[sicophiliac]

Maybe a bail out with some tight CAFE standard strings attached?

[3aidlillahi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('sicophiliac', 'M')aybe a bail out with some tight CAFE standard strings attached?

[JustaGirl]

The automakers already received billions earlier this year to make fuel efficient cars & Obama loves e85, so there ya go.

[Twilight]

US automakers already make fuel efficient cars that compete with their Japanese rivals, they are just not made in America by Americans for Americans. Ford has some good models actually, but by the sound of things their production mix in North America is a complete disaster. They stranded their cars on the wrong continent - too bad. The price must be bankruptcy, there must be no consolation prize from an unwilling taxpayer.

Besides, Ford mortgaged its US plants. If it fails, the banks can try to make a going concern out of them or sell the hardware to someone who will pay them for it. It is a private sector solution enabled years ago and I see no problem with letting it run its course.

[mos6507]

On the MSM they are pretty much assuming there will be strings attached to any bailout of the auto industry, and that those strings will include ultimatums to the big 2.5 to focus on efficient cars. Obama has also pledged to get a million plugin hybrids on the road and this would be one way to push it without relying solely on refunds to carbuyers.

Hitching their fate on SUVs wasn't the only thing to bring down US automakers, but it was a very big factor that the current cheaper price of gas can't completely erase. These executives should be ashamed to have to peddle for a bailout and accept whatever terms are given them (unlike the newest CAFE' standards which they fought tooth and nail against, which included using the Volt as a prop in Washington).

[vaseline2008]

Well, at the very least there is talk about reducing dependence on foreign oil, any oil for that matter is good. However at this time it is the "politically correct" thing to say. I guess we can only hope.

Another thing, what exactly is the definition of "efficient cars"? The latest hybrid cars from any manufacturer gets only marginally better mileage (in my mind) then their all gas counterparts. I mean, only the Prius gets like 50% better mileage then the Corolla. For the extra money you should get like a 200% increase in mileage.

Lexus LS460 - 16 City/26 Hwy
Lexus LS600h - 20 City/24 Hwy <-- Notice it gets LESS HWY Mileage!

Cost difference:

LS460 - $70K
LS600h - $104K

$30K buys a lot of gas...even @ $4/gallon.

1 Million Hybrids < 0.5% of all cars on the road.
Last estimates were that the US has over 210 Million cars and trucks on the road.

With the Oil and Auto Lobbyists in full effect, don't count on any world changing events to happen in the near future.

We are now desensitized to Iraq (how many American lives were lost there and how much in US Tax Dollars is being spent?!)

We now consider $50 oil "cheap".

We now consider Iran the "bad guys" with suspicion of the Nuclear Bomb....ummm, didn't Kim Jong Il detonate a Nuke himself? Maybe we are going after the wrong guy?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')This is a world destruction, your life ain't nothing.
The human race is becoming a disgrace.
Countries are fighting with chemical warfare.
Not giving a damn about the people who live there.
Nostradamus predicts the coming of the Antichrist.
Hey, look out, the third world nations are on the rise.
The Democratic-Communist Relationship,
won't stand in the way of the Islamic force.
The CIA is looking for you.
The KGB is smarter than you think.
Brainwash mentalities to control the system.
Using TV and movies - religions of course.
Yes, the world is headed for destruction.
Is it a nuclear war?
What are you asking for?

This is a world destruction. Your life ain't nothing.
The human race is becoming a disgrace.
The rich get richer.
The poor are getting poorer.
Fascist, chauvinistic government fools.
People, Moslems, Christians and Hindus.
Are in a time zone still searching for the truth.
Who are you to think you're a superior race?
Facing forth your everlasting doom.
We are Time Zone. We've come to drop a bomb on you.
World destruction, kaboom, kaboom, kaboom!

