Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 63

Thread: Obama to announce auto mileage, emissions standards

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Gods Chariot Vteckidd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Atlanta Centennial Park
    Age
    44
    Posts
    33,102
    Rep Power
    71

    Default Obama to announce auto mileage, emissions standards

    WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's new fuel and emission standards for cars and trucks will save billions of barrels of oil but are expected to cost consumers an extra $1,300 per vehicle by the time the plan is complete in 2016. Obama on Tuesday planned to announce the first-ever national emissions limits for vehicles, as well as require an overall or industry average fuel efficiency standard at 35.5 miles per gallon.

    Carol Browner, the White House energy and climate director, publicly confirmed the new initiative in appearances on morning network news shows, calling it a "truly historic" occasion and saying tougher standards are "long overdue."

    The plan also would effectively end a feud between automakers and statehouses over emission standards — with the states coming out on top but the automakers getting the single national standard they've been seeking and more time to make the changes.

    Obama's proposed change in rules would for the first time combine pollution reduction from vehicle tailpipes with increased efficiency on the road. It would save 1.8 billion barrels of oil through 2016 and would be the environmental equivalent of taking 177 million cars off the road, said senior administration officials speaking anonymously, ahead of the announcement.

    New vehicles would be 30 percent cleaner and more fuel-efficient by the end of the program, they said.

    The plan, to be proposed in the Federal Register of pending rules and regulations, must still clear procedural hurdles at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department. Automakers expressed their support for the plan. "We're all agreeing to work together on a national program," said Dave McCurdy, president and CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

    Administration officials said consumers were going to pay an extra $700, anyway, for mileage standards that had already been approved. The Obama plan adds another $600 to the price of a vehicle, a senior administration official said, bringing the total cost to $1,300 by 2016.

    That official said the cost would be recovered through savings at the pump for consumers and if gas prices follow government projections.

    Under the changes, the overall fleet average would have to be 35.5 mpg by 2016, with passenger cars reaching 39 mpg and light trucks hitting 30 mpg under a system that develops standards for each vehicle class size. Manufacturers would also be required to hit individual mileage targets.

    Browner, who headed the EPA during the Clinton administration, said the industry told the administration "they wanted to make cleaner cars and what they needed was the government to give them predictability and certainty so that they could make the investments toward cleaner cars."

    In a battle over emission standards, California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia have urged the federal government to let them enact more stringent standards than the federal government's requirements. The states' regulations would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent in new cars and trucks by 2016 — the benchmark Obama planned to unveil for vehicles built in model years 2012 and beyond.

    The Obama plan gives the states essentially what they sought and more, although the buildup is slower than the states sought. In exchange, though, cash-strapped states such as California would not have to develop their own standards and enforcement plan. Instead, they can rely on federal tax dollars to monitor the environment.

    The auto industry will be required to ramp up production of more fuel-efficient vehicles on a much tighter timeline than originally envisioned. It will be costly; the Transportation Department last year estimated that requiring the industry to meet 31.6 mpg by 2015 would cost nearly $47 billion.

    But industry officials — many of whom are running companies on emergency taxpayer dollars — said Obama's plan would help them because they would not face multiple emissions requirements and would have more certainty as they develop their vehicles for the next decade.

    Auto executives, including General Motors Corp. CEO Fritz Henderson, and executives from Ford Motor Co., Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co., Daimler AG and others planned to attend the White House event along with United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

    Browner was interviewed on CBS's "The Early Show" and ABC's "Good Morning America."
    Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
    -www.usedbarcode.net

  2. #2
    Stops the Resistance 81911SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,599
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    O that's good. Did I read this right? Every car has to get 35.5 mpg?

  3. #3
    Gods Chariot Vteckidd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Atlanta Centennial Park
    Age
    44
    Posts
    33,102
    Rep Power
    71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 81911SC
    O that's good. Did I read this right? Every car has to get 35.5 mpg?
    yup by 2016

    bye bye V8s
    Enterprise Data Resources- Ecommerce Project Manager
    -www.usedbarcode.net

  4. #4
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vteckidd
    yup by 2016

    bye bye V8s

    And high HP 4cy's and V6's also. We will all be required to drive smart cars.

  5. #5
    Stops the Resistance 81911SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,599
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    Yep, that's going to be interesting.

  6. #6
    Supra Equipped WhiteAccord's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    At Home
    Posts
    7,318
    Rep Power
    29

    Default

    Fuck this shit!!! Run open downpipe all day!!!

  7. #7
    BB6er IMPORTchic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    N. GA
    Posts
    2,404
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Fuck that. Well what about people that already have older cars? Will we still be able to drive them, or are they going to be banned?

