Monday, August 23, 2010

More Ethanol For Our Gasoline?

I recall as cars were becoming more computerized with fuel injection systems, the auto dealerships were I worked received a lot of complaints of drastically reduced fuel mileage as winter blend fuels became what was called “oxygenated.” If you are not familiar with that word, it is basically gasoline mixed with a minimum of 10% ethanol alcohol, made from corn.

It is widely known in the industry that alcohol boosts octane rating somewhat and creates less slightly less carbon monoxide emissions, or so claimed, but the trade comes in that more of it is burned to create the same level of energy as gasoline.

Not to mention the havoc created to internal combustion engines in corrosion and higher operating temperatures back then.

There is also a little item in the exhaust of your vehicle called an “oxygen sensor” that measures the amount of oxygen in your exhaust to help the computer (or engine controller) to regulate the mixture of fuel and air the fuel management system feeds to your engine. When it reads more oxygen than the computer was programmed to feed, it enriches the mixture, sending more gasoline to decrease the amount of air. Too little and it draws gasoline away.

The result was decreased fuel mileage, angering many owners who demanded the fuel mileage they had be restored. Many also would not accept that there was nothing we could do since the fuel blend was government regulated, not the doings of the manufacturer.

A pretty good discussion of the pros and cons of alcohol blended fuels can be seen by clicking HERE.

By now you might be wondering why a blog focusing on political matters is discussing alcohol fuel blends since many of the “bugs” of an E10 fuel blend were pretty much worked out. The answer is that once again, government regulation is set to increase the amount of alcohol in our fuel despite scientific studies on such an increase have not been completed.

Jack Gerard, president of the American Petroleum Institute explains the pending regulation at Don't Blend Politics and Science on E15.

Mr. Gerard tells us,

“Most of the gasoline we use includes up to 10 percent of ethanol, a renewable fuel that is playing an increasingly important role in meeting our energy needs. But the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering a plan that could permit blends of up to 15 percent ethanol (E15), despite the fact that a number of detailed scientific reviews of such a plan have not been completed.”

“This would be a mistake that could threaten vehicle performance and safety, void manufacturers' warranties, confuse consumers - and create a public backlash against renewable fuels.”

National Petrochemical & Refiners Association sent there own concern saying,
“We write to express our concern that EPA may decide to allow the introduction into commerce of mid-level ethanol blends such as E15 based on new information that was not available for public comment when the docket was open last year. We respectfully but strongly request that EPA provide for a second period of public comment on any data, tests, or studies that EPA may take into consideration in making its determination if such information was not available for review and comment as of the close of the initial public comment period on July 20, 2009.

“We continue to urge EPA to base any decision to permit the introduction of mid-level ethanol blends – whether a general waiver or the ‘partial’ waiver concept on which EPA invited public comment previously – on a complete and sound scientific record and in accordance with the procedures of the Clean Air Act. … To the extent that there are additions to this scientific record subsequent to July 20, 2009 on which EPA will base its ultimate decision, the public must have an opportunity to review and comment on those additions prior to an EPA decision.”

You can also review a Breifing Paper issued by the API on this rush by government again.

Jane Van Ryan, also of the API wrote some pieces on the controversy at Corn in Your Tank, E15: Not Ready for Prime Time and The Ethanol Urban Myth. Ms van Ryan also posted a podcast discussing the issue with Al Jessel, co-chair of the Coordinating Research Council that is currently researching ethanol fuel blends at Energy Tomorrow Radio: Episode - 115 E15 and Your Car.

Bear in mind, in addition to being more expensive to produce, alcohol fuels takes away from our food supply. Not only ours, but the corn our farmers grow and ship worldwide. As late as 2008 we heard Our Energy Policy Helps Launch Worldwide Food Riots and Mexico's Poor Seek Relief From Tortilla Shortage, due to a shortage of corn used for food stocks and instead, going to burn as fuel.

All the while, we have literally billions of gallons of untapped petroleum sitting under ground in the United States alone that we are not allowed to access due to, once again, government regulation.

Early in our history as a nation, President Abraham Lincoln ended his Gettysburg Address telling us basically that we are a “government of the people, by the people, for the people.

Are we, when a small band of government employees are allowed to dictate to us instead of listening to us?

Monday, August 09, 2010

Strange Things Going On In the Washington State 3rd Congressional District Race

It’s been a very heated competition for the nominations for the top two in our primary election this year. Probably the most heated I can recall, getting very nasty actually.