This is the world destruction, your life ain't nothing.
The human race is becoming a disgrace.
Nationalities are fighting with each other.
Why is this? Because the system tells you.
Putting people in faceless categories.
Knowledge isn't what it used to be.
Military tactics to control a nation.
Who wants to be a president or king? Me!
Mother Nature is gonna work against you.
Nothing in your power that you can do.
Yes, the world is headed for destruction.
You and I know it, cause the Bible tells you.
If we don't start to look for a better life,
the whole world will be destroyed in a time zone!

Speak of the destruction."
- Time Zone, 1984

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vaseline2008', '
')didn't Kim Jong Il detonate a Nuke himself? Maybe we are going after the wrong guy?

[sjn]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vaseline2008', '
')didn't Kim Jong Il detonate a Nuke himself? Maybe we are going after the wrong guy?

[vaseline2008]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')hen Einstein died on April 18, 1955 he left a piece of writing ending in an unfinished sentence.

These were his last words:

In essence, the conflict that exists today is no more than an old-style struggle for power, once again presented to mankind in semi religious trappings. The difference is that, this time, the development of atomic power has imbued the struggle with a ghostly character; for both parties know and admit that, should the quarrel deteriorate into actual war, mankind is doomed. Despite this knowledge, statesmen in responsible positions on both sides continue to employ the well-known technique of seeking to intimidate and demoralize the opponent by marshaling superior military strength. They do so even though such a policy entails the risk of war and doom. Not one statesman in a position of responsibility has dared to pursue the only course that holds out any promise of peace, the course of supranational security, since for a statesman to follow such a course would be tantamount to political suicide. Political passions, once they have been fanned into flame, exact their victims ... Citater fra...

[VMarcHart]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vaseline2008', 'A')re you for real?!$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')The auto industry is the backbone of American manufacturing and a critical part of our attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil," Mr. Obama said Friday.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vaseline2008', 'W')ell, at the very least there is talk about reducing dependence on foreign oil, any oil for that matter is good. However at this time it is the "politically correct" thing to say. I guess we can only hope.

[Carlhole]

Amory Lovins - CNN Opinion

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')nowmass, Colorado (CNN) -- Oil is on its way out. That journey will take several decades, but it's begun. Mindful markets and civil society will complete it as inexorably as innovators and capitalists got America off whale-oil lamps in the 1850s.

My 2005 TED talk explained how to get the United States completely off oil by the 2040s, led by business for profit. This would cost an average of about $15 per barrel in 2000 dollars, or about $18 per barrel in 2009 dollars -- less than a third of oil's current price, conservatively assuming that all its environmental, security and other "external" costs (paid in taxes, illness or insecurity rather than at the pump) are worth zero. The Pentagon-co-sponsored September 2004 study Winning the Oil Endgame by the Rocky Mountain Institute details how.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Carlhole', '[')url=http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/01/04/lovins.weaning.us.off.oil/index.html]Amory Lovins - CNN Opinion[/url]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')nowmass, Colorado (CNN) -- Oil is on its way out. That journey will take several decades, but it's begun. Mindful markets and civil society will complete it as inexorably as innovators and capitalists got America off whale-oil lamps in the 1850s.

My 2005 TED talk explained how to get the United States completely off oil by the 2040s, led by business for profit. This would cost an average of about $15 per barrel in 2000 dollars, or about $18 per barrel in 2009 dollars -- less than a third of oil's current price, conservatively assuming that all its environmental, security and other "external" costs (paid in taxes, illness or insecurity rather than at the pump) are worth zero. The Pentagon-co-sponsored September 2004 study Winning the Oil Endgame by the Rocky Mountain Institute details how.

[anador]

I have trouble trusting the rocky mountains institute fully.

They are fully commited to a techno-religious standpoint, aimed at continuing the current dystopian ideal of suburbanism and auto dependency, using theoretical, though i concede not totally unreasonable predictions for future technology and polticial will.

A solution for today should not be found in the theoretical technology of tomorrow.