  8. #8
    GOON oneSLOWex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Chattanooga,TN
    Age
    42
    Posts
    18,487
    Rep Power
    50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMPORTchic
    Fuck that. Well what about people that already have older cars? Will we still be able to drive them, or are they going to be banned?
    I dont see how that could ever be possible cause there are SO many people who cant afford a new car right now. Hopefully this will never work anyway.

  9. #9
    Stops the Resistance 81911SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,599
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMPORTchic
    Fuck that. Well what about people that already have older cars? Will we still be able to drive them, or are they going to be banned?
    There is no way, not possible.

  10. #10
    Senior Member SL65AMG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Age
    37
    Posts
    2,618
    Rep Power
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by IMPORTchic
    Fuck that. Well what about people that already have older cars? Will we still be able to drive them, or are they going to be banned?

    they cant FORCE you to buy a new car, they will just make the new ones abide by the new regulations.
    EF SQUAD FTMFW!!!!

  11. #11
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SL65AMG
    they cant FORCE you to buy a new car, they will just make the new ones abide by the new regulations.

    So I can still drive a car that requires leaded fuel?

  12. #12
    www.MSSRACING.com SPOOLIN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Northwest Georgia
    Age
    41
    Posts
    5,777
    Rep Power
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
    So I can still drive a car that requires leaded fuel?

    Lead is bad for YOUR Bodily health, bad fuel mileage is only bad for the planet and our available resources.
    www.MSSRACING.com - 99 Civic CX - Best ET: 9.53 / Best MPH: 160 - Competition Clutch - Arias Pistons - Coatings M.D. - Mahle-Clevite - ebtec - AHobbs Racing - JKOBD - TDC Performance
    Daily D: 2007 Dodge 2500 MEGA CAB, Cummins Turbo Diesel

  13. #13
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPOOLIN
    Lead is bad for YOUR Bodily health, bad fuel mileage is only bad for the planet and our available resources.
    So is carbon monoxide that is emmitted from unleaded cars. Leaded fuel burns far better and cleaner than unleaded which leads to the MUCH better mpg numbers.



    To make another point, there is only so far you can take efficiency of design. At that point, the only way you are going to increase gas milage is to reduce rolling mass. These ighter weight cars would be deathtraps on the roads, just like most current high milage vehicles like the Prius and the Smart car. I did a quick look and found that the increasing safty of the prius is directly connected with slightly lower fuel economy. My guess is that they added weight in the form of bracing and safety equipment, causing the very weak motor to lose some of its efficiency.

  14. #14
    ALL CAPS JITB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Lithonia
    Posts
    20,772
    Rep Power
    59

    Default

    Its not that ALL cars, its cars built as of 2016 will have to be 30mpg for trucks, and 35mpg for cars. The technology is there. Its one of the reasons for the big muscle car boom in the last few years. There gonna fill the market up with these..before the standard comes into play

  15. #15
    BB6er IMPORTchic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    N. GA
    Posts
    2,404
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    That is what I was thinking. It is impossible. There is always going to be V6, V8, higher power, low mileage cars IMO.

    Plus there isnt any way that everyone is going to be able to afford new cars. Unless that tard plans on giving out vouchers for cars, he better rethink it if that is the plan. lol

  16. #16
    Stops the Resistance 81911SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,599
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    LOL

  17. #17
    ALL CAPS JITB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Lithonia
    Posts
    20,772
    Rep Power
    59

    Default

    New vehicles would be 30 percent cleaner and more fuel-efficient by the end of the program

    Under the changes, the overall fleet average would have to be 35.5 mpg by 2016, with passenger cars reaching 39 mpg and light trucks hitting 30 mpg under a system that develops standards for each vehicle class size. Manufacturers would also be required to hit individual mileage targets.

    its not rocket science, nor is it the end of the world..

  18. #18
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JITB
    its not rocket science, nor is it the end of the world..
    but it is the end of high performance cars. Then again, it may make for a HUGE boom in the aftermarket industry to pick up the slack that is being shoved down our throats.

  19. #19
    ALL CAPS JITB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Lithonia
    Posts
    20,772
    Rep Power
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
    but it is the end of high performance cars. Then again, it may make for a HUGE boom in the aftermarket industry to pick up the slack that is being shoved down our throats.
    true but the technology to make power with low mpg is out there, this will force companies to use it. Its like with GM and their financial situation being based on the fact that they had so many gas guzzling trucks. We cant expect to keep getting 500hp cars with 10 mpg, and expect gas prices to stay at a steady reasonable price.

