Frank,
I'm not sure what time you were talking about. We were there in February when they had the hearings on SB1079, the measure that "allowed" ethanol free gas to be sold for exempted uses, but I haven't been back since & haven't heard that anyone else has either. If that's the time you were referring to, it was a sham, half the legislators walked out of the hearing once the lobbyists for the ethanol industry finished their testimony.
On the good side, Vicki Walker, senator from Eugene noticed the gas mileage in her Prius dropped about 25% when E10 came along and a handful of other legislators have indicated dissatisfaction with the mandate. On the bad side, Alan Bates, the majority leader published a letter that might have been industry written, saying ethanol was wonderful and there was nothing wrong with it.
FWIW, I recently sent the following missive to all the state senators--I hope you enjoy it:
To all you legislators who think you want to save the environment, which would you rather see, the air fouled by lead or would you rather continue to mandate that everyone use your crappy, beloved ethanol?
30% of the lead emissions into the atmosphere come from leaded gas used in piston powered aircraft.
70% of the piston powered aircraft don't NEED leaded gas. We only use leaded gas because you made us use it.
Many of us used to use car gas. I did. There was no lead in car gas.
Now you have made it virtually impossible for us to do so. Ethanol.
How does it protect the environment or reduce foreign oil usage if I have to make every second flight a flight for fuel?
How does it protect the environment if that fuel contains lead?
Oh, sure you passed your feel good measure, SB 1079 to make gas uncontaminated with ethanol available, but hardly anyone carries it. I have to drive 30 miles each way to get it. Special trip; I otherwise never go that direction. Well, I could get it closer, in a 5 gallon can from Wilco for about $45, but no one does. How does that help the environment? How does that help keep us off foreign oil?
We all know your ethanol requirement is highly questionable. We know it impacts gas mileage, food prices, and the environment, for a saving not of 10% (we all know that's bogus, because the energy balance is marginal), but of substantially less and may even be costing us more energy that it provides. We all know that the main energy from ethanol is for your campaign funds, that energy coming from Pacific Ethanol and other beneficiaries of your stupid mandate.
Now it is time to get your heads out of your collective asses and do something half right--I know it is almost impossible for legislators to really do something right.
And what's the right thing? At the very least, mandate that all premium gas sold in the state contain zero ethanol. That's right, zero, none, nada. If all you do is exempt ethanol, the refineries will still use it. You need to outlaw, ban, get rid of, ethanol from premium. And allow midgrade to go to 5%, because midgrade is made at the pump by mixing premium and regular. Oh, no! We can't do that! We love ethanol! Sure you can. And you know how much you will impact ethanol usage? 15%. That's right, just 15%. The market for premium and midgrade was only 10% each in 2007, according to DOE figures. And for you legislators who didn't pass math, the midgrade would have 5% ethanol so a 10% hit on the premium and a 5% hit on the midgrade gives you a 15% difference.
So your beloved ethanol takes a 15% hit and we no longer need to put lead in the air from aircraft engines. Use your brain for once and think about it. We know for sure about the lead. The ethanol benefits are questionable. There is no way you can justify keeping ethanol in premium.
It's time for you to stand up and do the right thing. Ban ethanol from premium. First day of the next session. Do it.