The switches should come down in price a bit if and when the off-grid stuff finally hits critical mass.
The problem with being off the grid is that you can't sell your excess back to the utility.
Here's another GW tack:
"Cutting smog and soot has an immediate impact on climate change.
The climate-warming effects of these short-lived pollutants have largely been ignored by scientists and regulators focusing on climate policy. Carbon dioxide, with a lifetime of many centuries, is the star of that show, and the effects on climate by these other pollutants, which endure for mere months, are less well understood."
"Cutting smog and soot has an immediate impact on climate change.
We may dodge the bullet this winter if oil prices stay low. It will mean less people using wood to supplement their other more costly heating oil etc. The neighbor in front and back of me heat with wood. Being close to 100 feet away brings only a faint odor of wood smoke.
Current after market emergency back ups can be pricey at best. I get a tool equipment catalog www.NorthernTool.com 800-556-7885 that has from the mild to wild (actually common sensical) adaptations which really CAN cost BIG bucks. Bottom line is they are either RUG or D2 powered.
When I was in the military and ran a production control facility (efforts of 3000 folks ) we had emergency back up diesel generators roughly about the size of a tractor trailer rig on a hard pad surface.
Oil has to be pretty cheap for that. I have 12 acres of land - 11 of which are wooded, and the expense of the wood is my chain-saw gas. My heating alternatives Oct - May are oil, electric, and wood; no natural gas service in the area.
Burning wood is a great natural heat source, recycling one of nature's gifts to us. Actually wood is nothing more than natural solar energy "batteries". Trees absorb solar energy and use that to build their molecular structure.
I have no need for AC however, as GW hasn't hit these parts. A ceiling fan is more than adequate in the summer.
...wood burning is the most pollution laden way to get heat in a home. While I do like the smell of a wood-burning fireplace, only the most recent designs will burn wood or pellets without an amazing pollution volume to go with it. You heating one house on a 12 acre parcel is no issue, but if all of Boston were to heat with 'wet pine', the snow would be black for many miles around....
But I always thought natural was good, and man-made was evil?
See the problem in trying to limit GHG isn't just getting the wealthiest countries to put in renewable energy and reduce driving, it's that the other 80% of the world is and will be too poor to do anything but burn fossil fuels - including coal and wood. And that population is growing.
Politically inconvenient truth about electric cars
Mr Sarkozy’s own government commissioned months ago one of France’s leading energy experts – Jean Syrota, the former French energy industry regulator – to draw up a report to analyse all the options for building cleaner and more efficient mass-market cars by 2030. The 129-page report was completed in September to coincide with the Paris motor show. But the government has continued to sit on it and seems reluctant to ever publish it.
Yet all those who have managed to glimpse at the document agree that it makes interesting reading. It concludes that there is not much future in the much vaunted developed of all electric-powered cars. Instead, it suggests that the traditional combustion engine powered by petrol, diesel, ethanol or new biofuels still offers the most realistic prospect of developing cleaner vehicles.
The misgivings over the future of the electric car may explain why the French government appears to have spiked the report. It probably considers it politically incorrect, especially when some of Mr Sarkozy’s big business chums such as Vincent Bolloré and Serge Dassault are developing either electric cars
We know EVs are going no where in the USA. No viable car has been built or demonstrated. Only vapor ware from Tesla and ZAP. It may continue to be a University and home grown oddity. I wish I had the ambition to build one for myself. Just too lazy.
More people in the suburbs of So CA are turning to wood for heat. The local Warm Hearth cannot keep a supply of wood and pellet stoves in stock. So much of the county does not have natural gas. Propane was a killer last winter. January my bill for Propane was over $500. That was keeping the house at 70 degrees. This year we will shoot for 68 degrees to try and cut that bill down. I can see folks in the NE using coal fired furnaces in place of heating oil. GW can go to H--l if you are cold and poor.
WOW ! My jaw nearly dropped when I read your posting! Jan monthly propane of $500 !! That is what one would imagine for a Jan in the North East/West !! Seems like living in a "globally warmed advantaged place" is THE way to go. The Oct 08 bill for nat gas totaled $14.08 (.50 cents per day) and I was racking the brain on how to get THAT down!! ?? I will stop now. Got to love that global warming! :confuse:
CR reviewed the new Jetta Diesel in their Jan issue. They loved it and ranked it #2 overall in the 20 to 25M segment...above the Prius and Civic. The regular 4 cyl Altima was #1.
Some like CR and some don't...they may have their own agenda but advertising revenue is not part of it.
Despite a lot of negative press, I have truly been enjoying the 03 TDI for 5 going on 6 years and 111,000 miles. I have been led to believe the MK V, aka 2009 TDI IS head and shoulders better than the MK IV generation, and have actually confirmed it with a test drive and inspection. The interesting thing in the 6 MY's that have passed, the cost is + 2.6% (more) per year, for app 3.4k more. It is interesting to read folks experiences on the reliability questions.
The sad fact is that GM sold more cars worldwide than Toyota in 2007, so selling cars is not the problem. Just extremely poor management and no expense control.
I want to see GM make it thru this...but not with a bailout at this point. They should first have to file chapter 11, reorganize, and get some competent management. Then if they need a loan to get jump started...maybe.
