Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Climate Change and Environmental Issues "Greener" Trucking - Or Something Else ?

Speaking of station wagons, don't forget the new Ford Flex!

They call it a "crossover vehicle" but if that aint a station wagon I'll kiss yer ass. No diesel of course, 3.5L v6. 17-24mpg. 'Bout $30K

Now if I had a chance to do things differently I'd go with the Nissan Cube!
It's asymmetrical.
1.8L 4cyl 25-30MPG and the msrp is under $15K!

LOL my wife told me she would divorce me if I ever got a Cube.
In fact, if I want to amuse my friends, I bring it up in front of them.

You'd have to be there to appreciate her reaction, but trust me, it's high comedy.

In fact, just seeing one of those on the road sets her off!

I'll agree with all of your statements Checkers, except the BIG OIL canard.

Is the next to be references to "magic carburetors" and other "fuel saving inventions suppressed by BIG OIL" ?

Seriously, the margin between production/consumption for gasoline and diesel has been so narrow for so long (thanks largely to the watermelon's continued obstruction of the creation of more and more efficient refineries), the oil companies are running flat out to meet demand most of the production year. Its one primary reason for seasonal fluctuations of fuel prices.

OTOH, the Obama Administration has been so successful in its efforts to blockade new field development the essential tools, (deep water drilling rigs) are leaving the Gulf for contracts with Petrobas off Brazil. Most interesting when you consider the USG guaranteed the EX-IM bank loans for this, and when you note a major stockholder in Petrobas is also a major contributor to the Democratic Party, a player in the US media markets, and a major supporter of the VPC and Brady orgs. Yeah I gotta agree lobbying - and political contributions by foreign nationals - are playing an increasingly larger role in the fate of the American consummer. >Mech

What are you going to say next time a non-Republican is in power, and they insist that the oil companies excercise care and due diligence in their drilling operations, Mech?

Or better yet, what are you going to say when the next disaster happens, and it's EVEN WORSE, so bad in fact that it threatens to become a global killer?

How bad do you want that oil?
Bad enough to put off ALL OTHER technological development including the one which is the most feasible, EFFICIENCY?

Are we required to submit to another century of petroleum monopoly in the liquid fuel market? Are we required to submit to liquid fuels as a monopoly?

What happened to the free market, Mech?
What is it, da poor poor put upon petroleum companies can't bear the thought of competition?

Alright, you win...drill baby drill, let's throw it all out.
Everybody gets their own Hummer, no catalytic, no smog controls, put the lead back in the gas and 8 miles per gallon for everyone.

And that f****ing M. King Hubbert, he was just a commie anyway, him and that damn Hubbert Curve.

Everyone knows that Gawd supplied us with abiotic petroleum in unlimited amounts and Obama's just an America hatin Muzzie who wants to make us all socialists anyway.

And while we're at it, let's have another war! Put it on the credit card!

How long do you actually expect that line of baloney to hold up anyway?

By the way, inside that last little bit of sark, look for some figures on domestic oil production. Try going over to The Oil Drum and looking up our real figures.

We're not sitting on that much oil, Mech.

You're being lied to, very seriously.

Archive on Peak Oil

These guys are some of the biggest heavy hitters in the oil business itself. That Sarah Palin bullshit won't fly over there, because these ARE the geologists, the drillers, the rig engineers and the petrochemical engineers in the business, these are the GEEKS of the oil industry.

If you don't have facts, they will eat you and anyone else with an agenda alive. And they have all the real goods on what's what with regard to how much oil we have, how much the Saudis have and how much the Mexicans have, and so on.

Do some homework and get back to me, I've grown tired of hearing the cornucopean whiners who think our problem is just some black muzzie terra-ist who pals around with other terra-ists and we'd all be happy Hummer owners if Amurrika would jes git down and pray and put a Tea Party Prezzy-dint in the White House.

"...reverse regs ... Now that's something I'll never live to see !

