On Tue, 30 Aug 2016 09:09:51 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

When Oregon mandated oxygenated (ethanol) gas in 2004?, my gas
mileage
went down 15%. If I have to burn 15% more gas when using 10%
ethanol,
how can that -possibly- be better for the environment or the attempt
to stop importing foreign oil for fuel? Especially when ethanol has
been proven to consume more energy to create than it gives back?
I'd like to whup these idiots upside the haid, I would.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygenate

So, how do you reduce smog when using 15% more fuel? It's all PC
bull****. You add 10% ethanol to fuel and lose 15% fuel mileage, so
you're still down 5% PLUS you have to make and buy the ethanol.
Typical Algoreesque scheme, I tell ya.

This morning I found out that it was the Oregon Global Warming
Commission (what a farce) which caused us to be strapped with ethanol
infected gasoline.

Meanwhile, the corn going to make ethanol causes food prices to rise
and all the while, the gov't is giving corn and ethanol producers
windfall profits to make it.

--
While we have the gift of life, it seems to me that only tragedy
is to allow part of us to die - whether it is our spirit, our
creativity, or our glorious uniqueness.
-- Gilda Radner