Tire Gauge

[Rigs11]

We might as well get this out of the way, since team mcsame is sending out tire gauges to the press, and you sheep are going to follow along....again. Kinda like when the Gop sent out band aids in 04. Gawd those repubs are so clever and funny,,,:dummy:


The Tire-Gauge Solution: No Joke
Monday, Aug. 04, 2008 By MICHAEL GRUNWALD


How out of touch is Barack Obama? He's so out of touch that he suggested that if all Americans inflated their tires properly and took their cars for regular tune-ups, they could save as much oil as new offshore drilling would produce. Gleeful Republicans have made this their daily talking point; Rush Limbaugh is having a field day; and the Republican National Committee is sending tire gauges labeled "Barack Obama's Energy Plan" to Washington reporters.

But who's really out of touch? The Bush Administration estimates that expanded offshore drilling could increase oil production by 200,000 bbl. per day by 2030. We use about 20 million bbl. per day, so that would meet about 1% of our demand two decades from now. Meanwhile, efficiency experts say that keeping tires inflated can improve gas mileage 3%, and regular maintenance can add another 4%. Many drivers already follow their advice, but if everyone did, we could immediately reduce demand several percentage points. In other words: Obama is right.

Politics ain't beanbag, and Obama has defended himself against worse smears. The real problem with the attacks on his tire-gauge plan is that efforts to improve conservation and efficiency happen to be the best approaches to dealing with the energy crisis — the cheapest, cleanest, quickest and easiest ways to ease our addiction to oil, reduce our pain at the pump and address global warming. 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.

The RNC is trying to make the tire gauge a symbol of unseriousness, as if only the fatuous believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil without doing the bidding of Big Oil. But the tire gauge is really a symbol of a very serious piece of good news: we can use significantly less energy without significantly changing our lifestyle. The energy guru Amory Lovins has shown that investment in "nega-watts" — reduced electricity use through efficiency improvements — is much more cost-effective than investment in new megawatts, and the same is clearly true of nega-barrels. It might not fit the worldviews of right-wingers who deny the existence of global warming and insist that reducing emissions would destroy our economy, or of left-wing Earth-firsters who insist that maintaining our creature comforts would destroy the world, but there's a lot of simple things we can do on the demand side before we start rushing to ratchet up supply.

We can use those twisty carbon fluorescent lightbulbs. We can unplug our televisions, computers and phone chargers when we're not using them. We can seal our windows, install more insulation and adjust our thermostats so that we waste less heat and air-conditioning. We can use more-efficient appliances, build more-efficient homes and drive more-efficient cars, preferably with government assistance. And, yes, we can inflate our tires and tune our engines, as Republican governors Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Charlie Crist of Florida have urged, apparently without consulting the RNC. While we're at it, we can cut down on idling, which can improve fuel economy another 5%, and cut down on speeding and unnecessary acceleration, which can increase mileage as much as 20%.

And that's just the low-hanging fruit. There are other ways to reduce demand for oil — more public transportation, more carpooling, more telecommuting, more recycling, less exurban sprawl, fewer unnecessary car trips, buying less stuff and eating less meat — that would require at least some lifestyle changes. But things like tire gauges can reduce gas bills and carbon emissions now, with little pain and at little cost and without the ecological problems and oil-addiction problems associated with offshore drilling. These are the proverbial win-win-win solutions, reducing the pain of $100 trips to the gas station by reducing trips to the gas station. And Americans are already starting to adopt them, ditching SUVs, buying hybrids, reducing overall gas consumption. It's hard to see why anyone who isn't affiliated with the oil industry would object to them.

Of course, in recent years, the Republican Party has been affiliated with the oil industry. It was the oilman Dick Cheney who dismissed conservation as a mere sign of "personal virtue," not a basis for energy policy. It was the oilman George W. Bush who resisted efforts to regulate carbon emissions. And most congressional Republicans have been even more reliable water carriers for the industry's interests.

John McCain has been a notable exception. He is not an oilman; he has pushed to regulate carbon emissions; and he opposed Bush's pork-stuffed energy bill, which Obama supported. He also opposed efforts to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and until recently opposed new offshore drilling. But now that gas prices have spiked, McCain is running for President on a drill-first platform, and polls suggest that most Americans agree with him. It's sad to see his campaign adopting the politics of the tire gauge, promoting the fallacy that Americans are powerless to address their own energy problems. Because the truth is: Yes, we can. We already are.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1829354,00.html?cnn=yes

[That One Guy]

The problem with Obama's plan is that he's basically telling the people that they can fix the problem themselves and people don't want to hear that. They want someone else to fix the problem while they go about their daily routine, changing nothing.

