To see a much more convincing and frightening video, head over to Kick the Oil Habit, a new campaign just launched by the Center for American Progress Action Fund. (Robert Redford will announce the campaign tonight on Larry King Live.)
For my part, I think they rely a little to heavily on gas-price hysteria on the problem page and ethanol on the alternatives page, but then, I don't have millions of dollars to research and craft these things, so I should probably defer to their judgment.
Let's hope it goes somewhere.
(Maybe Ana can drop by later and share more details about how the campaign was conceived and what its goals are.)
Comments
View as Flat
odograph Posted 10:19 am
17 May 2006
isn't it better to run 5-10% ethanol everywhere, rathern than 85% ethanol (E85) in just a few places?
as i understand it, 5-10% ethanol works with current cars and gas stations (etc.)
as i understand it, 85% ethanol requires changes ($$$) to current cars and gas stations (etc.)
as i understand it, we only have enough ethanol to do 5-10% ethanol nationally (if that much), and not enough to expand 85% ethanol very far.
Permalink
Bart Anderson Posted 10:44 am
17 May 2006
Absolutely
>>DR: but then, I don't have millions of dollars to research and craft these things, so I should probably defer to their judgment.
No, no need to defer to their judgment. As an individual writer, you can ask the probing, difficult questions that they avoid. What is the Energy Returned on Energy Invested of corn? How sustainable is intense monocropping of biofuel crops? Rather than subsidizing private vehicles through biofuels, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to reduce their use?
"Kick the Oil Habit" is a good start, but I don't think we do the campaign any favor by avoiding rigorous debate. We have a long way to go in our thinking about energy.
BTW, Daily Kos just published their latest draft of Energize America, "Achieving U.S. Energy Security by 2020."
Permalink
bookerly Posted 11:17 am
17 May 2006
While there are many admirable features to this plan, I see no call for alternative means of transportation, or action to end massive sprawl.
No funds for mass transit, no support of bicycling as a transportation means, no support for measures to promote eco-friendly urban housing initiatives.
To be honest, I am worried about all these piecemeal measures.
And I hate it when they include "energy security" as one of the mainstays of the campaign. This is not an environmental issue, and if they conflict, which would dominate? Energy security, or green measures?
patrick
Permalink
Icelander Posted 11:22 pm
17 May 2006
What they neglect to mention is that if we raise CAFE standards by 1mpg, we free up as much oil as is in ANWR. If we raise it by 7.5mpg (to 35mpg), we can stop importing foreign oil. And if we all used less (walking, biking, carpooling, public transportation), gas prices would go down.
People are afraid of change. Given the option of a cheap, easy band-aid fix that doesn't make them work and a real change that might cause some pain, they'll take the former in a heartbeat, no matter what they say privately.
Permalink
Icelander Posted 11:25 pm
17 May 2006
And if I read anymore of that buzzword-riddled text, I'm going to scream.
Permalink
kmp Posted 4:29 am
18 May 2006
Speed limits would increase to 80 mph on two West Texas interstate highways under a proposal by the Texas Department of Transportation. The Texas Transportation Commission could take up the proposed change, which would apply to Interstate 10 and Interstate 20 in West Texas, when it meets in Austin next week.
Some advocates for fuel conservation and safety have questioned the wisdom of boosting speed limits, but transportation officials said most drivers are already cruising at nearly 80 mph.
Is it just me, or is it simply block-headed to be thinking of raising speed limits now? Although I do love the DOT's sophomoric justification "but everybody's already driving that fast."
Ay carumba.
Permalink
odograph Posted 8:55 am
18 May 2006
of course, i don't recommend anyone do that at all.
it sounds like just the thing to mess up your prius in some weird way (maybe even injuring you or others).
FWIW, here are the 'go for it' guys:
http://www.creedproject.org/e85%20hybrid%20report.doc
Permalink
wendy Posted 9:34 pm
24 May 2006
Corn uses 29% more fossil energy than it produces
Switch grass " 45% "
Wood biomass " 57% "
For production of biodiesel:
Soybeans " 27% "
Sunflowers " 118% "
This info from a study by Pimental of Cornell Univ, see http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/July05/ethanol.toocostly.ssl.html
Permalink