Senator Daschle May Have An Alcohol Problem.

Written by Hal Pawluk
Published September 29, 2003
page 1 | 2

" Faced with over 10,000 MTBE contaminated sites in California, Governor Davis decided in 1999 to phase out the use of this terribly polluting fuel additive. To facilitate the phase out, the state of California requested a waiver of the federal oxygenate requirement for reformulated gasoline.
This waiver would have allowed the state to maintain the cleanest fuel standards in the country while shielding California consumers from gasoline price shocks...
EPA's technical staff examined the facts and found that a waiver was warranted.
Unfortunately, the White House reversed EPA's decision after meeting with special interests. As a result of the Bush Administration's decision, the Governor has had to delay the ban on MTBE to avoid dramatic price increases at the pump. This means California groundwater will continue to face the threat of contamination."

California is still fighting. In July 2003 a federal appeals courts ruled that: "The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was wrong in denying California an exemption to federal regulations on the content of its gasoline... Ethanol producers said they hoped the EPA would stand by its earlier decision."

In the meantime, we're still getting it in the gas.

Background: major corn-producing (and legislation-influencing) states are South Dakota, Indiana, Wisconsin, Michigan, Missouri and Ohio. [See also: Republican Senator Voinovich's "Ethanol is good for Ohio" to get a reading on how they're doing ] If you'd like to try to influence the outcome, contact your Senator or Representative.

More background: it costs about $1 million to clean up an MTBE-contaminated well, $5 million for a reservoir, and there are tens of thousands of contaminated sites around the county.

page 1 | 2
Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
Senator Daschle May Have An Alcohol Problem.
Published: September 29, 2003
Type:
Section: Politics
Writer: Hal Pawluk
Hal Pawluk's BC Writer page
Hal Pawluk's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Hal Pawluk
All Politics Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — September 30, 2003 @ 00:58AM — Ralph Del Rio [URL]

More ethanol means changes in farm subsidies. Anyways, I think it goes without saying that we need to become more energy self sufficient. So perhaps some wheeling and dealing can jump start all sorts of activity regarding energy production.

#2 — September 30, 2003 @ 09:29AM — Phillip Winn [URL]

I used to live in South Dakota, the place Senator Daschle still visits at least once per year and pretends is his home. Oddly (from the perspective of everywhere else I've ever been) the 89 octane fuel there was cheaper than the lower-grade 87 octane fuel. Why? Because the 89 octane fuel contains ethanol, of course, and so was subsidized in some way.

No real substance to add to this conversation, sorry.

#3 — October 1, 2003 @ 18:35PM — warren meyer [URL]

First, keep up the fight!

Second, though, your attribution of the public be damned I believe is incorrect. As you can imagine with many anti-business quotes, its not really in context. I believe it is from a Vanderbilt decscendent running the NY Central. It was in response to a question about running more limited trains (non-stop trains, particularly between NY and Chicago) to satisfy public demand for speedier transit. The NYC exec said I believe "the public be damned, I'll run limiteds because the Pennsylvania [RR] runs limiteds". If I am right, then your date is off as well since the great business battles of the limiteds occured in the early 20th century.

#4 — October 1, 2003 @ 18:38PM — warren meyer [URL]

ok, I was half right. The context part was right but it was earlier than I thought - in 1883.

#5 — October 1, 2003 @ 19:20PM — Hal Pawluk [URL]

Re: (3, 4)

I removed the incorrect date, but my usage is appropriate.

The original statement was made by William Vanderbilt and here's one version of the story:

'In the late 1880s, the New York Central railroad decided to discontinue the Chicago Limited, a fast, extra-fare passenger and mail train which ran between New York and Chicago. Reporters interviewed William Henry Vanderbilt, son and heir of the Commodore. They asked, "Don't you run it (the train) for the public benefit?" Vanderbilt's famous answer, "The public be damned"...'

It gained a lot of notoriety and came to used when businesses and others did not live up to their responsibilities to their customers and constituents.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/8760)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments