Quote :

"no one will touch the one thing they could do RIGHT NOW and that's impose a maximum 55 mph speed limit on all roads across the board (and yes, i know they don't have the power directly, but they can attach it to federal funding for roads, just like they did in the past)"

i'm no garage posting car expert or anything, but aren't most cars geared these days to be the most efficient at around 65?

2/7/2006 1:11:49 AM

http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/1gmarchive/002826.html

colbert on the subject

2/7/2006 8:59:06 AM

Well, if we "really" wanted to make cars as efficient as possible:
outlaw gasoline (diesel baby!)
outlaw automatic transmissions (+20% or more efficiency)
outlaw power steering (+5%)
outlaw power breaking (+3%)

Do all this, and we can eliminate our dependence of middle east oil in a hundred years (old cars would be worth more than new cars, so the efficiency increases wouldn't come until all old cars were scrap)

2/7/2006 10:06:39 AM

getting rid of automatic transmission would increase the hazards caused by women driving by 50%. that is, to note, after a 30% decrease in women drivers who couldnt figure it out.

[Edited on February 7, 2006 at 10:14 AM. Reason : .]

2/7/2006 10:14:22 AM

are you against power steering/breaks just because of the weight?

or is there some other variable?

2/7/2006 10:24:59 AM

^ Oh, I was being sarcastic, trying to point out the rediculousness of Bush trying to make us reduce our oil consumption. It would work, but to our detriment.

I was merely pointing out that such laws would forcibly reduce gasoline consumption in automobiles. They are called "Power" steering andbraking for precisely the same reason they stop working when the engine is off, they consume power. Each system runs off presurized fluid generated by a pump powered either electrically or mechanically. They do add weight, but they also consume power which cannot be used to drive the car forward.

2/7/2006 12:54:38 PM

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=businessNews&storyid=2006-02-07T191922Z_01_N07246586_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENERGY-EXXON.xml&rpc=23

Quote :

"Exxon: America will always rely on foreign oil HOUSTON (Reuters) - The United States will always rely on foreign imports of oil to feed its energy needs and should stop trying to become energy independent, a top Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM.N: Quote, Profile, Research) executive said on Tuesday. "Realistically, it is simply not feasible in any time period relevant to our discussion today," Exxon Mobil Senior Vice President Stuart McGill said, referring to what he called the "misperception" that the United States can achieve energy independence. The comments, in a speech at an energy conference in Houston, come a few days after U.S. President George W. Bush declared America was addicted to Middle Eastern oil and promised to help the country kick the habit. Many in the United States believe America should wean itself off oil imports from the Middle East, fearing it makes the country dangerously dependent on an unstable region. The world's largest publicly traded oil company, however, says hoping to end foreign oil imports is not only a bad idea, but also impossible. "Americans depend upon imports to fill the gap," McGill said. "No combination of conservation measures, alternative energy sources and technological advances could realistically and economically provide a way to completely replace those imports in the short or medium term." Instead of trying to achieve energy independence, importing nations like the U.S. should be promoting energy interdependence, McGill said. "Because we are all contributing to and drawing from the same pool of oil, all nations -- exporting and importing -- are inextricably bound to one another in the energy marketplace," he said."

[Edited on February 7, 2006 at 3:30 PM. Reason : could've read this way: "LoneSnark: America will always rely on foreign oil"]

2/7/2006 3:27:40 PM

more like "the america that elects our best friends, like W and Dick, will always be dependent on foreign oil"

2/7/2006 3:48:42 PM

that's like a crest executive saying "you're always going to be dependent on crest"

2/7/2006 4:19:18 PM

^^ And who would we have to elect to get the opposite result?

I only ask, because a $3 gas tax would probably result in revolution (states would refuse to collect it).

2/7/2006 4:58:28 PM

^^Plaque is a figment of the liberal media and the dental industry to scare you into buying useless appliances and pastes

^oh i dunno, plenty of people

2/7/2006 7:17:10 PM