- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 9, 2012 at 3:45 am #753630
kootchmanMemberredblack… they did… I remember Honda had a 6 month waiting list… Ford bought 20% of Mazda for access to their motor technology, Chrysler was rebadging Nissan… etc etc…
“if that was the case, cars would have become more efficient the first time we butted heads with iran over oil”
.
April 9, 2012 at 12:52 pm #753631
kootchmanMemberWell take a look at CNG Company. Tulsa OK. Natural gas is about 66 cents a gallon. DNG makes a bi-fuel adapter. A Ford Explorer can get about 62 mpg. Stored at a 4 psi pressure, a home tank for commuters..If on a long trip.. no problem.. flip a switch and run on gasoline. Costs for conversion? 7-10 grand. Cost for batteries for a Chevy Volt? 20K.,and then there is the dispoal of toxic batteries..(they do wear out) .. and ya still burn coal to generate the charge flow. No federal subsidies needed… market response to increasing fuel costs. The free market. The only involvement of the federal government,…. obstruction of natural gas extraction.. and of course, they haven’t yet placed the essential federal fuels tax… yet. You don;t have to build a massive infrastructure either..,,, an LPG storage tank can be hooked up to any home with a natural gas line service. That’s the free market… when government get the hell out of the way, entrepeneurs fill the voids. We don’t need your tax dollars… private investment will fill the need. Obama gas is going to top $ 5 per gallon… how about a conversion payback model on your SUV, Pick-up of about 12 months? Add an natural gas on demand water heater and those two actions alone will help fuel a roaring recovery as consumers have more disposable income. Now, where will I invest my 401K high yield allocation portions? HM and the Volt? or any of the myriad of compressed natural gas bi-fuel conversions companies? Obama will blow billions for bird choppers and solar panels… private enterprise will do what is market accepted. That DPB is how you make your energy policy work… you expand consumer choice. You don;t force feed government policy down the throats of a resistant consumer.
And lookee here…Canadian company doing the same for heavy transport. tractor trailers and locomotives…. and surprise surprise.. they are exporting the technology to China, Inda, Europe and the USA. Exporting value added manufacturing technology.. Private capital …. it’s wondrous and effective when you keep it out of the hands of government.
Jan, what a wizened hack sorta, Janism you posted. Ya wanna start that kinda crap? Still not checking your own posts again… feel free but don’t whine about geting a dose of your own. You aren’t that clairvoyant… gotta run….prepare for my two day seminar in Vegas… as a motivational speaker at a business seminar. Not a bad gig for a “miserable” old guy who will knock down about 6K for spreading my misery. ha ha ha.. (not GSA money either)
“(shaking head – what an unhappy, miserable person you seem to be)” Did that make you feel better?
April 9, 2012 at 1:23 pm #753632
redblackParticipantaround and around we go.
There are millions of us who just aren’t in awe of stumble bum governance.
and there are tens of millions of us who aren’t impressed with 30 years of laissez-faire economic policies.
I remember Honda had a 6 month waiting list…
how many of those cars were american-made – as in, made here, in america?
people are still buying 5,000-pound pickup trucks almost as fast as they buy camrys. really? how many farmers do we have in this country? at last check, about 75% of the populace lives in urban areas. so who the hell needs a silverado?
and the silverado, by the yea, has about the same fuel efficiency as – what? – a 1974 dodge dart? a ford maverick? maybe a mercury monarch?
and the american camry’s fuel efficiency ain’t that hot, all things considered.
VW is starting to get it with TDI engines, but they went backwards with the latest gas-powered golf and jetta models. mazda is starting to get it with their 40-mpg skyactiv engine.
we should have cleared 30 mpg as the baseline 20 years ago. instead, auto makers are bragging about 30 mpg as best-in-class. and, as a result, we still import 8 – 10 million barrels per day.
“Production on federal lands is down, while production on state and private lands is up.
there are two clauses in that sentence, separated by a comma.
read the second one.
now, regarding regulations:
the sheriff wants new regulations, the sheriff gets new regulations. simple as that.
don’t like the regulations? take your drills and go home. this is a dangerous industry, and obama did the right thing after the BP disaster. he should have done the right thing before the BP disaster, but i can’t imagine how many conservative tears would have been shed if he had stopped gulf oil production for a best-practices and safety review.
or – as you suggest – you can buy yourself a new sheriff in 2012. that’s the oil industry’s preferred approach.
i think obama made a pretty clever compromise: we’ll grant more leases, but the rules just got tougher.