"Change...industry..." Got a "Five-Year plan for that ? We've got a President with zero, zip, nil, nada business experience already advising the auto industry int insolvency, now you want to give truck manufacture/design go the government too ? !!!

Never claimed I was opposed to efficiency, CS. I am "opposed" to brands of thinking labeling gaining those increases is going to be as easy/cheap (as chip designers' reliance upon "Moore's Law" ) and peddling it as "doable reality" - if we just believe hard enough !

"Will have to.." IOW get more energy out of that gallon of diesel (as currently formulated), fuel than it contains...... Nopw that's a trick ! Maybe you can create a motor/generator able to run forever without an outside power supply, too ! Or have you been watching the Military Channel ? What works for the US Army in a point application is a long way from being proven durable/efficient enough for commercial trucking.

"cheap liquid fuel going" Since when ? The U.S. has the greatest energy reserves of any nation in the world ! Diesel would be a lot cheap if much of refinery output wasn't being wasted keeping mom's tootsies warm ! (which could be better done with gas or electricity) The U.S. has no "shortage of energy". It does, however, have a large - and growing - "shortage" of development and refining capacity. It also - thanks to generations of Congresses - lacks a long term comprehensive energy policy addressing both environmental and economic issues in time scales matching our investment/tax regulations.

So far, CS, all I'm reading is the equivalent of the stage magician's patter. But the public never seems to get to see the bunny whenever government gets involved. And I deeply distrust anyone supportive of pogroms restrictive of America's biggest assets - its people and their drive to succeed. >Mech

Thank God ! Its vehicles were of indifferent quality made to poor tolerances from dubious materials. Tuneups every couple of thousand miles, along with oil/filters. Tires every ten thousand or less, brakes the same. Top end overhauls at 50-60K miles.

All vehicles have already become many orders of magnitude more efficient than their mid-20th century counterparts ! And America is awash in energy ! Its hundreds of years' supply is cheaply and readily available, (if a series of governments would quit heeding senseless demands of a small minority) and implement long-term programs encouraging of personal initiative permitting individuals opportunity to select the fuel/vehicle best suited to their needs.

IOW, Americans are starving in the midst of a cornacopia of energy solely due to the non-science rantings of yammerheads with a political agenda that includes the "America must fail" as its central theme. >Mech

Class reply, Greger !

Can't argue the "facts" snark the message. Don't like the message, kill the messenger !

Just what form of "alternative energy" or "green energy" has lived up to it billing ?

Windmills/turbines, besides being apallingly noisy, are proven ecutioners of wildlife and insects, disruptive of migration routes, all while producing sporadic power at the cost of an abysmal availability record. And we haven't yet seen what effects massed banks of these devices will have upon downwind weather and perhaps climate.

Solar cells are great, until you learn they don't meet the touted life-span or efficiency numbers by a significant amount. Again a sporadic power source with seasonal and weather caused fluctuations. And no one's talking about their possible effects upon local and downwind weather due to the albedo change they creat over large areas. Or their vast footprint required to generate even modest amounts of electricity sporadically. And their "availability numbers" suck as well.

So far none of these environmental jewels has even remotely approached being viable. If they were their promoters wouldn't need the rate-payers of utilities to subsidize them, would they ? >Mech

So, Checkers, your answer is we needs must "gather in the dark and sign sad songs", eh ?

I would hope the next time there's a blowout ala Moncondo, (if there ever is), the administration would avail itself of all the expertise and resources extant in the industry, not "staff the control efforts into stasis" with droves of "experts" that had zero/zip/zilch experice in the industry in order to appear "in control". Demoncratic paternalism sure blew a fuse on Moncondo. And why hasn't the administration made a "big deal" of its examination of the "failed" BP ?

"Liquid fuel monopoly "? !!! You mean no individual or company can invent or create a cleaner burning more energetic liquid fuel that will work with current technology and sell/license it ? Who'da thunk it ? !!!

BTW the "Oil Drum" is just one of a number of industry sites I look in upon occasionally. IK stand by my assertion the U.S. is awash in energy from just known fields. Lots of exploration left. Be interesting to see a push on "mining" SCM as well. Lots of that along all our coastlines.

