Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no silver lining for China. China depends on glacial run off for 40% of its water. Those glaciers are melting and may be gone 50-75 years from now. China also relies on the monsoons (semi-annual rains) for watering its crops of rice. Most climate change models show the monsoons weaking so China is in line for a major cut in its food supply. China's heartlend is drying out and clouds of dust blow into Beijing or Shanghai like they did in 1930s America in places like Chicago and Washington DC. China also has a smog bank over most of the Eastern third of China and the pollution reaches Tokyo and sometimes even California. Would you trade a thirsty, hungary, smoggy nation for the USA? If you think this is ok then do you know what they routinely do to industrial wastes like cyanide, lead, dioxin etc.
China is buying land and making farming deals all over the world They are also stocking up on commodities. They are preparing..but their way.
Use it, abuse it, throw it out and find a new one.
If the author of that article is correct, gas prices will be lower (you'll save money if you drive).
The $23/month is likely based on average gas consumed by state.
Wanneroo, you aren't the first to misunderstand that article.
No don't think so. I can add and subtract and know I don't need the Stasi monitoring what I do with my leaves in the fall or having to be on a five year waiting list for an obama motors 2 cyl putt putt car.
The author is saying that all american cars combined will consume 25% less gas (result of new fuel standards and incentives to buy fuel efficient vehicles).
It's exactly what I said, I can do that now but instead with the bill I'll be forced into it. That article is trying to say this bill has a benefit we already have , if you want to purchase a high efficiency vehicle you can do so. What's going to be interesting is to find out what it's going to cost to maintain these vehicles. In the case of the hybrids you have many things to break and inevitably that's going to drive the cost up to fix them. Many people are having problems now finding mechanics to fix their vbehicles and end up having to go to the dealer to get raped.
I have two vehicles, one car that gets reasonable gas mileage that I use daily and other activities and 72 ford f-250 that gets 6 miles to the gallon but I can tow a house with it and have but I use it sparingly. Maybe a few times a year but it's quite handy when I need it. Now if my truck breaks and I can't repair it am I 'm going to be able to pull around a load of logs, dirt, sand, refrigerator or other large item with a Prius? Keep in mind I live in area often referred to as the endless mountains. If you're pulling anything substantial you need a larger vehicle.
It's exactly what I said, I can do that now but instead with the bill I'll be forced into it. That article is trying to say this bill has a benefit we already have , if you want to purchase a high efficiency vehicle you can do so. What's going to be interesting is to find out what it's going to cost to maintain these vehicles. In the case of the hybrids you have many things to break and inevitably that's going to drive the cost up to fix them. Many people are having problems now finding mechanics to fix their vbehicles and end up having to go to the dealer to get raped.
I have two vehicles, one car that gets reasonable gas mileage that I use daily and other activities and 72 ford f-250 that gets 6 miles to the gallon but I can tow a house with it and have but I use it sparingly. Maybe a few times a year but it's quite handy when I need it. Now if my truck breaks and I can't repair it am I 'm going to be able to pull around a load of logs, dirt, sand, refrigerator or other large item with a Prius? Keep in mind I live in area often referred to as the endless mountains. If you're pulling anything substantial you need a larger vehicle.
It still doesn't sound like you are getting what that article is saying.
The entire country will be consuming less gas with the new fuel efficiency standards (over what, 10 years right?). Less demand (consumption) - lower prices.
Again, regardless of what car you choose to drive.
It still doesn't sound like you are getting what that article is saying.
I understand exactly what the article says, it says because the government is going to ram fuel efficient cars down our throats we can save money. Yippee!
You ever price one of those cars?
FYI in case you haven't heard OPEC ultimately controls the price of gas as they have their hands on the spigot, see gas shortages in the 70's for reference. there goal is to keep just enough in the supply chain to keep the prices as high as they can yet make sure this plenty for people to buy. When the oil prices tumble so does the output. since they can manipulate the prices so easy less consumption will mean less supply. I beleive the aim is to keep the price around $3.00 a gallon as that's the magic number at the moment.
I understand exactly what the article says, it says because the government is going to ram fuel efficient cars down our throats we can save money. Yippee!
You ever price one of those cars?
FYI in case you haven't heard OPEC ultimately controls the price of gas as they have their hands on the spigot, see gas shortages in the 70's for reference. there goal is to keep just enough in the supply chain to keep the prices as high as they can yet make sure this plenty for people to buy. When the oil prices tumble so does the output. since they can manipulate the prices so easy less consumption will mean less supply. I beleive the aim is to keep the price around $3.00 a gallon as that's the magic number at the moment.
I believe you are correct, Coalman. Can't rep you just yet.
It is the goal of certain rich self-proclaimed elites to make themselves modern day feudal lords and to reduce most people to the equivalent of serfs, piled up in the cities doing only their master's bidding. This bill will advance their agenda just as the NPS burning people out of their homes in Alaska and elsewhere did and the sierra club and other such groups trying to turn every bit of rural land into parks or preserves, eliminating rural jobs like logging, etc., also have..
Location: Just East of the Southern Portion of the Western Part of PA
1,272 posts, read 3,707,158 times
Reputation: 1511
This is just another example of the typical liberal mindset that “they know what’s best for us”. They WILL create “green’ jobs even if it means destroying thousands of jobs in oil, natural gas, coal, manufacturing, agriculture, ect.
What many of you are missing is that the scientific community’s view on global warming is now irrelevant. The die has been cast, and the administration’s campaign of misinformation is nearly complete. This is about government regulation and financial control. It’s not about getting the science “right” or doing what’s right for the earth. If it was, they would currently be reading every line of the bill and debating both sides of the issue with the scientific community. Instead, the bill wasn’t pushed through with tons of extras and wasn’t even fully read by most members of the House. Their window for passing this pile of crap is closing, and they know it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
