Obama: 42 MPG for cars + CO2 regs by 2016.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,958
From: Kansas City, MO
the 100 watt bulb on 1/1/2012;
the 75 watt bulb on 1/1/2013; and
the 60 watt and 40 watt bulbs on 1/1/2014.
This was a provision of the December 2007 Energy Bill. Obviously it's not all incandescents, since there are situations CFLs won't work, but the most common ones...
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 203
From: U.S.A.
You had better stock up on incandescent bulbs then, they will be phased out by 2014.
the 100 watt bulb on 1/1/2012;
the 75 watt bulb on 1/1/2013; and
the 60 watt and 40 watt bulbs on 1/1/2014.
This was a provision of the December 2007 Energy Bill. Obviously it's not all incandescents, since there are situations CFLs won't work, but the most common ones...
the 100 watt bulb on 1/1/2012;
the 75 watt bulb on 1/1/2013; and
the 60 watt and 40 watt bulbs on 1/1/2014.
This was a provision of the December 2007 Energy Bill. Obviously it's not all incandescents, since there are situations CFLs won't work, but the most common ones...
I'm planning on having enough on hand that if need be, I can partially fund my retirement from selling my surplus on the black market.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 203
From: U.S.A.
The decision of our government to not live within its means and to continuously spend money it doesn't have to do things it is not required to do and in some cases, shouldn't be doing is why we are reliant on loans from China.
Fortunately much fo the country is waking up to the reality that our current lifestyle is unsustainable. Forget global warming and conservation for a moment. If we continue to consume at the current rate without forcing ourselves to develop an fossil fuels escape/migration plan we will cease to exist as a nation.
You think everyone wants to force us to live an 1800s style way of life. I disagree, what we want is for Americans to learn to live a 21st century lifestyle by choice, and escape an impending energy and resource crisis that will force us into an 18th century lifestyle.
You think everyone wants to force us to live an 1800s style way of life. I disagree, what we want is for Americans to learn to live a 21st century lifestyle by choice, and escape an impending energy and resource crisis that will force us into an 18th century lifestyle.
The market can determine when those choices are made if simply allowed to do so and as imperfect as the free market might be, it is far, far superior to government mandates regardless of of how well intentioned the mandates might or might not be.
Last edited by Route66Wanderer; May 20, 2009 at 09:54 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,712
From: Ontario
I was hoping these new fuel economy regulations were a US-only thing, and that somehow we in Canada would still have access to more of the powerful cars ... I guess not 
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...Story/Business
Fortunately I'm planning to keep the G8 for a while (and I may need to). I guess that's more sales that GM won't get when they don't offer anything attractive enough to get me to trade in the G8.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...Story/Business
Fortunately I'm planning to keep the G8 for a while (and I may need to). I guess that's more sales that GM won't get when they don't offer anything attractive enough to get me to trade in the G8.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,808
From: FL/MI
It's puzzling that energy is the only tade deficit worth the government's time and legislation.
Much could be done to reduce the importation of oil through the furtherance of domestic oil.
I'm all for research into other forms of energy. I'm all for expoliting intelligent apprroaches.
I'm no conspiracy theorist unless the evidence is overwhelming. Suspicion is not always unhealthy.
The old saying of "Follow the money" could certainly be at work here. All the demonizing of oil and other cheap energy use as being the crisis on which the very survival of the whole planet teeters the balance just might be more due to someone or some interests getting more money and more power in the process.
Last edited by 1fastdog; May 20, 2009 at 03:21 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 666
From: Stockton, Ca. USA
Do we really have an energy crisis in this country? When was the last time your lights went out because we didnt have the power? When was the last time we had gas lines because of foreign oil? Its not in the foreign countries best interest to cut off the oil from us. They will go broke, besides we get most of our imported oil from Canada and Mexico.
The energy we use in this country has barely nothing to do with the money we borrow from China. Keep the energy market in the private sector and it wont cost the gov much at all. actually with all the taxes they collect they will mnake money.