    Look at the direct injection mazda motors you have 280hp 2.3 4cyls that will get you 25mpg, and the ecoboost twin turbo 6 with 325 hp with almost 30mpg. And the Ecotech that can make almost 300hp, and still do 28-30 mpg.

  20. #20
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JITB
    tIts like with GM and their financial situation being based on the fact that they had so many gas guzzling trucks.
    This couldnt be further from the truth. Detroit auto maker's financial troubles start and stop with the unions and the legacy costs imposed by the unions.


    Quote Originally Posted by JITB
    We cant expect to keep getting 500hp cars with 10 mpg, and expect gas prices to stay at a steady reasonable price.
    Why not? At current usage we have several decades before we start to see any shortages in oil production. How about instead of shoving econo boxes down our throats whether we like it or not, the govt starts giving incentives to buy them?

    Honda Civic base price 15,505 30mpg average
    Civic Hybrid base price 23,650 42.5mpg average

    Taking today's AAA gas price average of 2.314 and an average of 15k miles per year it would take you 24 years to break even. That doesnt even take into account the need for VERY expensive replacement batteries and other repairs that wouldnt be needed on a non-hybrid.

    Lets look at another vehicle.
    Chevy Malibu

    standard base price 22,325 26mpg average
    hybrid base price 26,275 30mpg average

    Using the same criteria as above it would take 22 years to break even.

    Why should I buy a more expensive hybrid when it would take more than 2 decades to break even on the investment? If the govt wants to force these cars down our throats they need to do something to make it economically prudent.



    Quote Originally Posted by JITB
    Look at the direct injection mazda motors you have 280hp 2.3 4cyls that will get you 25mpg, and the ecoboost twin turbo 6 with 325 hp with almost 30mpg. And the Ecotech that can make almost 300hp, and still do 28-30 mpg.
    I'm not saying that the technology to make this happen will never be there. I am simply saying that in today's world the technology is not there, nor is it cheap enough to make it economically viable.

  21. #21
    ALL CAPS JITB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Lithonia
    Posts
    20,772
    Rep Power
    59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy

    Why not? At current usage we have several decades before we start to see any shortages in oil production. How about instead of shoving econo boxes down our throats whether we like it or not, the govt starts giving incentives to buy them?

    Honda Civic base price 15,505 30mpg average
    Civic Hybrid base price 23,650 42.5mpg average

    Taking today's AAA gas price average of 2.314 and an average of 15k miles per year it would take you 24 years to break even. That doesnt even take into account the need for VERY expensive replacement batteries and other repairs that wouldnt be needed on a non-hybrid.

    Lets look at another vehicle.
    Chevy Malibu

    standard base price 22,325 26mpg average
    hybrid base price 26,275 30mpg average

    Using the same criteria as above it would take 22 years to break even.

    Why should I buy a more expensive hybrid when it would take more than 2 decades to break even on the investment? If the govt wants to force these cars down our throats they need to do something to make it economically prudent.

    not all these cars will have to be hybrids


    As long as the manufacturer has them to offer, and the average be in the 35mpg range like tony stated. you can still have the 20mpg vette, with the 40mpg aveo. Its just gonna make companies have a set standard all across the board, instead of different emission standards for different areas. So the state manufacturers dont have to make changes for every different emission standard (california emissions), and the states wont have to fund the emissions.

    there not being forced down anyone throats, car companies are gonna be given a basic emission guideline to go by all around..

  22. #22
    Release the Kracken! Total_Blender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bunny Colvin's Hamsterdam
    Age
    44
    Posts
    2,325
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
    but it is the end of high performance cars..
    Thats what they said in the 1970's. It will be crappy for a few years but the performance will come back. The sky is not falling.

  23. #23
    Patience Pays...
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Age
    45
    Posts
    5,774
    Rep Power
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Total_Blender
    Thats what they said in the 1970's.
    That is how we ended up with turbocharged engines, it was originally used as a measure to lessen fuel consumption.. waste being converted back into energy. Look at this proposal as a little nudge toward that type of innovation.

    And no it is not the end of V8's and V6's, as it was stated earlier the requirement is based off of a composite of the fleet average. If your diesel aveo gets 65mpg and your Z06 gets 14 then the two offset each other at 38mpg.. 3 over the requirement. This forces car companies to emphasize efficiency but still have the freedom to put out Camaro's and Mustangs for enthusiasts.

