Minnesota Looks to Join California Clean Air Posse. For One Year.
Finance and Commerce reports that it was a close-run thing– 20 to 18. But despite strenuous lobbying by Minnesota's ethanol industry, the state's finance committee recommended adopting California's controversial car emissions standards. For one year. John Tuma, a lobbyist for the Minnesota Environmental Partnership, was a happy camper. Ish. "[For now,] consumers are going to be paying for vehicles that are not as fuel efficient as they could be so they will be paying more at the gas pump. And [there will be] more global warming pollution for a year. But it puts [standards] in place and that’s a step forward." [The bracket brigade in in da house!] Chris Radatz, director of public policy for the E85 FlexFuel-lovin' Minnesota Farm Bureau, is not so happy with The Gopher State's Clean Car Act. "“We’re depending on a state to set standards that has a whole different infrastructure,” Radatz said, referring to CA's lack of corn juice pumps. To placate the E85 crowd, a last-minute amendment stipulated a [taxpayer-funded] study of how the bill would affect the availability of flex-fuel vehicles. Availability as in sales? You betcha! Look for this legislation to fall on the floor and flop like a fish.
More by Robert Farago
Comments
Join the conversation
menno, If you want to avoid E10 fuel in Canada, you will need to fill up with mid or premium grade gasoline. Most pumps have a notice that says Regular gasoline "contains up to 10% Ethanol"
As a Minnesotan...I think copying ANYTHING Commiefornia does is a very bad idea. Leave the hippie, wacko stuff on the left coast...not here.
menno, Don't worry about driving through MN. I used to go there all the time, and the impression I got is that most of the people are apathetic. That has just got the activists ones even more active, but you aren't likely to run into one anymore than you are anywhere else. OTOH, downtown Calgary will likely be a nice place to run into some activists. Don't miss Banff. It's the nicest spot in the Rockies, and that hotel is something everyone in North America should see.
Thanks, crackers, for the tip about E10 in Canada. Dang. Well, I guess we're going to be changing our "return" plans and simply drive back to Michigan through Montana, North Dakota, Minnesota (not filling up with E10 gas in Minnesota though), Wisconsin and the Upper Peninsula (of Michigan). Can't change the route on the way "out" to Banff/Lake Louise/Jasper, as we have reservations near Terrace Bay (northern Ontario) and plans to see some waterfalls north of Lake Superior, in the Canadian Shield. At least in Canada, you still have stickers on the pumps alerting you to E10. In Michigan, it used to be the law but they removed it and so the stickers are gone. Where it is E10 in regular, I'll just pump mid-grade since there is no point in letting the ethanol simply run through the car (both of our current cars essentially lose as much MPG as the ethanol content in E10 when E10 is used, or more). Midgrade is surely not 10% more than 87 octane, even in Canada. Anyone wanting to avoid E10 in the northwestern Michigan area should avoid Shell, Speedway and Meijer gasoline. Hi Landcrusher, yeah, we're skipping Calgary - no time. Only 3 weeks to drive to, visit and return from the Canadian Rockies (about a 3 1/2 or 4 day drive each way). If gas prices continue (and reach the rumored $8 a gallon by 2009) then this may well be our last big road trip. Ever. As it stands, we probably won't be able to afford to fly to the UK to visit family much any more. Watch for airplane ticket prices to jump once all of these airlines merge that are talking shotgun wedding right now (largely due to fuel costs).