President Calls for Less Driving to Conserve Gas - NYtimes

[Sleepkyng]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/27/b...811cbb5856253e&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

From the article:

Mr. Bush's comments, while similar to remarks he made shortly after the disruption from Hurricane Katrina pushed gasoline prices sharply higher, were particularly notable because the administration has long emphasized new production over conservation. It has also opted not to impose higher mileage standards on automakers.

In 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney said, "Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it cannot be the basis of a sound energy policy." Also that year, Ari Fleischer, then Mr. Bush's press secretary, responded to a question about reducing American energy consumption by saying "that's a big no."

"The president believes that it's an American way of life," Mr. Fleischer said.



:lol:

 

[E-Z-B]

Sounds like a flip-flop to me.

 

[Quackzilla]

 

[Drocket]

Bush will be promoting his new conservation initiative with a 50 state tour via Air Force One. Starting in California, Bush will then travel to Maine, Nevada, Vermont, Hawaii, New York, Oregon...

 

[Sleepkyng]

Kerry :lol:

 

[E-Z-B]

Chavez was stunned when he came to the UN building in NYC. He saw "all these cars with only one passenger in them, and it seemed such a waste". But he's right - it seems that every country besides America & Canada actually believe in carpooling. I even noticed that in Hawaii. But I admit - it's too hard to do that in our society. Everybody has such busy schedules that it seems impractical to carpool daily.

 

[mykevermin]

Now if he would reverse his repeal of government-enforced increasing milage standards over the next ten years, then we'd be onto something.

In the meantime, hooray for Bush, but he's still foisting all kinds of responsibility on the American people, and taking away means of accountability for corporations. Bleh.

 

[Sleepkyng]

yeah, but how about a car that gets 40 mpg as opposed to 15?

Do all those people really need those SUVs and Trucks?

1 out of 100 Dodge 2500 Ram owners actually gets the full use of their rig. A 1500 or even just a Dakota would probably do the job just the same.

 

[evanft]

Maybe he'll repeal the tax breaks he gave oil companies in the energy bill. And maybe Master Chief will jump out of my ass and noscope a pigeon from 50 yards.

 

[Quackzilla]

He is also repealing energy laws...

 

[E-Z-B]

[quote name='Sleepkyng']yeah, but how about a car that gets 40 mpg as opposed to 15?

Do all those people really need those SUVs and Trucks?

1 out of 100 Dodge 2500 Ram owners actually gets the full use of their rig. A 1500 or even just a Dakota would probably do the job just the same.[/QUOTE]

I own a Ford Ranger, and must say that I've gotten my use out of it quite extensively. However, like you said, the tasks required for a truck can be most accomplished with a light pickup truck such as the Ranger or even S10, plus you get better gas mileage than the Ram or F150.

 

[Sleepkyng]

yup, my dad had a ram 1500 and we used it to pull stumps out of the ground and move whole trees, but after we did a lot of thinning in our forest he just couldn't justify owning it so he bought a Ranger and couldn't be happier.

fyi: Ram 1500 mpg on the highway: 15 - Ranger: 24

 

[Apossum]

This headline was funny to read...first thing on my mind was "what's the catch?"

 

[zionoverfire]

Or he could actually decrease gas consumption by spending federal money on coal plants, hydroelectirc dams and solar panels. But hey, talk is cheap.

 

[elprincipe]

[quote name='zionoverfire']Or he could actually decrease gas consumption by spending federal money on coal plants, hydroelectirc dams and solar panels. But hey, talk is cheap.[/QUOTE]

Actually, he is pushing clean coal technology (it has been a staple of his speeches for a long time) and there aren't many more good places in the U.S. to build dams for hydropower. But it's pretty ing ridiculous to start preaching conservation only after things go to hell with gas prices. Damn politicians can never see past the end of their noses.

Instead of preaching conservation, what about something substantive?

1. Repeal the tax breaks SUVs are given through them being classified as light trucks even though they are passenger vehicles.

2. Repeal tax breaks for energy companies that are using fossil fuels. Give said tax breaks as incentives to those developing the energy sources of the future.

3. Get serious with Saudi Arabia about oil supply in the meantime and force through drilling in ANWR.

4. Encourage telecommuting.

ETC ETC.

 

[zionoverfire]

[quote name='elprincipe']Actually, he is pushing clean coal technology (it has been a staple of his speeches for a long time) and there aren't many more good places in the U.S. to build dams for hydropower. But it's pretty ing ridiculous to start preaching conservation only after things go to hell with gas prices. Damn politicians can never see past the end of their noses.
[/QUOTE]

Most of the gas in this country is not used by cars, if he cared he'd address the real problem. Clean coal is nice, regular coal is cheap and more naturaly available than gasoline in this country.

 

[elprincipe]

[quote name='zionoverfire']Most of the gas in this country is not used by cars, if he cared he'd address the real problem. Clean coal is nice, regular coal is cheap and more naturaly available than gasoline in this country.[/QUOTE]

I think you mean most of the oil, not gas. And there is a lot of coal around and usable if we can get it to be a sufficiently clean source, very true.

Another thing would be to urge conservation in all areas of electricity use. Try to get people to use efficient light bulbs, not use so much air conditioning/heating, etc. Imagine how much energy it would save in the summer if people upped the thermostat to 73 degrees instead of 72.

 

[E-Z-B]

Actually, clean coal is on the chopping block to pay for Katrina, according to this Republican memo:

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/House_Republican_Study_Committee_document_recommends_huge_0922.html

Scroll down to Title V.

 

[elprincipe]

[quote name='E-Z-B']Actually, clean coal is on the chopping block to pay for Katrina, according to this Republican memo:

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/House_Republican_Study_Committee_document_recommends_huge_0922.html

Scroll down to Title V.[/QUOTE]

What a joke.

 

[E-Z-B]

McClellan said Tuesday the White House planned to take other steps to conserve energy and that orders were issued to staff asking them to restrict nonessential travel and to reduce use of electricity by shutting off printers, fax machines and lights.

The White House said it was reducing the size of the presidential motorcade, which numbered about a dozen vehicles in Beaumont but can run more than 20 vehicles for some trips.

COST SHARPLY UP TO RUN AIR FORCE ONE

But one of the heftiest costs of presidential travel entails flying Air Force One, a reconfigured Boeing 747-200B. Bush already has made stops in Mississippi, Colorado, Texas and Louisiana, including four in New Orleans, the low-lying city flooded by Katrina.

While precise costs were not available, Maj. Brenda Campbell, an Air Force spokeswoman at the Pentagon, said that as of a month ago, before Katrina struck, fuel expenses for the biggest airplane of the Air Force One fleet was $6,029 per hour, compared to $3,974 an hour in fiscal year 2004.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050927/us_nm/hurricanes_bush_dc_1

 

[coffman]

[quote name='zionoverfire']Most of the gas in this country is not used by cars, if he cared he'd address the real problem. Clean coal is nice, regular coal is cheap and more naturaly available than gasoline in this country.[/QUOTE]

Actually, most of the oil and gas used in this country is used for transportation. Very little is used for generation of electricity (probably around 5%). Also, clean coal is a misnomer. It may be clean"er", but it is certainly not clean. Also, the use of coal contributes to global warming.