  24. #24
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tony
    And no it is not the end of V8's and V6's, as it was stated earlier the requirement is based off of a composite of the fleet average. If your diesel aveo gets 65mpg and your Z06 gets 14 then the two offset each other at 38mpg.. 3 over the requirement. This forces car companies to emphasize efficiency but still have the freedom to put out Camaro's and Mustangs for enthusiasts.

    But those little cars are not selling nearly as well as the bigger cars and trucks. GM made its money off trucks and the Vette. Ford made it's off of the F150 and the Mustang. Put simply, Americans dont like little econo boxes.

    I know economic conditions will skew sales one way or another, but the simple fact is that most Americans dont want a smart car. They want a Mustang/Camaro/Charger and dont care that they ahve to put more gas in them.

  25. #25
    - - - - - - - - - - ash7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Hwy 315
    Age
    42
    Posts
    5,042
    Rep Power
    28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tony
    That is how we ended up with turbocharged engines, it was originally used as a measure to lessen fuel consumption..
    lol *wrong*

    Turbochargers were developed by the Swiss in 1905. They have always been used to increase power instead of to lessen fuel used. There is a difference between the two.

    -jonthan
    [/URL]
    Jesus Christ is my Savior

  26. #26
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Total_Blender
    Thats what they said in the 1970's. It will be crappy for a few years but the performance will come back. The sky is not falling.

    If it was just MPG requirements I would tend to believe you, but then add in emissions limits and it gets FAR more difficult. Put simply, it takes gas to make power. It you limit the amount of emissions, you limit the amount of power.

  27. #27
    drives a beat up 626 blackshine007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the overpass pissing on traffic
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,961
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Well, I have to stick my nose in and say that yes, the technology is there. Anyone with a properly tuned turbo knows that. Sctty411's car gets 40+ mpg on the highway and he's making some very nice numbers. A couple of years back, there was a 400 whp MR2 in one of those magazines that averaged 37mpg. The technology has always been there. The key is having the right size turbo. But the only downside to that is within those maps, there's fuel taken out to make those numbers which causes it to run lean, which in turn shoots up the NOx levels. With the Diesel technology, urethea injection could bring down the NOx, and with the proper gearing, even the trucks could make that possible. But that would mean goodbye to big V8's. Fuck em, we don't need them anyways. Ford's next line of fuel efficient big vehicles are gonna be turbo'd with the elimination of most of the V8's. In the coming years, ya'll are gonna be very familiar with the "Ecoboost" name.

    K series 626. That's right. It's got a K in it.

  28. #28
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackshine007
    But that would mean goodbye to big V8's. Fuck em, we don't need them anyways.
    Tell that to anyone that uses their truck to haul anything. When was the last time you saw someone hauling a car on a trailer with a Civic? How about hauling a load of drywall to a work site with a Malibu?

  29. #29
    drives a beat up 626 blackshine007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the overpass pissing on traffic
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,961
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
    Tell that to anyone that uses their truck to haul anything. When was the last time you saw someone hauling a car on a trailer with a Civic? How about hauling a load of drywall to a work site with a Malibu?
    Maybe you should reread what I typed. Turbos are the way to go. The whole original idea of them is to increase the efficiency of the motor. Look at it as having the power of a large displacement motor with no fuel economy penalties. I have an '86 F150 and I'm almost tempted to drop a Mustang SVO motor in just for the benefit of getting 24mpg as aposed to 17mpg it currently gets from the 5.0L V8. That SVO motor made more tq and hp than the V8. You can still pull with a turbo motor too. I wouldn't be surprised if Ford made the 3.7L Econoboost V6 the top motor for the superduty trucks to go along with some diesel engines.

    K series 626. That's right. It's got a K in it.

  30. #30
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackshine007
    Maybe you should reread what I typed. Turbos are the way to go.
    A turbo isnt going to increase towing capacity. I drove my brother in laws 1500 with the 4.8 and towed a boat. It towed alright, but it struggled at times. I had no problems at all towing the same boat, with almost 300 extra lbs of camping gear in the bed when I drove his new truck that has the 5.3.

  31. #31
    drives a beat up 626 blackshine007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the overpass pissing on traffic
    Age
    45
    Posts
    2,961
    Rep Power
    26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
    A turbo isnt going to increase towing capacity. I drove my brother in laws 1500 with the 4.8 and towed a boat. It towed alright, but it struggled at times. I had no problems at all towing the same boat, with almost 300 extra lbs of camping gear in the bed when I drove his new truck that has the 5.3.
    Those 2 motors make damn near the same hp give or take 10 hp. The difference between those 2 motors is that the 4.8L makes 20-30 ft lbs of tq less than the 5.3 so naturally you will notice the tq advantage on the 5.3L motor. Your point on that holds no water. Some of the most powerful production vehicles are turbo. Look at your diesels. Look at some of your performance economy cars like the SRT4 Neon that returned 30mpg on the highway according to the epa. Or the turbo cobalt running 13's getting 30mpg on the highway. Or the Mini cooper S returning 34mpg highway. And then let's turn to GM's Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky cars. The n/a car with the 2.4L gets 26mpg highway while the turbo car with the 2.0L returns 28mpg and both share the same transmissions and rear ends. I think my point is clear. You can make power and reduce displacement without any adverse effects.

