Obama wants increased fuel efficiency, less smog »
Posted By STONERS 7 months, 2 weeks ago in Business & Finance
President Barack Obama outlined Tuesday the nation's first comprehensive effort to curb vehicle emissions while cutting dependence on imported oil, calling the plan an historic turning point toward a "clean-energy economy."
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
455 Views Share Story 10 Comments Report
Submitted By:
STONERS
Welcome to my profile...I've started a ""STONERS Daily News Group"" Please stop by and have a look and join if you like it ...
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 10 (view all)
-
100%
STONERS7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"As a result of this agreement," Obama said, "we will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in the next five years. And at a time of historic crisis in our auto industry, this rule provides the clear certainty that will allow these companies to plan for a future in which they are building the cars of the 21st century."
Reply
"He said the new rules amounted to removing 177 million cars from the roads over the next 6 1/2 years."
"In that period, the savings in oil burned to fuel American cars, trucks and buses would amount to last year's combined U.S. imports from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya and Nigeria." -
100%
automan9097 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't forget how this will also be the demise of the auto industry.
Reply
They already are saying that they can't make money with these standards.
Cars will cost 1300.00 more just to be within these standards.
The people are not interested in cars like that.
They won't buy them.
Then Government will raise gas taxes to the point where you have no choice.
I like the government out of my life.-
100%
jaern7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Maybe if these standards had been put in place 25 years ago, the American auto industry wouldn't be in the position they are in now. Perhaps the Big 4 (remember AMC?) and the UAW should have tried to compete with their Japanese competition instead of swinging sledgehammers in the 70s. Imagine where we'd be today.
Reply
-
-
100%
AboveMyPayGrade7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am all for CAFE standards, but perhaps we should allow the auto-industry here in the USA to recover before dealing them another serious blow. Their vehicles are overwhelmingly SUV types. If we institute these policies now, we risk rising costs for companies that can barely produce as is. Keep a greener auto industry for when it is economically viable, perhaps in 1-2 years.
Reply -
25%
Endoscopy7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If the people are for cafe standards they are also for the other problem that comes from them. The cars have to be made smaller with less metal around the people. Therefore like in Europe that means a higher number of deaths with the more fragile cars.
Reply
So libs. What level of deaths are you willing to have?
Or didn't you realize that is a result of more fragile cars. Nasty libs wanting more death.-
-
100%
quackpot7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Once again, Endo, the actual data does not support your hypothesis.
Reply
There are several European countries with LOWER deaths/mile than the U.S.A. The Data places the U.S.A. about in the middle of the pack.
Data: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...
-
-
-
0%
FrankHummel7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I submit the gambit to require ever higher fuel efficiencies is really a (very ADMIRABLE!) "back door" approach to actually COMPELLING people to do what they really SHOULD have done LONG AGO NOW ALREADY!
Reply
How can ever-more stringent fuel-efficiency standards possiblu be met?! CONTRARY to the notion that has been propagandistically cultivated among the hugely techologically IGNORANT preponderance of "We the People" --- who have evidently been beguiled into believing that any meaningful change is predicated on hypothetical "exotic, futuristic" NEW developments "in the laboratory" over, say, the next fifty years or so --- it would LONG AGO NOW ALREADY have been possible to adopt an alternative-technology drive paradigm of the automobile that could actually ELIMINATE "our" abject, addictive dependency on foreign oil! The many people who may not yet be aware of the fact that the means for ACCOMPLISHING that ARE in fact (and have in fact LONG BEEN!) in hand need to wise up and be informed about some basic technological realities:
The truth of the matter is that by the mere application of very OLD technological concepts --- applying to the mere AUTOMOBILE things worked out MANY YEARS AGO NOW ALREADY in much HEAVIER-DUTY systems --- "we" could LONG AGO have easily FLAT-OUT ELIMINATED by now about THREE-FOURTHS of oil importation to refine into gasoline to fuel "our" automotive vehicular fleet --- had “we” but had the wit and the wisdom to do so!! And “we” would have thereby simply AVOIDED the huge waste of an entire WAR that has now crashed “our” whole economy!
