35 Mpg By 2020!?

[Bulldog_916]

Auto makers are by far the laziest they have ever been. They can increase horsepower in cars DRAMATICALLY with relatively little effort. But they cant make cars more fuel efficient in less than 12 years!? Give me a break!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071201/ap_on_...congress_energy

[ZenSilk]

Go Honda Civic!

[gaia.plateau]

Haha like the environment will make it that long.

[Scheetz]

In 5 years that bill will disappear. Who gives a shit, not like our country's fuel use is solely destroying this world.


Ah, Key words in that link: "An agreement among congressional Democrats"

[gaia.plateau]

Who gives a shit, not like our country's fuel use is solely destroying this world.

But you are doing more alone than India and China combined, each with quadruple your population.

[guyt]

Who gives a shit, not like our country's fuel use is solely destroying this world.

But you are doing more alone than India and China combined, each with quadruple your population.

Good point. Hooray for excessive consumption =)

[Geiseric]

I think you assume too much about long term self-interest. Adam Smith and his following of super-capitalists thought the same, thinking that greed and self preservation would provide long term balance and overall stability. He was wrong. But some reason people still assume that awareness of the eventual repercussions of our frantic consumerism will prompt people to act logically. Not going to happen. Paradigms, my friends. It takes a crisis to change them.

[TheScotsman]

As long as the public feels a need to drive a 6000 pound, 350+hp SUV at 75+ mph there is little hope of a decent average fuel mileage.

The big 3 US makers are still filling the lots with these behemoths, the public still insists on buying them. It's hard to feel sorry for the $100+ fill-ups to drive a full-time 4x4 to china-mart in perfect weather.

It does take a crisis to change them! In the mid-70's lack of petrol sent everyone to the lightest, most generic 75hp cars they could find. We forgot that lesson, and now get to pay the price. According to CAFE the 1987 total fleet mileage for the year was 26+mpg, in 2005 it was under 21 as a result of all the light truck chassis vehicles. As long as minivans, and SUV's and pickups are exempt from mileage requirements the makers will sit on old designs, and do their best to convince every fool they "need" one.

They CAN make cars more efficient, the public just doesn't want them.

(Subaru has a fleet avg of 33EPA for 2007, only 2 away)

[Geiseric]

It is the nature of paradigms. People can argue them to no end, a lot of people say they aren't applicable to economics and social change at all. I say that is where they are most applicable, because that is where the human tendency towards paradigm paralysis is most influential.

[Scheetz]

Who gives a shit, not like our country's fuel use is solely destroying this world.

But you are doing more alone than India and China combined, each with quadruple your population.

Um, ok. Did you see China has to stop production of majority of factories just so they can host the Olympics. Their air is so nasty that they have to STOP production in order for it to clear. I don't see that at any of our cities.

Now, just because America is trying to stop polluting means jack shit. Do you think China cares? Do you think Russia cares? Do I need to keep going, 1 to 5 countries changing will not do anything. This is natural progress on the earth, heaven forbid we keep the earth alive for 100 more years after its Billions long lifespan. Thats what, 1 day in the Earth's life.

As long as the public feels a need to drive a 6000 pound, 350+hp SUV at 75+ mph there is little hope of a decent average fuel mileage.

And I feel the need to drive around in a 2560 pound, 450+hp car at 75 mph. There is no reason to bitch about gas prices, look at Europe they laugh at the Americans and cheap gas. They pay over $10 a gallon. You can thank our government for keeping prices down for as long as they have.

[dude3516]

Motorcycles FTW 75 mpg w00t. Of course saying everyone should buy a motorcycle is stupid, although it would clear up our cities from all the real morons who can't drive.

[boulderkid303]

In 5 years that bill will disappear. Who gives a shit, not like our country's fuel use is solely destroying this world.


Ah, Key words in that link: "An agreement among congressional Democrats"

Not solely, but surley it is.

We are so greedy when it comes to oil! I can't stand it sometimes. We complain day in and day out about prices, look at the UK I dont seem them bitching.

[gaia.plateau]

Did you see China has to stop production of majority of factories just so they can host the Olympics. Their air is so nasty that they have to STOP production in order for it to clear. I don't see that at any of our cities.

China is in the middle of the industrialization process, while Britain, France, Russia, and the United States (to list 4 examples) are long completed. Do you really believe that a century ago, any major American city would have been clean enough to host the Olympics by today's standards? Not a chance.

