My dog Yo-Yo.

I cannot remember how he got his name.

Attach file:

---

  (66.84 KB)

Hello All:

The momentum against ethanol subsidies seems to be mounting.

There is some new hope that ethanol subsidies may end soon. I did not know this, but the massive ethanol subsidy ($7.7 BILLION) last year is up for renewal in the next 30 days.

Reuters newswire is reporting, "...A bipartisan group of U.S. senators called for an end to a tariff on ethanol imports and subsidies to ethanol blenders on Tuesday, saying the program is too expensive and increases dependency on foreign oil.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AT5MK20101130

And you won't believe who is behind this. "Senators Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, Jon Kyl, a Republican from Arizona, and 15 colleagues wrote a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority leader Mitch McConnell to urge halting the "fiscally irresponsible and environmentally unwise" tax credit and tariff."

Some 60 (divergent) groups have also sent letters to the Senate to end this subsidy including, get this; MoveOn.org, The Sierra Club, (tea-party aligned) Freedom Works, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Working Group, International Dairy Foods Association and Grocery Manufacturers Association.

Take a moment to read this editorial from today's Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-oped-1130-byrne-20101130,0,6661567.column

Do you want ethanol out of our gasoline supply and your Packard?
Do you want to save $7.7 BILLION annually in ethanol subsidies?

Then contact your US Senator and tell them to let the VEETC (Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit) expire and not renew it. If your senator listens and does nothing, then this subsidy will die - now.

Attach file:

---

  (33.93 KB)

Hello:
Excuse me but the discussion is about putting alcohol in our cars, not drinking it.

Al Gore now finally admits that the benefits of ethanol are "trivial" and that he pushed massive subsidies only to buy votes from special interests. And recent scientific studies suggest that carbon emissions from biofuels (ethanol) will increase 80% to 165% over fossil fuels.

With this evidence we should be talking about how to eliminate ethanol in our fuel system.

Randy Berger wrote:
And we should thank the WSJ for their efforts to shine light on this.

Yes, this is one of the reasons I read the Wall Street Journal - fact based reporting.

Soon the government will be mandating 15% ethanol in our fuel supply. Al Gore's admission that that ethanol's benefits are "trivial" and solely based on his listening only to special interest groups are eye-opening.

Maybe this can be overturned now that Al has confessed.

Meanwhile, look at all the subsidy money that has been thrown around and all the effort used to force this scheme on the tax paying public.

Maybe there is some hope. Al Gore no longer believes in ethanol as the benefits are "trivial."

Below is an editorial opinion that I copied from the Novemeber 27, 2010 edition of the Wall Street Journal.



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703572404575634753486416076.html?mod=WSJ_comments_MoreIn_Opinion

The Wall Street Journal
NOVEMBER 27, 2010

Al Gore's Ethanol Epiphany
He concedes the industry he promoted serves no useful purpose

Anyone who opposes ethanol subsidies, as these columns have for decades, comes to appreciate the wisdom of St. Jude. But now that a modern-day patron saint--St. Al of Green--has come out against the fuel made from corn and your tax dollars, maybe this isn't such a lost cause.

Welcome to the college of converts, Mr. Vice President. "It is not a good policy to have these massive subsidies for first-generation ethanol," Al Gore told a gathering of clean energy financiers in Greece this week. The benefits of ethanol are "trivial," he added, but "It's hard once such a program is put in place to deal with the lobbies that keep it going."

No kidding, and Mr. Gore said he knows from experience: "One of the reasons I made that mistake is that I paid particular attention to the farmers in my home state of Tennessee, and I had a certain fondness for the farmers in the state of Iowa because I was about to run for President."

Mr. Gore's mea culpa underscores the degree to which ethanol has become a purely political machine: It serves no purpose other than re-electing incumbents and transferring wealth to farm states and ethanol producers. Nothing proves this better than the coincident trajectories of ethanol and Mr. Gore's career.

Ethanol's claim on the Treasury was first made amid the 1970s energy crisis, with Jimmy Carter and a Democratic Congress subsidizing anything that claimed to be a substitute for foreign oil. Mr. Gore, freshman House class of 1976, was an early proponent of what was then called "gasahol."