April 9, 2012 at 1:29 pm #753633
kootchmanMemberdobro… “paranoid generalizations’? Man, Obama was an unabashed supporter of cap and trade… touted it’s merits. it was in his campaign promises….his own secretary of energy stated in congressional testimony we should be at $7 per gallon? That’s paranoia? Those are facts.
Candidate Obama
April 9, 2012 at 3:45 pm #753634
dobroParticipantThe generalization I was talking about was the one I quoted. I clearly quoted it first thing and then commented on it. It concerned the liberal-bashing statements with which you litter your posts.
so post #78 is an excellent example of your “non-sequiter” style posting, in which you take something out of context and then go off on a tangenital rant that has nothing to do with the original post, thereby obscuring the issue and pretending its all factual.
Are those the kinds of BS debate techniques you espouse at your 6K motivational speaking gig?
April 9, 2012 at 3:48 pm #753635
dobroParticipantBTW, cap and trade is another Republican idea (like the Romneycare mandate) that the “personal responsibility” crowd thought was great until Obama proposed it.
April 9, 2012 at 6:20 pm #753636
DBPMember1st: Sorry, redblack. I blindly misread your quote.
2nd: OK, kootch. I like your CNG example. That’s an example of a market-based solution for some energy needs (home heating, cars).
But there are other energy needs beyond those that CNG can or should supply. Can CNG supply Boeing with power?
April 9, 2012 at 6:35 pm #753637
kootchmanMemberAs I watched the “rap” tune of the GSA employees who gleefully stated they are immune from OIG audits… ya have to sigh..54% of all Americna homes receive a government check and almost 50% pay no income taxes. Tell me Dobro just how do you think that system can perpetuate itself? . Once they have taken care of themselves.. whatever is left goes to the masses. Cap and Trade sucked..in concept and execution….Cap and Trade died when it became apparent there would be no financial reward to trade carbon credits…. see the housing collapse.. government making markets by legislation not by demand. I still think personal responsibility is a great idea. I’ll do that my way thank-you. DHHS telling me how? No.
Well redblack the Japanese had a customer focus. The American auto industry had a quarterly profit and labor unrest avoidance focus. As we deploy yet another battle group to the Gulf this week…Pax Americana for oil alone.
Romney care… was never intended to be a universal healthcare policy… for the 10% of Mass residents who dropped themselves on the public dole… Romneycare was a simple.. buy private insurance or buy it from the state. .. it did not suck in the entire population of Mass. It was a terminus program, get the 10% covered.. Obamacare is the the start of a massive government takeover and we know single payer is the end game. Would that Obamacare’s intent was to cover 10% not 100% of the US population. There is a difference. And for sure.. Romneycare didn’t raid medicare to fund it.
April 9, 2012 at 6:46 pm #753638
kootchmanMemberDBP ..Probably not CNG… but.. Westport probably can fuel aviation. The entire Luftwaffe, and ME 163 all flew on coal derived aviation fuels. It was a blend of kerosine and LNG… but… it’s progress. I would imagine that 66 cent per gallon of LPG will inspire GE who is a customer with Westport (locomotive manufacturer) to design LNG enignes.
(Reuters) – The world’s first commercial passenger flight powered by a fuel made from natural gas completed late on Monday a six-hour journey from London to Qatar, one of the biggest producers of natural gas. One thing for sure… they won’t be flying with Solyndra panels or windmills
April 9, 2012 at 6:54 pm #753639
kootchmanMemberAgain redblack see the California debacle and the doubling of projected costs… before one track has been laid. That’s a lot of altruism…the government can’t run a profitable transportation mode…. it hasn’t yet. AmTrak? Sound Transit? Wash State Ferry System? any of em making even operating costs?
high speed rail? i don’t just want us to subsidize it. i want us to build it, operate it, and own it. but if the private sector wants to do the right, altruistic thing and partner with its country, that’s great
April 10, 2012 at 3:05 am #753640
WorldCitizenParticipantFYI:
The cost of the high speed rail in CA has not doubled. It has risen, but not doubled. The current estimates are 30 Billion dollars less than that doubled figure initially reported. AND it will be finished 4 years earlier than proposed now.