The actual US market inventories might belie those assertions. (not to mentioned a cheap starter model bailout out of 20 B, 25 B, now 30 BILLIION dollar bail out. Does anybody doubt we will end up with the more luxurious fully loaded MODEL ????? ) :sick: :lemon:
So for example, I would have seriously considered 2003 big three car products competitive with the VW products that got the 42/49 mpg. Just two problems: (X 3). 1. No turbo diesels 2. no car product that got 42/49 mpg. in the US markets. 3. poor resale relative to the TDI model.
Or, perhaps as you seem to be suggesting, we might really be looking at the whole issue/scenario incorrectly. A modest press to test. We should buy the inventory at an extreme discount and loan it back to the big three at retail??? Plus interest of course? :shades:
My point is that handing over billions of dollars to the big 3 on their terms would be akin to handing money to a crack addict and expecting him to spend it responsibly. There has to be some fundamental changes before any money is handed out.
I can see folks in the NE using coal fired furnaces in place of heating oil.
The wood-stove I have can burn either coal or wood. As I get older, I might get tired of cutting my own wood, and switch to coal. I think the tipping point for me is oil above $3.50/gal. A guy I work with had just put in a regular coal furnace.
If the utilities or government want people off propane and oil, then they had either get gas-lines run, or build a few million windmills. Maybe they could make the windmills more economical by building a factory at each prison, and paying the prisoners $0.50/hr? It would be more useful to repay society, then watching TV or lifting weights.
Sounds like a dying gasp from a bunch of political hacks that see their gravy train disappearing into a snow bank.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., vowed to push two global warming bills starting in January: Mother Nature, of course, is oblivious to the federal government's machinations. Ironically, 2008 is on pace to be a slightly cooler year in a steadily rising temperature trend line. Experts say it's thanks to a La Nina weather variation. While skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming.
Don't the GW clan realize how silly they look? If man was causing the planet to warm it would be steadily going up in temp as we burn more and more fossil fuel. Variations show that it is caused by elements far beyond the control of mortal man. It should show just how insignificant we really are.
...NEW RECORD LOW TEMPERATURES IN DENVER FOR DECEMBER 14TH AND 15TH...THE LOW TEMPERATURE AT DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ON DECEMBER 14TH DROPPED TO -18 AT 635 PM AND NEVER DROPPED BELOW -18 PRIOR TO MIDNIGHT. SO THAT ESTABLISHES A NEW RECORD LOW TEMPERATURE FOR DECEMBER 14TH BREAKING THE OLD RECORD OF -14 DEGREES SET IN 1901.
Several places in the state have already shattered daily record lows, and more are expected to be broken as the sub-zero temperatures continue through Sunday night. White Sulphur Springs reported 29 degrees below zero to the National Weather Service today, stretching way beyond the last daily record low of 17 degrees below zero set in 1922.
“We’re waiting for a lot of reports to come in still,” said Scott Coulston, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Great Falls.
Other towns breaking records on Sunday were Lewistown with -25 degrees this morning (24 below was the previous record) and Dillon with 16 degrees below zero (the last record low was 15 below).
Fort Benton and Boulder tied previous record lows of 23 and 20 degrees below, respectively, and Havre and Great Falls are both on their way to shattering previous records as well.
I don't think the people in Colorado and Montana will continue to believe in the GW myth. It is supposed to snow today in San Diego county down to record low elevations. I'm glad I have this Sequoia 4X4 to get around in.
Guys, get with the programme, (please note correct spelling ). Global Warming is dead.
It was replaced by Climate Change a while ago, (at least here in Euroland). Global Warming is a limited-use phrase, whereas Climate Change is a real catch-all phrase..........a politician's wet dream, so to speak.
With CC, whatever happens - it's our fault and "they" are correct. Neat huh ?
Probably coming to a capital city near you, real soon.
Well lets see, in grammar school (53 to 45 years ago (k-8)), they used to refer to that as the 4 seasons. In no particular order, but using Carol Kings' song: WINTER, SPRING, SUMMER OR FALL,... "You Got A (climate changing) Friend."
Here in New York (that's New Netherlands to you Euro folks) we have a governor who is planning a "fat tax" on non-diet soda to help balance his budget. He is probably worried that us fatties will sweat too much when the Climate Change arrives.
Also Discover Magazine in it's latest issue has declared that the Climate Change deniers are being led astray by a bunch of public opinion con men who used to work for Big Tobacco.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
And let's remind everyone that these record low temperatures, and the ice-storm that just hit the NE, are in the FALL! Winter has not even started, and I've burned 1.5 cords of wood.
So obviously we have a concensus here that it's too cold, most of the year, and just right in the summer. The Earth had better warmup quite a bit more before we start running low on fossil fuels, or else you'll see a great migration from anywhere north of the Mason Dixon line.
The first day of winter is more of an astronomical term - I don't think it has anything to do with weather. But look on the bright side, it's only a week until the days start getting longer again.
Here's a guy tying the auto bailout with global warming (and some other stuff):
"U.S. leadership in these forms of personal transportation can ultimately create vital export industries—vehicles, components and intellectual property. Failure to lead, ultimately, will require Americans to import what they need and result in a lower standard of living.
