<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Eye On China: China Passes United States as Largest Annual Global Warming Polluter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/</link>
	<description>Dispatches from the Youth Climate Movement</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 08:12:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-92901</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:23:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-92901</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Improving California&#039;s Smog Check System 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLaBbcmZemA&amp;feature=player_embedded#!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Improving California&#8217;s Smog Check System </p>
<p><span style="text-align:center; display: block;"><a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/"><img src="http://img.youtube.com/vi/jLaBbcmZemA/2.jpg" alt="" /></a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-88771</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 07:07:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-88771</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl-Nrep74qg]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="text-align:center; display: block;"><a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/"><img src="http://img.youtube.com/vi/Zl-Nrep74qg/2.jpg" alt="" /></a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-87887</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 04:22:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-87887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Money available to clean air and improve smog program
 
Charlie Peters, The Daily Review / MY WORD, August 14, 2002

The smog check issue has been under continuous legislative debate since 1993. AB 2637 by Dennis Cardoza is an opportunity to improve program performance and public support.

We at the Clean Air Performance Professionals propose “reasonably available control measures” to improve California Smog Check performance. Consider a Consumer Assistance Program (CAP) quality audit (secret shopper) to improve smog check performance.

We propose using the CAP cars and funds to provide random quality audit of smog check providers. Audits that result in the car’s not being in compliance should be handled similarly to the former Consumer Repair and Education Workforce program. The Bureau of Automotive Repair program did not fine the licensees nor did it involve coercion. But when the question of “what would you like to do?” was asked, the shop took care of business and usually elected to fix the car.

The average smog check failure repair is about $ 150.00 statewide. The motorist pays about the same at the average repair station and the CAP station The average CAP repair is about $350.00. Many cars are not brought into compliance.

To level the smog check failure repair playing field so more cars meet standards after repair, the whole smog check market should be subject to a CAP (secret shopper) random audit.

Around 1985, BAR started a “missing part” audit. In 1991 that program was stopped,

The difference was a 300 percent change in result in finding the missing part.

When BAR ran fewer than on audit per station per year, the result was a change in behavior that started at more than an 80 percent rate, but moved to less than 20 percent rate of noncompliance.

The difference was a 300 percent change in result in finding the missing part. If the CAP audit was addressing the issue of repair compliance rather than just finding a missing part, the results may be the same or a 300 percent improvement in compliance.  

With the missing part program, a follow-up audit with increasing demands lift the stations no options but to find the missing part or be removed from the game. 

There are huge inconsistencies from smog check station to station and with BAR representatives. For BAR to decide a car is not in compliance, rules of smog check must be clarified.  Money is available for the CAP program. It can be used for contracted scrap and repairs, or some of the funds can be used to evaluate and support improved 
Performance of licensed small business. The cars and funds are the same, but the results may be credit for 2,000 tons per day in pollution prevention credit in the State Implementation Plan, rather than our current credit of fewer than 100 tons per day. 

The governor and state Legislature would get the credit for improved performance. Performance improvements would be accomplished at a cost of less than $500.00 per ton. And program illusions would be reduced in 1 year. 

Charlie Peters is president of Clean Air Performance Professionals.  510.537.1796

