ktabz16

well then i guess you've made your choice. and your choice is to not to do a simple thing that would save you money.

WH

Not quite true. I commute by subway to work, drive less, walk more, shop a lot on the Internet and go easier on the pedal in the city.

On the highway, though, I dont have time to waste going 55. Time is money.

We all make our choices and examine the tradeoffs. I like crab and lobster, for example, and could save money by buying imitation or canned meat. I don't. I'd rather have the expensive, fresh stuff.

X-man47

As Pogo pointed out so many years ago, "We have met the enemy, and it is us." We owe it to ourselves, our neighbors, and our progeny to stop wasting the dwindling stocks of non-renewable resources. There will always be those willing to pay to drive in ways that unnecessarily waste fuel, but we must make them pay the true price of profligacy.

__________________
What can Brown do for you?

WH

I don't think "we" or "us" are the "enemy" in this matter and I would be curious to see how "profligacy" is legislatively defined. Even if your view of things were correct 47 - a proposition of which I am uncertain - this is not the sort of language to persuade the potentially persuadable. I can see you would never make a good politician. (-:

AOXOMOXOA

Keep right except to pass.

__________________
A word from President Eisenhower

clark1

On the highway, though, I dont have time to waste going 55. Time is money.



Wow. Kinda says it all. I'm a bit surrpised by that statement.

Ghost of "Clear the track here comes WH."

WH

Guess I listened to Sammy Hagar too much in my youth.

I go to NJ, RI and Massachusetts a few times a year. When I do, I drive about 75-80 most of the way. That's about it for me, though. I'm no Nascar driver. A car is merely a device to get me from one spot to another. I am quite utilitarian about it.

X-man47

You're right, WH, I could never be a politician. In fact my ten years living in DC has caused me to get the willies when I ever get in proximity to one. As for the term "profligacy", of course it can't be legislatively defined. But when the US, with less than 10% of the world's population, routinely uses over 25% of the world's energy resources including oil, I believe that this behavior qualifies.

And what do our farsighted leaders want to do??? Why LOWER the federal tax on gasoline, or drill in ANWAR, or who know what else to encourage even faster burning up the dwindling stock of the earth's oil of course! It's ludicrous.

__________________
What can Brown do for you?

WH

I see the argument a lot about the US using 25% of the earth's energy resources, but that's because we also produce about 25% or more of all the world's goods and services, including plenty of agriculture and medicine that goes to the rest of the world.

Cut our energy usage, slash our output and the entire planet would be in rough shape. All other countries combined could not hope to replicate our production in a matter of years.

Lowering the energy usage in the US either means the rest of the world has gotten richer -- necessitating the expansion of all commodity production and using up more of the earth's resources - or that the US has gotten a lot poorer.

Greater energy efficiency alone will not suffice to aid in the former or to prevent the latter. The world has some problems to iron out, but like most Americans, I won't tolerate the solutions coming largely at our expense.

clark1

Greater energy efficiency alone will not suffice to aid in the former or to prevent the latter. The world has some problems to iron out, but like most Americans, I won't tolerate the solutions coming largely at our expense.


I'll agree with that, but just slow down you'll live a lot longer. Besides, you're not the only one out there. Maybe you need one of those police flashing red light thingsy to put on the roof of your car.
Who knows, maybe oil is actually being created in the earth's center core, ya think?

X-man47

The US is actually fairly energy efficient on the production side although part of that involves the fact that we are a service-oriented economy. But the way we produce our energy, and the way we transport ourselves, is where the gains need to be made. If our politicians don't force the issue, time will.

__________________
What can Brown do for you?

rusty X

Cambridge Energy Associates (a very well regarded energy consulting group) has made a persuasive argument that the world will still have a lot of oil, well into the next century. As technology improves, so does the efficiency of extracting oil. In the 60's a noted Shell geologist was well quoted as saying there is plenty of oil, and he was using a 48% recovery ratio. It is significantly better today, and will no doubt get better as time goes by. Also, since oil is a commodity - and if the government will keep their freakin' hands off it - it does respond well to a supply/demand ratio. Experts such as Boone Pickens, and others, have said that if political risk is removed from oil pricing (thanks a lot speculators, Iran, Russia) the current price would be $40 - $60 a barrel (half what it is now).

__________________
If you want to run with the big dogs, you've got to get off the porch.