Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Keith Feral who wrote (185729)	4/27/2006 9:42:54 AM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Delayed reaction...it occurred to me that I wrote an implied question and to be clear I should be explicit. I wrote. It's not clear to me that using ethanol is a federal mandate to begin with. CA went to ethanol two years ago and there are states that don't require ethanol. As I showed in the earlier link the spot shortages are due to scheduling/delivery issues rather than the availability of ethanol. Bush has eased environmental regulations but CA has it's own regulations that required the use of ethanol. Does the easing of EPA regulations override CA regulations? jttmab

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next