Oh, the Democrats are off the hook this year as there is little doubt that their candidate, Denny Heck, will easily win one of the coveted slots. It’s the Republicans that have gotten down and dirty with supporters of the candidates at times seeming ready to come to blows and dirty tricks galore.

We have 3 candidates running, David Castillo, Jamie Herrera and YouTube figure, David W. Hedrick, known for his bombastic confrontation against Brian Baird lasting some 3 minutes almost a year ago.

Herrera leads in the funds raised. Castillo outshines all in endorsements received, including every major newspaper that covers the 3rd Congressional District and makes primary endorsements. Hedrick has remained dragging the rear while making some noise, but basically going nowhere, gaining only some fringe support.

All that seemed to change suddenly, very suddenly in fact with Hedrick recently touting some poll no one has ever heard of showing him out in front of Herrera and with Castillo so far down it would be physically impossible for him to make up the difference in time for the August 17 vote.

Needless to say, eyebrows of people who pay attention were raised as this just seemed far too unlikely.

Further raising many more eyebrows is the vitriolic assaults launched against the supposedly last place candidate, Castillo, by many Hedrick supporters on forums, blogs and in the Columbian’s comments sections.

You may see what I mean by scrolling through comments found HERE and HERE, just for 2.

It is highly unlikely that supporters of a real leading candidate would so vehemently attack and belittle a real last place candidate, while ignoring the third candidate that is supposedly in a statistical tie with that “leading Republican” candidate.

Some light was shed on a possible answer this past Wednesday, August 4 on KPAM 860’s Victoria Taft program, when a caller named ‘Jason’ called in expressing the same disbelief many others have and identified himself as an individual familiar with computer forensics and searching out questionable computer sites for the Attorney General’s office in the past.

Questioning the validity of this poll like many of us have and also being a “poll junky,” he looked closely at the poll and saw, amongst several red flags, just how unreliable their methodology was in that it is an internet poll with no safeguards to prevent selectees of the poll from sending the link on to others to participate in.

He laid out the steps he took in discovering an unlikely coincidence in that the polls host site and domain registrar were shared by FreedomsAnswer.com, a company whose sole ownership is listed as belonging to Washington 3rd Congressional District Candidate, David W. Hedrick.

Realizing that although an unlikely coincidence, it was still possible, he looked a bit deeper and was shocked to discover that the IP address of the poll was on the same block as the sites owned by Hedrick.

You can read the full report ‘Jason’ wrote HERE

Admittedly, I am no computer sleuth or techie sort. All of that goes right over my head, much as it does most others today. But to those who dabble in such computer research, it makes complete sense. Therefore, I had the full 7-page report reviewed by a person I am acquainted with online who does understand such computer lingo.

In confirming the data ‘Jason’ revealed, he said,

“The most DAMNING of all of the data comes in point nine (and ten further.)”

“Most website owners or professional web coders or computer programmers reuse code or professional libraries of code to save production time. Every hour that someone creates a website site or computer program is VERY expensive. Especially in the United States. A library of code is like a bible.”

“And also coding structure usually is similar to the coder who creates it. No one wants to recreate the coding wheel when he has a library of code to use that he has used on previous projects. That shortens website development time. And most of that coding has a fingerprint or coding style within it (as he explains in further detail there) so why does Hedrick’s code look so similar in each of his websites or a piece of masthead, a beginning of a site is so similar?”

In closing, my acquaintance added,
“All I would finally say [is] I would not want to be the damn fool who was associated with this site, whoever coded it or is hosting it. It was a tragic error to do, looks too much like an attempt to smarm or live in some fantasy that one would think David Hedrick is in any way have an ability to be in the leagues with David Castillo or Denny Heck. It looks like a juvenile attempt to make someone look better than they really are.”

Any that choose to read the report ‘Jason’ submitted, I would only hope you have your own computer techie’s review it for themselves and your peace of mind instead of just fuming.

Something just doesn’t add up with this campaign and it stinks to high heaven.

As I’ve said before, it isn’t unusual for a newspaper to make an endorsement and get it wrong, not endorsing who the people over all vote for. It is highly unusual that four major newspapers of different ideological, political, regional and historical backgrounds from within the same congressional district to agree on one candidate and that candidate be polled dead last in any legitimate poll.