The energy we use in this country has barely nothing to do with the money we borrow from China. Keep the energy market in the private sector and it wont cost the gov much at all. actually with all the taxes they collect they will mnake money.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 666
From: Stockton, Ca. USA
Commie way of thinking?!?!
Posts like this drive me nuts.
I post thoughts and facts to try to present a situation and predict what is coming for us all, and I'm a commie.
You go spend a few years in countries where people live in cardboard boxes, have no running water, are subjected to corrupt cops and no judicial system, have no form of social protection, no basic provisions, no guarantee of health care or even a next meal... and then post on this board about how "necessary" the things you posted REALLY are.
I'm not saying I want everything abolished but survival needs. I never brought the word survival up in my post. But there is a huge difference in surviving, living a nice yet modest lifestyle, and being grossly wasteful.
If you have the money and the resources, why can you not use a 3-cyl or hybrid for your everyday commuting and errands to save gobs of fuel for the week, then pull out your hot rod for a Saturday drive, a trip to the track, or a cruise... then put it back up for a while?
Again, I'm not being extremeist or elitist... I'm simply pointing out that the average American is accustomed to living a lavish lifestyle that is grossly wasteful... unneccessarilly wasteful. It's time we started to change our ways a bit. Shame we can't see that and make the changes ourselves, and not need organizations and governmental interference to make us see that, because I don't want anyone to make the choices for me (or you), but apparently that is what it's coming to.
Posts like this drive me nuts.
I post thoughts and facts to try to present a situation and predict what is coming for us all, and I'm a commie.
You go spend a few years in countries where people live in cardboard boxes, have no running water, are subjected to corrupt cops and no judicial system, have no form of social protection, no basic provisions, no guarantee of health care or even a next meal... and then post on this board about how "necessary" the things you posted REALLY are.
I'm not saying I want everything abolished but survival needs. I never brought the word survival up in my post. But there is a huge difference in surviving, living a nice yet modest lifestyle, and being grossly wasteful.
If you have the money and the resources, why can you not use a 3-cyl or hybrid for your everyday commuting and errands to save gobs of fuel for the week, then pull out your hot rod for a Saturday drive, a trip to the track, or a cruise... then put it back up for a while?
Again, I'm not being extremeist or elitist... I'm simply pointing out that the average American is accustomed to living a lavish lifestyle that is grossly wasteful... unneccessarilly wasteful. It's time we started to change our ways a bit. Shame we can't see that and make the changes ourselves, and not need organizations and governmental interference to make us see that, because I don't want anyone to make the choices for me (or you), but apparently that is what it's coming to.
I totally dont disagree with you. I agree Americans are extremely wasteful but who is going to tell people what is over the top and what is needed.
I myself have a 95 Civic I use for daily stuff that gets 40+mpg. My SS and Dodge Ram get used for when they are needed.
I like the idea of having an LS3 in a 3100 pound car. I wonder how much that would help the mileage?
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
Do we really have an energy crisis in this country? When was the last time your lights went out because we didnt have the power? When was the last time we had gas lines because of foreign oil? Its not in the foreign countries best interest to cut off the oil from us. They will go broke, besides we get most of our imported oil from Canada and Mexico.
The energy we use in this country has barely nothing to do with the money we borrow from China. Keep the energy market in the private sector and it wont cost the gov much at all. actually with all the taxes they collect they will mnake money.
The energy we use in this country has barely nothing to do with the money we borrow from China. Keep the energy market in the private sector and it wont cost the gov much at all. actually with all the taxes they collect they will mnake money.
A few other comments on this thread.
I don't think performance will die like in the 70s. It is possible to increase fuel economy while maintaining performance. The automakers will try their best to do this. Fuel economy is calculated based on a drive cycle. That drive cycle spends minimal time at WOT. Therefore, you can tune the engine for fuel economy on the cycle while maintaining performance.