The subsidies continued through the 1990s, with the ethanol lobby finding a sympathetic ear in Clinton EPA chief and Gore protege Carol Browner, who in 1994 banned the gasoline additive MTBE and left ethanol as the only option under clean air laws. When the Senate split 50-50 on repealing this de facto mandate, then Vice President Gore cast the deciding vote for . . . ethanol. That served him well in the 2000 Democratic primaries against ethanol critic Bill Bradley.

During the George W. Bush years, Big Ethanol adapted again, attaching itself to the global warming panic that Mr. Gore did as much as anyone to foment. Republicans in Congress formalized the mandate and increased subsidies in the 2005 and 2007 energy bills.

Meanwhile, the greens have slowly turned against corn ethanol, thanks to the growing scientific evidence that biofuels increase carbon emissions more than fossil fuels do. But the boondoggle lives on in dreams for so-called advanced fuels like cellulosic ethanol. Note Mr. Gore's objection only to "first generation," though we've been hearing that advanced ethanol is just a year or two away from viability for two decades.

At least on corn subsidies, we now have the makings of a left-right anti-boondoggle coalition. Major corn energy subsidies such as the 54-cent-per-gallon blenders credit expire at the end of the year, and Republican Senators Jim DeMint and Tom Coburn are encouraging the new Congress to prove its fiscal bona fides by letting them die. Chuck Grassley (R., Ethanol) responded this week on Twitter: "WashPost reports 2 of my colleagues want sunset ethanol tax credit R they ready sunset tax subsidies oilANDgas enjoys?"

Messrs. DeMint and Coburn replied, essentially, make our day--and rightly so. Regardless of government intervention, the economy will continue to demand oil and gas, because they are useful. No one could plausibly say the same about ethanol, and maybe now that he's had his epiphany Mr. Gore will join the fight against the subsidized industry he did so much to promote.

Hello JW:

Here is a link to the Top Gear Guy as a passenger in a U2 spy plane. Pretty cool & inspiring stuff:

http://www.wimp.com/breathtakingfootage/

BTW, wimp.com publishes about 5 videos each day. Worth the look.

They also allow you to download all videos to your computer - you will have to dowhload "Realtime Player." So you can kiss your DVR goodbye.

Enjoy

Hello Owen:

We would love to show you (and anyone else) around the place. The PPG is open to the general public several times a year. Normally the Spring Open House is the third Sunday of April, but we have not nailed that down for sure this year. The Fall Open House (25+ Packards and 250 other collector cars in 2010) is the third Sunday in October. Motor City Packards and the VMCCA co-sponsot the Cars-R-Stars show the first sunday in June.

I have also planned a special day at the PPG during the 2013 PAC National Meet.

However, if you EVER find yourself headed toward Detroit, then contact me or any other MCP member and we will do pour best to get you in for a special tour.

Now that I am getting used to this posting thing I will forewarn everyone about the PPG Open House schedule.

Hello Joe:

The Packard Motor Car Foundation comprised of a lot of local Motor City Packard (PAC) members acquired one of the front doors several years ago. It is in storage at the PPG and awaits reassembly when more funds can be collected.

It did not come cheap. A Texas car collector wanted the front doors for his museum and price was no object for him. Well, there are 2 sets of front doors. He got one set and the PMCF got the other.

By the way, this is larger than a LOCAL issue. You should not expect the "locals" to do everything. If you do not live in the area, then you the give the PMCF your financial support.

http://www.packardmotorfdn.org/

While I have not seen the US version I don't think it could match the British sense of humor. Plus the quirky cars they drive over there. Click on this link to see one of my favorites:
http://www.wimp.com/reliantrobin/

Takes a few minutes. but it is well worth it.

Hello Bkazmer:

Would be happy to park along side-by-side for a comparison. Drive on over from Grand Rapids for the Spring Open House at the PPG.

Remember, these are accessories and many were installed at the dealer and by the dealer from his source of stock. Unless you had a copy of the factory build sheet you cannot tell for sure when and where that accessory was added to your car.

I would even bet that more than one dealer used non-Packard approved antenna mounts because he could get them cheaper/faster from the local parts store rather than waiting for PMCC to send out the "approved/correct" mount from Detroit. This may be why my 1941 came with a factory radio, but an after-market antenna with two (incorrect) mounting points. At my first show I got points deducted for an incorrect antenna mount and fixed it shortly thereafter.