However OUTRAGEOUS and OUTLANDISH that assertion may sound to many, make no mistake about it: PRECISELY THAT genuinely, simply IS the implication of the “new” ELECTRIC / I.C.E. "chimera" automotive architectural concept --- exemplified by the imminently forthcoming (really much belated!) Chevy VOLT --- or if not THAT, then by its now slightly-FURTHER-advanced EUROPEAN counterpart (jovially dubbed the AMPERE), soon to be followed, no doubt, by still other entries into the “development derby” coming from all those clever folks over in ASIA.
The idea involves BATTERY POWER carrying the car a number of miles (in the case of the VOLT, FORTY), with an internal combustion engine then kicking in if (and only if) the battery runs down. But FULLY THREE-FOURTHS of all personal auto usage "fits" within a forty-mile power budget! You go to the store, bank, doctor, etc., and you come back home AND PLUG THE CAR BACK INTO THE WALL. MOST OF THE TIME THE PETROLEUM-POWERED ENGINE NEVER RUNS!-
Neutral
FrankHummel7 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, BOTH components of the "chimera" are VERY OLD technology. ELECTRIC cars have been around since the EARLIEST days of the automobile. (And by the way, the speed record for ELECTRIC-powered cars these days out at the Bonneville Salt Flats now stands IN EXCESS OF FOUR HUNDRED MILES AN HOUR. So how’s THAT for speed and power?) And the I.C.E "fallback" component, involving a petroleum-powered engine that is coupled NOT to an elaborate, troublesome, expensive TRANSMISSION / DRIVE TRAIN but, rather, merely to a GENERATOR that supplies the ELECTRIC drive motors (which had been powered by the BATTERY until it ran down) --- is a paradigm implemented MANY YEARS AGO NOW ALREADY on a much larger scale on the RAILROADS and also in the BIGGEST SHIPS on the high seas! (Anybody ever hear of the DIESEL-ELECTRIC LOCOMOTIVE??)
Reply
The truth is, really BIG-MUSCLE machines have LONG relied on relatively simple, UNbreakable MAGNETIC-force drive elements rather than on complex, fallible mechanical ones --- because “we” simply couldn’t BEGIN to engineer a viable CLUTCH to couple internal combustion engines (which by their basic nature CANNOT operate all the way down to zero RPM as ELECTRIC motors can) to really HEAVY loads!
I submit that all the folks who now dither and blather about the "meltdown" in the "financial sector" are in reality BEING DIVERTED AWAY from what really should be the MAIN object of their exasperation --- which is actually the FAILURE of "our" past MISguided (or maybe more like MISBEGOTTEN!) MIS"leadership" (both “political” and also “corporate”!) to fulfill their ACTUAL obligations to the membership of this society (and others) --- which WOULD have been to OPTIMIZE BOTH THE CHARACTER AND THE QUALITY OF "OUR" PRODUCTS, rather than to merely MAXIMIZE ”THEIR” MONEY!
Now I wonder just how THAT sort of technological / economic realization must now weigh on all the folks who long sponsored and bankrolled the likes of a Saddam Hussein (by buying so much of what he "had to sell"), and who (or whose kids and grandkids) have subsequently been lured off into fighting a dirty little "OIL war" over in Iraq, making "us" lots of enemies the world over and in some cases even coming back dead or permanently damaged "our"selves --- or who may have LOST LOVED ONES or friends therein?? Surely it is a very UGLY, HATEFUL reality to which to have to face up. But would it somehow be any "better" for people to now just meekly try to erect a "psychological defensive barrier of DENIAL", letting their RIGHTFUL wrath and ire be "harmlessly" diverted over to and dissipated on practitioners of artificial hocus-pocus involving "our" mere "financial system"??! Would not THAT actually merely COMPOUND the REAL fraud that has been foisted off on the REALLY aggrieved victims??!
-
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.