Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
itchmesir

Enough to tick you off...

13 posts in this topic

I know this ain't fishing related.. but i read about this in a Field and Stream awhile back..

Quote:
The Department of Natural Resources' expanding fleet of 300 "flex-fuel" vehicles is undercutting the agency's mission to conserve wildlife habitat and clean up the state's lakes and rivers, according to two Minnesota conservation groups.

The DNR's cars, trucks and vans burn "E85," a blend of 85 percent corn-based ethanol and 15 percent gasoline, and can be more expensive to operate than comparable vehicles that use the Minnesota-mandated blend of 90 percent gasoline and 10 percent ethanol.

Tens of thousands of federal Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) acres of Minnesota grasslands that support ducks, pheasants, songbirds and other wildlife have been plowed under in part to support the state's ethanol boom.

"The irony of having the DNR charged with preserving prairie and grasslands and Conservation Reserve Program acres and at the same time helping to drive demand for corn-based ethanol isn't lost on us, and I don't think it's lost on a lot of people," said Matt Norton, forestry and wildlife advocate with the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy (MCEA).

DNR Lac qui Parle area wildlife manager Dave Trauba has seen firsthand the effects of the land conversion in western Minnesota. "After watching these conservation lands support so much wildlife for so many years, it really kicks you in the stomach to see them plowed up," Trauba said.

Yet, as directed by state policy, Trauba and his staff refill their DNR pickups with E85.

More than 1 million of the state's CRP acres might be lost in coming years, with much of the land converted to growing corn, DNR officials estimate.

Money is driving the switch.

The federal government pays farmers in some parts of southern Minnesota about $80 per acre to plant in grasses and enroll the land in the CRP. By comparison, rental rates to plant corn on some of the same lands have risen to as much as $200 an acre.

seriously? why are we destroying this land with a fuel that soon will hopefully be obsolete.. we've already proven it to be just as toxic to the environment as regular fuel.. not to mention it uses just about as many resources to make E85 as it does to make regular fuel.. if anything.. why can't DNR vehicles be solar/electric vehicles.. it makes a lot more sense, does it not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is part of Governor Pawlenty's SmartFleet Iniative. This wasn't a choice by the DNR.

The Gov. also proposed and signed legislation that will move "regular" gasoline in the state from 10% ethanol to 20% ethanol by 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and I suppose you'd prefer we spend the rest of our lives making the thugs from Iran and other middle eastern oil countries rich???

The farm ground that produces the vast majority of corn in this country would never be enrolled in CRP. Your post tells why...at $80 per acre, the farmer can make 3 times that (or more) growing row crops. If someone stepped forward with a viable alternative to corn based ethanol, it'd be worth exploring, but today, it doesn't exist in large quantities. So for now, I fill up with ethanol to do what I can to support farmers...many of whom allow me to hunt their land.

There...I'm off my soapbox now grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro or con, it's interesting to note that the state of Minnesota has been adding Toyota to there fleet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About 28,000 gallons of E-85 will be dispensed into DNR vehicles this year. That's about 3 percent of the DNR's total fuel consumption, up from less than 1 percent five years ago, said DNR fleet manager Dave Schiller.

Most likely to appease the enviro's.

Hardly worth getting your undies in a bundle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E-85 isn't necessarily better for the environment. This is based on more politics than facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sugar Cane.

Sugar Cane is more easily turned into ethanol then corn is. Currently I understand that turning corn into ethanol uses more oil during the process then we save by using E85.

Sugar Cane is supposed to require far less oil during ethanol production.

Of course the problem is that the US does not have enough of the correct type of land to grow meaningful amounts of sugar cane. Perhaps someday when global warming takes over we'll be able to grow it but until then we either need to import it or just wait it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He is not a republican, he is a liberal that does not like taxes,

Republican, Democrat, is there really any differance anymore?

This whole State biofuel initiative is marketing, pure and simple. This is a smart politician with higher asperations that knows what sells to voters these days. There are a whole lot of votes to be gained by playing the "green" card. It does not matter if these green initiatives work, or make any sense, as long as you appear to be "green" and say the right things.

Just listen to the corporate commercials playing the green card these days. Do you really think the Walmart Executives believe or care that piece of junk they are marketing as "green" manufacuted from "50% recycled products" is going to make any difference to the environment?