I not worried one bit about the "might just happen" (aka the 150% safety scenario), when our economy is in tatters and people are soon going to be making "food/fuel" choices that needn't occurr. Why is it the paternalism of liberatti has, like children and puppies, have to have everything they want "right this second" ? And why does it always seem Joe the Plumber types with sweat or their brows and calluses on their hands have to "pay the piper", not the urbanites and entitlement drones ? >Mech

Maybe I need to do a better job with my words. You're either too eager to put words in my mouth or I'm not doing a good enough job explaining myself, or a little of both.
I'm saying that if regulations get too skewed against trucking in general, there will be pressure generated by the market itself to change or correct them.
Regulations get changed, reversed or eliminated all the time.
Deregulation has been the clarion call of the Republican Party since there was a Republican Party. Are you attempting to tell me that you have never seen an industry deregulated in your entire life?



Oh so the President is the one that put the auto industry into insolvency now. Hmmmm...
GM on the road to recovery

GM reclaim #1 spot

US automakers: China is most important new market


You might not be opposed to it but you obviously don't understand it. To wit:


The above has to be one of my favorites.
You must be related to Tim from Massachusetts.
Something that works for the military won't work in the domestic market, eh?





You're right, I guess it makes no sense to look for adaptability OR a market for military ideas, we just manage to do it on a regular basis.



You'll get absolutely no argument from me there.


A large part of that is due to the fact that oil companies DO NOT WANT to build additional refinery capacity.
If you tell me they do, you're either lying or you don't understand WHY they don't. Additional refinery capacity drives down prices and profits. Furthermore, and this actually DOES make sense, additional refineries run the risk of going idle, which eats INTO profits at a very high rate.
Oil companies learned a long time ago to build JUST ENOUGH capacity, in fact they learned to keep capacity at a razor sharp edge, which allows them to keep prices higher.


Wrong again, moosebreath.
Congress has voted countless times to create long term energy policies. Would you like to know who benefits the most from a LACK thereof? Take a wild guess.



After all, if we have a long term energy policy that means we will also have a long term vision to do more with less, and that means less for "the people of America's oil and gas companies" and we know what they want. They want more for themselves and less for the rest of us. They want to squeeze as much of that money out of our pockets as possible.


Yeah, you keep saying that there is some mysterious group of sinister people out there who want to restrict people's drive to succeed. That's got a strangely familiar ring to it!

Hey, you wanna keep slinging those barbs about five year plans and other little jabs that imply I'm a communist? Sure go ahead, it's not going to do much toward promoting honest intellectual discussion and it sure makes it hard to respect what you have to say, but go ahead.

Five year plans, pogroms, anything else?
You expect someone to treat you with respect, you're gonna have to drop the Hannity act.

And by the way, you've proven that you have never been to
The Oil Drum forum until the day I introduced you to it, because you keep trying to imply that I think we can squeeze more energy out of a gallon of fuel than it contains.
It's not possible to be a reader of that forum and believe in such an idea. That's why I never have believed such a thing.
You're trying very hard to make it SOUND like I do, but you've failed. That's YOU talking, not me.

I think I have proven long ago that I am intelligent enough to understand concepts like energy content, EROEI, quantitative inputs, peak power curves etc.

I think what you're actually trying to do is intentionally insult my intelligence. Keep it up.

I think I already explained the way I believe we can increase efficiency, and it had nothing to do with some fantasy in YOUR head that makes YOU think I believe there is more energy in a gallon of fuel. That's all on you, pal. I never said, implied it or promoted it.

What I DO believe is that we're clinging to ancient powertrain concepts which are woefully inefficient and the least we can do if we're going to ride out the remainder of Hubbert's curve is to make the powertrain get the most OUT of the energy in that fuel.

We can do more to deliver most of the power to the wheels and throw away less as mechanical loss and waste heat.

And it is incumbent upon us to make the effort to do so.