I think CAFE regulations are the wrong way to decrease our dependence on oil and reducing CO2 emissions. This does not create a demand for fuel efficient vehicles, it forces them upon us. A better way would be to raise fuel taxes. This will cause a demand for more fuel efficient cars.
Last edited by rlchv70; May 20, 2009 at 06:36 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 203
From: U.S.A.
My opinion: The crisis we have is our dependence on oil. This can be seen in the gas prices last year. Speculators think they can make money on oil, and our fuel prices sky rocket. This weakens and already weak economy, sending us into a recession....
A few other comments on this thread.
I don't think performance will die like in the 70s. It is possible to increase fuel economy while maintaining performance. The automakers will try their best to do this. Fuel economy is calculated based on a drive cycle. That drive cycle spends minimal time at WOT. Therefore, you can tune the engine for fuel economy on the cycle while maintaining performance.
I think CAFE regulations are the wrong way to decrease our dependence on oil and reducing CO2 emissions. This does not create a demand for fuel efficient vehicles, it forces them upon us. A better way would be to raise fuel taxes. This will cause a demand for more fuel efficient cars.
A few other comments on this thread.
I don't think performance will die like in the 70s. It is possible to increase fuel economy while maintaining performance. The automakers will try their best to do this. Fuel economy is calculated based on a drive cycle. That drive cycle spends minimal time at WOT. Therefore, you can tune the engine for fuel economy on the cycle while maintaining performance.
I think CAFE regulations are the wrong way to decrease our dependence on oil and reducing CO2 emissions. This does not create a demand for fuel efficient vehicles, it forces them upon us. A better way would be to raise fuel taxes. This will cause a demand for more fuel efficient cars.
Yes, we should be exploring and exploiting other kinds of energy - other ways of doing things but there is nothing wrong with oil and no need to ruin our economy just to stop using it.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,802
From: Annapolis MD
It's time we started to change our ways a bit. Shame we can't see that and make the changes ourselves, and not need organizations and governmental interference to make us see that, because I don't want anyone to make the choices for me (or you), but apparently that is what it's coming to.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
Again... do you think performance must be a 400+hp V8 RWD coupe?
If so, I can introduce you to some I4 drivers that would strongly disagree.
And then there is the electric-powered cars that are rivaling and even surpassing the IC engine these days...
Remember.... I'm not advocating a neutered life, just an economically responsible one. We all want/need toys to play with - I've no problem with that. But I have a huge problem with 80% of Americans driving 400hp or more vehicles only to sit in gridlock on a highway during a morning commute. We need to change our ways.
If so, I can introduce you to some I4 drivers that would strongly disagree.
And then there is the electric-powered cars that are rivaling and even surpassing the IC engine these days...
Remember.... I'm not advocating a neutered life, just an economically responsible one. We all want/need toys to play with - I've no problem with that. But I have a huge problem with 80% of Americans driving 400hp or more vehicles only to sit in gridlock on a highway during a morning commute. We need to change our ways.
I think I get your main point. I would certainly not drive a V8 to work if the roads were gridlocked. That's sheer ignorance and stupidity, IMO.
There's really nothing wrong with having a weekend car that's 400+ hp. No doubt, if people (could afford or) are happy to have a car that sits in their garage or driveway for most of the week, no harm in that. At least that's not what I think you are advocating against, surely?
Anyhow, I think there's enough demand out there for families who still want a third car even if it is essentially unnecessary.
Last edited by SSbaby; May 21, 2009 at 01:16 AM.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,808
From: FL/MI
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
I wasn't joking. You can get any amount of torque you want, just by multiplying it with gears. The same is true of the electric motor. That 1000 ft-lbs would be 7500 ft-lbs if hooked to the same engine and transmission.
It is not the torque that matters. This is an old-wives tale. You can change the torque with gearing. You can't do that with horsepower.
It is not the torque that matters. This is an old-wives tale. You can change the torque with gearing. You can't do that with horsepower.