(retyped from original)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Money available to clean air and improve smog program</p>
<p>Charlie Peters, The Daily Review / MY WORD, August 14, 2002</p>
<p>The smog check issue has been under continuous legislative debate since 1993. AB 2637 by Dennis Cardoza is an opportunity to improve program performance and public support.</p>
<p>We at the Clean Air Performance Professionals propose “reasonably available control measures” to improve California Smog Check performance. Consider a Consumer Assistance Program (CAP) quality audit (secret shopper) to improve smog check performance.</p>
<p>We propose using the CAP cars and funds to provide random quality audit of smog check providers. Audits that result in the car’s not being in compliance should be handled similarly to the former Consumer Repair and Education Workforce program. The Bureau of Automotive Repair program did not fine the licensees nor did it involve coercion. But when the question of “what would you like to do?” was asked, the shop took care of business and usually elected to fix the car.</p>
<p>The average smog check failure repair is about $ 150.00 statewide. The motorist pays about the same at the average repair station and the CAP station The average CAP repair is about $350.00. Many cars are not brought into compliance.</p>
<p>To level the smog check failure repair playing field so more cars meet standards after repair, the whole smog check market should be subject to a CAP (secret shopper) random audit.</p>
<p>Around 1985, BAR started a “missing part” audit. In 1991 that program was stopped,</p>
<p>The difference was a 300 percent change in result in finding the missing part.</p>
<p>When BAR ran fewer than on audit per station per year, the result was a change in behavior that started at more than an 80 percent rate, but moved to less than 20 percent rate of noncompliance.</p>
<p>The difference was a 300 percent change in result in finding the missing part. If the CAP audit was addressing the issue of repair compliance rather than just finding a missing part, the results may be the same or a 300 percent improvement in compliance.  </p>
<p>With the missing part program, a follow-up audit with increasing demands lift the stations no options but to find the missing part or be removed from the game. </p>
<p>There are huge inconsistencies from smog check station to station and with BAR representatives. For BAR to decide a car is not in compliance, rules of smog check must be clarified.  Money is available for the CAP program. It can be used for contracted scrap and repairs, or some of the funds can be used to evaluate and support improved<br />
Performance of licensed small business. The cars and funds are the same, but the results may be credit for 2,000 tons per day in pollution prevention credit in the State Implementation Plan, rather than our current credit of fewer than 100 tons per day. </p>
<p>The governor and state Legislature would get the credit for improved performance. Performance improvements would be accomplished at a cost of less than $500.00 per ton. And program illusions would be reduced in 1 year. </p>
<p>Charlie Peters is president of Clean Air Performance Professionals.  510.537.1796</p>
<p>(retyped from original)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-87033</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 05:54:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-87033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[* * If an elected official would request a copy of the Sierra Research SR 2007-04-01 and all communication about the report from CARB, DCA/BAR, IMRC &amp; Sierra Research it might help improve performance of Smog Check.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvB3em82Lk]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>* * If an elected official would request a copy of the Sierra Research SR 2007-04-01 and all communication about the report from CARB, DCA/BAR, IMRC &amp; Sierra Research it might help improve performance of Smog Check.</p>
<p><span style="text-align:center; display: block;"><a href="http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/"><img src="http://img.youtube.com/vi/TvB3em82Lk/2.jpg" alt="" /></a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-86603</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 18:45:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-86603</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[#  Charlie Peters Says:
January 31st, 2010 at 11:44 am

Clean Air Performance Professionals

Friday, January 29, 2010

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-558-3160 ( new number )

C/o Lisa

RE: Sierra Research Report SR 2007-04-01

Dear Mr. Governor

California Air Resources Board (CARB) and The Department of Consumer Affairs/ Bureau of Automotive Repair DCA/BAR have contracted with Sierra Research for a Report of Smog Check performance.

Sierra has informed me the report was final in March 2009 and released to CARB.

CARB, BAR, IMRC, and the California Legislature are using the Report for public policy but refusing to release the publicly funded Report.

Mr. Governor, I’m confused, can you refer me to someone who might help?

Cc to interested parties

From: Charlie Peters

Clean Air Performance Professionals

cappcharlie@earthlink.net

(510) 537-1796 – fax: (510) 537-9675]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#  Charlie Peters Says:<br />
January 31st, 2010 at 11:44 am</p>
<p>Clean Air Performance Professionals</p>
<p>Friday, January 29, 2010</p>
<p>Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger<br />
State Capitol Building<br />
Sacramento, CA 95814<br />
Phone: 916-445-2841<br />
Fax: 916-558-3160 ( new number )</p>
<p>C/o Lisa</p>
<p>RE: Sierra Research Report SR 2007-04-01</p>
<p>Dear Mr. Governor</p>
<p>California Air Resources Board (CARB) and The Department of Consumer Affairs/ Bureau of Automotive Repair DCA/BAR have contracted with Sierra Research for a Report of Smog Check performance.</p>
<p>Sierra has informed me the report was final in March 2009 and released to CARB.</p>
<p>CARB, BAR, IMRC, and the California Legislature are using the Report for public policy but refusing to release the publicly funded Report.</p>
<p>Mr. Governor, I’m confused, can you refer me to someone who might help?</p>
<p>Cc to interested parties</p>
<p>From: Charlie Peters</p>
<p>Clean Air Performance Professionals</p>
<p><a href="mailto:cappcharlie@earthlink.net">cappcharlie@earthlink.net</a></p>
<p>(510) 537-1796 – fax: (510) 537-9675</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-63401</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 03:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-63401</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What was the cause of death of Alexander Farrell, 46, expert on alternative fuels?

