Bush: U.S. Needs Smarter Ways to Meet Energy Needs (he uses all

[rodeodance]

the right words-but they are hollow.



http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=578&e=8&u=/nm/20050416/pl_nm/bush_energy_dc

Bush: U.S. Needs Smarter Ways to Meet Energy Needs

Sat Apr 16,10:16 AM ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Under pressure over rising gasoline prices, President Bush said on Saturday that energy legislation to be debated on Capitol Hill must encourage conservation and increased production of energy at home.
.........



In his radio address, he said he wanted energy legislation to encourage the use of technology to improve conservation.

"We must find smarter ways to meet our energy needs, and we must encourage Americans to make better choices about energy consumption," he said.

The energy legislation, he said, must also encourage more production of energy at home, diversify the energy supply by developing alternative sources such as ethanol or bio-diesel and find better, more reliable ways to deliver energy to consumers by upgrading transmission lines and pipelines.....

[mikehiggins]

1. Bush...smarter

seeing these words in same heading does not compute!

Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!

[KlatooBNikto]

2. Can you ask your Rasputin, Cheney, to release the minutes to his

Energy Task Force so we can divine his answers to our Energy Problems?

[tabasco]

10. Hell, I'd just like to know WHO was in on it.

How many Enron thieves did Cheney have working on fucking the American People?

[Barrett808]

16. I'd guess: Ahmed Chalabi, Ken Lay, Zalmay Khalilzad...

The CEOs of Reliant, El Paso, and Dynegy. Basically everybody who conceived and executed the rigging of the West Coast power market and the Iraq invasion.

[Inland]

3. Buried, among all the ideas that will die for lack of support from Bush

Drilling in ANWAR.

That's his policy.

[DesEtoiles]

4. Idea: Elect (for real this time) a new president

[punpirate]

5. He wants...

... his energy legislation (well, Cheney's, actually), which isn't going to do anything but hurt the country's budget without solving any problems. It's a monstrous tax giveaway to mature industries in this country, but the public isn't going to figure that out--Bush is counting on the average voter not figuring it out.

Want to solve the immediate problem--high gas prices?--institute some realistic CAFE standards, include +6000 lb GVW vehicles in the fleet mileage requirements and remove the business tax credits for gas hog vehicles.

And watch the price of gas drop....

[Theduckno2]

19. How about lowering the maximum speed limit to 60mph?

People are going to be inconvenienced anyways with higher prices (more service stations are making their pumps prepay), why not at least slow the price increases down? Plus we get the added benefit of safer roads. As you said conservation is an answer, NOT tax breaks to the oil industry!:think:

[punpirate]

20. Doesn't make a difference without enforcement....

And enforcement these days is simply seen as a cash generator, and it's very unpopular. It's not a way to get people on your side. And, restrictive speed limits won't change pricing as quickly as other means of influencing the market. A government-mandated increase in fuel mileage means that people, with higher gas prices looming, trade in the fuel wasters. That sends resonating market messages throughout the industry.

Another problem with restrictive speed limits is that it doesn't save that much, comparatively, and it doesn't reward the guy that buys a gas-saver (that psychology has to be considered). In the eastern half of the country and the far west coast, much of the fuel used is burned up stuck in traffic. Restrictive speed limits make that situation worse, not better.

But, one of the biggest inhibitors to lower national speed limits is that portion of the population west of the Mississippi, where the distances between population centers is large. The biggest fuel-savings to be made in that area of the country would be on heavy truck speed limits, and there are huge problems associated with such a proposal. Texas tried it when they raised speed limits for cars, but kept trucks to a lower limit. It lasted only a few months.

There are a lot of things which will happen in the next few decades which will change all that, and they will happen no matter what is done now. If the issue is just a matter of controlling current pricing by changing demand, forcing the domestic manufacturers to implement hybrid technologies is the surest way to do it.

In that regard, what happened in the late `70s, after two gas price shocks? Chrysler went broke, had to be bailed out and immediately regained profitability by changing virtually its entire lineup to smaller, more fuel-efficient cars. Toyota and Nissan grabbed a huge market share by selling more efficient and reliable cars and light trucks and the only reason they didn't put the domestic makers completely out of business was the tariff structure at the time. To make substantive changes in the demand structure, one has to make structural changes in the market. Raising CAFE standards and not giving an artificial break to the most gas-wasting vehicles on the market is a really quick way to do it. It's also very appealing to the individual car owner, because their way of life doesn't change appreciably and it costs them less because their fuel use goes down. Fuel distributors see demand go down, and therefore, that excuse for high fuel prices disappears.

Cheers.