Sadly, the Detroit Three have less capital to develop more fuel-efficient internal combustion systems and alternative vehicles than their competitors. Cash strapped, they have smaller vehicle development budgets than foreign competitors that produce comparable numbers of vehicles."
He does not sound optimistic about the B3 surviving.
If the Detroit Three, with the cooperation of the UAW, cannot present plans to Congress that would fully and completely align their labor costs and work rule flexibility with Japanese transplants and demonstrate how their vehicle development and distribution costs can similarly aligned, it would be better to let them go through Chapter 11 and reemerge with new labor agreements, dramatically reduced debt and strengthened management.
I don't see any other choice. Maybe the off shore portion of GM can survive and ship cars from China. They have a losing combo and banking on the money losing VOLT is just plain STUPID.
You post just drove home the point that perhaps (I for one) WE have really been not calling the Big THREE corrrectly. It is really the Big FOUR: UAW, ford,chrysler, gm.
Here's a guy tying the auto bailout with global warming (and some other stuff):
I'm really surprised that I don't hear more from environmental groups or Al Gore concerning the B3 bailouts. I mean the creation of less cars - the manufacture and use of which creates pollution and CO2, should be something they are in favor of. Are environmental groups and the GW-supporting world against a bailout of the B3?
"Climate Change" and the impending death of the B3 are definitely related.
So why does Obama and Pelosi have the contradictory positions of wanting to reduce GHG, yet strongly support the B3? If anything Obama should be giving money to those auto manufacturers who make the best and most popular hybrids, and or high mpg diesels.
If Obama wants to reduce GHG, why doesn't he take this B3 financial problem as an opportunity to get the U.S. from building more vehicles. The less factories run the < GHG created.
How come Al Gore isn't on 60 Minutes and every other talk show, stating that the government should let the Big3 die if that's what the market determines, and thus GHG will be reduced? Is it because it doesn't support the party-line of supporting the UAW? Is Gore being quiet because it is now his friends who would be hurt by reducing GHG's?! :P
You hit the nails on the heads!! My take this is all a " C" broadway production. I think the "enwiremental wacko weft" attack pit bulls have been put on leash by the powers that be, demos.They probably threaten them with muzzles as they look to repair the other side that got them the office/executive branch....the UAW. Now that they have the majorities in the legislative; house senate and now they are working on those old guys and dolls in the judicial.
I think the Greens are against shifting any of the initial $25B in tech money to the bailout.
I hadn't thought about them lobbying against the bailout to get more fuel-efficient cars (i.e. foreign) cars on the road.
That doesn't make a lot of sense though, because GM has a lot of models getting 30 mpg.
And the Greens and the UAW usually work together on other issues so I don't see the Greens attacking the industry and risking all those jobs.
I did see a blurb where the Sierra Club is attacking buyouts of hog farmers as corporate welfare, so maybe they are against an auto bailout as well. They surely wouldn't support bailing out HUMMER.
..."think the Greens are against shifting any of the initial $25B in tech money to the bail out. "...
While I would agree, they might take/plagerize the game plan from what our local TA (transit authority)did. They promised under penalty of law, votes, etc NOT to touch SPECIFIC funds for a SPECIFIC project.....So what did they do?
Basically the logic was: IF we go bankrupt (which they threatened) THEN we will not be able to fulfil the project that was voted on and to wit what the funds are "segregated" FOR. LOL !!! You will never guess what they got to do !! :lemon:
Also it is finally coming out the SUV's (etc) are the "vehicles" by which the literally enormous profits are used to pay for UAW ENORMOUS feather bedding.
The essential problem/s still exist/s.
IF now SUV's are NOW verboten, THEN what other cars (segments) in the (future) line up will take the place of the app $15,000 per vehicle or so PROFIT the suv's USED to contribute to the feather bedding???
So if one (TAXPAYERS) can/will NOT see that; not only will the taxpayers BAIL OUT the UAW (aka big three) but that future cars WILL COST dramatically MORE (to make up for the figurative as well as literal cash cow: SUV's) THEN in effect the taxpayers deserve what they will reap down the road !!?? :sick: :lemon:
Also it is finally coming out the SUV's are the "vehicle" by which the literally enormous profits
Well, duh, why do you think I bought a minivan instead of an SUV? If I had to tow, then I'd get a truck but there's long been a $10,000 premium for getting into an SUV. Why pay it, when you can get into a van for thousands cheaper? (don't answer that, LOL).
The same thought process is hammering Apple right now. People want netbooks for $300 and Apple can't survive selling stuff with that little of a profit margin.
Why encourage building (cheap) new cars instead of having most people drive old ones into the ground? Would save a lot of resources keeping old ones on the road. But you'd never get new tech to the people that way (like more efficient, less polluting engines).
The "dah" will be on YOU !... :P when they 1. past the bail out 2. probably chose the next cash cows..... So yes be very careful what one collectively wishes for.
One suv was gotten 15 years ago under IRS #179 and I will keep it another 15 years !!! (it just passed the mandatory Smog Test ONLY essentially with lower than the first smog test!!! ) Still got to declare income when I sell it for ( 5,000 to 10,000...but does the statue of limitations run out? :shades: ) But I might hedge by getting something now, as invoice to under invoice pricing seems to be the rule of the day. Might pick up some tax credits also !!
