By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
This Prez is doing what he said ( for once at least, not often yet ) in regard to energy initiatives:
link title
Obama commits $1.2. billion in energy R&D
Seeking to boost the U.S. clean-energy industry, President Obama on Monday announced $1.2 billion for science research at national labs and a proposal to extend a business tax credit for investments in research and development.
At an event at the White House, Obama told researchers and green-technology business people that their work was vital to revitalizing the U.S. economy and cutting the country's dependence on foreign oil. About 120 researchers, lab directors, and CEOs from energy technology companies attended the event.
No money in there for the homeowner to install energy saving devices or solar panels?
http://www.oksolar.com/n_cart/product_details.asp?ProductID=021718&cat=Solar%20S- - ystems&subcat=Solar%20Home%20Grid%20Tie
"Well, there you go again"
Ronnie Ray-Gun Back in the Day, and Larry Singleton to Gary again.
There you go quoting the "worst case scenario" to make your point.
How's this:
With the new 2009 federal tax credit, which allows a 30% system credit for solar systems, combined with state tax credit and utility credits, I can get a 4 KW system in AZ installed for $5599 after the credit, and that would provide about 95% of my total usage.
Must be lotsa overchargin for solar going on in Cali.
P.S. Now, of course, the WEAKNESS in these programs is that I have to "front" the cash for the project, and the tax credits come back to me next year. So I would have to come up with $12-15K at the outset.
Better check the IRS fine print. That Federal Tax Credit has a cap of $4000. That would be about 10% of a 4KW system in CA. A 4KW system installed in San Diego will be about $39,000. If you borrow as they suggest on a Home equity loan at 7% you will never pay it off and get ahead. Check out the calculator for Solar. They do not take into consideration the Federal Tax cap. Believe me if it would be a money saver I would be for it.
calculator
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f5695.pdf
It is good to see we have concensus 8-)
JONATHON PORRITT, one of Gordon Brown’s leading green advisers, is to warn that Britain must drastically reduce its population if it is to build a sustainable society.
Porritt’s call will come at this week’s annual conference of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), of which he is patron.
The trust will release research suggesting UK population must be cut to 30m if the country wants to feed itself sustainably.
Porritt said: “Population growth, plus economic growth, is putting the world under terrible pressure.
“Each person in Britain has far more impact on the environment than those in developing countries so cutting our population is one way to reduce that impact.”
Many experts believe that, since Europeans and Americans have such a lopsided impact on the environment, the world would benefit more from reducing their populations than by making cuts in developing countries.
So do we draw straws or have a giant lottery? Every other person is a WINNER. This is the kind of mentality the the GLOBAL WARMING WONKS breed. I know where I would start but that would probably not be considered politically correct. So how do you get rid of half your population?
The new credit passed with Obama's latest bailout was UNCAPPED !!!:
On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed a stimulus bill (The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) that made some significant changes to the energy efficiency tax credits. The highlights are:
* The tax credits that were previously effective for 2009, have been extended to 2010 as well.
* The tax credit has been raised from 10% to 30%.
* The tax credits that were for a specific dollar amount (ex $300 for a CAC), have been converted to 30% of the cost.
* The maximum credit has been raised from $500 to $1500 for the two years (2009-2010). However, some improvements such as geothermal heat pumps, solar water heaters, and solar panels are not subject to the $1,500 maximum.
Take that, solar doubters.............:)
MODERATOR
Need help getting around? claires@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Tell everyone about your buying experience: Write a Dealer Review
Might as well close it.
No nuttier than the adviser to the British PM who stated that the UK had to reduce it's population from 61 million to 30 million as fast as possible so as not to hurt the planet too much. He went on to say that population should be reduced in "western" countries first because we do the most harm to the environment.
I wonder if they will shoot the SUV owners first and save the Prius owners for later.
This is the point I have be trying to make all along. If you think that the enviro-wackos won't get you because you try to have a small carbon footprint, think again. These folks think you are a virus on this planet and their ultimate goal is to get rid of you.
Don't believe me? Think what you would have said a few years ago if someone told you that the government would be taxing CO2.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
There are people that post on this thread that did not believe their government would try to tax carbon. Well our President has made it one of his top priorities. He knows full well it will hit the poor and middle class the hardest. He has groups that he is beholden to.