[Graeme]

Freeing America from its addiction to oil

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')il is on its way out. That journey will take several decades, but it's begun. Mindful markets and civil society will complete it as inexorably as innovators and capitalists got America off whale-oil lamps in the 1850s.

My 2005 TED talk explained how to get the United States completely off oil by the 2040s, led by business for profit. This would cost an average of about $15 per barrel in 2000 dollars, or about $18 per barrel in 2009 dollars -- less than a third of oil's current price, conservatively assuming that all its environmental, security and other "external" costs (paid in taxes, illness or insecurity rather than at the pump) are worth zero. The Pentagon-co-sponsored September 2004 study Winning the Oil Endgame by the Rocky Mountain Institute details how.

In the five years since its publication, implementation has accelerated, led largely, as it proposed, by private-sector innovation and often stimulated by the institute's "institutional acupuncture": figuring out where the business logic is congested and not flowing properly, and then sticking needles into sensitive sites to get it flowing.

The 2008 oil-price spike and 2009 policy shifts all helped too. Of the six sectors needing transformation to increase efficiency and reduce oil use -- cars, trucks, planes, fuels, finance and military -- three or four are near or past their tipping point and starting to get easier.

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('anador', 'I') have trouble trusting the rocky mountains institute fully.

They are fully commited to a techno-religious standpoint, aimed at continuing the current dystopian ideal of suburbanism and auto dependency, using theoretical, though i concede not totally unreasonable predictions for future technology and polticial will.

A solution for today should not be found in the theoretical technology of tomorrow.

[TheDude]

Green Energy Advocate Amory Lovins: Guru or Fakir? - Democratic Underground

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he facts plainly show that Lovins has been consistently wrong about the ability of renewables to take large amounts of market-share from fossil fuels. He’s been proven wrong about the long-term ability of efficiency to reduce overall energy consumption. And yet, despite being so wrong for so long, he keeps getting awards and prizes by the forklift-load. And the fact that the Lovins love-fest continues unabated causes no small bit of antipathy among some long-time energy watchers. One of them is Vaclav Smil, the polymath and distinguished professor of geography at the University of Manitoba who has written numerous books on energy. “Inexplicably,” Smil wrote recently, Lovins “retains his guru aura no matter how wrong he is.”

Smil and others point out that Lovins has been wrong on numerous fronts. Four of Lovins’s claims are worth investigation.

1. Renewables will take huge swaths of the overall energy market. (1976)
2. Electricity consumption will fall. (1984)
3. Cellulosic ethanol will solve our oil import needs. (repeatedly)
4. Efficiency will lower consumption. (repeatedly)

[shortonsense]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TheDude', '[')url=http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x121251]Green Energy Advocate Amory Lovins: Guru or Fakir? - Democratic Underground[/url]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he facts plainly show that Lovins has been consistently wrong about the ability of renewables to take large amounts of market-share from fossil fuels. He’s been proven wrong about the long-term ability of efficiency to reduce overall energy consumption. And yet, despite being so wrong for so long, he keeps getting awards and prizes by the forklift-load. And the fact that the Lovins love-fest continues unabated causes no small bit of antipathy among some long-time energy watchers. One of them is Vaclav Smil, the polymath and distinguished professor of geography at the University of Manitoba who has written numerous books on energy. “Inexplicably,” Smil wrote recently, Lovins “retains his guru aura no matter how wrong he is.”

Smil and others point out that Lovins has been wrong on numerous fronts. Four of Lovins’s claims are worth investigation.

1. Renewables will take huge swaths of the overall energy market. (1976)
2. Electricity consumption will fall. (1984)
3. Cellulosic ethanol will solve our oil import needs. (repeatedly)
4. Efficiency will lower consumption. (repeatedly)

[AirlinePilot]

I wont go into it again. This is pie in the sky.

Not enough time, not enough alternative sources, not enough money.

On top of those...Too much pain so none of it will be voluntary.


We have undergone little replacement to date. yes there is some, but scope and scale is going to kill us.

This author has no clue of either.