Now, as per the actual legitimacy of Obama's plan, that's a baseless claim. I have a hard time believing that if I go get a tune up and tires inflated tomorrow that it will do much for me. Why? Because my tires are inflated and I get tune ups. Their 7% claim is probably based on worst case scenarios and people are going to dismiss that as "that's not my car" just as I did. That's just throwing out possibilities rather than ACTUAL solutions. It's possible you could save 7%, or it's possible you could get a tune up and be in the exact same situation you are right now. People want answers, not possibilities.

[Rigs11]

The problem with Obama's plan is that he's basically telling the people that they can fix the problem themselves and people don't want to hear that. They want someone else to fix the problem while they go about their daily routine, changing nothing.

Now, as per the actual legitimacy of Obama's plan, that's a baseless claim. I have a hard time believing that if I go get a tune up and tires inflated tomorrow that it will do much for me. Why? Because my tires are inflated and I get tune ups. Their 7% claim is probably based on worst case scenarios and people are going to dismiss that as "that's not my car" just as I did. That's just throwing out possibilities rather than ACTUAL solutions. It's possible you could save 7%, or it's possible you could get a tune up and be in the exact same situation you are right now. People want answers, not possibilities.

yeah but how many people out there neglect to tune up their cars or inflate their tires?the answer may surprise you.

"A motorist survey this year by the Rubber Manufacturers Association found that 85 percent of American drivers do not properly check tire inflation pressure. This is an alarming statistic since tires are the only part of a vehicle in contact with the road and a critical vehicle safety component," said James MacMaster, chairman of the RMA Board of Directors.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/04/23/yokohama-reminds-you-to-check-your-tire-pressure-regularly/



Mcsame is saying that this is all that obama's energy plan entails, and anyone with half a brain knows this is not the case. Honestly this campaign that mcsame is running is getting more ridiculous daily. Obama was making a comparison to the oil that we would get 10 years from now if offshore drilling was started which accounts to 1% of our use.inflate your tires and you can save 4%.now multiply that by the millions of drivers and what does that do to our demand?

[Spider]

ummmmmm i got 22 tires I have to keep inflated ,very important , not only for fuel millage, but hydroplaning , wreaking tire walls causing blow out ........

[Rigs11]

August 4, 2008, 2:40 PM
Obama Camp Hits Back At "Tire Gauge" Rhetoric


The McCain campaign has been trying to drum up media coverage today for its mockery of Barack Obama for calling on Americans to make sure their tires are inflated in order to help save money gas.

Obama said this last week: "There are things that you can do individually though to save energy; making sure your tires are properly inflated, simple thing, but we could save all the oil that they’re talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could actually save just as much.”

To spotlight the "inflating their tires" part of the quote, the McCain campaign and the Republican National Committee have been handing tire gauges out to reporters in sarcastic celebration of Obama's birthday today.

"...the RNC is providing members of the media with complimentary tools related to Barack Obama’s energy plan – a brand new tire gauge," the RNC wrote in a press release this morning. "Because, instead of actually increasing America’s domestic oil supply, this is how Obama thinks Americans should try to alleviate burdensome pain at the pump."

The McCain campaign also used the tire gauge gimmick in a fundraising plea today.

"Today, I'm asking for your help in putting Senator Obama's 'tire gauge' energy policy to the test,' McCain campaign manager Rick Davis wrote to potential donors. "With an immediate donation of $25 or more, we will send you an 'Obama Energy Plan' tire pressure gauge. Will simply inflating your tires reduce the financial burden of high gas prices on your wallet?"

Now the Obama campaign has responded to the tire gauge rhetoric.

"As Senator McCain knows, Barack Obama has a comprehensive plan to provide real relief to Americans struggling with soaring prices and make the long-term investments we need to break our addiction to oil," the campaign writes in an email with the subject line "more from the low road." (Here's a story on Obama's speech on energy today, in which he proposed that the government sell 70 million barrels of oil from its strategic petroleum stockpile in a reversal of his previous position.)

