Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is very obvious that Ms. Jackson and her cohorts are ready to pound us on the price of gasoline. They are ready to attempt to force a cut in the amount of sulfur in gasoline and I believe that they are pushing this one as part of the failure of the Congress to pass Cap and Trade for the administration.
Not necessarily because it's them that craft an implement the regulations, things like the Clean Air Act are usually a little vague and don't specifically outline what they will regulate and how they will regulate it. If you take the CO2 case for example, the Clean Air Act was never intended to regulate CO2. The EPA ended up at the Supreme Court but ultimately won the right to regulate CO2 under the current act, the only way that power can officially be stripped from them now is by new legislation or an amendment.
Not necessarily because it's them that craft an implement the regulations, things like the Clean Air Act are usually a little vague and don't specifically outline what they will regulate and how they will regulate it. If you take the CO2 case for example, the Clean Air Act was never intended to regulate CO2. The EPA ended up at the Supreme Court but ultimately won the right to regulate CO2 under the current act, the only way that power can officially be stripped from them now is by new legislation or an amendment.
elect Ron paul and the ability of the EPA to effect that will disappear.
They just did it to diesel fuel not to long ago, as of 2011 all (exceptions in industry) diesel fuel #1  is now ulsd or ultra low sulfur diesel it went from 500ppm to 15ppm. The tax and cost of the fuel went up these are some one of the reasons diesel fuel now costs more than gasoline does.
You say, so what we use gas.
Well, the world runs on diesel fuel.
Everything you have from food to your toilet paper is all dependent on diesel fuel. This cost hits you in the pocket book every time you buy something.
$600 million, I believe the number I saw quoted was that it equaled what the government invested in the last 10 years. You can guarantee if Exxon is looking at it that there is viability. The other thing they are most likely looking at is that it can be used for carbon capture, it wouldn't be true capture because it's released when the bio fuel is burned It's more along the lines of recycling it once, you could for example us it to capture the CO2 from a coal plant. This effectively removes those emissions because the only emissions now are from the liquid fuel.
I read where algae could produce up to 2K gallons of fuel per acre while corn for instance produces around 250 plus we don't eat algae and it can be grown on ground not suitable for food crops. Of course the green folks will probably find something wrong with it if and when it ever catches on full scale. Not sure what the cost/gallon breakdown would be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
