*THE HULL TRUTH is the world's largest FREE network for the discussion of Boating & Fishing. Whether you're researching a new boat, or are a seasoned Captain, you'll find The Hull Truth Boating & Fishing Message Forum contains a wealth of information from Boaters and Sportfishermen around the world.
Welcome to the updated THT!
If you are having trouble signing in, please email feedback@thehulltruth.com with your username and we will help you. We thank you for your patience as we help you access the new site!
Random Quote: its easier to seek forgivness than ask permission
NMMA needs your help today to prevent EPA from increasing the amount of ethanol allowed in gasoline. Please take a moment to read this alert and take action.
On March 6, 2009, a new pro-ethanol lobbying organization called Growth Energy and 54 ethanol manufacturers formally requested that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) increase ethanol blend levels in gasoline up to 15 percent (E15). As is required by law, EPA on April 21 published a Notice for Comment in the Federal Register, beginning a 30-day public comment period that closes on May 21, 2009.
Ethanol Advocates are mobilizing their forces to submit 20,000 favorable comments to EPA requesting that the Agency grant a waiver for E15.
Let's beat them at their own game. There are 18 million boats currently in operation in the U.S., and none of them has been designed, certified or warrantied to run on anything above E10, the current maximum legal blend level. Boaters know very well that increased ethanol blends will cause performance problems with their boats and engines, increase maintenance costs, potentially pose safety risks and increase air pollution.
And yet, neither EPA nor any other federal agency has done a single test on the impacts of E15 on marine engines, fuel systems, or components. Marine engines and fuel systems are not designed, calibrated or certified to run on anything above 10 percent ethanol. We ask you to support a science first approach and urge EPA to deny the ethanol industry's E15 waiver request unless and until independent and comprehensive scientific testing is completed on a full range of marine engines and other products.
CLICK HERE for further information or to send your comments to the EPA.
For more information, contact NMMA Legislative Director Mat Dunn at mdunn@nmma.org; (202) 737-9760
I think ethanaol is probably a scam foisted upon the American public by the "out of control",anything in the name of the environment, even if it is a lie, envirolobby. I have read that it takes as much diesel to produce it as it offsets. It has drastically increased the cost of all corn products. I have read that it separates from the fuel in marine tanks and can leave an engine to run on near pure alcohol. feel free to debate these claims. The "Green car of the year" is a diesel, but in Wa. we pay a higher tax for diesel because it polutes. That is one case of documented hipocracy.
Last edited by Fishguy 50; 04-24-2009 at 06:03 PM.
I don't understand how they can get away with that...? You'd think all the outboard manuf's would be screaming their heads off directly and not hiding behind the NMMA... Either that or maybe Obama is going to pay them to retro all the running engines to handle E15??
Good edits... this is not a dem vs repub thing, not an Obama vs Bush thing. Trust me, if the repubs thought of it first, they'd be pushing it. It's all about money and lobbyists. Its a battle between the oil companies and the farmers (and their associated lobbyists). Send the email, regardless of which party you support. Stop being a sheep and vote with how it affects you personally.
In the big picture sadly the boating industry even with the help of NMMA is but a whisper in the wind when it comes to a voice with a chance of being heard in the energy debate. The green folks simply don't care if it hurts our stuff. The facts that are being ignored that I think should matter are that ethanol is not as green as they think. It is my opinion that the carbon footprint of ethanol fuel is greater than that of pure petroleum based fuel because of the energy required to produce it. I think we would have a better chance of success if we not only protested for the sake of our outboards, but also from a scientific approach with proof that it does more harm to the environment than good.
In the big picture sadly the boating industry even with the help of NMMA is but a whisper in the wind when it comes to a voice with a chance of being heard in the energy debate. The green folks simply don't care if it hurts our stuff. The facts that are being ignored that I think should matter are that ethanol is not as green as they think. It is my opinion that the carbon footprint of ethanol fuel is greater than that of pure petroleum based fuel because of the energy required to produce it. I think we would have a better chance of success if we not only protested for the sake of our outboards, but also from a scientific approach with proof that it does more harm to the environment than good.
This is so very true, it's not just about boating, Ethanol is a scam, it's stupid, and shows that the government is very ignorant and very hypocritical, to the point that it is no longer acceptable. More importantly, They have really taken liberties (democrat and republican) to do what they wish, not what is good for the country, but them as individuals, not as a group. We have to stop this madness.....2010 can not come soon enough, more importantly we have to support those delegates that stand behind common sense decisions, if there are any left.
15% ethanol means 15% less economy. Is this crap a fuel or a filler? Seems pointless if you think about it. Just have to use more gas to get where ever you want to go. We should just ditch the E10 BS and go back to regular gas. Problem is, the government can never admit they were wrong in doing something.
To save you all a bunch of reading, in case you don't have time, one of the most interesting lines in the article............
The U.S. National Renewable Energy Lab finds that it requires 1 BTU of fossil fuel to get 1.3 BTUs of ethanol to market [source: NREL]. That would mean a 30 percent net gain in energy, not a net loss.
In other words we have a net gain of thirty percent in useable energy after all is said and done, and this is the best case scenario. Other estimates claim a net loss but I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt.
For many years now I have been promoting the development and use of alternative energy sources, even before the first oil embargo in the early seventies, but we have got to do this intelligently. We can't let green activists promote what they perceive to be better based on emotion alone. I'm all about progress as long as we are moving forward. In that vain.....
Ethanol when added to gasoline does produce a cleaner burning fuel. Whether you agree with Al Gore's global warming opinion or not I believe it is a good idea to reduce pollution whenever we can. If ethanol does that, OK. Percentages of ethanol in fuel higher than ten percent eventually require that the engine be built specifically to run on ethanol rather than petroleum. When that is done we can realize even better efficiency from ethanol than we can from pure gasoline, so I understand, which explains the alcohol use in dragsters way back before I can remember. The reason for this is that alcohol is a high octane fuel. High octane allows greater compression ratios, and thereby greater efficiency. All of that is fine in an engine that is designed to run on the stuff, and has the higher compression to benefit from it.
Therefore I will concede that ethanol can be a good idea as an alternative fuel, if......
If we can arrive at a method of producing it that is energy efficient itself. None of this thirty percent gain nonsense.
If we run it in engines specifically designed to benefit and be more efficient as a result of using ethanol.
If we can produce a reasonable amount of ethanol without displacing an un-reasonable amount of food producing land. We gotta eat you know.
And if we can do all of that without depending on government subsidies, which is just another way of saying that the taxpayers pay for it all so some jack leg senator or congressman from the corn belt can come off looking like a hero to his constituents. OK, enough political stuff, but you get my drift.
It's funny how the corporate corn lobby has managed to deflect criticism and have it placed in the enviro lobby when in fact, many environmentalists are against the use of ethanol as a fuel additive in the amounts that the corn corps current peddle and want.
Listen up, the massive use of corn as a source for ETOH is NOT something that environmentalists generally agree on.
Study up. Know the facts before making blanket statements that are NOT true. . . no matter how much you'd LIKE those falsehood to be true.
Important ethanol info!!!! please act 
THT sponsor