Add to that the vitriol thrown at David Castillo by supporters of David Hedrick, who proclaims in ads that he is “the leading Republican” in the race, while completely ignoring Jaime Herrera, although she is in a statistical tie for the nomination Hedrick claims is his, just doesn’t make sense.

Something very strange is definitely going on in the race to replace retiring Brian Baird in the 3rd Congressional District.

And, it stinks!

Sunday, August 08, 2010

No Apologies Due Japan for Atomic Bomb


UPDATE: For those who wish to berate me for saying Japan is owed no apology for America ending the war with the A-Bomb, Japan Developed Atom Bomb (1946 Atlanta Constitution Articles)

It’s difficult to believe that long before most of us were born, the entire world was embroiled in the bloodiest war in history, World War Two. Oh, we’ve read about it in books, learned about it from parents and grandparents who fought in it and saw the many movies made about it.

None can accurately capture the sheer brutality of war, though. Only participation can give the true feeling of that.

Being a Veteran of Viet Nam myself and growing up in the shadow of that brutal war, perhaps that is why I am so perplexed these past few years that the world now seems to demand America apologize to those who drug us into that war for our ending it by the two atomic bomb attacks on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Atomic weapons had never been used and it was not even known that they would work, having just been developed. But work they did and the Japanese agreed to an unconditional surrender, as had Germany many months before. The war ended and the troublesome task of peace began for a while.

But, why use such a brutal weapon that killed over 100,000, many ask today. Surely it could have been ended without taking so many lives, they opine. And, they are wrong.

The brutality of the Japanese Imperial Army is a well known historical fact today, thanks in part to such books as The Rape of Nanking by Iris Chang, which documented how they used the slaughter and beheadings of innocent Chinese for sport.

The maltreatment of Prisoners of War such as occurred during what is known as the Bataan Death March where “Beheadings, cutting of throats and casual shootings were the more common actions, compared to instances of bayonet stabbing, rape, disembowelment, rifle butt beating and a deliberate refusal to allow the prisoners food or water while keeping them continually marching for nearly a week in tropical heat” against captured American and Filipino soldiers and civilians are well documented.

Ignored or forgotten is that both Germany and Japan were also working on creating nuclear weapons as America was developing ours. Luckily, our scientists developed ours first.

Couple the Axis’ Powers development programs of Atomic Weapons with their work on developing delivery systems, such as the German Messerschmitt Me-264 Amerika Bomber and the sharing of technology between Germany and Japan prior to wars end, there can be little doubt that had they developed theirs first, it would have been used against Allied forces, if not America itself.

Much has been said over the years of the scientists that developed the American Atomic Bombs expressed hesitation on using it against Japan. While that will be endlessly debated, the decision was not an easy one for President Truman to make.

Given the Japanese refusal of the Potsdam Declaration and the fierce fighting seen in taking Okinawa and the high loss of life on both sides, every indication was that millions of lives would be lost to invade Japan and bring the war to an end by that means.

Many still claim a “demonstration” of the might of the “A-Bomb” would have encouraged Japan to surrender. But, remember that we only had two bombs built and there was still the question of whether or not they would actually work, even though one had worked in the New Mexico desert.

Even if it had worked, given the fanaticism of the Japanese Army at the time and even with the claims now of they were ready to quit anyways, Truman did not have a lot of choices if he were to end the war and avoid millions more in deaths on both sides.

Those now crying that America should apologize for the Atomic Bomb conveniently leave out one little undisputed fact.

That being, had there not been s sneak attack Sunday morning, December 7, 1941 against the United States Naval Forces moored in Pearl Harbor Hawaii, dragging a reluctant America into a war they were trying to avoid, there would have been no reason to drop any bombs on the cities of Hiroshima or Nagasaki just under 4 years later.

If any apologies are due to anyone, it should be from Germany and Japan for plunging the world into the bloodiest conflict ever seen in the history of mankind.

Thursday, August 05, 2010

Reporters vs Black Conservative Leaders



Would a Fox News reporter be allowed a pass for talking in such a manner to a group of Black Liberals Leaders?

H/T Human Events

Monday, August 02, 2010

House Democrats Vote To Kill More Jobs

I don’t know why this would surprise anyone, but once again, the Democrat led House of Representatives has chosen to push through legislation to send to the Senate that is another obvious job killer.

Under the guise of improving safety on offshore oil drilling, referring to the Deepwater Horizon accident 3 months ago, Democrats in the House have pushed through a bill to Overhaul System of Offshore Drilling .