Now, just because America is trying to stop polluting

That's an interesting take on reality... I would love to see any sort of evidence that any Western, developed nation is actually trying to stop polluting.

*Gaia begins to thumb through his rolladex of international pacts, conventions, accords and protocols*
Hmmmm let's see. Rio, 1992... nope, no binding resolutions there... Kyoto, 1999... nope, not even the slightest whisper of reformation... And jee whiz that's actually the full list of international conferences the impotent and ineffectual countries of this world have had concerning environmental degredation and/or climate change, which are arguably the biggest and most imminent threats facing the world today.

Do you think Russia cares? Do I need to keep going, 1 to 5 countries changing will not do anything.

Where do you get Russia from? Russia has completed the industrialization process just like America, and has given the symbollically important but realistically useless Kyoto Accord just as much support as the US has. So yes, you do need to keep going, and since 1-5 countries (The US, Canada, Britain, Russia, China and India - oh shit that's 6!!!) contribute over 85% of all greenhouse gases and pollutants (I'll get a couple of sources for that later, for now trust that I've done substantial research), them changing will in fact do quite a bit.

Do you think China cares?

Whether or not the Chinese government feels personal impact from environmental degredation, their industrialization is probably the biggest ecological threat right now, which is exactly why Australian PM Ron Howard did not ratify Kyoto- any international environmental agreement that does not include India and China is doomed to fail.

This is natural progress on the earth, heaven forbid we keep the earth alive for 100 more years after its Billions long lifespan. Thats what, 1 day in the Earth's life.

Are you talking about climate change specifically, or ecological degredation in general? Because right now the two impending human catastrophes are racing, along with the nuclear arms race, to see which can finish us off first.

[Scheetz]

Not solely, but surley it is.

We are so greedy when it comes to oil! I can't stand it sometimes. We complain day in and day out about prices, look at the UK I dont seem them bitching.

The UK is bitching, so is the rest of Europe.

China is in the middle of the industrialization process, while Britain, France, Russia, and the United States (to list 4 examples) are long completed. Do you really believe that a century ago, any major American city would have been clean enough to host the Olympics by today's standards? Not a chance.

So because China is in a industrial revolution they are exempt?


This is obviously a pointless argument. You have closed your viewpoint book long ago and so have I. Until, a scientist comes forward with exact information proving 1 way or another then I will stand my ground. I need proof and by proof I need to see someone physically enter a time portal back when the earth started and progress with a temperature changing chart. Until then, people can keep bullshitting each other around to gain supporters and strategically leave out information that doesn't help their argument. All we have is a bunch of procrastinators and it will keep going long after we all die. By the time the Earth is no longer usable, I am sure we will be on other planets using its resources as well. If that doesn't happen, then we will all know N. Korea and China won the war.


I am all for using Solar power for homes. I think its one of the coolest things around, besides the rotary engine. However, the cost to set up a home to run on full solar is quite pricey. And to force people to change to it when its the cost of 10 years of electric bills is never going to happen. However, I do think its cool you can power a 10,000 sqft home on solar power for $35 year. However, it will run you $75,000 just to set up that solar power.

[gaia.plateau]

So because China is in a industrial revolution they are exempt?

I didn't say or imply that they are exempt, what I said and implied is that it is wrong to criticize China for their industrialization while supporting Western countries for theirs, simply because they are in the middle of it and ours are completed.

This is obviously a pointless argument. You have closed your viewpoint book long ago and so have I.

Firstly, I don't consider this an argument, I consider it a discussion, and secondly you couldn't be more wrong. I'm not sure what you're using to determine that I "long ago" closed my viewpoints, but politically, economically, and culturally speaking I am a fallibilist, which is defined by an absolute openness of perception.

If there's a clash between your view and mine, it's a clash of mentalities, between your certainty ("standing your ground") and my uncertainty.

By the time the Earth is no longer usable, I am sure we will be on other planets using its resources as well. If that doesn't happen, then we will all know N. Korea and China won the war.

Thinking of ecological degradation as a "war" between states is a dangerous and toxic attitude... we all live on the same planet, and if anything the threats we're facing should be uniting, not dividing. The idea that the earth will ever be no longer usable is simply a logical fallacy in the face of every bit of evidence available to us- the earth will always be usable, and that's the crux of our situation. Climate change, whether you believe it is caused by human civilization or a natural occurrence, is a defense mechanism of the earth.

