 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech!
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Aug 08 - 02:30 PM Yes, there are some other great powers out there potentially...waiting in the wings. And China is the foremost of them. I think that the American Age, in fact, is nearing its end and that the Chinese Age is on the way. That doesn't necessarily mean another great war, though it could. It might just mean a gradual shift in predominance from one part of the world to another. "The world is less safe than it was at the end of WWII." I agree. And it is less safe at present primarily because of the very aggressive and reckless imperial policies of the USA/UK Axis, who are trying by military intervention to control all the oil in the Middle East and Central Asian regions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Amos Date: 05 Aug 08 - 02:49 PM DV; Hell, I guess it's a tossup between selective apathy and small incremental change. The "drop out of the system" ssolution, in my view, leaves the system entirely int he hasnds of those who choose to play it. Not always a good thing. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Aug 08 - 03:19 PM The world is a lot safer than when the cold war ended. Certainly the US is much safer from outside aggression. The Russians and Chinese are getting too fat and happy to go to war. The reserve is not nearly large enough to see us through an oil embargo. There is no one who can invade us. Other grades are just as useful to the military as light sweet crude, and releasing the light sweet crude will do more to lower todays oil prices than a gas tax holiday or freeing up more oil leases. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,DV Date: 05 Aug 08 - 03:25 PM Agreed, Little Hawk. And it is the US/UK playing American Roulette (cue Robbie Robertson song here!) with Pakistan, India, and Israel--all of whom are volatile nuclear players. It could all go literally up in a mushroom cloud at any time. Amos, you sound as if you think us schmucks, through voting, has some kind of control over "the system" as it stands. So far, voting hasn't done anything to either reform the system, or bring about it's demise. That is because voting is a subterfuge, to protect and insulate the ruling oligarchy from radical change in the system they own and control. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,DV Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:14 PM Also, I think Obama capitulating on FISA and environment will have an effect. Today's news via the latest Zogby poll says: New poll shows Obama losing support among young, women By Steven Thomma | McClatchy Newspapers Barack Obama has lost ground among some of his strongest bases of support, including young people, women, Democrats and independents, according to a new ATV/Zogby poll. The Illinois Democrat has also lost some support among African-Americans and Hispanics, where his lead over Republican John McCain has shrunk, and among Catholics, where he's lost his lead. The net result, pollster John Zogby found, is a race that's neck and neck, with McCain supported by 42 percent; Obama by 41 percent; Libertarian Bob Barr by 2 percent; and independent Ralph Nader by 2 percent. Another 13 percent supported other candidates or were undedcided. Zogby called the results a "notable turnaround" from a July survey he did that showed Obama leading by 46-36. "McCain made signifciant gains at Obama's expense among some of what had been Obama's strongest demographic groups," Zogby said. His findings: -Among voters aged 18-29, Obama lost 16 percent and McCain gained 20. Obama still leads, 49-38; -Among women, McCain gained 10 percentage points. Obama now leads 43-38; -Among independents, Obama lost an 11 point lead. They're now tied; -Among Democrats, Obama's support dropped from 83 percent to 74 percent; -Among Catholics, Obama lost the 11 point lead he had in July and now trails McCain by 15. Zogby said Obama also lost ground among minorities. He attributed Obama's erosion of support to McCain's criticisms of Obama as inexperienced in the wake of Obama's trip to Europe, the Middle East, Afghanistan and Iraq and to Obama's flips on some issues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Peter T. Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:33 PM To repeat myself, these flips are going to kill him. Pandering makes him not the new broom, which is what all the excitement was about. High oil prices are an absolute necessity. They should be far, far higher. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:36 PM "That is because voting is a subterfuge, to protect and insulate the ruling oligarchy from radical change in the system they own and control." That, sadly, is the case. When the major political parties are all simply compliant puppets of a ruling imperial order, then voting becomes a mere subterfuge. It becomes a rubber stamp. And they are all simply compliant puppets. This is true in the USA, in the UK, in Canada, and in most other countries as well. It's a game. People play the game not knowing that the game is rigged. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:46 PM Peter T He's going to be attacked either way. I've never heard him say that there was no way he would agree to drill offshore. That's what McCain has been saying about him. What I have heard him do is criticize McCain for saying that his opposition to drilling is the reason for high prices. I've heard him say that we can't drill out way out of the mess we are in. And for gosh sakes! John McCain was actually against Offshore drilling until June 13. He flip flopped for oil company donations. Obama said he would agree to it only as a means of getting more important concessions. The so called liberal media gives McCain a pass and says Obama has flip flopped. what are ya gonna do? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Amos Date: 05 Aug 08 - 04:49 PM FUnny...on the Pop Views of Obama thread, I think, I posted ap oll released Tuesday (today) that had him up six points over McCain. SIgh. WHat paper d'ye read? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:11 PM You can find all the major polls here. Realclear polls. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Donuel Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:23 PM The McCan't energy speech is delivered in Michigan today. He wants more nuke plants and drilling. Newseek Aug. "France has had 923 nuclear "incidents involving their nuclear power plants and breeder reactors this year alone." It must be hard for McCain to point to France as leaders in nuclear power. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Donuel Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:42 PM Not only is Obama not ready for primetime but his energy policy amounts to inflating your tires. THis is not tiddlywinks folks. Obama is like an internet date, once you actually meet him you realize what a big mistake he is. Gov. Romney Aug. 5th 08 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Peter T. Date: 05 Aug 08 - 05:55 PM No, no, when I think of all the nice people I have met at Mudcat through the Internet, I am almost sold on Internet dating!!! I didn't say Obama wasn't the best bet, I just don't see him as the Second Coming. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Amos Date: 05 Aug 08 - 06:47 PM I am QUITE sure he is not the Second Coming, PT!!! But compared to the alternatives, we should be treating him as though he were!! :D A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 Aug 08 - 06:58 PM The new sovereignty are not borders as we once knew them, but corporations. Forrest Bush, George 41,'s father opened up China, during the Nixon administration. George 'W', Billy Clinton, Carter, and George (41), have continued on the same path. It does NOT matter what the media (run and owned by large corporation players)reports, in their coverage,,if you're not part of the 'club' you don't get press, unless its, in belittling, and watered down, coverage....and very little air time, during the debates, as not to let your voice be heard. Obama and McCain are cut from the same fabric, though hidden from the public. McCain has one main CFR adviser, while Obama has six. Bob Barr, who probably has the most integrity of the lot, gets hardly any coverage. For years I've said,(and Jesse Ventura has echoed this recently), that 'they should provide a box on the ballot, saying 'None of the above'. That way we could show a 'non-confidence' vote, but show we are still willing to participate....By the way, during the Nixon election, 'Mickey Mouse' received a quarter of a million 'write in' votes!. Now with the ballot system, presently in place, there is nowhere to 'write in' a candidate. As I have said, for quite some time now, this 'election' is a major farce, perpetrated on the American public, to whoop up emotional support, over candidates, who offer so very little other than blab! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Donuel Date: 05 Aug 08 - 06:59 PM Months ago I did a humorous post of a series of miraculous events that all pointed to a second coming. We all know what happens if you say you are more popular than Christ but suppose you could suspend belief for a moment and imagine that "he" really is the ... George W Bush that is ;~} |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:06 PM Both McCain and Obama see nuclear as part of the energy mix. Their major difference is that Obama doesn't talk about McCain's position. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:10 PM LOL >>Forrest Bush, George 41,'s father opened up China, during the Nixon administration. Was he a politician? Did people yell "Run Forrest Run!" at the campaign rallies? (Prescott) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:14 PM "Their major difference is that Obama doesn't talk about McCain's position."...Well that changes everything!!..I guess he gets my vote!!.......................(Not!) There's a lot of things Obama isn't talking about! But really, does it matter??..Its all talk..talk is cheap..and both have them have been bought at bargain prices. Do you really think these guys represent you??