Trading blood for oil: Feinstein (D-CA) proposes increased gas mileage standards

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Little-Acorn, May 10, 2007.

  1. Little-Acorn
    Online

    Little-Acorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,323
    Thanks Received:
    2,017
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +5,819
    With Democrats newly in majorities in Congress, they are looking at yet another proposal to mandate increased gas-mileage standards for automakers.

    Higher mileage can certainly be had. Mostly by building smaller, lighter cars. Expensive methods such as developing dual-drive "hybrid" vehicles can nearly double the price of the car, eating up any potential fuel cost savings and more, as well as pricing these highly-effficient vehicles out of the range of what most people who buy cars of that size, can afford.

    And just as inevitably, driving smaller, lighter cars, translates directly to more injuries and deaths from car crashes. Study after study has shown that, when two small cars collide, the resulting injuries and deaths are worse on average, whan when two large cars collide. And of course, when a small car and a large car collide, it's not difficult to predict which car's occupants will come out worse.

    Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is proposing a bill to force auto makers to increase their corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards. Apparently Ms. Feinstein believes that the savings in fuel would more than offset the thousands of additional deaths that would result.

    Recently we have been treated to TV pictures of "protesters" carrying leftover signs screaming "NO BLOOD FOR OIL". When do you suppose they will visit Ms. Feinstein's office to remind her of the (possibly unintended) consequences of her plans?

    Has there ever been a time when one of these do-gooder legislators has looked out beyond the rosy glow of their own idealistic vision, to the real world where people suffer the REAL consequences of what they propose?

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-cafe9may09,0,3790776.story?coll=la-opinion-leftrail
     
  2. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    Where the heck is all that oil that the anti-war crowd says the current administration as a reason for war?
     
  3. Mr.Conley
    Offline

    Mr.Conley Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    1,958
    Thanks Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    New Orleans, LA/Cambridge, MA
    Ratings:
    +116
    True (unless they used carbon fiber, which they're not), nonetheless, once you factor in the effects of global warming and terrorist funding via oil revenues, it's entirely possible that the net total deaths will decrease. Gotta look at the whole picture.

    Besides, with all the safety equipment available in today's cars it's more a problem of people being idiots then cars failing.
     
  4. Vintij
    Offline

    Vintij Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,040
    Thanks Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Anaheim, CA
    Ratings:
    +105
    Hydrogen fuel cell engines. Find a cheaper way to manufacture those, and we have the solution to our oil dilema. Trust me oil will be a thing of the past within 20-30 years, at least for the U.S.
     
  5. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    'Huge oil find' in Gulf of Mexico

    Chevron said the oil field may be a "significant discovery"
    Three companies led by US-based Chevron say they have found an oil field under the Gulf of Mexico that could boost US reserves by more than 50%.
    Drilling at a test well yielded "a flow rate of more than 6,000 barrels of crude oil per day", Chevron said.

    The discovery may rival the biggest US oil field in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska.

    Experts caution that the true size of the oil field is not yet known and it will be a long time before any of the oil there enters the market.

    "In the last 15 years, there've been so many great projects that started out and then petered out," Matt Simmons, the head of a group of energy investment bankers, told Reuters news agency.


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/5318776.stm
     
  6. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    The no blood for oil crowd thinks we went into Iraq for oil. At best, Iraq produces about $20 billion per year worth of oil, depending on the price of crude. We have spent $500 billion in Iraq. America could have instead purchased every drop of Iraqi oil for 20 years, given it away for free, and still been $100 billion ahead of the game. The blood for oil slogan makes no sense and demeans the sacrifice of the men and women, Americans, British, Iraqis, and others, that have given their lives trying to bring democracy and freedom to a place where they have never been known.

    Regarding mandated auto mileage standards: they would in fact reduce or slow consumption. So would a 55mph speed limit, required use of public transportation, required car pooling, and slashed discretionary driving. But I do not favor government enforcement of such policies. Rather than concentrate on punishing public use of energy, the government should instead concentrate on the research and development of alternative sources of energy. If the free market does not make economically viable alternative sources, e.g., new nuclear power plants or coal gasification, then the government must step up and develop the resources. We know the oil will run out and we must have replacement energy sources ready to go online. Then, when nuclear power, coal gasification, geothermal, solar, hydrogen, helium 3, etc., become economically viable, the government can then sell those assets to private organizations and shareholders. We are not going to get out of this mess by mandating fuel economy or driving 55mph. As a nation, collectively, we have to identify the future sources of energy and press with all our might to develop them right now, even if it means temporarily setting aside the belief that free market forces will always lead to the most adaptive solutions. Sometimes the free market only leads into a box canyon.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  7. TheStripey1
    Offline

    TheStripey1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    548
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Left Coast
    Ratings:
    +23
    It's laying on the ground in Iraq because the insurgents, who according to DICK cheney are in their last throes, keep blowing up the pipelines...
     
  8. TheStripey1
    Offline

    TheStripey1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    548
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Left Coast
    Ratings:
    +23
    and your solution is to what? Keep driving your big gas guzzling SUV? :cuckoo:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. TheStripey1
    Offline

    TheStripey1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    548
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Left Coast
    Ratings:
    +23

    well said One... well said...
     
  10. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    This thread so smack of "Big Brother" it's unbelievable.
     

Share This Page