I'm not a scientist, but when confronted by terrabytes of well-documentated factual information by the leading 15,000 unbiased experts in the world that tell me it is an unequivocal fact that we are the cause of it, I cautiously lend to them my acceptance. But that is beside the point... this topic of discussion doesn't revolve around the issue of climate change.

We could never destroy the earth or completely use up it's resources; no matter how much damage we cause, the earth will correct and repair itself until the sun dies out. What is a very real possibility, on the other hand, is that we will simply no longer be around to destroy and use up our planet.

I am all for using Solar power for homes. I think its one of the coolest things around, besides the rotary engine. However, the cost to set up a home to run on full solar is quite pricey. And to force people to change to it when its the cost of 10 years of electric bills is never going to happen. However, I do think its cool you can power a 10,000 sqft home on solar power for $35 year. However, it will run you $75,000 just to set up that solar power.

It's expensive because there is such a small market for it, and the fossil-fuel producing corporations are doing everything in their very considerable power to keep the prices that high. A viable but unlikely solution would be to mass produce solar paneling through multilateral government subsidization, in Western states like the US, Canada, Britain, Australia, France, etc., and sell it for a greatly reduced price, something to the tune of 5-10 thousand. An even more viable and much less likely solution would be for these Western and "liberally enlightened" countries to cover these subsidization costs for industrializing countries like China and India, and post-colonial globally Southern countries like Haiti and Angola.

The bottom line is that sovereign states will always put their own national interest before international interest, even if the latter is critical to their own survival. So any real solution would have to be at a radically systemic level. The Westphalian order just doesn't cut the mustard anymore.

Edit: for more on the notion of a clash of mentalities, see the work of world renowned scholar Richard Bernstein - "without an appeal to absolutes, we lack the grounds for acting decisively in fighting our enemies." Edited December 3, 2007 by gaia.plateau

[ghostofdavid]

Anytime any of you want to stop using heat in the winter or stop driving cars altogether, you may. Oops! Being environmentally concerned only works when it inconveniences others! You better start growing your own food, living in a house you built with your own hands or consider joining/starting a commune that cares as much about energy as yourself. Otherwise, isn't the pound me in the head message a bit hypocritical?

[Bulldog_916]

[SOAPBOX]

It doesnt have anything to do with being hypocritical. We went from never having made a trip to sub-space to having a space program/Apollo moon landing in 8 years!!! -Cry- We cant make cars efficient, its too hard! We cant cut carbon emissions, its too hard! We cant move from a fossil fuel economy to a hydrogen/bioenergy/solar/wind/tidal water driven economy in less than 25 years, its too hard and too expensive! -/Cry- Bullshit! BIG OLD PILE OF BULLSHIT! We are the god damn United States, we have some of the most innovative thinkers in the world here! That, in conjunction with actually taking some of the rest of the world's ideas and using them might actually get us somewhere. It isnt that we cant do it, it's that we refuse to do it. The relative unpopularity of hybrid vehicles in this country shows that. This may come as a shock, it may even offend some people. I love this country, dont get me wrong, sometimes tough love is needed. But I'm really not proud to be an American right now when it comes to energy and innovation. Once, we were leaders, but we are no longer. We're starting shit with other countries! Spending, what was it....oh yea 1 TRILLION DOLLARS on Iraq! No big deal right? We could have fixed health care, fixed education, fixed transportation, and fixed America's energy policy with that money. But realistically we wouldnt have. Republicans are too conservative to take the lead on those issues and democrats dont have the spine to push them through. Typical American politics. That's the only things holding this country back is horse shit. But no one cares or is making any strides in any other direction. We need a president with some big green balls and a big green stick! Make it a national security issue, then they'll all line up!

[/END SOAPBOX]

[ZenSilk]

Once our cars have 35 MPG we will be used to driving even more. And we will use the same amount of gas.

[Bulldog_916]

Even SAYING we WILL invest in other sources of energy to power our cars would send oil stock prices tumbling. Merely saying we are going to use way less oil in 5 years would keep the pressure on. But our retard of a president wont say that because he has as much of a stake in oil based business as the oil companies themselves. It's about time America actually took the lead again instead of being the terrorists' bitches. Cuz thats all we are until we stand up.