All on a theory pushed by a few highly compensated scientists and rag tag politicians.
A United Nations document on "climate change" that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.
Those and other results are blandly discussed in a discretely worded United Nations "information note" on potential consequences of the measures that industrialized countries will likely have to take to implement the Copenhagen Accord, the successor to the Kyoto Treaty, after it is negotiated and signed by December 2009. The Obama administration has said it supports the treaty process if, in the words of a U.S. State Department spokesman, it can come up with an "effective framework" for dealing with global warming.
Our leaders just cannot be that naive or stupid. I think they know exactly what they are doing---dismantling our country. I just don't know why.
Almost the first of April. Heavy snow here in KC. Global warming indeed !!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
That's an interesting point - right now it seems that we subsidize the automakers to dump CO into the air we breathe, so our oxygen is already being taxed in a way. Next we'll get taxed to clean it up.
The process of algae growth and bio diesel production is C02 consumption and oxygen PRODUCTION !!!!??? This is not even to mention algae is a food source, etc etc. Why no "Kennedy" man on the moon in less than a decade siren call? (aka) 23% of the passenger vehicle fleet bio diesel machines out by.....
My take.... it is almost TOTAL BS!!!
But a lot of people these days are finding the new compact fluorescent bulbs anything but simple. Consumers who are trying them say they sometimes fail to work, or wear out early. At best, people discover that using the bulbs requires learning a long list of dos and don’ts.
Take the case of Karen Zuercher and her husband, in San Francisco. Inspired by watching the movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” they decided to swap out nearly every incandescent bulb in their home for energy-saving compact fluorescents. Instead of having a satisfying green moment, however, they wound up coping with a mess.
“Here’s my sad collection of bulbs that didn’t work,” Ms. Zuercher said the other day as she pulled a cardboard box containing defunct bulbs from her laundry shelf.
One of the 16 Feit Electric bulbs the Zuerchers bought at Costco did not work at all, they said, and three others died within hours. The bulbs were supposed to burn for 10,000 hours, meaning they should have lasted for years in normal use. “It’s irritating,” Ms. Zuercher said.
Irritation seems to be rising as more consumers try compact fluorescent bulbs, which now occupy 11 percent of the nation’s eligible sockets, with 330 million bulbs sold every year. Consumers are posting vociferous complaints on the Internet after trying the bulbs and finding them lacking.
Compact fluorescents once cost as much as $30 apiece. Now they go for as little as $1 — still more than regular bulbs, but each compact fluorescent is supposed to last 10 times longer, save as much as $5.40 a bulb each year in electricity, and reduce emissions of carbon dioxide from burning coal in power plants.
Much of the credit for that sharp cost decline goes to the Energy Department. The agency asked manufacturers in 1998 to create cheaper models and then helped find large-volume buyers, like universities and utilities, to buy them. That jump-started a mass market and eventually led to sales of discounted bulbs at retailers like Costco, Wal-Mart Stores and Home Depot.
I keep the receipt with the spares. When one fails I put it in the original package and return it to the place I bought it. I have had many fail after 6 months or less. Several went pop and burnt out first time they were turned on. With 56 lights in the house mostly recessed it does save on electricity using CFLs. Most were bought when SDG&E was having specials.
The grasslands of America, before Columbus, supported about 60 million huge bison and 100 million small antelope. Today, America's grasslands feed about 100 million medium-sized cattle.
What if U.S. lands had to support ten times that many cattle? What kind of destruction would that wreak on our soils, our streams, and our wildlands?
Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and other U.S. environmental groups have long demanded that America shift to organic farming, giving up "man-made chemicals" that they say harm wildlife. The New York Times and Hollywood stars enthusiastically endorse organic food. Congress and government regulators are forcing U.S. farmers in the organic direction by restricting safety-proven pesticides, fertilizers, and farming systems.
Unfortunately, our city-wise society may not have thought this countryside question all the way through.
Nitrogen is the key chemical in farming. If we don't replace the nitrogen crop plants take from our soils as they grow, our fields will become barren, as they did during the Dust Bowl days of the 1930s. (That's when the nitrogen, built up in Great Plains soils by eons of bison manure, began to run out.)