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Peter T. Date: 05 Aug 08 - 07:40 PM George W. (actually his speechwriters) said at one of the White House Dinner Suck-up Events that Pamela Anderson and Mitt Romney had both been invited, and were sitting in the same room, and that he was pretty sure that he had read somewhere that that was one of the signs of the impending Apocalypse. yours, Peter T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Ween Addict Date: 05 Aug 08 - 08:14 PM Well interesting speech...though what would have sold me was the mention of a "feed in tariff law" instead of just tax credits. I wonder how many people on this site even know what a feed in tariff law is, well without googling it at this point that is. If ya don't google it, its worth knowing about. Its probably one of the most proven and viable models for deploying renewable energies. Now that would have been an bold and impressive statement..at least in my opinion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 05 Aug 08 - 09:25 PM Great post..BUT....who's going to pay for all that national upgrading??..Being as he wants huge tax increases, to redistribute money, are you going to have any left??? Even worse, after the 'election' the plan is to devalue the dollar, drastically, no matter who wins. ..Another 'pie in the sky', get all emotional, dribble! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Donuel Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:22 PM If building is to occur in any event, it is wasy to see that efficient buildings are actually cheaper to build. One example is to virtually never bend ducting and pipes which is cheaper to do in the first place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 05 Aug 08 - 10:43 PM >>Hey what happen to my posts other 2 posts? ;( Friendly heads up! If you don't say who you are you might lose that one.
Thanks. **Forum Moderator** |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,WeenAddict Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:11 AM As for who foots the bill of the national upgrades thats a BIG question and a BIG answer and I won't lie im not an economist but i doubt anyone here is one either..well maybe but im sure they don't balance the national budget, elect me president i figure it out though i swear ;)..anyways its not like we are a poor country, it would seem plausible that the government could find the money for this, hell they managed to find 400 billion dollars or so for Iraq....anyways Lets take a look at somethings i do know. First improving building energy efficiency. Its economically sound to build efficiently right now! incentives or not (there are incentives in place at the moment, better mortage rates, rebates on things..tax credits)..so why isn't it a more profound trend? Thats a answer ive been putting together for awhile now. The only reason i can see is that ITS NOT IN THE BUILDING CODES!!!!! Its as simples as that..The technology,mehtods, and materials are here..they are proven, they are affordable, they are BETTER then the older practices, BUT humans are by nature reactive not proactive at least a majority are, now that includes contractors too. Why the hell would they change anything unless they had to? The construction business runs as many other archaic-like business models with this motto. If it ain't broke don't fix it...unfortuantely most contractors don't see the way they are building is broken! But sense no one is there to point out how inefficient energy performing structures are a huge problem (in my opinion the root of our problems from a non-transportation energy consumtion crisis)it doesnt change. WHY? Simple..No legistlative body has taken the initiative to improve our building energy codes to the level they need to be for the 21st century) and these practices won't change until a legisaltive body does( be it federal or state)WHY? Cause as i said we are reactive not proactive. EXample: well a question firs... have you been on a construction site lately? Next time you are try this its almost laughable if it wasn't so sad. Ask a architect or contractor about their energy efficiency stratgies for the building..id say 90%(The REACTIVE type)just look at you with a blank stare and say ahh..yeah we got enough insulation in the walls and the house to pass code(unfortuantly this code is not even close to efficient)..thats our strategy, thats all we need to do so thats all we are doing. Now a couple(PROACTIVE) will actually surpise you and say ahh well we have done this this and this above the code and now this home will have 50% less energy useage annual. Why did you do that? Becuase it relates to better marketing abilities of our product blah blah blah..the key here is they are buidling like this not becuase they have to but voluntarily becuase they see it as a marketing advantage, have a very high standard of business ethics,ect. Hence the problem, building energy efficient structures is voluntary..not manditory!..So unless legistlation steps in and improves energy codes to a level we need i don't see how this HUGE problem will be fixed any time soon. So who pays for this "Upgrade". Well truthfully it won't be an upgrade on new construction , new structures are going to be built whether we like it or not..and since building efficiently doesn't necessarily cost more..it just takes better building practices(aka new energy codes instated)there will not really be a need of federal subsides just for new code implementation. Now upgrading existing homes..well that will need incentives most likely but as i stated above i don't balance the budget so i have not exact answer, but ill say this improving efficiency in existing homes is not horribly expensive, a