Energy bill

[tenguzero]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050808/...bush_energy_dc


I can't believe people are buying into this BS. Some parts of the plan make sense (the extension of daylight savings, tax credits for hybrids, etc.) but too much of it is just pure crap. Take the whole Alaskan Wildlife thing: according to this, the first oil wouldn't start flowing until 2015! What the hell is that!? I should hope we would have shifted over to a vastly greater reliance on alternative fuels by then (I'm so damn tired of being bent over a barrel of oil that is right now just shy of $64.) And as for stricter gas mileage requirements on SUV's and other large vehicles that didn't make the bill-- why not? I'm glad to see the public's demand for these road-beasts waning, but even if I was supporting the things, something like a mileage mandate could only be beneficial, as people are shying away from the vehicles largely because of gas prices (a mandate would force the manufacturers to remedy that, thereby potentially boosting their sales again -- sort of a "helping them help themselves" deal.)

The very idea that this is branded a "long-term energy bill" by people like Bush is a farce in itself. Why? Simply stated, the very issues this thing hopes to address are already old-hat. Oil drilling? Coal conversion? Give me a break. Meanwhile we have an outdated shuttle fleet and process for managing it, an alternative fuel program merely putting along, handicapped stem-cell research policies, and healthcare/support/educational systems woefully ill-equipped to take us very far into the 21st century. And they're earmarking billions for oil drilling and coal refining? Well yee-haw cowboy

[TexasF355F1]

Yea, im still completely unsure of how EXACTLY extending daylight savings time is going to conserve energy and save money.

[YogsVR4]

The daylight savings time saves because of when people use lights and heat during the day. Shift when the sun is up and overlap those hours saves energy. http://www.energy.ca.gov/daylightsaving.html

Of course, the laws of diminishing returns is applicable and stretching the daylight savings time (though I like having the sun up later) probably won't make much more in the way of savings then is does now.


As for the rest of the energy bill. Again, to much of our taxpayer dollars are going to subsidize others (buisnesses and individuals).

[highteknology]

one interesting little side note that i read about was the fact that there may be a little "Y2K-esque" dilemma with the whole month-longer daylight savings. some cell phones and other electronic components are programmed with the date that daylight savings time changes at. granted, i'm sure new cell phones will be programmed to accept this change. but it's something to think about.

[TexasF355F1]

Originally Posted by YogsVR4

Of course, the laws of diminishing returns is applicable and stretching the daylight savings time (though I like having the sun up later) probably won't make much more in the way of savings then is does now.

That's pretty much what I was referring to. It just doesn't seem that it will logically make a noticeable difference.

[MagicRat]

Extending daylight savings has been done before as an energy conservation move. Back in '73-74, the US stayed on daylight savings for the entire winter and did not revert to standard time at all. It did save some money and energy.
And every little bit helps.

[Flatrater]

The miltary has accepted the first fuel cell Chevy truck for testing. This powerplant makes the same torque and horsepower of a 5.3? V8 engine.

Ford is introducing a diesel/electric Hybrids.

So just because you don't see anything about creating less gas guzzling cars and trucks doesn't mean it isn't going on.

[Kurtdg19]

I say let the market handle the situation. Once prices get to the point where buying a 12mpg SUV isn't marketable, the companies will quit selling them and turn to a more marketable product. I know it sounds simple, but when money talks, big corporations listen.

[fredjacksonsan]

Solar power

[tenguzero]

Solar power

I believe solar will be the next big thing -- the only thing holding it back is more funding and more incentive for people to switch over. Now, there ARE some sections written into this new bill providing tax credits for people willing to adopt this new technology, but people like to see immediate benefits, which could better be achieved by lowering the initial price of the equipment. Sure, solar power equipment has been on the market for some years now, but it's still very costly. The only way to bring down the price dramatically, is through new designs and more effective components -- which requires necessary funding. Why are the big coal and oil companies getting roughly 9 billion, while the other 5 billion is to be divided up by groups representing renewable energy and efficiency programs? I mean, it seems to me that, if this were TRULY a bill designed to address our long-term (ie. future) energy needs, shouldn't the ratio be reversed? I couldn't give a rat's ass about the oil companies, but they stand to make a pretty penny off this -- which helps us HOW?

http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/29/mark...sers/index.htm

(and while they're seeing record profits right now, we're paying record prices at the pump.)

