VISTA Bus service shutting down. (2015, luxury, DMV)

[user_id]

If the Vista bus services is indeed primarily servicing the county's wealthier residents that it should be stopped today, there is absolutely no reason that tax payers should be subsidizing the wealthiest residents transportation costs.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by user_id

If the Vista bus services is indeed primarily servicing the county's wealthier residents that it should be stopped today, there is absolutely no reason that tax payers should be subsidizing the wealthiest residents transportation costs.

100% agree, or give them the option of raising fees to ride it. Raise them enough it covers all expense.

[HSP1161]

Mass transit takes cars off the road, reducing traffic and lessening demand for gasoline.

You're welcome.

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

Yea, especially when those high wage earners are paying a larger portion of their pay in Taxes. In fact it would seem that maybe they are riding to get some of that money back that the Government takes from them. Still, that may change as those that I know that rode the VISTA liked the idea that they could use the bus wifi and get work done on their way to work, or what ever it is that they were doing on line. I don't know if the current service offers wifi.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

I've never seen a carpool of anyone "working" it is usually online screwing off or personal tasks.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by OpenSky

Mass transit takes cars off the road, reducing traffic and lessening demand for gasoline.

The traffic reduction created by the Vista system would be so small it wouldn't even be measurable.....

As for gas, there is a much better way to lessen the demand for gas: cars that don't run on gas. Electric cars are now a reality and are produced by most car manufactures. There is nothing about a transportation system built around personal automobiles that necessitates the use of polluting fossil fuels....

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

How do you intend to produce the electricity that the cars run on? All you do when you run a car on a battery is transfer where the polution is produced.

Can you show the figures on how efficient it is to build electric powered cars? I just read a story on how GM is selling the volt at a major loss. No one would purchase the car if they sold it for what it cost to build. How is that efficient? You do know that the carbon footprint for a battery powered car is quite a bit more than for a gasoline powered car don't you? On top of that the range for purly electric cars is not sufficient for most.

The truth is that we have a supply of fuel that will continue on into the next hundred to by some accounts 300 years. With cars becoming more efficient the need for fuel oil declines. we have cars getting 40mpg now and within the not too distant future you will see 50 and 60mpg cars, all built much cheaper than the high priced electric cars on the market today. If anything the electric cars have shown that builders can make lighter cars that allow more MPG from gasoline powered engines.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

How do you intend to produce the electricity that the cars run on?

Renewable energy and here in California the electrical companies are being forced to move to renewable sources of energy (If you recall, republicans told us that this would send our electrical rates to the moon....)

Also, a lot of energy goes to waste at night (because energy use drops dramatically at night, but energy production can't so easily be turned on/off) and this is precisely when most people would be charging their cars. So to a large degree, electric cars will utilize energy/infrastructure that is currently going to waste.

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

Can you show the figures on how efficient it is to build electric powered cars? I just read a story on how GM is selling the volt at a major loss.

Why would electric car production be less efficient? They can be built on assembly lines just like gas powered cars. As for the volt, I know what you're referring to and GM responded:

GM calls report of money-losing Volt sales 'grossly wrong' - latimes.com

Also, the fact that electric cars aren't pulling a profit for the auto companies yet is exactly what you'd expect. Large scale production requires economies of sale, and it takes years to build sufficient sales volume to pull a profit.

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

The truth is that we have a supply of fuel that will continue on into the next hundred to by some accounts 300 years.

Where did you get this idea? Oil is being depleted at a rapid rate:

File:Oil depletion per country.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which is perfectly consist with raising oil/gas prices. If the US doesn't start to develop alternative energy infrastructure today, it will be catastrophic in the coming decades.

One thing that is a bit amusing is how people are oddly attached to fossil fuels (well, odd logically speaking, not so odd when you consider the marketing efforts of oil companies).

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

We have 100 billion barrels in the outer shelf waiting to be drilled. In the Rocky mountains their is a trillion barrels in oil shale that is becoming easier to recover as new methods are developed. Many of those methods are used now by Shell in Canada to recover the trillion barrels believed to be sitting under Canada. We can increase the amount of drilling in the USA and recover even more easy to get reserves. Alaska has plenty of oil waiting to be drilled. with demand in the 80 million barrel a day range and with a trillion current barrels in reserves accounted for we could go on for hundreds of years.

[user_id]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

We have 100 billion barrels in the outer shelf waiting to be drilled. In the Rocky mountains their is a trillion barrels in oil shale that is becoming easier to recover as new methods are developed.

There is ~100 billion in the outer shelf but its not "waiting to be drilled", only a relatively small fraction is currently exploitable. But regardles, the world will burn through 100 billion barrels in 2~3 years.

The sands/shale can't be cheaply extracted and represents all sorts of environmental problems and nobody knows how much can be economically extracted. Talking bout the size of resources doesn't answer that question... The fixation on oil in this country is odd though, alternatives exist and it makes no sense to continue using an energy source that is destroying the planet. But to destroy the rocky mountains to process shale oil? That's just crazy....