April 10, 2012 at 3:16 am #753641
WorldCitizenParticipantI think oil is necessary and vital to the present and future interests of the United States. I think we should be increasing our domestic production in intelligent, environmentally sound ways, and decreasing the need to rely on Mid-East sources. I also, think we should be doing everything we can to raise the price of gas in this country slowly but steadily regardless of where we get it from by taxing the hell out of it. We should be eliminating the giveaways to Big Oil. We should take that tax money and re-invest almost 100% into R&D for renewable energy technology. We should eventually make it hurt financially to own something that uses so much oil that it threatens the sovereignty of our nation.
This kind of plan would take decades to accomplish as we can not obviously get rid of our existing fleet of autos overnight. We don’t have the technology to replace fossil fuels in this country as of now, and the pressing need for change won’t alter that reality.
Excellent public transportation systems are vital to the future of our country. Change is coming and we will be dragging all the car culture warriors along with us kicking and screaming. And it won’t be easy. And it won’t be fair to all people either. It’s necessary, though, as we aren’t living a sustainable existence.
April 11, 2012 at 2:00 am #753642
kootchmanMemberAh yeas WorldCitizen… and how many fault lines does that high speed rail cross? Should be interesting when a 160 mph track segment rises four feet rather suddenly. I was in SeaTac with my family when the Nisqually quake hit… good thing there were alternate airports to divert traffic to.
It ain’t “on track” and sure isn’t on budget!!!
“The strikes against California’s high-speed rail project keep piling up, but Gov. Jerry Brown refuses to abandon the project, with one political analyst even likening him to Captain Ahab
That followed two studies – one by and independent panel, one by the state auditor – that called the plan risky. Polls show faltering support among California voters because of rising costs. Governor Brown’s continuing support for the project – which is expected to cost $68 billion, according to a new business plan.”
See that WorldCitizen… DOUBLE the cost.. so far. The only tax advantage “Big Oil” gets is the same one every manufacturer gets… they can deduct the actual expenses they incur in running their business. Again liberal speak.. every dollar you confiscate for taxes. is discretionary income you take out of your own pocket… the income you spend that employs people. You would never see a fresh food for 7 months out of the year… how do your think that produce gets to market? Where have you been? Every University center in this country is doing research on electrical and transportation mode efficiency. But ya know it’s as basic as this… you have to have an energy input to create an energy form that is stored for use on demand. Many of our business models include transportation flexibility that public transit doesn’t provide. And can’t. For the cubicle dwellers and such it’s fine. BTY… the largest consumer of energy is structures… not transportation. Your lawn service guy getting on the bus with equipment should be interesting to watch. I think we should tax anyone who works in an office, retail shop. hospital. anywhere there is a temperature controlled work environment $10 a day for your R&D program..$10 per day for every kid in public school classroom all day…. cause that is the hugh energy user… not the car. Think about it… 70% of fossil fuels consumed are to heat or cool buildings… not power cars. That tax WorldCitizen.. will fall on the shoulders of everyone… including those least able to afford it.
April 11, 2012 at 2:37 am #753643
DBPMemberÂ
The only tax advantage “Big Oil” gets is the same one every manufacturer gets… they can deduct the actual expenses they incur in running their business.
—So can BP deduct the $20 billion (?) they paid for damages and clean-up of the Deepwater Horizon disaster? Can they deduct “loss of income” for the oil they couldn’t sell ‘cuz they spilled it into the water?
I’m guessing . . . yes!
************************************************************************************
Ah yeas WorldCitizen… and how many fault lines does that [proposed California] high speed rail cross? Should be interesting when a 160 mph track segment rises four feet rather suddenly.
—Ah yeas, fault lines . . . Japan has those, too, I believe. That’s why Japan’s “bullet train” was a miserable failure and nobody rides it. (See Figure 1.)
Â
Probably kills birds, too.