That doesn't make a lot of sense though, because GM has a lot of models getting 30 mpg.
Big 3 Rebadging helps a lot in the model count. Also I wonder if they count a hatchback and a sedan as separate models - like the Aveo? Looking at the glass-half-empty side, what manufacturers have the most models under 20mpg? I'd say the Chevy and GMC pickups and SUV's, along with their Hummer models. I'd also guess Chrysler with their trucks and Jeep don't fare well on that question.
Maybe we can send people down to Cuba to see how a society gets by almost exclusively on used cars. If the government sponsors it, I'm sure we can get the study done in 2-3 years for no more than $100M.
Now that is a heck of a plan !!! They might welcome an upgrade from the 1930/40/50's models "UAW MADE" American cars !!! We in turn can make more Holly wood movies with Chip Foose like conversions, while they smoke Cuban Cigars !!!!!
(I had a few (Cuban cigars) by way of Istanbul. (legal products bought in Turkey are not LOL illegal to bring into the US) other cash crops from Turkey decidedly ....ARE )
Since I am not a smoker, I am sure it was really WASTED on me)
I think Gore, Obama, and Pelosi should get behind the effort to decrease vehicle manufacturing in this country, and to limit imports of vehicles, in the name of reducing GHG.
As another facet of this program, they could offer a Vehicle Buyback program, just like the gun buyback programs offered in many cities. Bring in any sort of registered, operational motor vehicle and receive a credit towards the purchase of a U.S. made Segway or U.S. made bicycle. The lower the mpg of the vehicle, the larger the credit. Use the proposed bailout funds and future bailout funds, to fund this conversion.
Take the workers from the bankrupt Big3, and convert those car factories into making bikes and Segways, and offer them jobs there, at average wages. If there are any extra UAW workers, have them working building new paths, or administering the vehicle buyback program.
Well, substitute all-electric for bicycle and you might be onto something. It's easier to install and monitor emission controls on the electric generation facilities than on millions and millions of cars.
That's called "local weather", which is not a global condition.
The science for supporting the theory of actual man-made contributions to global warming seems to be good and solid, and getting better every day. I read Alexander Cockburn's "denial" of man-made global warming, and as much as I enjoy him, this was a very shabby piece of writing and easily refuted by George Monbiot and others.
Gambling revenue BTW is way down I see, refuting the notion that gambling businesses are recession-proof.
So what is being hypothesized is local weather is not affected at all by so called global warming !!! Interesting disconnect.
Apparently the MASSIVE northern pole ice berg melting has NOT resulted in inundating coastal areas, such as: NY and Boston harbors, etc. Even with dire proof positive environmental assurances that was EXACTLY what would happen.
So the Kyoto Accord signers have green lighted places like China to grow to a min of 300 M vehicles that have lower than European emissions standards because....????? Seems to me even THEY don't believe their own press.
That's correct, local weather need not get "warm" if the earth is warming...it might in fact get way colder in some places as ocean currents shift or slow down. It's not a disconnect at all---quite the contrary.
(quote from How Stuff Works) "The .climate and the weather are not the same thing: we experience only the weather, which is the day-to-day, sometimes hour-to-hour changes of temperature, precipitation, wind etc. The climate, on the other hand, refers to the cumulative average of the weather around us over decades, centuries and longer."
Melting polar ice won't affect ocean level because most of the Arctic ice is already floating prior to melting, so it has already displaced its volume in water.
Your quote from How Stuff Works has been happening for literally millions of years !!! Global Climate change, a lot to most of it has been occuring with no humans on the earth !!!!
The melting polar ice was a "slam dunk" IF/THEN guarantee/guaranteed by the global warming environmental advocates !!!! :lemon:
Yes, one might think that, since the quote is out of context, but it actually refers to the climate records since mankind has been recording them. In other words, to someone in the Victorian Age, the year 2008 would be regarded as uncommonly warm (if say, the year 2008's climate suddenly happened instead in 1888 for instance--they would have certainly noticed it world-wide, if not perhaps been quite alarmed by the drastic change).
Also we can measure the various *isotopes* of carbon in the atmosphere, and in that sense definitely "ID" it as man-made, vs. say carbon dioxide coming out the ocean or out of vegetation--which would be "natural".
Science is not political--it is neither right or left---it's either true and testable, or it isn't. That's the beauty of it. It is ASSAILABLE. Science is not a 'belief" system, it has no "advocates". You're either right or you're wrong based on solid evidence.
And evidence takes time to accumulate.
So you'll see all kinds of junk science being bandied about, but the true scientists themselves would never claim such a thing as melting polar ice causing the oceans to rise is a "slam dunk" conclusion. Sounds like some "blog" or another, the usual nonsense.
The most frightening aspect of global warming is, in fact, our partial ignorance as to the effects of it in the long term.
Or to put it more simply, who is reckless enough to roll the dice and bet that *nothing* will happen and *nothing* needs to be done?
..."Or to put it more simply, who is reckless enough to roll the dice and bet that *nothing* will happen and *nothing* needs to be done? "...