simple energy audit, which many utility companies will do for free can save lots of energy..unfortuantlay again it is voluntary and not mandatory and unfortuantly not only are we reactive we are freaking LAZY as americans so even though its out there and alot of times free most people just don't do it..a true shame. Solution..pass legistaltion that says utility companies are required to do an energy audit on the structures of existing or new customers..either in-house or contracted out..it is in the utility companies best interest to do it anyways and that is why most offer the service for free or at discount prices right now. whew that was long...sorry if i repeated and ranted but there is a lot to it..that was just the tip of the iceburg on how to implement something like that, didn't even get into the methods, techologies, or real meat of the subject but that would be a book in itself. Any ways will obama or mccain do this..well..thats the big question i guess. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,WeenAddict Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:28 AM Well something to add on i was just thinking about..why aren't energy codes as much of a priority or as strict as say structual codes? or electrical codes? or plumbing codes? Well I had a little help on this one, but the simplest answer is cause they can't kill you if they fail! Sorry Joe, you used so much energy that your house lost all magnetic structural integrity and collapsed upon itself...oh and it created a black hole which is slowly..well... consuming the rest of the neighborhood. Ahh better call your homeowners association..uhmm you are insured right? WRONG! LUDICRIOUS! WOULD NEVER HAPPEN! OR SO ONE WOULD THINK..That black hole is starting to seem less and less ludicrious in a strange bizzaro world kind of way..now that IS laughable. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,WeenAddict Date: 06 Aug 08 - 01:14 AM Well i might have made things sound a bit to simple, there will be a cost to state, local, or federal government in the efforts to enforce these codes. Seems the problem is the resources aren't in place at the moment to ensure these codes are being properly implemented. So coin would have to be spent to hire and train more inspectors and im sure cerftification seminars would need to be developed for properly interpeting and implementing energy codes will need to be given to practicing contractors and new contractor liscenesing tests for those entering the industry. But hey thats the price for continuing to do business in a certification/licscence type industry..Its not really a big deal truthfully, it happens all the time already with re-certification liscened contractors need to get on different yearly type schedules. So necessarliy free but the energy and $$ that could be saved to both the owners of these structures and state and local governments on energy bills would probably far outway the cost then again thats just speculations but im sure someones doing studies on it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,mg Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:24 AM I think the biggest problem keeping people from driving small cars -- and most only drive themselves shorter distances -- is not a desire for status or luxury but simple safety, especially for their children. We need alternate road systems where only smaller lighter vehicles at lower speeds..sharing perhaps with bicycles etc.. are going. So you would only crash with each other and not a Greyhound bus. We also need trains that would pull cars like ski ropes and you get off at your destination. or maybe like putting your car onthe ferry, something like that but for highways. I take the bus and walk now but I would be a perfect candidate for a smart car or a zebra or something..except the winds here would probably blow it off the road. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Barry Finn Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:44 AM "Great post..BUT....who's going to pay for all that national upgrading" It pays for itself,,,in time. Green Buildings, a nice post on it above, is far from complete when you take into consideration the building's footprint when using recylced or new composite materials, the diastanse they travel from manufactured site to job site. Buildings can now be built to be completely self sufficent energywise. And yes the building code are in bad need of updating the present techology hasn't even made it to print yet. "The people who can AFFORD to buy a hybrid don't need the rebate, the people who CAN'T AFFORD A NEW CAR AT ALL need a rebate" Well, my mother bought a Prius & so did I. Neither of us can be considered to belong to the middle class anymore. We are those people you say can't afford a new car! I'm no better off than a church mouse but I was able to buy one at $23,000 a year & a half ago. I've put on well over 100,000 miles & figure I've saved more than $4,000 in gas as appose to someting that woud've gotten half what I get now. I get generally between 45 & 50 mpg never worst sometimes better. I got a rebate of just over $2000 which was very helpful. I haven't bought an American vechicle in decades because the US auto manufactures continue to push the big gas drinkers. It's only now that the bastards are