Kill Me Now: I Can't Take The Stupid

Okay, back to liberal eco echo chamber Grist blog once again. Sorry, I simply can't allow something this moronic to go by without commenting. Someone want to explain the logic of Miss Ms. Kate Sheppard at work here to me, please??

Indeed, according to government figures, keeping your tires properly inflated gives you a 3 percent fuel economy benefit. Getting regular tune-ups gives you a 4 percent fuel economy benefit. Replacing your air filters can save up to 10 percent, and using the right grade of motor oil can save you up to 2 percent. Meanwhile, energy experts estimate that the U.S. only holds a total of 3 percent of the world's oil supply. So even if we drilled in every hole, we couldn't find nearly as much oil as could be saved via efficiency.

:::thud:::

The president also called for ending a ban on oil shale drilling in the Rocky Mountain states, a move he said might open access to about 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil, or three times the reserves of Saudi Arabia. It has been considered too costly to develop those reserves, but Bush said the economic "calculus is changing."

Someone should do her and the Left a favor and take that gals 'puter away before she hurts herself and them even more.

Comments

[Spartan112]

I love the right making fun of Obama's suggestion that you properly inflate your tires to save gas...of course he's right it can make a huge difference in efficiency. You want proof? Go get a bicycle, inflate the tires to the recommended level (let's say 100psi for example) and ride it for a mile. Now let out air and try to ride it at say 60psi. It will take much greater effort to ride the same mile. That effort is your body expending a greater amount of fuel.

Let's also not forget that years back John McCain recommended turning of your lights to save energy.

[moldy]

I read the article completely and I am not opposed to taking her computer away. My explanation can only be: tight deadline - fill some whitespace fast.

A better article on the same subject can be found at
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1829354,00.html?

I encourage a full read but the gist of the article is:

"It's a pretty simple concept: if our use of fossil fuels is increasing our reliance on Middle Eastern dictators while destroying the planet, maybe we ought to use less."

Moldy

[Dan Riehl]

Moldy, I'm not opposed to getting off of foreign oil ASAP. Nor am I opposed to developing alt. fuels, electric cars, solar and nuclear energy.

What I oppose is de-railing the economy unnecessarily to get there before we can without too much disruption, social and economic.

[PA]

There was a time when it made sense to expend other people's resources because they were inexpensive. That time is apparently past.

[seekeronos]

In terms of conventionally recoverable oil (drill a hole, stick a pump on top of it, slurp out oil) - she is probably not too far off the mark: we have long since passed our peak production of US oil in that manner.

Oil Shale extraction really isn't feasible until normal, light sweet crude is permanently above $80/BBL. Since $100/BBL+ looks to be the new price point, this along with any other less cheaper forms of energy equivalent are on the table.

That aside, as I like to pinch my pennies and get the most value out of the stuff I spend money on, I make a point of keeping my tyres at the proper pressure, and I replace my oil filters (but not necessarily the oil - the oil itself should be fine if freshly filtered and can be recycled through at least two if not three filters) and wash out my air filters on a regular basis, among other things.

It's just good sense. And as a father, I take great relish in being the "turn out the lights if you are not in the room!" overlord.

Now as soon as those high-intensity LED screw-in bulb replacements hit the market, I'll be all over them.

[Spartan112]

There was a time in this country when it was a point of pride to cut back and conserve. During WWII children did all they could to collect tin foil for the war effort, people gladly cut back on fuel consumption and accepted the rationing of basic food supplies and even things like cotton, etc. Why? Because we were a nation at war and everyone wanted to do what they could to contribute to the war effort even if that was only gathering a few pennies worth of foil.

According to W the Great were are involved in a global war on terror but now it seems the GOP reaction is not to conserve and do what we can to support the war effort from a rationing stand point, but to take the attitude that we shouldn't have to sacrifice or even use common sense by doing something as simple as checking the air pressure in your tires. I loved Obama's line about the GOP "It's like these guys take pride in being ignorant"...good stuff.

[moldy]

"What I oppose is de-railing the economy unnecessarily to get there before we can without too much disruption, social and economic."

Good point. Move to cheaper, cleaner energy long term but be realistic about how we get there. I support that approach.

[Fred Beloit]

Spart: "I love the right making fun of Obama's suggestion that you properly inflate your tires to save gas" BBByyyyyaaaattt. Wrong, Spart. You left out a major part of what we are laughing at, silly.
Obama: If we inflate our tires..."We could save all the oil they are talking about drilling..."
I DON'T THINK SO.

[Spartan112]

"Obama: If we inflate our tires..."We could save all the oil they are talking about drilling..."
I DON'T THINK SO."

Some estimates put the increase in oil to about as little as 1%, not to mention it wouldn't hit the market until 2030 according to the gov't (although Fox Noise is saying as little as 18mos). When it did hit the market the money from that oil would go straight to the oil companies and we'd likely see zero savings, nor would it effect our reliance on foreign oil. Any saving gotten from proper tune-ups and proper tire inflation goes straight to the consumer which is probably why the GOP is against it.

[Fred Beloit]

Spart, I'm beginning to suspect you are not too bright. Or perhaps your BDS and emotional way of forming opinions interferes with your thinking. How about a little Econ 101.

Prices, especially prices of commodities, are a function of supply and demand. You guys seem to think prices can be lowered by reducing demand. And it is true. That is what inflating tires and tune ups would do. It would work, to some degree.

I would like to say we, but I'll just speak for myself, I think we ought to increase the supply. That too would lower the price. There seems to be a wide difference of opinion on which way would be better (better = lower price).

I think drilling to find and pump more oil and refine more than we do now would be better, much, much better. Why? (1)I just seems like common sense that inflating tires and getting more tune-ups will not match producing more oil from the Gulf, Anwar
and offshore or onshore anywhere around the U.S. where it may be found safe, appropriate and convenient to do so. (2)Oil companies are, for lack of a better word, good. They do a great job of producing oil products we need and use every day. They provide lots of jobs and drilling and refining means lots more. (3)Oil companies provide profits to the people who own stock in them. Millions do. You can too.

Please don't respond with a lot of goofy accusations that I don't care about the environment and all that other liberal gibberish. If you want to disagree, saying inflating and tune ups are just as good or better, fine, I am not opposed to inflating and tune-ups (accept some garages/dealers charge too much for them). I do not accept that they will have the impact that an eased drilling policy will have on prices now and in the future (when there may also be a workable substitute for oil, which there is not at this time).