    K series 626. That's right. It's got a K in it.

  32. #32
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackshine007
    I wouldn't be surprised if Ford made the 3.7L Econoboost V6 the top motor for the superduty trucks to go along with some diesel engines.

    If Ford did that they would completely lose the market to companies that are still building the vehicles that are actually useful.

  33. #33
    What The Hell
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kennesaw/Acworth
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,543
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    i read in a magazine once (dont remember which one but it was a car magazine) that companies know how to make a car get 100 miles to the gallon. they dont tho cuz that could change the world market due to the fact that the US would not need to buy as much oil.

    also i was watching a show on speed (cant remember the name, for some reason im bad at remembering those) but it was a car building/rebuilding/just fixing up show. anyways they build a new Z06 that could do 200 mph on the track but also got 30 mpg on the street. Right there shows that its possible to get a lot of power out of a car and still have great gas miliage.

    also if i find what show that was on ill post back up

  34. #34
    What The Hell
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kennesaw/Acworth
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,543
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    dont know how reliable this is but check it out

    http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/10...hon-in-the-uk/

  35. #35
    What The Hell
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kennesaw/Acworth
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,543
    Rep Power
    20

    Default

    ok i finally remember the name of the show and it was Gearz

  36. #36
    Stops the Resistance 81911SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,599
    Rep Power
    44

    Default

    Of course the Obama lovers will side with him. :jerkit:

  37. #37
    Patience Pays...
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Age
    45
    Posts
    5,774
    Rep Power
    29

    Default

    Its just strange to me how when the "Drill here Drill now" initiative was put forth our dependency on oil was oh so important and urgent, but even an empty threat of taking away muscle cars (which wont happen) in an attempt to achieve the same goal and the sentiment goes from one spectrum to the other. Lack of priorities and partisan bull ish is the reason why we can't make progress on issues like these.

  38. #38
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tony
    Its just strange to me how when the "Drill here Drill now" initiative was put forth our dependency on oil was oh so important and urgent, but even an empty threat of taking away muscle cars (which wont happen) in an attempt to achieve the same goal and the sentiment goes from one spectrum to the other.

    Drill here, Drill Now, was about reducing dependency on foreign oil, not oil as a product. If the US wants to reduce foreign oil consumption then we need to drill more. If the US wants to reduce oil consumption as a whole, we need a replacement for plastics, heating oil, most solvents, and oil fired power plants also, not just a few dollars a year in gasoline. Oil fired plants are easy, though expensive, to replace with nuclear plants. Plastics, heating oil and solvents are much harder to replace.


    Lack of priorities and partisan bull ish is the reason why we can't make progress on issues like these.
    Although I dont see this as anything more than govt intervention in business and completely unnecessary it cuts both ways. Both sides of the aisle are more interested in partisan politics than us on the street. Just look at that liar the dems put in as speaker of the house if you need further proof.

  39. #39
    Patience Pays...
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Age
    45
    Posts
    5,774
    Rep Power
    29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BanginJimmy
    Drill here, Drill Now, was about reducing dependency on foreign oil, not oil as a product.
    Its the same thing, reduction of oil consumption in this country which in turn lessens our dependency. Actually higher standards is a more effective approach seeing as how when oil is produced it becomes a global commodity..

  40. #40
    Moderator BanginJimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Hiram, GA
    Age
    46
    Posts
    7,499
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tony
    Its the same thing, reduction of oil consumption in this country which in turn lessens our dependency. Actually higher standards is a more effective approach seeing as how when oil is produced it becomes a global commodity..
    Its not the same thing, but you are right, oil is a global commodity so domestic oil companies need to have some sort of benefit for selling domestically only.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
ImportAtlanta is a community of gearheads and car enthusiasts. It does not matter what kind of car or bike you drive, IA is an open community for any gearhead. Whether you're looking for advice on a performance build or posting your wheels for sale, you're welcome here!
Announcement
Welcome back to ImportAtlanta. We are currently undergoing many changes, so please report any issues you encounter with the site using the 'Contact Us' button below. Thank you!