You mean like Kyoto Accord signers green lighting a min of 300 M cars with lesser than European emissions standards? etc., etc,.
You document a WAY stylized almost .... look at science. Science is really the documentation of immense and constant failure with periodic jolts of firm maybe's.
Science is not a 'belief" system, it has no "advocates". You're either right or you're wrong based on solid evidence.
What happens when two scientist present opposing "PROOF"? There are hundreds of scientist that do not believe man is responsible for the current rise in Global Temperatures. It is only the politicians that see an opportunity to tax the populace that are trying to convince US that it is man made. If no politicians or the flaky UN was not involved it may have a lot more credibility. I see a lot more solid evidence being presented that totally refutes man's causing any change in the climate.
If you would like to buy some carbon credits I was thinking of putting a few of mine on eBay or Craigslist.
Gary says, "What happens when two scientists present opposing "PROOF"? "
All it means is that either one is wrong or both of them are wrong.
Good idea about the carbon credits. Since my Carbon Footprint is so small, I think I will sell some carbon credits on Craigslist to some family of five living in a 3500 sq ft home with an electric bill of $350 a month and three SUVs.
That's the beauty of science! It doesn't matter if 99% of all Americans think that man doesn't contribute to global warming. The facts will remain true (or prove false) no matter what anyone "believes". People can believe the sun revolves around the earth all they want.
Another way to distinguish science from dogma and politics is that in science, the scientists themselves are attacking their own ideas.
In other words, any statement or "factoid" that will not permit itself to be assailed is not science.
I haven't read or "met" many of these "hundreds of scientists" who would baldly state that man does not contribute to global warming. All I've read are people without any serious scientific credentials mis-stating science all the day long. Cockburn is just one good example among many. I myself might have believed what he said had I not checked out his "facts" (bad) and his sources (none cited).
At best, a true scientist would question the data with equally compelling data. Saying "I don't think so" is not a scientific argument.
Often you will find, upon close examination, that the dispute among scientists is not that Global Warming is occurring (almost all agree that it is).
Only a very few have ever stated that man does not contribute in SOME way, (and many of those have recanted) but there is a large and legitimate dispute as to the EXTENT of man's contribution and whether it's enough to do anything about or not.
I don't know the answer to that either.
As for examples of "human folly", well that goes without saying doesn't it? :P
NASA satellites show that about two trillion tons of ice in Antarctica, Alaska and Greenland have melted in the past 5 years. The agency plans to present the facts on Thursday at the American Geophysical Union conference which will be held in San Francisco, Calif. Many scientists state that this phenomenon is a vivid illustration of the effects that global warming has on Earth’s environment and climate.
A NASA geophysicist said that a good part of the melted land ice is located in Greenland, according to the agency’s GRACE satellite. Yet, the scientist pointed out that the ice loss recorded this year is not as severe as in 2007.
Scientists pointed out that the situation in Alaska is getting better because the satellites have recorded a minor increase in land ice throughout 2008. Yet, they are yet worried, as Alaska lost about 400 billion tons of land ice in the past five years.
Comments
The problem with being off the grid is that you can't sell your excess back to the utility.
Here's another GW tack:
"Cutting smog and soot has an immediate impact on climate change.
The climate-warming effects of these short-lived pollutants have largely been ignored by scientists and regulators focusing on climate policy. Carbon dioxide, with a lifetime of many centuries, is the star of that show, and the effects on climate by these other pollutants, which endure for mere months, are less well understood."
Trimming smog and soot offer immediate impact on climate change (Mercury News)
We may dodge the bullet this winter if oil prices stay low. It will mean less people using wood to supplement their other more costly heating oil etc. The neighbor in front and back of me heat with wood. Being close to 100 feet away brings only a faint odor of wood smoke.
When I was in the military and ran a production control facility (efforts of 3000 folks ) we had emergency back up diesel generators roughly about the size of a tractor trailer rig on a hard pad surface.
Burning wood is a great natural heat source, recycling one of nature's gifts to us.
I have no need for AC however, as GW hasn't hit these parts. A ceiling fan is more than adequate in the summer.
See the problem in trying to limit GHG isn't just getting the wealthiest countries to put in renewable energy and reduce driving, it's that the other 80% of the world is and will be too poor to do anything but burn fossil fuels - including coal and wood. And that population is growing.
Mr Sarkozy’s own government commissioned months ago one of France’s leading energy experts – Jean Syrota, the former French energy industry regulator – to draw up a report to analyse all the options for building cleaner and more efficient mass-market cars by 2030. The 129-page report was completed in September to coincide with the Paris motor show. But the government has continued to sit on it and seems reluctant to ever publish it.
Yet all those who have managed to glimpse at the document agree that it makes interesting reading. It concludes that there is not much future in the much vaunted developed of all electric-powered cars. Instead, it suggests that the traditional combustion engine powered by petrol, diesel, ethanol or new biofuels still offers the most realistic prospect of developing cleaner vehicles.
The misgivings over the future of the electric car may explain why the French government appears to have spiked the report. It probably considers it politically incorrect, especially when some of Mr Sarkozy’s big business chums such as Vincent Bolloré and Serge Dassault are developing either electric cars
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/37f1f624-c7b0-11dd-b611-000077b07658.html?nclick_check- =1
We know EVs are going no where in the USA. No viable car has been built or demonstrated. Only vapor ware from Tesla and ZAP. It may continue to be a University and home grown oddity. I wish I had the ambition to build one for myself. Just too lazy.
