by Jotapay » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 14:55:05
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', 'Y')ea, I'd be interested to read that.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... =h111-2454$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')ext of H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
Section requiring three environmental inspectors/enforcers per town (population area):
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')EC. 207. COMMUNITY BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATION GRANTS.
(c)(2) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT- Each building code enforcement department receiving a grant under subsection (a) shall empanel a code administration and enforcement team consisting of at least 1 full-time building code enforcement officer, a city planner, and a health planner or similar officer.
The Feds will charge you for inspecting your home:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')SEC. 201. GREATER ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN BUILDING CODES.
Section 304 of the Energy Conservation and Production Act (42 U.S.C. 6833) is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 304. GREATER ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN BUILDING CODES.
(f)(3) The Secretary may set and collect reasonable inspection
fees to cover the costs of inspections required for such
enforcement Revenue from fees collected shall be available to
the Secretary to carry out the requirements of this sect on upon
appropriation.
by davep » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 14:57:28
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JPL', 'Y')ea, I'd be interested to read that.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtex ... =h111-2454$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')ext of H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009
Section requiring three environmental inspectors/enforcers per town (population area):
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')EC. 207. COMMUNITY BUILDING CODE ADMINISTRATION GRANTS.
(c)(2) ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT- Each building code enforcement department receiving a grant under subsection (a) shall empanel a code administration and enforcement team consisting of at least 1 full-time building code enforcement officer, a city planner, and a health planner or similar officer.
The Feds will charge you for inspecting your home:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')SEC. 201. GREATER ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN BUILDING CODES.
Section 304 of the Energy Conservation and Production Act (42 U.S.C. 6833) is amended to read as follows:
SEC. 304. GREATER ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN BUILDING CODES.
(f)(3) The Secretary may set and collect reasonable inspection
fees to cover the costs of inspections required for such
enforcement Revenue from fees collected shall be available to
the Secretary to carry out the requirements of this sect on upon
appropriation.
What we think, we become.
by davep » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 15:18:22
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'I') am extremely energy efficient in my home and daily life. I ride a 65mpg Honda scooter to commute to work and the store, I don't use the clothes drier, I don't use the house air conditioner and heater hardly at all and I turn off vampire electrical devices. I do have a dog, however, which has been called environmental assassination in the past 2 weeks by the MSM.
But NO ONE is going to bully me about my own home, fine me for unlawfully occupying my own home or try and dispossess me of it. No one.
How energy-efficient is your house? And isn't there a timeframe for becoming compliant? If these idiots had actually invested money into this kind of thing rather than giving handouts to bankers, I would be happier. But they didn't. There must be some kind of tax rebate on the renovation though.
My big worry is that these people may not properly understand moderm passive solar design, for example, and their assessments may be totally awry due to their lack of understanding of how materials interact for better insulation, ventilation etc.
What we think, we become.
-

davep
- Senior Moderator

-
- Posts: 4579
- Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
- Location: Europe
-
by Dr. Ofellati » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 15:19:01
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')
Why is it that half of the thrust of this site is slamming sheeple for their Hummers and McMansions and the other half is spent fearmongering that TPTB will start micromanaging our consumption like some kind of Sarah Palin talking point?
You're right Mos. That just seems wrong.
How about we include about 30% of the site to post climate cult articles and you and the other cultists can call them people who don't agree with you deniers?
Oh wait . . .
Dr. O
The Mos theorem - Those who do not reach my conclusions after having reviewed the evidence are either deniers, if they reject my conclusion, or conspiracy theorists, if I reject theirs.
-

Dr. Ofellati
- Lignite

-
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Thu 22 Oct 2009, 12:26:37
-
by Dr. Ofellati » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 15:31:20
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '
')Some people, presumably, would much rather hold onto their freedoms at the expense of any hopes of a controlled energy descent. To me that is an unacceptable tradeoff.
This is Mos' theory in a nutshell. It happens to also be the central tenet of Marxism.
Mos camoflages his Marxist beliefs by couching them in the terms of the climate change cult - "we all have to give up personal liberties so that the planet doesn't kill us" - but the truth is that Mos would have you give up your liberties for the good of everybody
whether it was required or not.
What Mos is saying, convolutedly and inelegantly, is that the rights of the collective trump the rights of the individual.
When this opinion takes over, that's when every self-respecting human should lock and load.
Dr. O
The Mos theorem - Those who do not reach my conclusions after having reviewed the evidence are either deniers, if they reject my conclusion, or conspiracy theorists, if I reject theirs.
-

Dr. Ofellati
- Lignite

-
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Thu 22 Oct 2009, 12:26:37
-
by Dr. Ofellati » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 15:33:17
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('davep', 'M')os, what worries me about a top-down model is the inevitability of the Government pandering more to corporate interests than those of the populace. It's a hard habit to break.
But in the end one has to
endorse something, damn it.
Nonsense. You're in complete denial.
You can't come to grips with the fact that it's all going down in flames, so you're running around the cabin screaming at the ones who have resigned themselves to their fate and screaming at them to "do something."
Dr. O
The Mos theorem - Those who do not reach my conclusions after having reviewed the evidence are either deniers, if they reject my conclusion, or conspiracy theorists, if I reject theirs.
by Dr. Ofellati » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 15:37:04
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'e')
You're level headed and an excellent contributor to this site, but your characterization of the bill was extreme.
There is no indication that the law will be used to inspect existing houses.
Like virtually every statutory provision involving home inspection, this one, as well, will likely be implemented for new construction/renovation only.
Dr. O
The Mos theorem - Those who do not reach my conclusions after having reviewed the evidence are either deniers, if they reject my conclusion, or conspiracy theorists, if I reject theirs.
-

Dr. Ofellati
- Lignite

-
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Thu 22 Oct 2009, 12:26:37
-
by Jotapay » Thu 12 Nov 2009, 16:47:23
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dr. Ofellati', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'e')
You're level headed and an excellent contributor to this site, but your characterization of the bill was extreme.
There is no indication that the law will be used to inspect existing houses.
Like virtually every statutory provision involving home inspection, this one, as well, will likely be implemented for new construction/renovation only.
Well shoot, it looks like what I thought isn't true. After looking over the bill a little bit and searching for home auditing/inspection references, I can't find any that can prove mandatory inspections of existing homes, which is what has been claimed in the past. So it appears that this bill doesn't authorize hoards of inspectors to be unleashed on our residences, which is what I've heard claimed by people. The passages from the bill I quoted above were read by house members during the debate on the bill. I'll have to look later and see towards what action they actually reference.
by Keith_McClary » Fri 13 Nov 2009, 02:23:04
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', '1')05 mil/bbl by 2030?
I do wonder what they project in between now and then, like for 2020, and for 2012 and 2016...
I'd say if they have figures projected for those years, and 2012 rolls around and the figures are lower than projected for 2012 or even lower than 2008, it'd be pretty obvious what 2030 is going to look like.
As I pointed out above, the graph:

shows that"Crude oil - fields yet to be developed" will be 20 million barrels per day in 2013.
We should not have to wait till 2013 to know the answer, since any field that will be producing by then will be under development now - hiring, booking rigs, ordering pipe etc.
We just need to ask Mr. OilFinder for a list of "fields yet to be developed" with their expected production by 2013.
Facebook knows you're a dog.
-

Keith_McClary
- Light Sweet Crude

-
- Posts: 7344
- Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Suburban tar sands
-