The sad part is that it is working and people are buying into this load of .....totally organic green 100% biodegradable male bovine excrement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I failed to mention, that in addition to appealing to the gullible voting public by sounding "green", the media also eats this up. They have an unsatiable appetite for unlimited reporting on anyone talking about anything "green" and have absolutely no interest in doing any fact checking. Perfect free campaign publicity, and anyone questioning you is simply labeled anti-environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About 28,000 gallons of E-85 will be dispensed into DNR vehicles this year. That's about 3 percent of the DNR's total fuel consumption, up from less than 1 percent five years ago, said DNR fleet manager Dave Schiller.

Most likely to appease the enviro.

Hardly worth getting your undies in a bundle.

Its always got to be about the enviro's or the other party, well if you have been following who has been pushing this carp it is one person who seems to have ulterior motives and it is not the environment. Even after studies have shown this stuff is no better than fossil fuels. Why would a governor let an ethanol plant be constructed in an area that already has problems with their ground water supply, money is what drives this not the environment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many Toyotas have higher domestic content than similar vehicles from Big Three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • We live in some sort of Bizarro world now - Sarah Palin calling Trump sinfully stupid.     Here's another one from Ann Coulter, who literally wrote a book "In Trump We Trust"    
    • You do realize that if the taxes were done that way, the cities would get $2.53 billion richer, and rural areas would get $2.53 billion poorer. The 7 county metro pays substantially more taxes (nearly 2/3 of the states total) than the other 80 counties in Minnesota combined, but only receives roughly half of the state expenditures.   Sorry to break it to you, but rural America is not fiscally solvent. Those citiots you speak of are bankrolling the entire country. It's easy to see on this chart: more urban states are to the left (givers) and more rural states are to the right (takers).  
    • I tried to purchase the screws yetti uses from Fastenal who is their vendor for the screws. They are only sold in large reels designed for a self loading screwgun. I finally called Casey at Glacial lake docks where I purchased my yetti and he sent me out the amount I needed. They work great to add additional fir strips. The plastic used to tie them together comes right off as you screw them in. Hope that helps. 
    • Sorry...was wrong on the specs.   Manufacturer is Core Ice.  It was 1450# for a 12' and 1250# for a 8'.  
    • I believe you want to use a zinc coated or galvanized steel according to the charts.  I'm sure someone will come along to correct me
    • In the back room there is a company that is using bonded foam panels (similar to garage door panels, but really clean looking), and had weights of 1250# for a 12' and 1450# for a 16'.  Aluminum trailer frames that could convert to a skid frame.  Can't recall the name.  I'm sure they were spendy, but I can see a concept like that going somewhere for the hardcore fishing crowd.   Yetti, Firebrand, Big Bite, and Glacier all had really nice display models.      Lots of campers (disguised as fish houses) out there at prices that make me want to jump into the business.  I was in two different manufacturers houses with prices well over $30k that had wire nuts for connections.  That is going to be a fun adventure for someone 2-3 years down the road when they find out their manufacturer saved $15 on their wiring.           
    • Thank you for all the help!  Ended up going with the Marcum VS485C.  After some research, there were a few other Marcums that were on the list (825 & 625), the Aqua Vu HD, and the Pan Cam.  The mini cams from all manufactures weren't what I was looking for, but they are cool and do have their place.     After seeing everything in person, I think the Aqua Vu HD had the best camera/screen.  The Marcums were a little bit behind, but the 825, 625, 485, and Pan Cam had similar real life clarity.  The 485 won out because of the $300 price point vs the others at $450-700, and was almost identical for resolution, other than the HD.
      I honestly think these cameras are all about 5+ years behind in technology in comparison to the broader camera/tv screen market.  Running off a 7-9ah battery is probably one of the limiting factors.  Another may be the cold.  The main reason (IMO) is that the manufacturers are hoping they can incrementally rape us by trickling out technology each year, similar to the computer manufacturers of the 90s/early 2000's.  For the price of a middle of the road underwater camera, I can buy a Chinese made 50" TV (these all have Chinese made 5-8" screens) and a GoPro or Sony Action Cam (which is 10x's the picture quality).       
    • Any newcomers in the wheelhouse business at the Ice show in St. Paul?
    • Im sure it's hard to see through your Liberal tears.  
  • Our Sponsors