Some like CR and some don't...they may have their own agenda but advertising revenue is not part of it.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Thomas L Friedman "Obama's test: Cars,"...link title
Might be an interesting slant on why he probably would not touch an Obama cabinents job. with a 10 foot pole?
I want to see GM make it thru this...but not with a bailout at this point. They should first have to file chapter 11, reorganize, and get some competent management. Then if they need a loan to get jump started...maybe.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
So for example, I would have seriously considered 2003 big three car products competitive with the VW products that got the 42/49 mpg. Just two problems: (X 3). 1. No turbo diesels 2. no car product that got 42/49 mpg. in the US markets. 3. poor resale relative to the TDI model.
Or, perhaps as you seem to be suggesting, we might really be looking at the whole issue/scenario incorrectly. A modest press to test. We should buy the inventory at an extreme discount and loan it back to the big three at retail??? Plus interest of course? :shades:
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
The wood-stove I have can burn either coal or wood. As I get older, I might get tired of cutting my own wood, and switch to coal. I think the tipping point for me is oil above $3.50/gal. A guy I work with had just put in a regular coal furnace.
If the utilities or government want people off propane and oil, then they had either get gas-lines run, or build a few million windmills. Maybe they could make the windmills more economical by building a factory at each prison, and paying the prisoners $0.50/hr? It would be more useful to repay society, then watching TV or lifting weights.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., vowed to push two global warming bills starting in January: Mother Nature, of course, is oblivious to the federal government's machinations. Ironically, 2008 is on pace to be a slightly cooler year in a steadily rising temperature trend line. Experts say it's thanks to a La Nina weather variation. While skeptics are already using it as evidence of some kind of cooling trend, it actually illustrates how fast the world is warming.
Don't the GW clan realize how silly they look? If man was causing the planet to warm it would be steadily going up in temp as we burn more and more fossil fuel. Variations show that it is caused by elements far beyond the control of mortal man. It should show just how insignificant we really are.
...NEW RECORD LOW TEMPERATURES IN DENVER FOR DECEMBER 14TH AND 15TH...THE LOW TEMPERATURE AT DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ON DECEMBER 14TH DROPPED TO -18 AT 635 PM AND NEVER DROPPED BELOW -18 PRIOR TO MIDNIGHT. SO THAT ESTABLISHES A NEW RECORD LOW TEMPERATURE FOR DECEMBER 14TH BREAKING THE OLD RECORD OF -14 DEGREES SET IN 1901.
http://www.nws.noaa.gov/view/validProds.php?prod=RER&node=KBOU
Several places in the state have already shattered daily record lows, and more are expected to be broken as the sub-zero temperatures continue through Sunday night.
White Sulphur Springs reported 29 degrees below zero to the National Weather Service today, stretching way beyond the last daily record low of 17 degrees below zero set in 1922.
“We’re waiting for a lot of reports to come in still,” said Scott Coulston, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service in Great Falls.
Other towns breaking records on Sunday were Lewistown with -25 degrees this morning (24 below was the previous record) and Dillon with 16 degrees below zero (the last record low was 15 below).
Fort Benton and Boulder tied previous record lows of 23 and 20 degrees below, respectively, and Havre and Great Falls are both on their way to shattering previous records as well.
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20081214/NEWS01/81214005
I don't think the people in Colorado and Montana will continue to believe in the GW myth. It is supposed to snow today in San Diego county down to record low elevations. I'm glad I have this Sequoia 4X4 to get around in.
It was replaced by Climate Change a while ago, (at least here in Euroland). Global Warming is a limited-use phrase, whereas Climate Change is a real catch-all phrase..........a politician's wet dream, so to speak.
With CC, whatever happens - it's our fault and "they" are correct. Neat huh ?
Probably coming to a capital city near you, real soon.
So true, we colonials kan't spel worth a damb.
"...coming to a capital city near you..."
Here in New York (that's New Netherlands to you Euro folks) we have a governor who is planning a "fat tax" on non-diet soda to help balance his budget. He is probably worried that us fatties will sweat too much when the Climate Change arrives.
Also Discover Magazine in it's latest issue has declared that the Climate Change deniers are being led astray by a bunch of public opinion con men who used to work for Big Tobacco.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
So obviously we have a concensus here that it's too cold, most of the year, and just right in the summer. The Earth had better warmup quite a bit more before we start running low on fossil fuels, or else you'll see a great migration from anywhere north of the Mason Dixon line.
Here's a guy tying the auto bailout with global warming (and some other stuff):
"U.S. leadership in these forms of personal transportation can ultimately create vital export industries—vehicles, components and intellectual property. Failure to lead, ultimately, will require Americans to import what they need and result in a lower standard of living.
Sadly, the Detroit Three have less capital to develop more fuel-efficient internal combustion systems and alternative vehicles than their competitors. Cash strapped, they have smaller vehicle development budgets than foreign competitors that produce comparable numbers of vehicles."
Auto Industry Bailout Testimony
Seriously however, we hope that things settle down.