"And while the McCain team may is busy amusing themselves, the fact is that the idea they’re attacking is supported by, among others, top McCain surrogate Joe Lieberman, conference call host Mike Rogers, Governors Charlie Crist and Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Department of Energy, and NASCAR — all of whom have urged Americans to help save energy by minding tire pressure," the Obama team continued in the email. "But hey, who ever let the facts — or supporters’ positions — get in the way of a political attack? Aboard the Low Road Express, that’s no problem at all."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/08/04/politics/horserace/entry4319530.shtml

[That One Guy]

yeah but how many people out there neglect to tune up their cars or inflate their tires?the answer may surprise you.

"A motorist survey this year by the Rubber Manufacturers Association found that 85 percent of American drivers do not properly check tire inflation pressure. This is an alarming statistic since tires are the only part of a vehicle in contact with the road and a critical vehicle safety component," said James MacMaster, chairman of the RMA Board of Directors.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/04/23/yokohama-reminds-you-to-check-your-tire-pressure-regularly/



Mcsame is saying that this is all that obama's energy plan entails, and anyone with half a brain knows this is not the case. Honestly this campaign that mcsame is running is getting more ridiculous daily. Obama was making a comparison to the oil that we would get 10 years from now if offshore drilling was started which accounts to 1% of our use.inflate your tires and you can save 4%.now multiply that by the millions of drivers and what does that do to our demand?

I understand where the logic is coming from, I just think it's not the logic that's necessary for winning an election. Elections are all about perception and, like I said, when Obama says you can fix part of the problem yourself then most people are going to dismiss it. It may be 85% of tires aren't properly inflated but noone's gonna look there when they stop to fill up their tank. Everyone figures their tires are good as long as they look like they're up so not many are going to feel like Obama's bit of advice has helped their cause in any way. Whether you have the solution or not doesn't seem to be the issue. The issue is whether you can convince the general public that you have the solution and your opponent doesn't. I bet the public doesn't know that 85% of tires are underinflated but I bet they know that if more oil is drilled, gas prices will drop. Both assertions may be incorrect, but that's what the public knows right now and Obama isn't stroking what they know, he's trying to introduce foreign ideas. I just don't see that tactic taking root.

[Rigs11]

I understand where the logic is coming from, I just think it's not the logic that's necessary for winning an election. Elections are all about perception and, like I said, when Obama says you can fix part of the problem yourself then most people are going to dismiss it. It may be 85% of tires aren't properly inflated but noone's gonna look there when they stop to fill up their tank. Everyone figures their tires are good as long as they look like they're up so not many are going to feel like Obama's bit of advice has helped their cause in any way. Whether you have the solution or not doesn't seem to be the issue, the issue is whether you can convince the general public that you have the issue and your opponent doesn't. I bet the public doesn't know that 85% of tires are underinflated but I bet they know that if more oil is drilled, gas prices will drop. Both assertions may be incorrect, but that's what the public knows right now and Obama isn't stroking what they know, he's trying to introduce foreign ideas. I just don't see that tactic taking root.

Agreed. I wish the obama camp would do a little research and bring forth some data on this, it seems that all they would have to do is hold a press conference and present data on how much properly inflated tires save on gas, if nothing more than to shut up the mccain camp. It's sad that so many americans are blind to the low ball/no solutions campaign that mccane is running. I hate to paint the American population as being stupid, but look a the recent polls.The ads that mccane are running are working.

[That One Guy]

Agreed. I wish the obama camp would do a little research and bring forth some data on this, it seems that all they would have to do is hold a press conference and present data on how much properly inflated tires save on gas, if nothing more than to shut up the mccain camp. It's sad that so many americans are blind to the low ball/no solutions campaign that mccane is running. I hate to paint the American population as being stupid, but look a the recent polls.The ads that mccane are running are working.

And that's something that politicians camps don't always seem to realize. Educated people have their opinions made up before ad campaign time usually. Those who are willing to base their vote on ad campaigns should tell you of their level of ignorance/involvement in politics. Ad campaigns and the general election should be about maintaining the base that got you through the primaries while trying to attract the ignorant public that didn't care about the election until the campaign ads began popping up on their TVs. Mccain is aiming for that general public vote as he didn't really have the base that Obama had in the first place. Obama is trying but some issues like offshore drilling contradict between his camp's position and what the general public thinks they want. That seems to be where these flip flop accusations always arise. Mccain is just working on publicizing his popular stances while highlighting Obama's unpopular ones and it seems while Obama is still most likely to win, Mccain is landing plenty of blows.