The bill passed the House by a 209-193 vote and sent on to the Senate, where it “faces an uncertain future.”

Congressional Republicans and Oil-state Democrats all are “warning that the bill will put independent oil and gas producers out of business,” in an area already reeling with high unemployment and no recovery in sight.

A contentious portion of the bill will eliminate the cap on economic damages should another spill occur. Small oil companies say they will not be able to purchase insurance on their operations and insurance companies have already said, “they will not offer offshore-drilling insurance without a cap on damage claims.”

Barry Russell, president of the Independent Petroleum Association of America says,

“While trying to punish 'Big Oil,' Congress is actually harming small, independent companies who produce the majority of America's natural gas and oil.”

At a time of severe economic recession coupled with rising energy costs, the Democrats and the Obama administration are rushing headlong with measures that can only further hurt the country’s well-being and our ability to survive, not to mention making us even more dependent upon foreign oil sources.

In fast-tracking the bill through the House, West Virginia Democrat and head of the House Natural Resources Committee, Nick Rahall said,
“This will ensure that oil and gas development on federal waters is done in a safe, fiscal and environmentally sound manner.”

The American Petroleum Institutes president, Jack Gerard said prior to the bill passing,
“Majority Leader Reid suggests his bill will create 150,000 new jobs, but our analysis indicates that failing to develop in the deepwater of the Gulf of Mexico will cost more than that - 175,000 jobs, the majority of them in already hard-hit Gulf Coast communities.”

Upon hearing the bill passed, Gerard released a statement,
“The House bill passed today will kill jobs, threaten our fragile economic recovery and place our energy security at risk. This is an anti-jobs, anti-consumer and anti-energy bill. Instead of addressing the risks of offshore development by improving safety and establishing a robust system for covering the costs of possible future accidents, this bill effectively bans development and sends thousands of workers in offshore communities to the unemployment lines.”

“The unlimited liability provisions will drive the vast majority of American companies out of U.S. waters because they will not be able to obtain insurance coverage. Those remaining will be subject to huge cost hikes, reducing energy production, economic growth, American jobs and government revenues.”

“While the House recognized that the deepwater moratorium is a jobs killer, we need real action and call on the administration to lift the moratorium to allow our people to get back to work. The inability to develop in the deepwater of the Gulf of Mexico, whether through an explicit moratorium or through policies that creates a de-facto moratorium, will cost more than 175,000 jobs a year, the majority of them in already hard-hit Gulf Coast communities.”

“Americans want and deserve improvements in offshore safety and this can be accomplished without putting thousands of people out of work and increasing the nation’s reliance on foreign sources of energy.”

We need energy sources as much as any other nation, nations that are being pressed upon to accept such sub-standard representation from government. We are constantly told how “big-oil” is our enemy, but they at least supply jobs, pay massive taxes and improve our living standards.

Big government appears more to be the enemy as more and more in every walk of our lives; they tighten the stranglehold on the American people, now through energy.

Alternative sources and so-called “green energy” sources are years away from being perfected or supply the amount of energy available from petroleum products and none are as economical as petroleum. Other countries that thought “green energy” was going to create jobs have discovered that it actually costs jobs.

See Spanish Study Sparks Skepticism About Green Jobs and The Fallacy of 'Green Jobs.'

In 2006 Nancy Pelosi campaigned on a platform of “A New Direction for America.” She made the promise of,
“The New Direction for America advances the right priorities – to make our nation safer and our economy fairer; to make health care and college more affordable; to energize America with energy independence; and to guarantee a dignified retirement for all Americans.”

In 2008, Barack Obama campaigned on “Hope and Change” and now tells us that “we cannot go back to the failed policies of the Bush administration.”

I don’t know about you, but I enjoyed a much better living standard under those “failed policies of the Bush administration.”

We must wrest control of the country from Barack Obama and the Democratic cartel running rough shod over America. Personally, I cannot afford any more “Hope and Change” and Pelosi’s “New Direction for America” is not one that has benefitted anyone but the left-winged elite.

We need to elect people this November that will practice sound energy policies and allow us the opportunity to utilize our own energy resources, while we work towards the alternatives. Once viable, the free market will provide for our energy needs, as it always has, without having to grant massive subsidies in order to have it.

As Barry Russell quoted above also said,
“Members of Congress who vote for this bill will have a lot to explain when they leave Washington this weekend for the congressional August recess.”

It’s up to us. This November, vote every one of these job killing Democrats out, for good!