If the Detroit Three, with the cooperation of the UAW, cannot present plans to Congress that would fully and completely align their labor costs and work rule flexibility with Japanese transplants and demonstrate how their vehicle development and distribution costs can similarly aligned, it would be better to let them go through Chapter 11 and reemerge with new labor agreements, dramatically reduced debt and strengthened management.
I don't see any other choice. Maybe the off shore portion of GM can survive and ship cars from China. They have a losing combo and banking on the money losing VOLT is just plain STUPID.
I'm really surprised that I don't hear more from environmental groups or Al Gore concerning the B3 bailouts. I mean the creation of less cars - the manufacture and use of which creates pollution and CO2, should be something they are in favor of. Are environmental groups and the GW-supporting world against a bailout of the B3?
BigSuvEra = BigProfitEra = BigPollutionEra
Now that people want to drive smaller cars (mostly because of gas prices) the B3 are in the ICU.
So why does Obama and Pelosi have the contradictory positions of wanting to reduce GHG, yet strongly support the B3? If anything Obama should be giving money to those auto manufacturers who make the best and most popular hybrids, and or high mpg diesels.
If Obama wants to reduce GHG, why doesn't he take this B3 financial problem as an opportunity to get the U.S. from building more vehicles. The less factories run the < GHG created.
How come Al Gore isn't on 60 Minutes and every other talk show, stating that the government should let the Big3 die if that's what the market determines, and thus GHG will be reduced? Is it because it doesn't support the party-line of supporting the UAW? Is Gore being quiet because it is now his friends who would be hurt by reducing GHG's?! :P
I hadn't thought about them lobbying against the bailout to get more fuel-efficient cars (i.e. foreign) cars on the road.
That doesn't make a lot of sense though, because GM has a lot of models getting 30 mpg.
And the Greens and the UAW usually work together on other issues so I don't see the Greens attacking the industry and risking all those jobs.
I did see a blurb where the Sierra Club is attacking buyouts of hog farmers as corporate welfare, so maybe they are against an auto bailout as well. They surely wouldn't support bailing out HUMMER.
While I would agree, they might take/plagerize the game plan from what our local TA (transit authority)did. They promised under penalty of law, votes, etc NOT to touch SPECIFIC funds for a SPECIFIC project.....So what did they do?
Basically the logic was: IF we go bankrupt (which they threatened) THEN we will not be able to fulfil the project that was voted on and to wit what the funds are "segregated" FOR. LOL !!! You will never guess what they got to do !! :lemon:
Also it is finally coming out the SUV's (etc) are the "vehicles" by which the literally enormous profits are used to pay for UAW ENORMOUS feather bedding.
The essential problem/s still exist/s.
IF now SUV's are NOW verboten, THEN what other cars (segments) in the (future) line up will take the place of the app $15,000 per vehicle or so PROFIT the suv's USED to contribute to the feather bedding???
So if one (TAXPAYERS) can/will NOT see that; not only will the taxpayers BAIL OUT the UAW (aka big three) but that future cars WILL COST dramatically MORE (to make up for the figurative as well as literal cash cow: SUV's) THEN in effect the taxpayers deserve what they will reap down the road !!?? :sick: :lemon:
Well, duh, why do you think I bought a minivan instead of an SUV? If I had to tow, then I'd get a truck but there's long been a $10,000 premium for getting into an SUV. Why pay it, when you can get into a van for thousands cheaper? (don't answer that, LOL).
The same thought process is hammering Apple right now. People want netbooks for $300 and Apple can't survive selling stuff with that little of a profit margin.
Why encourage building (cheap) new cars instead of having most people drive old ones into the ground? Would save a lot of resources keeping old ones on the road. But you'd never get new tech to the people that way (like more efficient, less polluting engines).
One suv was gotten 15 years ago under IRS #179 and I will keep it another 15 years !!! (it just passed the mandatory Smog Test ONLY essentially with lower than the first smog test!!! ) Still got to declare income when I sell it for ( 5,000 to 10,000...but does the statue of limitations run out? :shades: ) But I might hedge by getting something now, as invoice to under invoice pricing seems to be the rule of the day. Might pick up some tax credits also !!
Big 3 Rebadging helps a lot in the model count. Also I wonder if they count a hatchback and a sedan as separate models - like the Aveo?
Looking at the glass-half-empty side, what manufacturers have the most models under 20mpg?
Maybe we can send people down to Cuba to see how a society gets by almost exclusively on used cars.
(I had a few (Cuban cigars) by way of Istanbul. (legal products bought in Turkey are not LOL illegal to bring into the US) other cash crops from Turkey decidedly ....ARE )
Since I am not a smoker, I am sure it was really WASTED on me)
As another facet of this program, they could offer a Vehicle Buyback program, just like the gun buyback programs offered in many cities. Bring in any sort of registered, operational motor vehicle and receive a credit towards the purchase of a U.S. made Segway or U.S. made bicycle. The lower the mpg of the vehicle, the larger the credit. Use the proposed bailout funds and future bailout funds, to fund this conversion.
Take the workers from the bankrupt Big3, and convert those car factories into making bikes and Segways, and offer them jobs there, at average wages. If there are any extra UAW workers, have them working building new paths, or administering the vehicle buyback program.
