, but if you want me to feel sorry for the oil companies, it will never happen. Oil companies, insurance companies, and car companies. 3 that will never be money losers, but will whine like they are.
Icemanii is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:31 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.40882 seconds with 80 queries