Â
Â
April 11, 2012 at 3:35 am #753644
jamminjMember“That’s why Japan’s “bullet train” was a miserable failure and nobody rides it. (See Figure 1.)”
There is a huge difference in culture between the Japanese and the United States, especially over the past 60 years. Japanese culture relies heavily on helping each other out, privately and publicly. While here this country, it has become of what can I get out of it and screw everyone else. Listen to some of the comments on this small board, it is basically, I have mine, don’t touch it, and if you can’t help yourself, screw you.
Are there other answers to big oil, sure… but we have a can’t do attitude right now in this country and generation.
Is high speed rail right for us right now, maybe not. 60 years ago,sure. But we are fighting for big oil, not advancing our infrastructure like we should be. While other countries are moving ahead, we are still arguing high speed rail, where that is old technology to them.
Take a look at how Japan handled their natural disaster, and then compare how we handled ours the past few years. That gives you an idea of our mindset is in this country.
April 11, 2012 at 3:39 am #753645
kootchmanMemberWhen the Osaka Shinkansen was opened, 50% of the population was within the service range. Look at a map. We don’t have 65 million people in the entire state of California. Our economics won’t support the ridership. However, if a private company, wants a shot at it.. go for it. Japan broke up the JNR because (surprise surprise) as a government owned monopoly, it was spending $150 for every $100 of revenue. The system was privatized in 1987… and is now profitable. No surprise. If it is such a great deal, … use eminent domain to secure the land rights. and open it up to international bid… any private consortium who wants to put the system together .. have at it. Part of being “sustainable” means cost effective. Let me know when Sound Transit.. our “little” experiment makes a profit.. or even breaks even. Those pictures look so comfortable too. Great picture… get one of the white golved attendants who shove the passengers in during rush hour. Let me know when AmTrak the NY to DC line with the highest population use breaks even or makes a profit. When we subsidize money losing government constructions… in perpetuity. It takes resources out of the private sector. Now, there actually are sections of the interstate system that do meet operation costs, generate enough revenue to repair and replace… but they toll the users. Japan didn’t handle that disaster alone my learned friend. The Russians, USA, France, Germany all had nuclear disaster response teams in country within 48 hours. The US Navy was on station rendering aid, including delivering aviation fuel for the helicopters and making drinking water. When Kobi was flattened right here in good old Seattle we sent all manner of search and rescue aid including recovery dogs… from every corner of this country… we are still in Haiti and 80% of the world aid that arrived for the Indonesia tsunami… came from the USA. We do a pretty good job in natural disasters… but they are called disasters for a reason. They require time, talent, and money. My little critter is right at this moment is New Orleans… still trying to restore the vitality of coastal Louisiana. And I PAY for plane ticket, lodging and about 1 grand to help with the construction materials and logistics. Those damn faith institutions… and a shout out to ASPCA… the Navy, Coast Guard, USACE. National Guard, …
April 11, 2012 at 3:55 am #753646
redblackParticipantOur economics won’t support the ridership.
we won’t know until we try, will we?
if you can get from seattle to portland on a train in less time than it takes to navigate the airports at each end, people will ride.
same thing for LA to san fran.
It takes resources out of the private sector.
…who are busy taking resources out of us. please don’t interrupt them.
right, kootch?
April 11, 2012 at 4:04 am #753647
kootchmanMemberNo you can’t redblack… that is pure BS… in fact, you are lucky if the train is within 2 hours of scheduled time. I have run that gauntlet. I take the train for novelty…. but if I have to meet a schedule… plane.
I would prefer we try small scale first. Before we through 100 billion and find .. oooops it take hundreds of millions to maintain it… let’s see our little Sound Transit or Metro break even huh? Before we double down. User fees should cover the costs. Wish I could start a business where you will write me a check every month wether you use my products or services or not.
You might be right though… as long as private capital develops it … my objection would be over. No public employees either!
