Comments on: Bush implements hard targets with energy bill http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/ The Blog that Talks about Climate Change Sat, 19 Jul 2008 23:47:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: Speed Limit 80kmh - Pollution Ahead : EcoWorldly http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-632 Speed Limit 80kmh - Pollution Ahead : EcoWorldly Wed, 27 Feb 2008 21:07:29 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-632 [...] The City of London has faced stern opposition over its new congestion charges (even being threatened with legal action from Porsche), the Germans refuse to bow to pressure from environmental groups to put speed limits of their unrestricted autobahns, speed cameras are branded as a universal menace, and Detroit automakers have been vigorously opposed to a national fleet average fuel consumption figure of 35mpg. [...] […] The City of London has faced stern opposition over its new congestion charges (even being threatened with legal action from Porsche), the Germans refuse to bow to pressure from environmental groups to put speed limits of their unrestricted autobahns, speed cameras are branded as a universal menace, and Detroit automakers have been vigorously opposed to a national fleet average fuel consumption figure of 35mpg. […]

]]> By: Europe Gets Tougher On Heavy Co2 Emitters : EcoWorldly http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-447 Europe Gets Tougher On Heavy Co2 Emitters : EcoWorldly Tue, 05 Feb 2008 20:34:47 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-447 [...] & further reading: The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, BBC News, TCC – Bush Implements Hard Targets with Energy Bill How useful is this post? 0(0 [...] […] & further reading: The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, BBC News, TCC – Bush Implements Hard Targets with Energy Bill How useful is this post? 0(0 […]

]]> By: DFM http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-183 DFM Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:52:40 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-183 Mark, you can save money with better fuel economy, no question. Almost 2 years ago I went from a 20mpg SUV to a 32mpg vehicle. When I had my SUV, gas was $2.50/g. It's now gone up to $3.25/g. Now it costs me almost as much to drive as it did before, and it keeps going up. And, I have to pay for a new car on top of that, when my older one was paid for. With no end in sight, us little guys are between a rock and a hard place. The states are already talking about raising gas taxes because they're losing money from gas sales. They've been experimenting with all kinds of new ways to tax us. My biggest problem is the government never seems to do the right thing for the right reasons, but always does the wrong thing for the wrong reason. There are much better and cost effective alternatives that they won't touch, preffering to go with the one that will hurt all of us the most. Mark, you can save money with better fuel economy, no question.

Almost 2 years ago I went from a 20mpg SUV to a 32mpg vehicle. When I had my SUV, gas was $2.50/g. It’s now gone up to $3.25/g. Now it costs me almost as much to drive as it did before, and it keeps going up. And, I have to pay for a new car on top of that, when my older one was paid for. With no end in sight, us little guys are between a rock and a hard place.

The states are already talking about raising gas taxes because they’re losing money from gas sales. They’ve been experimenting with all kinds of new ways to tax us.

My biggest problem is the government never seems to do the right thing for the right reasons, but always does the wrong thing for the wrong reason. There are much better and cost effective alternatives that they won’t touch, preffering to go with the one that will hurt all of us the most.

]]> By: Mark http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-181 Mark Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:59:53 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-181 I’ve seen various quotes on the source, most of which are similar to this: „The Democrats said the legislation will reduce US demand for oil by 4m barrels a day by 2030, more than twice the present daily imports from the Gulf. They said the fuel economy requirements will save motorists $700 to $1,000 a year in costs.“ On your second point, my experience has been that cash savings through MPG can be very significant. I never gave it much thought until I brought a new car last year which gives 50+MPG (the previous car gave around 30 MPG). Until then I had never really considered the fuel costs, but after realising that I previously spent 250 euros per month on fuel and suddenly the new car was using around 40% less I was saving quite a bit of money. Of course, fuel is much much more expensive in Europe. I’ve seen various quotes on the source, most of which are similar to this: „The Democrats said the legislation will reduce US demand for oil by 4m barrels a day by 2030, more than twice the present daily imports from the Gulf. They said the fuel economy requirements will save motorists $700 to $1,000 a year in costs.“

On your second point, my experience has been that cash savings through MPG can be very significant. I never gave it much thought until I brought a new car last year which gives 50+MPG (the previous car gave around 30 MPG). Until then I had never really considered the fuel costs, but after realising that I previously spent 250 euros per month on fuel and suddenly the new car was using around 40% less I was saving quite a bit of money. Of course, fuel is much much more expensive in Europe.

]]> By: DFM http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-180 DFM Thu, 20 Dec 2007 23:34:03 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-180 I've read the AP article and they list as the source the "Union of Concerned Scientists". Calculating savings based solely on MPG is sort of silly, don't you think? Mind you, I'm not complaining about the new CAFE standards; I think they're overdue. I just dislike the spin that it's going to save us money. Ya right! I’ve read the AP article and they list as the source the “Union of Concerned Scientists”.

Calculating savings based solely on MPG is sort of silly, don’t you think? Mind you, I’m not complaining about the new CAFE standards; I think they’re overdue. I just dislike the spin that it’s going to save us money. Ya right!

]]> By: Mark http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-179 Mark Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:59:29 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-179 These figures were quoted the the Democrats in their support of the bill. I believe that these figures were derived purely by calculating the savings made by improvements to MPG. These figures were quoted the the Democrats in their support of the bill. I believe that these figures were derived purely by calculating the savings made by improvements to MPG.

]]> By: DFM http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-178 DFM Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:52:58 +0000 http://www.talkclimatechange.com/2007/12/20/bush-implements-hard-targets-with-energy-bill/#comment-178 "It has been noted that increased US economy standards could bring annual fuel savings of between $700 to $1,000 to consumers" Who did this fuzzy math? When you consider the added cost of fuel with higher ethanol content, along with the lesser efficiency (less mpg), how will this save anyone money? When they calculate mpg, are they going to use regular gasoline, or the higher ethanol blend? And the added cost of food; it's already gone up about 8% without the higher mandate. And then there's the mandated renewable energy. There go the electric bills. Again, who did this fuzzy math? “It has been noted that increased US economy standards could bring annual fuel savings of between $700 to $1,000 to consumers”

Who did this fuzzy math? When you consider the added cost of fuel with higher ethanol content, along with the lesser efficiency (less mpg), how will this save anyone money? When they calculate mpg, are they going to use regular gasoline, or the higher ethanol blend? And the added cost of food; it’s already gone up about 8% without the higher mandate.

And then there’s the mandated renewable energy. There go the electric bills. Again, who did this fuzzy math?

]]>