I really don't think facts win over the general public. They just don't care enough. It'd be easier for Obama to assault Mccain's position on offshore drilling in comparison to merely inflating your tires than it'll be for Obama to justify how the tire inflation plan will suffice.

Ultimately "Offshore drilling is less effective than inflating your tires" would be a much better received message by the public than "85% of all tires are underinflated and if you inflate your tires properly, you can save 7% of your gas". The first plays into the drama, competition, and simple whit that the average voter wants this time of year. The 2nd is facts that will be dismissed as soon as their regularly scheduled programming returns.

And for the record, I think I've followed these things slightly more than the average voter and I didn't know the offshore drilling would have so little impact. Never heard those stats before. That should've been harped from the beginning but instead Obama just stuck to "that's not the answer" which makes it sound like he just wants a better answer rather than the one being proposed is completely impracticle.

[Rigs11]

And that's something that politicians camps don't always seem to realize. Educated people have their opinions made up before ad campaign time usually. Those who are willing to base their vote on ad campaigns should tell you of their level of ignorance/involvement in politics. Ad campaigns and the general election should be about maintaining the base that got you through the primaries while trying to attract the ignorant public that didn't care about the election until the campaign ads began popping up on their TVs. Mccain is aiming for that general public vote as he didn't really have the base that Obama had in the first place. Obama is trying but some issues like offshore drilling contradict between his camp's position and what the general public thinks they want. That seems to be where these flip flop accusations always arise. Mccain is just working on publicizing his popular stances while highlighting Obama's unpopular ones and it seems while Obama is still most likely to win, Mccain is landing plenty of blows.

I really don't think facts win over the general public. They just don't care enough. It'd be easier for Obama to assault Mccain's position on offshore drilling in comparison to merely inflating your tires than it'll be for Obama to justify how the tire inflation plan will suffice.

Ultimately "Offshore drilling is less effective than inflating your tires" would be a much better received message by the public than "85% of all tires are underinflated and if you inflate your tires properly, you can save 7% of your gas". The first plays into the drama, competition, and simple whit that the average voter wants this time of year. The 2nd is facts that will be dismissed as soon as their regularly scheduled programming returns.

And for the record, I think I've followed these things slightly more than the average voter and I didn't know the offshore drilling would have so little impact. Never heard those stats before. That should've been harped from the beginning but instead Obama just stuck to "that's not the answer" which makes it sound like he just wants a better answer rather than the one being proposed is completely impracticle.
yep, obama needs to take the gloves off. Sensibly though and attack mccane politically, not personally like mccane does.

[Drek]

This argument underscores the difference in the two candidate's energy policy. McCain acts like nuclear power (20-30 years until return) and OCS drilling (5-7 years until return) are somehow short term returns.

Meanwhile Obama's energy plan calls for our goverment (the nation's largest energy consumer) to reduce energy use by 25% within 4 years, sponsors the commercialization and adoption of greater energy efficiency (tax breaks for hybrid cars, encouraging energy efficient light bulbs and other electronics, etc.), and giving tax breaks to businesses that meet energy efficiency goals. Best of all, he wants to overhaul the energy grid into a fully digital, much more efficient system. We'll lose less energy in delivery, know weak links in the system sooner, and can even allow a truly free market where everyone who invests in renewables like solar and wind can sell their excess energy back to the grid.

All that can see results within a calendar year, and significant results within 3 years, and can be fully in effect within 5. That is the true short term answer to our energy problems.

[Rohirrim]

As the Republicans have been proving for years, to them the idea of providing good government is poison. What they give is rhetoric, not reality. Hell, like Raygun said long ago, "Government is the problem." Ever since then, the GOP has tried to prove this by starving everything but the military, while filling their own pockets (and the pockets of their cronies). As the last eight years have proven, the GOP looks at the government as a large trough where they and their cronies can line up and fill their gullets. The idea that government could actually work, and perform it's functions with some efficiency and competence (in other words, the ideas Obama is talking about) runs completely counter to everything the Republicans believe in.

