55
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
55 points (100.0% liked)
Asklemmy
43855 readers
1745 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Afaict from reading that (and one of the sources, and its source) it boils down to the fuels’ “RVP levels” (which have an impact on volatility and the amount of VOCs given off) being past a particular threshold. E10 is also past that threshold, but it has an exception that E15 doesn’t have. However, by that same measure, E15 is less volatile than E10.
The author also expressed concern about expanding corn production as a result of expanded E15 and that there haven’t been sufficient studies on the impact of E15 on the environment (particularly in the summer months). But that’s also paired with a statement saying that “consumers don’t want E15,” which detracts from the previous arguments; if true it means their impacts, if any, would be minimal.
I didn’t read every link from that page but none gave a better reason.
My takeaway is that it sounds like we don’t have any data showing that E15 is worse than E10, so the obvious move is to actually start funding those studies.
I also found https://foe.org/blog/2012-05-understanding-e15/ which is very anti-E15; however I wasn’t able to verify their claims because none of the linked articles loaded for me.
I mean the proof is in the pudding with this one as you must also ask yourself why E15 is banned during summer months in the first place. If you can answer that question you'll likely find the information you're looking for.
It isn’t.
I did. And I shared that in my comment above.
Your source doesn’t share any data on the topic, even just as a summary, but it links to summertime smog, which links to “smog-causing pollutants”, which says:
The article’s justification for why E15 isn’t legally permitted is that there’s a law against it, which is circular logic. From the environmental protection perspective, it doesn’t sound like there is data suggesting that E15 on its own is worse for the environment than E10. If the only argument is a legal one, it’s not a good argument.
I did, and I shared that answer in my comment above, too - but it’s not the answer you seem to think it is.