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/18/BAOK1087DP.DTL]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What was the cause of death of Alexander Farrell, 46, expert on alternative fuels?</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/18/BAOK1087DP.DTL" rel="nofollow">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/04/18/BAOK1087DP.DTL</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-62747</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 07:57:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-62747</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Should Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger consider a $17/gallon &quot;fee&quot; on corn fuel ethanol use? 

 * Lower price for food, gas, water, beer and cleaner air… and… funds for the budget from oil profit

 * Clean Air Performance Professionals]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Should Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger consider a $17/gallon &#8220;fee&#8221; on corn fuel ethanol use? </p>
<p> * Lower price for food, gas, water, beer and cleaner air… and… funds for the budget from oil profit</p>
<p> * Clean Air Performance Professionals</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Maria Surma Manka &#187; Blog Archive &#187; No More CO2 Bragging Rights for the U.S.</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-54975</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Maria Surma Manka &#187; Blog Archive &#187; No More CO2 Bragging Rights for the U.S.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:58:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-54975</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] It’s Getting Hot in Here The Guardian Technology Review [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It’s Getting Hot in Here The Guardian Technology Review [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-50666</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2007 06:50:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-50666</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Background Research Paper on Corn Ethanol

http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/08/14/18440750.php]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A Background Research Paper on Corn Ethanol</p>
<p><a href="http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/08/14/18440750.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/08/14/18440750.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charlie Peters</title>
		<link>http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-49759</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charlie Peters]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Aug 2007 03:37:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://itsgettinghotinhere.org/2007/06/22/eye-on-china-china-passes-united-states-as-largest-annual-global-warming-polluter/#comment-49759</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Farce About Ethanol...

By State Senator Tom McClintock, Free Republic, 06/28/2007

In response to my blog, &quot;Ethanol Economics,&quot; Former Secretary of State Bill Jones (now Chairman of Pacific Ethanol), made five key points in his piece, &quot;The Facts About Ethanol.&quot;  Just for fun, let&#039;s run &quot;The Facts About Ethanol&quot; through the old fact-checker: 

&quot;Today, ethanol is about 65 cents per gallon cheaper than gasoline in the California market.&quot; That&#039;s only after taxpayers and consumers have kicked in a subsidy of $1.50 per gallon - or $7 billion a year paid into the pockets of ethanol producers to hide the staggering price of ethanol production. And even with the subsidy, the California Energy Commission estimates that the new CARB edict will INCREASE the price per gallon by between 4.2 and 6.5 cents - on top of the tax subsidies. Ouch. 

&quot;Allowing a 10 percent blend of ethanol into gasoline provides a 4 percent supply increase to the marketplace at a price far below current gasoline prices.&quot; Not only is the price far ABOVE current gasoline prices (see above) but Bill ignores the fact that ethanol produces less energy than gasoline - meaning you&#039;ll have to buy more gallons for the same mileage. 

&quot;CARB&#039;s recent vote reduces our reliance on oil from overseas...&quot; Let&#039;s walk through the numbers again. One acre of corn produces 350 gallons of ethanol; the CARB edict will require 1.5 billion gallons of ethanol, in turn requiring 4.3 million acres of corn for ethanol production. Yet California only has 11 million acres devoted to growing crops of any kind. And that, in turn, means an increasing reliance on foreign agricultural produce, shifting our energy dependence from King Abdullah to Hu Jintao. 

&quot;Further, it sends a signal to companies like ours to continue to invest in California production to help make this state energy independent.&quot; Yes, you can sell a lot more ethanol with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone. You got me there. But it also sends a signal to the market to raise prices on every product that relies upon corn for both food and grain feed - meaning skyrocketing prices for everything from corn meal to milk. Remember the tortilla riots in Mexico in January? 

&quot;Pacific Ethanol uses state-of-the-art production practices that reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 40 percent compared to conventional gasoline.&quot; Unless Pacific Ethanol has re-written the laws of chemistry, ethanol is produced by converting glucose into two parts ethanol and two parts carbon dioxide. The chemical equation is C6H12O6 = 2C2H5OH + 2CO2. (Memo to Bill: If you&#039;re not using this formula, you&#039;re not producing ethanol. And if you are, you&#039;re also producing lots of carbon dioxide. Better check.)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858095/posts

* NO on “car tax” AB118 (Nunez)

* Clean Air Performance Professionals (CAPP)  supports a Smog Check inspection &amp; repair audit, gasoline oxygen cap and elimination of dual fuel CAFÉ credit to cut car impact over 50% in 1 year.