Must be global warming !! All those driving gamblers during an economic crisis !!!
The science for supporting the theory of actual man-made contributions to global warming seems to be good and solid, and getting better every day. I read Alexander Cockburn's "denial" of man-made global warming, and as much as I enjoy him, this was a very shabby piece of writing and easily refuted by George Monbiot and others.
Gambling revenue BTW is way down I see, refuting the notion that gambling businesses are recession-proof.
Another myth shattered.
Apparently the MASSIVE northern pole ice berg melting has NOT resulted in inundating coastal areas, such as: NY and Boston harbors, etc. Even with dire proof positive environmental assurances that was EXACTLY what would happen.
So the Kyoto Accord signers have green lighted places like China to grow to a min of 300 M vehicles that have lower than European emissions standards because....????? Seems to me even THEY don't believe their own press.
(quote from How Stuff Works) "The .climate and the weather are not the same thing: we experience only the weather, which is the day-to-day, sometimes hour-to-hour changes of temperature, precipitation, wind etc. The climate, on the other hand, refers to the cumulative average of the weather around us over decades, centuries and longer."
Melting polar ice won't affect ocean level because most of the Arctic ice is already floating prior to melting, so it has already displaced its volume in water.
The melting polar ice was a "slam dunk" IF/THEN guarantee/guaranteed by the global warming environmental advocates !!!! :lemon:
Also we can measure the various *isotopes* of carbon in the atmosphere, and in that sense definitely "ID" it as man-made, vs. say carbon dioxide coming out the ocean or out of vegetation--which would be "natural".
Science is not political--it is neither right or left---it's either true and testable, or it isn't. That's the beauty of it. It is ASSAILABLE. Science is not a 'belief" system, it has no "advocates". You're either right or you're wrong based on solid evidence.
And evidence takes time to accumulate.
So you'll see all kinds of junk science being bandied about, but the true scientists themselves would never claim such a thing as melting polar ice causing the oceans to rise is a "slam dunk" conclusion. Sounds like some "blog" or another, the usual nonsense.
The most frightening aspect of global warming is, in fact, our partial ignorance as to the effects of it in the long term.
Or to put it more simply, who is reckless enough to roll the dice and bet that *nothing* will happen and *nothing* needs to be done?
You mean like Kyoto Accord signers green lighting a min of 300 M cars with lesser than European emissions standards? etc., etc,.
You document a WAY stylized almost .... look at science. Science is really the documentation of immense and constant failure with periodic jolts of firm maybe's.
What happens when two scientist present opposing "PROOF"? There are hundreds of scientist that do not believe man is responsible for the current rise in Global Temperatures. It is only the politicians that see an opportunity to tax the populace that are trying to convince US that it is man made. If no politicians or the flaky UN was not involved it may have a lot more credibility. I see a lot more solid evidence being presented that totally refutes man's causing any change in the climate.
If you would like to buy some carbon credits I was thinking of putting a few of mine on eBay or Craigslist.
All it means is that either one is wrong or both of them are wrong.
Good idea about the carbon credits. Since my Carbon Footprint is so small, I think I will sell some carbon credits on Craigslist to some family of five living in a 3500 sq ft home with an electric bill of $350 a month and three SUVs.
Thanks for the tip !!!
Another way to distinguish science from dogma and politics is that in science, the scientists themselves are attacking their own ideas.
In other words, any statement or "factoid" that will not permit itself to be assailed is not science.
I haven't read or "met" many of these "hundreds of scientists" who would baldly state that man does not contribute to global warming. All I've read are people without any serious scientific credentials mis-stating science all the day long. Cockburn is just one good example among many. I myself might have believed what he said had I not checked out his "facts" (bad) and his sources (none cited).
At best, a true scientist would question the data with equally compelling data. Saying "I don't think so" is not a scientific argument.
Often you will find, upon close examination, that the dispute among scientists is not that Global Warming is occurring (almost all agree that it is).
Only a very few have ever stated that man does not contribute in SOME way, (and many of those have recanted) but there is a large and legitimate dispute as to the EXTENT of man's contribution and whether it's enough to do anything about or not.
I don't know the answer to that either.
As for examples of "human folly", well that goes without saying doesn't it? :P
Think of how many margaritas we could have made !!!
NASA satellites show that about two trillion tons of ice in Antarctica, Alaska and Greenland have melted in the past 5 years. The agency plans to present the facts on Thursday at the American Geophysical Union conference which will be held in San Francisco, Calif. Many scientists state that this phenomenon is a vivid illustration of the effects that global warming has on Earth’s environment and climate.
A NASA geophysicist said that a good part of the melted land ice is located in Greenland, according to the agency’s GRACE satellite. Yet, the scientist pointed out that the ice loss recorded this year is not as severe as in 2007.
Scientists pointed out that the situation in Alaska is getting better because the satellites have recorded a minor increase in land ice throughout 2008. Yet, they are yet worried, as Alaska lost about 400 billion tons of land ice in the past five years.
I suspect we are genetically programmed to only view our immediate future. If things look bearable 5 years out, we're happy to stop thinking about it.
It's possible that long-term conceptual thinking might become a required survival mechanism for future generations.