[El Minion]

As the Republicans have been proving for years, to them the idea of providing good government is poison. What they give is rhetoric, not reality. Hell, like Raygun said long ago, "Government is the problem." Ever since then, the GOP has tried to prove this by starving everything but the military, while filling their own pockets (and the pockets of their cronies). As the last eight years have proven, the GOP looks at the government as a large trough where they and their cronies can line up and fill their gullets. The idea that government could actually work, and perform it's functions with some efficiency and competence (in other words, the ideas Obama is talking about) runs completely counter to everything the Republicans believe in.

"The Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work and then they get elected and prove it." - P. J. O’Rourke

[Garcia Bronco]

Keeping tires inflated isn't the answer. Increasing supply is the answer while looking to increase other energy sources. Increasing mileage standards doesn't help people today. It helps with regard to new car purchases. Both candiates are talking about research. McCain is talking about increasing supply.

[Drek]

Keeping tires inflated isn't the answer. Increasing supply is the answer while looking to increase other energy sources. Increasing mileage standards doesn't help people today. It helps with regard to new car purchases. Both candiates are talking about research. McCain is talking about increasing supply.

Please enlighten us, how can we increase supply today? I'd really love to know.

[Rohirrim]

Keeping tires inflated isn't the answer. Increasing supply is the answer while looking to increase other energy sources. Increasing mileage standards doesn't help people today. It helps with regard to new car purchases. Both candiates are talking about research. McCain is talking about increasing supply.

Nobody is saying it is "the answer." What Obama is saying it that if everybody in America simply inflated their tires to the proper pressure it would do more to add to current supplies, and faster, than offshore drilling could dream of. Besides, in case you haven't heard, Big Oil has plenty of open leases for offshore oil in deep water they could start drilling on tomorrow, but they refuse to use those because the profit margin wouldn't be big enough. They want to use political pressure and scare tactics to force Congress to open up close to shore contracts which are cheaper to drill and give them more profit (the oil still goes to China Ha!). For that strategery, McCain is their tool.

[Rigs11]

Keeping tires inflated isn't the answer. Increasing supply is the answer while looking to increase other energy sources. Increasing mileage standards doesn't help people today. It helps with regard to new car purchases. Both candiates are talking about research. McCain is talking about increasing supply.

How is oil drilling going to help today? Why is it so hard for you yahoos to understand that it will be 7 years before we see any results? And by then it will provide 1% of our needs.If the 85% of drivers inflated their tires properly that would save 4%, dropping demand. Now I know i'ts a tough one for ya but what is greater 1% or 4%. come on you can do it..quit being lazy and expecting the government to solve all your problems. Isn't that what you tell us liberals all the time?

[TailgateNut]

Nobody is saying it is "the answer." What Obama is saying it that if everybody in America simply inflated their tires to the proper pressure it would do more to add to current supplies, and faster, than offshore drilling could dream of. Besides, in case you haven't heard, Big Oil has plenty of open leases for offshore oil in deep water they could start drilling on tomorrow, but they refuse to use those because the profit margin wouldn't be big enough. They want to use political pressure and scare tactics to force Congress to open up close to shore contracts which are cheaper to drill and give them more profit (the oil still goes to China Ha!). For that strategery, McCain is their tool.


Just the "next Big Oil Puppet" to be used and abused as needed. The only difference is the look on his face (Dumbfounded grin) compared to Bushs' (Dumbfounded smirk).

[El Minion]

Obama: GOP takes pride in being ignorant

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/akjXqfvLu28&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/akjXqfvLu28&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Rigs11]

:rofl: Obama just bitchslapped the whole GOP.:thanku: Gloves are off fellas. lookout.

[TDmvp]

http://images.politico.com/global/tire%20gauge.jpg

i think this may be the gauge in question hehhe

[Rigs11]

You repubs that are getting such a kick out of this should under inflate your tires, since it wont make a difference anyways, and see how much more gas you spend in 6 months. Then come back and share your findings...

[Florida_Bronco]

:rofl: Obama just b****slapped the whole GOP.:thanku: Gloves are off fellas. lookout.

+1

That was a good speech.

[That One Guy]

Spider's been singing for years (according to his posts) about how we can drill ourselves out of this problem yet this thread runs parallel to one of those and noone is crossing the lines. So, why aren't people that agree with Obama's stance over there making the claim that we can't drill ourselves out of it and why isn't Spider in here saying tire pressure wont solve our problem, shale oil will? It seems like the two Obama camps of the site are completely contradicting each other but avoiding the issue.