* Some folks believe corn ethanol in gasoline increases oil use and oil profit

* Ethanol uses lots of water

* A Smog Check audit would cut toxic car impact in ½ in 1 year.  Chief Sherry Mehl, DCA/BAR, has never found out if what is broken on a Smog Check failed car gets fixed, never

* A corn ethanol waiver would stop a $1 billion California oil refinery welfare program coming from the federal government @ $0.51 per gallon of ethanol used 

* About 60,000 barrels per day of the oil used by cars is allowed by the &quot;renewable fuel&quot; CAFE credit]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Farce About Ethanol&#8230;</p>
<p>By State Senator Tom McClintock, Free Republic, 06/28/2007</p>
<p>In response to my blog, &#8220;Ethanol Economics,&#8221; Former Secretary of State Bill Jones (now Chairman of Pacific Ethanol), made five key points in his piece, &#8220;The Facts About Ethanol.&#8221;  Just for fun, let&#8217;s run &#8220;The Facts About Ethanol&#8221; through the old fact-checker: </p>
<p>&#8220;Today, ethanol is about 65 cents per gallon cheaper than gasoline in the California market.&#8221; That&#8217;s only after taxpayers and consumers have kicked in a subsidy of $1.50 per gallon &#8211; or $7 billion a year paid into the pockets of ethanol producers to hide the staggering price of ethanol production. And even with the subsidy, the California Energy Commission estimates that the new CARB edict will INCREASE the price per gallon by between 4.2 and 6.5 cents &#8211; on top of the tax subsidies. Ouch. </p>
<p>&#8220;Allowing a 10 percent blend of ethanol into gasoline provides a 4 percent supply increase to the marketplace at a price far below current gasoline prices.&#8221; Not only is the price far ABOVE current gasoline prices (see above) but Bill ignores the fact that ethanol produces less energy than gasoline &#8211; meaning you&#8217;ll have to buy more gallons for the same mileage. </p>
<p>&#8220;CARB&#8217;s recent vote reduces our reliance on oil from overseas&#8230;&#8221; Let&#8217;s walk through the numbers again. One acre of corn produces 350 gallons of ethanol; the CARB edict will require 1.5 billion gallons of ethanol, in turn requiring 4.3 million acres of corn for ethanol production. Yet California only has 11 million acres devoted to growing crops of any kind. And that, in turn, means an increasing reliance on foreign agricultural produce, shifting our energy dependence from King Abdullah to Hu Jintao. </p>
<p>&#8220;Further, it sends a signal to companies like ours to continue to invest in California production to help make this state energy independent.&#8221; Yes, you can sell a lot more ethanol with a kind word and a gun than with a kind word alone. You got me there. But it also sends a signal to the market to raise prices on every product that relies upon corn for both food and grain feed &#8211; meaning skyrocketing prices for everything from corn meal to milk. Remember the tortilla riots in Mexico in January? </p>
<p>&#8220;Pacific Ethanol uses state-of-the-art production practices that reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 40 percent compared to conventional gasoline.&#8221; Unless Pacific Ethanol has re-written the laws of chemistry, ethanol is produced by converting glucose into two parts ethanol and two parts carbon dioxide. The chemical equation is C6H12O6 = 2C2H5OH + 2CO2. (Memo to Bill: If you&#8217;re not using this formula, you&#8217;re not producing ethanol. And if you are, you&#8217;re also producing lots of carbon dioxide. Better check.)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858095/posts" rel="nofollow">http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1858095/posts</a></p>
<p>* NO on “car tax” AB118 (Nunez)</p>
<p>* Clean Air Performance Professionals (CAPP)  supports a Smog Check inspection &amp; repair audit, gasoline oxygen cap and elimination of dual fuel CAFÉ credit to cut car impact over 50% in 1 year.</p>
<p>* Some folks believe corn ethanol in gasoline increases oil use and oil profit</p>
<p>* Ethanol uses lots of water</p>
<p>* A Smog Check audit would cut toxic car impact in ½ in 1 year.  Chief Sherry Mehl, DCA/BAR, has never found out if what is broken on a Smog Check failed car gets fixed, never</p>
<p>* A corn ethanol waiver would stop a $1 billion California oil refinery welfare program coming from the federal government @ $0.51 per gallon of ethanol used </p>
<p>* About 60,000 barrels per day of the oil used by cars is allowed by the &#8220;renewable fuel&#8221; CAFE credit</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