To keep their soils fertile, today's American farmers apply about 11 million tons of "chemical" nitrogen per year. This is pure nitrogen, taken literally from the air (which is 78 percent N) through an industrial process. Worldwide, high-yield farmers apply about 80 million tons of chemical N per year.
But the first and foremost rule of organic is "no chemical fertilizer." The organic movement was founded in the 1930s on the precept that chemical fertilizer poisons the soil. Organic farmers are allowed to use only organic nitrogen, mainly from cattle manure and "green manure crops" like rye and clover.
The Rest of the Story
More dueling environmentalist, proposing we spend a lot of money. Other people's Money.
When word got out that CARB couldn’t find a reflective version of deep black paint that suited its needs, auto enthusiast blogs and conservative commentators smelled another “kooky California” story — or “out-of-control government” expose, take your pick — and jumped in with relish.
The fact that black is the second most popular color among car owners in the U.S. — behind white — helped stoke the outrage. The Truth About Cars, a blog that brings a smart sensibility to its automotive commentary, opined that “regulating car color comes across as nothing more than an exercise in bureaucratic power for its own sake.”
CARB ultimately decided to ditch the paint scheme and move ahead with just the reflective glass mandate (which is not window tinting, by the way; it’s a reflective clear coat).
So, did the bureaucrats really intend to ban black cars, only to be foiled by an outraged citizenry? That’s hard to say. Young notes that it’s not unusual for CARB to get an earful over its proposed regs, and in this case, “it wasn’t exactly opposition” that killed the paint initiative. “It was an appraisal that the technology was not yet mature enough to deliver what we hoped to achieve.”
Moreover, the CARB PowerPoint presentation that got everyone’s fan belt in a twist never actually recommends that black cars be banned. It merely — “sinisterly,” Rush might say — notes that “jet black remains an issue.”
Still, the timing is interesting. Although the workshop at which the paint plan was discussed was held on March 12, the decision to drop the idea wasn’t made until this week, according to Young — the very same week, sinisterly enough, that Limbaugh referred to the CARB rule makers as tyrants.
Coincidence? We report, you decide.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/03/black-car-ban.html
It is interesting how this is playing out.
"... such as Sen. James Inhofe and Reps. Joe Barton and John Shimkus (see video) have ensured that climate change deniers without credentials in climate science testify alongside respected scientists."
Now why would they do that? :confuse: Where are the millions of scientists that claim there is no relationship between human activities and climate change?
I want to see scientific evidence presented by legitimate scientists. Ones not on the government teat. It is well documented that a denier will be ostracized from some universities that are controlled by state and federal government grants. I have posted several scientists with credentials that make Hansen look like a freshman in college. Show me a REAL scientist that is totally believing the hype put out by the likes of Al Gore and the joke of the WORLD the UN IPCC. .
PS
If you have not noticed I have NO respect for Al Gore, James Hansen or the United Nations. I consider them all con artists and flim flam men.
Topolanek, who holds the rotating EU presidency, described U.S. fiscal spending as a "road to hell" and is also a noted global warming doubter.
Or maybe POTUS is just jet-lagged.
It would be interesting to know if the Czech's are on the US dole like the other GW cists nations. Even N Korea who notoriously "LEAVE the lightsOFF @ night" if dark satellite monitoring data are to be believed is beating the nuclear drums.(aka- need more money).
I am still waiting for the (now) Vice President Joe Biden's prophetic concept ( before 6 mo BO's, world stage acid tests) to happen.
I am thinking he might want to arrange a pow wow with the President of Iran. :lemon: Hmmmmmmmmmm.....
Think Says Its City EVs Now in Service in Austrian Electric Car Test Program
And why are the auto companies kowtowing? Because the president is in cahoots with environmentalists who stay awake nights trying to figure out how to get us back to the good, old days when a gallon of gas cost more than $4.
Ah, but the evil-doers in Washington, D.C. (and their cronies in Sacramento) can't fool steely-eyed consumers when it comes to hybrids.
"Nobody's buying 'em," Limbaugh said. "Nobody wants them! The manufacturers are making them in droves to satisfy Obama! Sorry for yelling. Nobody wants them!"