[Theduckno2]

23. Well reasoned and I'm inclined to agree.

Just a couple of thoughts though. I live in an area frequented by weekend vacationers, especially summer. Friday evenings look like they are holding time trials for the SUV 500. Making matters worse are the ones pulling trailers (campers or boats), with the AC going full blast, going 75-80 mph (limit is 70mph). This is where I started from, the conspicuous consumption of gasoline, just to save a few minutes time. I knew the Western (wide open) states would be a problem, but didn't, and still don't have an answer. As far as making structural changes, you must be a real hit at laissez-faire club meetings. Many auto-makers tried to advertise (heavy marketing of their existing lines) their way out of 70's gas price shocks and it didn't work for them. I see parallels to the Bush Administration's opting for tax breaks to maintain the status quo and not changing the market structure. His way won't work. I'm still going to slow down some (when safe to do so).
Best wishes.

[punpirate]

25. Well, you try...

... mandatory speed limits and see how far you get these days. :)

The key to your argument is the phrase "SUV 500." There are two components to that as you describe--going too fast, and SUVs. You emphasize the former, which has minor impact. I emphasize the latter, which has major impact.

It seems to me that the meat of your argument, from the examples you've provided, is that you don't like people in SUVs driving in your vicinity faster than you think appropriate. I don't think that's the basis for national policy.

I'm not a laissez-faire guy. But, I live in a western state and have spent the last thirteen years working in the transportation manufacturing industry, so I feel I have a clue about what works better.

And, if you think drastic CAFE measures and fleet mileage standards for large vehicles is laissez-faire, you've been on a different planet than this one for some considerable time. What I'm suggesting is anathema to both industry and the Congress--and has been for nearly two decades.

Cheers.

[MaineDem]

6. Seems to me I heard Kerry say this a year and a half ago

He was saying we have to take the same effort that went into putting a man on the moon and use it to come up with alternative energy sources.

[rodeodance]

7. yes, he said to invent our way of the this problem rather than dig and

drill.

[Conservativesux]

8. Yeah, but that would make life so tuff on all those SUV driving RED State

Repuglycans with the W-'O4' bumper stickers, wouldnt it?

Well, we cant have that !! :crazy:

[NYC]

9. Encourage Americans to make better choices?

Okay, I'd like my electricity to come from a windmill, please.

Why is that not one of my choices?

[orpupilofnature57]

11. What a crock of shit, he believes in the "Dominion theocracy",

He would send your children to die, before he'd do the "Hard work" of thinking and being honest, all at the same time.

[slor]

12. Puhleeze...giving tax breaks to those...

dumb ass hummer drivers. That is a smart choice?

[Erika]

13. Cheney scoffed at conserving gas when he/Bush took office

The higher the cost of gas the more Bush donors profit.

Especially if they can drill America's lands previously protected from the intrusion of corporate globalists.

[4dsc]

14. This is pure BS

Perhaps AWOLBush should ask Cheney about PEAK OIL and the upcoming shortages that will wreak havok in the industrial world!!

{n late 1999, Dick Cheney stated:

By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with, conservatively, a three-percent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a day.

To put Cheney?s statement in perspective, remember that the oil producing nations of the world are currently pumping at full capacity but are unable to produce much more than 80 million barrels per day. Cheney?s statement was a tacit admission of the severity and imminence of Peak Oil as the possibility of the world raising its production by such a huge amount is borderline ridiculous.

http://www.counterpunch.org/everest12132003.html

The future will be here sooner than most people think..

[daleo]

15. Bush energy policy: invade countries with oil.

Even that one isn't working out, though.

Plan B: impoverish the middle and working classes so they can't afford cars or houses.

[natrat]

17. bush energy plan: gut the clean air act with one paragraph

screw northeastern states by letting midwest plants spew endless toxins

[Lisa]

18. he's a body-snatcher

I've noticed that he often steals the ideas and catchphrases of people who know more than he does and have done more work on particular issues. He stole from McCain on the compassionate conservative stuff, and he's tried to pretend he's Al Gore on environmental and energy issues. He wasn't even content with letting Al's signature stay on the Kyoto Protocol -- he wanted to erase the agreement and replace it with a policy that he'd made up, just so nobody else would get any credit.

[Inland]

28. "What do the people who give a shit say about this issue?"

"Put it in the prompter for him to read, and get to work stopping them".

[Fire Walk With Me]

21. Enron Movie

http://www.enronmovie.com

Doesn't the Bush family make money selling oil?

[magellan]

22. Fascinating

"...many environmentalists say the only way to reduce petroleum demand significantly is to boost vehicle fuel efficiency. But lawmakers on Wednesday blocked an effort to improve U.S. vehicle fuel efficiency."

I wonder which party these lawmakers represent? Hmm...wait, I'll get it, don't tell me....

[lumpy]

24. A great big huge enormous DUH,

No shit George. Did you think this up all by yourself, Georgie? Brilliant ideas! DUH.

[wildwww2]

26. We? Don`t include me in your we. You freaking murdering maniac!

I would not be part of any we. That included asswipe Bu$h or any of his disturbed followers. Unending deaths of Iraqi children for his personal profit. Is something I will always despise being part of our American culture. Killing people 17,000 miles away because they are a supposed threat. We are dealing with pure "morans" here.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[truthisfreedom]

27. i got your smarter way to meet our energy needs right here, bushco...

it's called IMPEACH.