EPA Director: 75 mpg CAFE needed to reach CO2 emissions goals

[logansowner]

Originally Posted by jman196

Exactly why is Co2 bad for the environment again?

The rest of our exhaust gas is bad to breath, the C02 is the only one that actually hurts the environment. Traps heat. But I refuse to believe that it does so at any meaningful level. Read somewhere that man creates less than 5% of the C02, the rest is natural. So we will just ruin our economy over that 5%. Sounds great.

And how exactly do they think we are going to meet 35 MPG in 2020, but in 2030, that's going to jump to 75MPG...Year frickin right.

Only way that is possible is for electric vehicles to improve, and catch on. And if that happens we need a whole new electrical infrastructure to provide the extra power demand.

This in the western world, technology HAS to change to meet what we want, we do not have to change to meet technology. What I mean is that new discoveries are only going to matter if they can be implemented to our lifestyle, and not if our lifestyle needs to change to make it work.

That's why trucks will never die, we want what we want, regardless of what that guy who can't type proper sentences thinks. If 60 MPG Micro cars from Europe would work here, we'd ****ING HAVE THEM HERE.

I'm not changing my lifestyle to drive some piddly ass-ed car.

[FenwickHockey65]

What if we just stick E-Flex into every single car?? 150 MPG all around, with gas and diesel and possibly hydrogen still in the mix.

[VibenPontiac]

Originally Posted by EldoFan

Hell, they'd prolly stand with us in opposition vs. the environazis......

A little unknown fact is that they have been standing with the Big 3. They opposed the new standards, they opposed California setting their own standards etc...yet somehow it never gets reported...I can't imagine why .

[eaton53]

The thing I am less clear about is how the government arrived at these figures.

They were lodged so far up the bunghole they required one of these to extract them...

[PhishPhood]

Remember that the EPA has nothing to do with CAFE. That's under the bailiwick of the NHTSA. The EPA however does have responsibility for monitoring and controlling CO2 and GHGs since the Supreme Court told it to do so.

This may be a shot in some intramural warfare between agencies. IOW a tempest in a teapot.

[Ming]

2020 GMC Sierra HD (co-produced with Suzuki of Japan):
Standard 12" rims and tires
Gasoline 3-cylinder 660cc engine
5-speed manual w/extra low gear

[Astra RL]

^ You may be able to put a crotch rocket in the back, but let's see one of those tow a 25 foot boat. Yeah didn't think so.
If the Gubment wants us to have these types of trucks then they should have to use them first.
I have nothing against more efficient vehicles but if they come in that form then I want no part of it.
Edit: did you mean 2030

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by Astra RL

If the Gubment wants us to have these types of trucks then they should have to use them first.

Oh please.

[wildgoosechase]

My question is if methane is 150% more heat trapping than CO2 will they ban Mexican food as well?

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by wildgoosechase

My question is if methane is 150% more heat trapping than CO2 will they ban Mexican food as well?

UN panel: Cows emit more greenhouse gases than cars

A panel convened at the United Nations yesterday to discuss what the IT industry could do to better the environment, nearly came to the conclusion its practitioners could do more by changing their lifestyle...for instance, how they eat.
...
But it's the number one global carbon emitter that had everyone floored: livestock. "It comes as a shock," Arteche-Carr said, perhaps understating the fact.
...
Which could result in more vegetables, which could in turn address problem #1 after all: that what comes out of cows contributes more to the global warming problem than what comes out of cars.

[TimR]

Originally Posted by Astra RL

^ You may be able to put a crotch rocket in the back, but let's see one of those tow a 25 foot boat. Yeah didn't think so.
I have nothing against more efficient vehicles but if they come in that form then I want no part of it.

You don't think they are going to let you keep your boat too, do you?

[XP300]

Now I understand. Cows cause global warming. So if we eliminate cows, except for India, we will be OK.

The new global cooling ads could say, "Shoot a Cow, Save a degree".

[usa1]

Originally Posted by wildgoosechase

My question is if methane is 150% more heat trapping than CO2 will they ban Mexican food as well?

Actually methane is much worse than that. It has a global warming potential of 12 vs CO2 at 1. This means methane has a 1,200% more heat trapping potential compared to C02.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_potential

Mark

[gardnet1]

T.Boone Pickens just predicted today that oil would settle in around $125 a barrel because of dimishing supplies and increasing demand.

Gee I wonder how this $2500 emission less car will change things?

I think it's time to claim immenent domain on all off shore drilling in FL, CA, OR, etc.

Nuclear power plants full steam ahead as many as you can build for the plug-ins.

[HoosierRon]

Originally Posted by gardnet1

I think it's time to claim immenent domain on all off shore drilling in FL, CA, OR, etc.

The government does not need to take the land. It simply needs to allow private companies to drill for oil.