[Spider]

Spider's been singing for years (according to his posts) about how we can drill ourselves out of this problem yet this thread runs parallel to one of those and noone is crossing the lines. So, why aren't people that agree with Obama's stance over there making the claim that we can't drill ourselves out of it and why isn't Spider in here saying tire pressure wont solve our problem, shale oil will? It seems like the two Obama camps of the site are completely contradicting each other but avoiding the issue.

LOL LOL i am in the Obma camp ?
Ok clue me in when did this happen ?
Tire pressure will help hence helping solve the problem , so why would i spout off about how it wouldnt work ? And i was dead right about shale oil
And WE CAN DRILL OUR WAY OUT OF THIS ...... The only issue here is you being an idiot

[That One Guy]

LOL LOL i am in the Obma camp ?
Ok clue me in when did this happen ?
Tire pressure will help hence helping solve the problem , so why would i spout off about how it wouldnt work ? And i was dead right about shale oil
And WE CAN DRILL OUR WAY OUT OF THIS ...... The only issue here is you being an idiot

Spider calling someone an idiot. Laughable.

Maybe the fact that you piggy back ride on LABF & company's sack so often makes you look like one of the crowd.

As to the point of it all, Obama is saying drilling (period) is not the answer. Noone denies airing up your tires can't hurt, but he says drilling is not the answer. You say it is. Why avoid this topic if it contradicts your opinion? Oh, because your BFFs are here and Spider doesn't want to dissent from his idols.

[Drek]

Spider's been singing for years (according to his posts) about how we can drill ourselves out of this problem yet this thread runs parallel to one of those and noone is crossing the lines. So, why aren't people that agree with Obama's stance over there making the claim that we can't drill ourselves out of it and why isn't Spider in here saying tire pressure wont solve our problem, shale oil will? It seems like the two Obama camps of the site are completely contradicting each other but avoiding the issue.

You mean the shale oil thread that I started?

That doesn't mean we can drill our way into a soluble energy future that still relies heavily on petrol.

Shale oil is a bridge, nothing more. If we don't start laying the ground work now we'll just be passing this same crisis off to our kids and them to theirs. Sooner than later we'll run out of economically viable petrol resources.

Obama's willingness to accept the bi-partisan energy bill that is scheduled to be put before the senate when they return from break (nice trick by Ms. Cali-centric Pelosi there, taking the senate on vacation to block an energy bill both sides of the isle support but her state doesn't) highlights this need. We can bridge to make it a little more gentle on ourselves, but we need to start new technology development and better resource management/conservation ASAP. The sooner we start the sooner we see a truly secure energy future.

Drilling won't solve all our ills. Getting off foreign oil and reducing our need for domestic oil will. Obama's energy plan in fact references shale oil as one of the bridge sources we can use in several years to help us get by on our way to a clean energy future.

[That One Guy]

You mean the shale oil thread that I started?

That doesn't mean we can drill our way into a soluble energy future that still relies heavily on petrol.

Shale oil is a bridge, nothing more. If we don't start laying the ground work now we'll just be passing this same crisis off to our kids and them to theirs. Sooner than later we'll run out of economically viable petrol resources.

Obama's willingness to accept the bi-partisan energy bill that is scheduled to be put before the senate when they return from break (nice trick by Ms. Cali-centric Pelosi there, taking the senate on vacation to block an energy bill both sides of the isle support but her state doesn't) highlights this need. We can bridge to make it a little more gentle on ourselves, but we need to start new technology development and better resource management/conservation ASAP. The sooner we start the sooner we see a truly secure energy future.

Drilling won't solve all our ills. Getting off foreign oil and reducing our need for domestic oil will. Obama's energy plan in fact references shale oil as one of the bridge sources we can use in several years to help us get by on our way to a clean energy future.

I don't know who started the thread, it could've been the Easter Bunny for all I know.

What I'm hearing is Obama's claim (or maybe just his backers), from what I've read, is that drilling is going to so little help that it's not a viable solution at this point - long term or short. They talk of 1% of current oil use 10 years down the road or whatever... meanwhile, folks go into those shale oil threads and talk like they could really make a significant difference to Americans. I just think these two threads are basically contradicting each other.

So, does drilling bring short term relief for Americans or is the tire gauge the answer?

[Drek]

I don't know who started the thread, it could've been the Easter Bunny for all I know.

