Banning mogas at the airport...

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:55:26 -0400, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Dave Stadt" wrote

Most farms have stationary tanks that are serviced by fuel distributors.
That's the norm but who knows what goes on in CA.

I don't think that fact would be possible to prove or disprove. Those that
have stationary tanks will have a paper trail, although it would be
difficult to assemble all of it.

I can speak with some knowledge at least for Central Michigan. Most
farms have one or more large underground tanks from the "old days" and
the more modern are above ground. It's a much simpler instalation and
no EPA problems. OTOH most of us do not like the idea of the above
ground tanks, with the exception that they save a lot of money over an
in ground installation.

The big problem with above ground tanks is visibility. You darn near
need a "junk yard dog" tied to each of the 4 main supports when the
price of gas goes up.

We had additional underground tanks conveniently next to the end of
the apron in front of the garage. (bulk is cheaper)

Tanks in pickups are sold in big quantities and by many different
manufacturers. They are filled at local gas stations. No paper trail for
either of the above.

I doubt you will find many farmers filling those big tanks at the
local gas station. Not when they can save $50 to $100 or more by
purchasing in bulk to fill the main tanks.


I think the stationary gas tank is perhaps a regional thing, because here in
the area I live in, only very large farmers have stationary tanks, and many
also have pickup tanks to use while they are away from the central tank and
pump, which during parts of the year is almost every fill up

That is hard to imagine what with farmers being a some what frugal
lot. Those big stationary tanks save them a lot of money. Just don't
buy when gas is at a high. Then there is the paper work to get the
road tax refunded in many states.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

"Kyler Laird" wrote

We have two (underground tank) gasoline pumps on our farms. It doesn't
take many tractors to make it a necessity. (We have four International
560 tractors that we use for various odd jobs.)

Do you have to do all of the fancy groundwater sampling that commercial gas
stations have to do?
--
Jim in NC

Any tax that is not legally justified and properly enacted
should be protested on "principle." The airport use taxes
collected on airline passengers was intended to be spent on
ATC, runways, ramps and other infrastructure. A lot of it
was spent on new airline terminals, including nice statues
and art work.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Newps" wrote in message
. ..
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
|
| But if you don't complain the tax becomes accepted and
any
| late complaints will likely be ruled moot.
|
| A flow tax is generally not contested as almost always the
money is used
| at that airport for improvements. Rarely does the money
end up in some
| city's general fund.

The airport use taxes
collected on airline passengers was intended to be spent on
ATC, runways, ramps and other infrastructure. A lot of it
was spent on new airline terminals, including nice statues
and art work.

I think that counts as "other infrastructure", especially for airline
passengers.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

A new terminal building, yes, baggage handlers, yes. But
pictures on the wall, no. Especially because they bought
high dollar stuff. BTW, the airport ATL.


'
"Jose" wrote in message
...
| The airport use taxes
| collected on airline passengers was intended to be spent
on
| ATC, runways, ramps and other infrastructure. A lot of
it
| was spent on new airline terminals, including nice
statues
| and art work.
|
| I think that counts as "other infrastructure", especially
for airline
| passengers.
|
| Jose
| --
| The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the
music.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

A new terminal building, yes, baggage handlers, yes. But
pictures on the wall, no. Especially because they bought
high dollar stuff. BTW, the airport ATL.

I don't think I agree with you that nice pictures to make an airline
terminal attractive do not qualify as "other infrastructure". I may
have allocated the money differently (and I may not have), but it is
being spent on what it was intended for.

Would you feel the same way if that same amount of extra money were
spent on the architecture?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

If it is appearance, let the city or the airline pay for it
without federal TAX dollars.



"Jose" wrote in message
. com...
| A new terminal building, yes, baggage handlers, yes. But
| pictures on the wall, no. Especially because they
bought
| high dollar stuff. BTW, the airport ATL.
|
| I don't think I agree with you that nice pictures to make
an airline
| terminal attractive do not qualify as "other
infrastructure". I may
| have allocated the money differently (and I may not have),
but it is
| being spent on what it was intended for.
|
| Would you feel the same way if that same amount of extra
money were
| spent on the architecture?
|
| Jose
| --
| The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the
music.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

If it is appearance, let the city or the airline pay for it
without federal TAX dollars.

Do you feel the same about architecture? Would the best use of the
funds be to make all terminals look like bare cinderblock houses?

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

I have a soft spot for architects, my father was a
structural engineer and registered architect. But I also
have a soft spot for Quonset huts on airports. If you want
bling, you pay for it.



"Jose" wrote in message
. com...
| If it is appearance, let the city or the airline pay for
it
| without federal TAX dollars.
|
| Do you feel the same about architecture? Would the best
use of the
| funds be to make all terminals look like bare cinderblock
houses?
|
| Jose
| --
| The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the
music.
| for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Morgans" writes:

We have two (underground tank) gasoline pumps on our farms.

Do you have to do all of the fancy groundwater sampling that commercial gas
stations have to do?

I hope not. (We haven't.) It would be worthwhile though.

Above ground tanks seem to be more common now. I've even seen some
ringed with containment barriers.

Farmers get away with a lot, often through "grandfather clauses." (One
of our underground tanks *was* installed by my grandfather.) It's a
mighty lobby, very resistant to...oh, I won't shoot myself in that foot
right now.

--kyler