offering any sort of semi alt. They could've helped starting back in the 60's, it's no wonder they're hurting & crying now & Honda & Toyota are at the top. "Democrat Barack Obama called today for tapping the nation's strategic oil reserves to help drive down gasoline prices, a shift from his previous position on the issue. The reversal is the second refinement in Obama's energy policy...." I'd rather have a president that's not for keeping us at war for the next 100yrs or bring us into a new one & who'd at least not use the excuse of a future war as a reason not to release the reserves now. "The strategic oil reserves are there for a good reason: we may be attacked again and find ourselves at war. In some cases we paid more for that oil than market value because it was considerd necessary. Leave it where it is." Hopefully we won't have a president in offce that feels that war is fis 1st choice. I also don't think that the reserves were bpought close to the present day price. There's quite a difference between Obama & MaCain. MaCain would continue the present war until victory is attained no matter the cost or time & he wouldn't think twice about using war as a settling point with other nations if HE see's fit. MaCain doesn't care a hoot about the enviorment as can be seen by his energy policy & the only green he cares about is in dollars. MaCain carries the banner of Reagan & the Bushes high & will support the right of might & the mighty corporation. MaCain also thinks highly of the right to Government to ride rough shod over our human & civil rights in times of fear & he knows how to keep fear in the forefront & wave it in our faces like a bloody cross. On the other hand I've seen enough about Obama to believe he's all fo what MaCain isn't & that plenty enough reason for me to give my vote for him. While I'm at it, if you don't plan on voting you have no right to squaking now or after. When my children turned of age they even knew it's one of their rights that they needed to excersize. It's unthinkable that one has this opportunity when so many die for it in other countries. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,DV Date: 06 Aug 08 - 08:04 AM Sorry Barry, but if you can afford a new car at all, much less an expensive Prius, you are middle class. I too am middle class, and have never owned a new car in my life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,WeenAddict Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:12 AM Quick question, how much would the monthly car payment be for a new hybrid with the 7,000 dollar rebate taken out? You can do an easy spread sheet and see what the cost comparison would be between the hybrid(40+ miles/gallon) total monthly or annual costs (car payment + gas costs) vs. a cheaper used car's($10,000 and lower @ 30gallons/mile and lower) total monlthy or annual costs (car payment + gas costs). Damn Ill can whip out a graph in about 10 15 minutes if someone can supply the monthly payment cost, or just the typical interest rate and lenght of the loan that is standard today for car loans. That should sheed some light on whether or not this is feasible..numbers don't lie ;) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Sawzaw Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:27 AM "We don't know what a hitch ball is. Anybody know?" A cameraman politely explained that it's the silver thing on the back of a truck used to tow a trailer. "Oh, I see," Obama said, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: pdq Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:34 AM Thanks for that tidbit GUEST,Sawzaw. That ain't gonna help sell the Obama product out here in rural America. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Sawzaw Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:34 AM "In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed," Obama told a crowd in Richmond on Tuesday |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,DV Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:46 AM Seriously, Obama didn't know what the trailer hitch was? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Amos Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:46 AM That one smells to high heaven, Sawz. Even money it's a mashup. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 06 Aug 08 - 10:53 AM I've owned and used ball hitches on and off for thirty years and this is the first time I've heard or seen the term "hitch ball" last time I bought one, I called it a ball for my trailer hitch and low and behold, the dude knew enough to sell me one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 06 Aug 08 - 11:00 AM Ah, I didn't get what was going on at first. The out of context snippets attacks! Nice job Sawzaw. See if you can find one where he says under wear, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Sawzaw Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:21 PM Please be informed that criticism is not an attack. Insecure people claim that least bit of questioning or challenging of their positions, convictions or knowledge is an attack. The guy did not know what a hitch ball was. What context should that be put in to excuse his naïveté? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 06 Aug 08 - 12:39 PM Taking a sentence or two out of context to try to pretend that someone is stupid is not criticism. Its playground teasing. Grow up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,DV Date: 06 Aug 08 - 01:54 PM It isn't about Obama being stupid, it is about him being an elitist, college lecturing city boy, I believe. Or at least, that is what the McCain camp would likely have to say about it. Wait--isn't he supposed to be Kansas stock? Is there someone in Kansas who doesn't know what a 'hitch ball' (or as we call it around my parts, a 'ball hitch') is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Peace Date: 06 Aug 08 - 01:59 PM That reminds me of a good joke. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:03 PM "it is about him being an elitist, college lecturing city boy" YIKES!!! God forbid that that should happen! "Oh, where are my homespun 'just plain folks' credentials when I need them? Why couldn't I have grown up in a log cabin, chawin' on a grass stem and cleanin' my daddy's old shootin' iron?" (sob! sob!) "Hey, but watch this!" (shoots a few baskets...and every one of them is a 'swish') |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:06 PM Elitist be damned!! I'm with John Stewart! This is the kind of President I want!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:15 PM Are you kidding, Jack? When you could have this instead? The Dream Team |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Amos Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:15 PM The fact that he may not have had occasion to use a ball-type trailer-hitch does not mean he can't handle a dry-balled Has-Been. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,DV Date: 06 Aug 08 - 02:21 PM Good one, Amos! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: GUEST,WeenAddict Date: 06 Aug 08 - 03:41 PM So can whats the monthly cost(car payment + gas bill) of say a new hybrid with this $7000 dollar rebate compared to a say coventional, cheaper used car? Well heres what i came up with: A $22,000 dollar hybrid with the $7000 rebate is a $15,000 car loan. At 10% APR on the loan for 5 years is $318/month. Now say this car gets 50miles/gallon and has an annual mileage of 15,000 miles which is 1250 miles a month and 25 gallons of gas a month. Say an average of $4/gallon that $100 a month in gas bill + the car payment for a average grand total of ...$418/month. A $10,000 car loan for a conventional vehicle at 10 APR for 5 years is $212/month. SAy this car gets 25miles/gallon and has an annual mileage of 15,000 miles which is 1250 miles a month and 50 gallons of gas a month. Again an average of $4/gallon so thats $200 a month in gas bill + car payment for a averagen grand total of....$412/month. Ahh a $6 dollar difference...thats pretty damn good But how about for a say 7,000 car loan for a conventional vehicle at all the same variables as the 10,000 car. That would be total average montly payment (gas+loan) of .....$348/month Hmm..thats what a $70/month difference between a brand new hybrid and a 7,000 used car. That doesn't sound to bad at all. So can lower income people afford a hybrid vehicle with this rebate? Seems its feasible. Now a million hybrid cars at $7,000rebate/car..well that 7 billion dollars in incentives. In terms of gas savings and this is im sure not the most acurate statistics lets say 25miles/gallon for conventional and 50m/g for hybrid, with an average of 15,000 miles/car traveled annually. So thats 300 gallons/car saved annually, which relates to about 300,000,000 gallons of gas for 1 million hybrids saved annually...at 42gallons/barrel so thats about 7,200,000 barrels of gas we don't have to import annually at $120/barrel...which is about $864,000,000 a year saved on import costs. so how many years will it take to pay off the initial 7 billion dollars in incentives? well that less then 10 years...so if you put 100,000 new hyrids with this incentive on the road every year there would be a net cost of $0 dollars over a 10 year period due to the savings in buying oil from another country and keeping that cash in our own economy and auto industry..sounds like a sound plan to me..ahh whats a better idea then giving american owned auto companines and employees the coin or give it to middle eastern royal families so they can buy another 1,000 jets and make more ridicuioulsy lavish palaces..hmmm? Well to me the numbers seem to work but maybe its over simplified, but its not that oversimplied i mean when you do LCC(life cycle costs) you really need to but inflation and a few other numbers into the equations but this is just a pretty close approximation. Maybe i missed something though check the math and critiqueif ya like. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: beardedbruce Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:01 PM Environmental impact of making the battaries for the hybrids, and disposing of them after end-of-life? (vs impact of "normal" 12v car battary) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Have you seen Obama's energy speech! From: Amos Date: 06 Aug 08 - 04:07 PM I think you mean recycling them at end of life. BEar in mind, with the right impetus this is a technology which will ramp DOWN in total cost per watthour delivered. For example, just over the horizon is an efficient fuel-cell-recharge system based on solar. A |