See, the more people that rely on solar and wind, the less rely on oil and gas, which means less profits for those companies (keep that in mind when they're bending you over a barrel in home heating costs this winter.)

The problem is, the same robber-barons who muscled the country around with their railroads and steel and (surprise surprise) oil a century ago are still at it today, just under a different guise -- and with a bill including provisions for new drilling opportunities and royalty eliminations, this whole thing seems more to me like a wolf in sheep's clothing: a bunch of pretty words and vague, half-hearted promises designed to distact the public while the same old corporate and political tag-team BS continues.

Screw ExxonMobil, BP, Conoco and the whole lot of them. I can only hope there will come a time when we aren't under the sway of politicians suckling from their collective teat.

Or at least when the majority of us can afford to ween OURSELVES off these dinosaurs by utilizing privately harvestable energy sources. Are the big energy companies and the politicians whose pockets they line afraid of this potentiality? You'd better believe it. I hope fast-developing countries like China see the writing on the wall, and sidestep these fossil fuel giants all together while they have the most promising opportunities.

[fredjacksonsan]

Originally Posted by tenguzero

I believe solar will be the next big thing -- the only thing holding it back is more funding and more incentive for people to switch over. .
.
.
.
Why are the big coal and oil companies getting roughly 9 billion, while the other 5 billion is to be divided up by groups representing renewable energy and efficiency programs? I mean, it seems to me that, if this were TRULY a bill designed to address our long-term (ie. future) energy needs, shouldn't the ratio be reversed? I couldn't give a rat's ass about the oil companies, but they stand to make a pretty penny off this -- which helps us HOW?

http://money.cnn.com/2005/07/29/mark...sers/index.htm

(and while they're seeing record profits right now, we're paying record prices at the pump.)

I haven't paid much attention to news lately, and that article really pissed me off. The government is giving away millions of our tax dollars to fund the oil companies. For what? So they can go look for more oil to reduce our foreign dependency!? Why I ask you...it's already been established that there are minimal reserves in the US, which is why we have to buy from other countries now!

You're 100% right teng, the ratios should have been flipped -- or the oil companies left out entirely. They're already awash in a sea of profits. Heard the latest? Increase in gas prices because of political instability in Saudi Arabia. Sure. Oh yeah, and manufacturing hiccups in production. Two bullshit reasons if I ever heard them. Maybe the (*&^#$ oil companies are just trying to maximize their profits before the oil dries up (inflammatory statement with no basis in fact, I know). I'd be willing to bet the oil conglomerates already have the alternative fuels/systems ready.

[Steel]

I say diesel (oil and bio) is the next logical step to take for mass transportation. solar/wind/ natural sources all rely on converting to electricity, and then we need an effective way to store the electricity for long periods of time and with minimal loss. Hydrogen is a lost cause, don't even bother with that. but BIODIESEL!

-renewable
-stores easily
-safe (non-flammable and nontoxic)
-efficient (only slightly less than dino diesel)
-modern diesel engines can aleady run the stuff
-cleaner than dino diesel and gasoline

Even dino diesel is a step up from gasoline - look at any of the specifications of a modern VW diesel. Sure the rest of the car sucks, cause it's a VW, but that motor kicks ass. All we need to do it kill everyone at the "society of concerned scientists" that refuse to believe that facts presented to them that modern diesel engines are in fact cleaner and more efficient than gasoline engines.

[YogsVR4]

The problem with solar is its unpredictable. Aside from the obvious about of daylight you may have in a day (hello folks in Alaska and northern Canada during December) shade and space are big issues. The batteries people need for back ups almost negate the environmental benefits of going with solar.

I expect that bio will be the next big thing as its a renewable and predictable source.


I still agree that the government shouldn't be giving handouts to anyone.

[tenguzero]

$66 a barrel for crude oil -- up more than 2 dollars since I started this thread 3 days ago. Do I hear $67? $68? Let's just call it an even $70 for simplicity's sake.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20050811/...oline_spike_dc

I'm up around $35 per fillup now, and I drive a damn ACCORD. That Yukon XL Denali doesn't seem so cool NOW, does it?

[YogsVR4]

I still plan on getting my Titan this fall. Unless the cost per gallon reaches five or six a gallon, it makes little to no difference to me.