April 11, 2012 at 4:14 am #753648
redblackParticipantheh. you obviously don’t fly that much. airports suck.
i’ll put money on it, kootch. if you give me a train that breaks 100 mph on a dedicated line (as opposed to one that leases right-of-way from freight lines) i’ll race you from downtown seattle to downtown portland any day of the week.
and twice on sunday.
by the yea, airports are usually located hell and gone from where people really need or want to be. and unless they have some kind of rail system to get them from the airport to downtown, they’re just wasting more fossil fuels.
trains, on the other hand, go right into urban cores.
as a matter of fact, i’ll race you on amtrak right now. downtown to downtown. elysian fields to the rogue ale house.
but you have to go through seatac. no cheating with your private jet.
and i’ll spot ya’: you can ride link light rail to seatac and max to downtown PDX.
April 11, 2012 at 6:11 am #753649
HMC RichParticipantLast check, Amtrak Cascades 516 was late by three hours. That is when my son and I gave up waiting (to watch).
Buses are far more efficient and go more places than trains. Don’t get me wrong. I love trains. But if the route isn’t popular buses can change their route, trains can’t.
Trains have to subsidize their ridership with Federal Funds, while buses usually don’t.
I would rather spend the money on improving bridges, roads, etc.
April 11, 2012 at 1:00 pm #753650
redblackParticipantridership would improve and times would improve if passenger rail didn’t take a back seat to freight. the economics would improve with increased ridership.
i have never left the train station late. we have been delayed by waiting for right-of-way from BNSF, though.
and the amtrak tracks north of ballard need to be improved, for sure.
and, by the way, buses are not “far more efficient.” they get stuck on I-5 with the other rubber-tired vehicles and get 0 mpg while idling. and their engines are nowhere near as efficient per mile and per passenger as train engines.
April 11, 2012 at 2:07 pm #753651
JoBParticipantwhen you build it
they ride it
it’s that simple
We are facing an aging population
who will be increasingly unable to get around via private automobile
where do you think they are going to spend their retirement dollars?
where they can get out and about on public transportation?
or where they are isolated in retirement communities?
Cities that have invested in public transportation have a real edge tapping into those funds
April 11, 2012 at 2:17 pm #753652
kootchmanMemberTrue enough. But if it is a good model… and the technology is up to snuff… it should be profitable then. So, let the state use eminent domain, secure the land and all rights of way, condemn all the road crossings.. and put ii out to bid. Any private consortium that wants to build and own a high speed rail…go for it. Worked for Leland Stanford right? I am way past “le’s try it and see if it works” with tax dollars. Splash it with cold water reality… see if private capital agrees with you. Of course… your 1% that you want to tax bond and investment income at the top marginal tax rate are going to balk unless they get a decent RPOI… and your are opposed on principal to tax free nubi or development bonds too…. that would raise the cost of capital.. so ya gotta find investors..they will do a much better job of parsing the economic viability of your plan. The per mileage for passenger trains bty is not as efficient as freight tonnage per mile… not by a long shot… and of course the passenger load is unknown. Hey WorldCitizen checked out those California budget numbers yet?
April 11, 2012 at 2:23 pm #753653
kootchmanMemberGive me a business address in say… Lake Oswego. We can both leave the house at the same time. I will take my car…. I will do the 75 mph…. maximum. You take the train, rent a car, or take a taxi…… who do you think gets to the address first? And I will have the flexibility to drive all day long, and do as I please when I please. Whilst you can fumble with all the surface transit schedules .. and maybe cram in one or two extra stops.
April 11, 2012 at 5:01 pm #753654
WorldCitizenParticipantJoB:
You know, I never really considered the aging Baby Boomer population. How incredibly short-sighted of me. That is almost enough right there to add rail systems (esp. in urban areas).
I watched my grandfather, who spent his last years living in our house, grow angrier and angrier as his physical state deteriorated and his independence was relinquished. After a lifetime of driving and being self-sufficient he all of a sudden had to rely on us to do the little things that made his life “his.”
He was a fantastic man, but died far more a frustrated individual than he should have. Just a simple thing like a rail system to access real life events at his convenience would have made all the difference in the world. And he was part of the WWII (or Greatest Generation or whatever you’d like to call it). The numbers of the Boomers make the numbers of that group look minuscule.
That first Hill line with all of its limitations and shortcomings is going to be so valuable to Seattle. I really hope they can come together and design a line that links Ballard, West Seattle and downtown. It won’t be perfect, but can realy make such a huge difference in people’s lives.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.