Rush Limbaugh Tells All (And Then Some) in the Green Car Conspiracy
Some counterpoints are listed in the Green Car Advisor article.
As you mentioned the GW & BO folks want the good ole days BACK when gas was INXS of 4 per gal; I waxed nostalgic when taking public transportation was .05 cents per way: .10 cents per round trip
Take nukes - most greens don't like 'em but there's a significant faction that thinks nuke energy is a cleaner solution than anything else out there.
So, using gasoline to generate electric power to store in batteries doesn't necessarily appeal to a green person. Going to a plug-in vehicle where you shift the pollution to a coal fired electric generator hundreds of miles across the country has its own set of problems.
I think my minivan could go to 200,000 but my wife is tired of it after a decade. Maybe we'll go test a Prius, but there are lots of other suitable rides out there that are thousands cheaper that appeal to our frugal nature. And since we do drive them forever the battery life is a concern. Shoot, I complain if the scheduled maintenance requires a $400 timing belt in 105k (the van's engine is non-interference, so I'm ignoring that maintenance recommendation
2008 was a bear. There were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days (73%). To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go all the way back to 1913, which had 311 spotless days: plot. Prompted by these numbers, some observers suggested that the solar cycle had hit bottom in 2008.
Maybe not. Sunspot counts for 2009 have dropped even lower. As of March 31st, there were no sunspots on 78 of the year's 90 days (87%).
It adds up to one inescapable conclusion: "We're experiencing a very deep solar minimum," says solar physicist Dean Pesnell of the Goddard Space Flight Center.
"This is the quietest sun we've seen in almost a century," agrees sunspot expert David Hathaway of the Marshall Space Flight Center.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm
It was a record cold winter in many parts of the world. It is still seasonably cold here in So CA.
I would hardly call them a "disenfranchised" lot , or if you prefer groups, especially when they have been so successful in driving up the cost of anything you care to mention, but specifically automobiles. The amount of useless and stupifying codified regulations as a result is simply mind boggling.
Are you linking increased sunspot activity with the "end of the world?" GW an "end of times" phenomenon, of a sort?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Warming to burn down Cali in next few decades
As California warms in coming decades, farmers will have less water, the state could lose more than a million acres of cropland and forest fire rates will soar, according to a broad-ranging state report released Wednesday.
The document, which officials called the "the ultimate picture to date" of global warming's likely effect on California, consists of 37 research papers that examine an array of issues including water supply, air pollution and property losses.
Without actions to limit greenhouse gas emissions, "severe and costly climate impacts are possible and likely across California," warned state environmental protection secretary Linda Adams.
I'd bet that would be more than offset by the increase in arable land, and longer growing season in the Northern Plains and into Canada.
Many GW studies are "glass 1/2 empty studies". Anyone with basic knowledge knows that the bio-density and bio-diversity are highest in the warmer regions of the Earth. The tropical rainforests are the richest in life. Life thrives better in warm tropical environments.
CA is not the place to live if you can't accept change, and the dangers of nature. especially when you're sitting on a known time-bomb series of faults. I find it just as frustrating that people develop along the San Andreas and in SF, just as they develop again in New Orleans.
"The more dramatic impact could actually be in the moist tropics, despite modeling that indicates temperatures there will warm just 2 or 3 degrees by 2100 compared with 6 degrees or more at higher latitudes, Tewksbury said. That is because organisms in the tropics normally do not experience much temperature variation because there is very little seasonality, so even small temperature shifts can have a much larger impact than similar shifts in regions with more seasonal climates."
Tropics to bear brunt of global warming (ScienceBlog)
That is something that should be taught by parents. Don't build in a wash or flood plain. Building on a known fault is not very bright either. Or in Hawaii in the path of a volcano flow. Though many times you gamble that you will not be the one that is nailed. I think of this GW business the same way. You got a house on the beach. You are more likely to get wiped out by a storm or tidal wave than rising oceans caused by GW.
Cap and trade will do nothing but put a bigger tax burden on the over taxed middle class.
And,
Natural mechanism for medieval warming discovered
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16892-natural-mechanism-for-medieval-warmi- ng-discovered.html
http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/cms/dn11648/dn11648-2_726.jpg
This answers your question from a few posts ago.
Must be windy sitting ON the roof.