What I'm hearing is Obama's claim (or maybe just his backers), from what I've read, is that drilling is going to so little help that it's not a viable solution at this point - long term or short. They talk of 1% of current oil use 10 years down the road or whatever... meanwhile, folks go into those shale oil threads and talk like they could really make a significant difference to Americans. I just think these two threads are basically contradicting each other.

So, does drilling bring short term relief for Americans or is the tire gauge the answer?

Shale oil can make a real difference, but not within 10 years, probably not a real difference within 20, and even then it is still a non-renewable resource.

And OCS is a drop in the bucket, just like ANWR, that won't actually land in the bucket for ~20 years. Its the simple science of the situation.

Shale oil is a promising but as of yet still largely unproven source for petrol. Even if it lives up to all of Shell's wonderful proclamations it still won't be a cure all, just an alternative to get us off foreign petrol for a few decades.

McCain thinks we can drill our way out of this because he doesn't care where this country is 100 years down the road. He's made that pretty obvious since over his 26 years in the senate he's done nothing but vote down renewable energy legislation. Now he decries Obama for supporting Bush's energy plan of a few years ago that did have issues but it flat out doubled our nation's production of renewable energies.

If you don't give a damn what kind of world your kids are dealing with in 40-50 years and their kids are dealing with after that then yes, we can drill our way out of this current mess. And it'll only take us 20 years to do so (wow, what response time!)

If you actually hope that we can clean up some of the problems with this nation and not just keep handing them down to the next generation then no, we sure as hell can't drill our way out. We need to overhaul how this country uses energy as well as where it gets its energy from. Then we can make some long term lasting changes that will decrease the burden on future generations for once.

There is only so much oil on this earth. We've exhausted 80% of it in a little over 200 years. That last 20% isn't going to last a whole lot longer no matter when, how, or where we take it out.

[Rigs11]

Obama pokes McCain over tire-pressure issue
Two rivals continue several days of sparing over energy plans

ELKHART, Ind. - Democrat Barack Obama on Wednesday taunted Republican presidential rival John McCain for first mocking the idea of keeping tires inflated for energy conservation and then agreeing the practice works.

"It will be interesting to watch this debate between John McCain and John McCain," Obama said as he campaigned in Indiana with Sen. Evan Bayh, widely considered a top-tier candidate for running mate.

When asked about the air-pressure issue during an appearance Tuesday night, McCain said: "I agree with the American Automobile Association. We should all inflate our tires." Obama had noted that keeping tires inflated and cars tuned was endorsed by both NASCAR and AAA and should be part of any comprehensive plan to reduce reliance on imported oil.

However, McCain had spent recent days ridiculing Obama's remarks about tire pressure, telling a motorcycle rally in Sturgis, S.D.: "My opponent doesn't want to drill, he doesn't want nuclear power, he wants you to inflate your tires." The Republican National Committee, meanwhile, poked fun at the idea, sending reporters tire gauges with "Obama Energy Plan" emblazoned on the side.

The two rivals have been sparring for several days over energy.

Assailing his rival's energy plans, Obama said, "that's a debate I'm happy to have. Because Senator McCain's energy plan reads like an early Christmas list for oil and gas lobbyists. And it's no wonder — because many of his top advisers are former oil and gas lobbyists."

Obama's joint appearance with Bayh led to considerable speculation that Obama might announce a decision about his choice for vice president. But it was not to be.

Bayh said Obama would bring "a breath of fresh air" to the nation's capital. He said McCain "is not a bad man," but that McCain had some bad policies.

Bayh opened his introduction of Obama by saying he had some "good news" to depart. "In five short months, the Bush administration will be done," Bayh said. A McCain victory, he said, would mean "four more years of what we've had."

Bayh, a former two-term governor and son of former Sen. Birch Bayh, is a former supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, has executive experience and sits on the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees. Furthermore, Democrats view Indiana — which has not voted for a Democrat for president since 1964 — as competitive this year.

Obama campaigned in Indiana as his campaign released a new television ad that seeks to link McCain to President Bush and questions whether McCain is the political maverick he claims to be. It shows McCain acknowledging that he agrees with Bush on most issues.

The ad also criticizes McCain on three economic issues of concern to middle-class voters: tax breaks for the wealthy, money for oil companies, and tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas. The ad ends with a smiling McCain and Bush side by side.

McCain's campaign turned out an ad Tuesday in the other direction, suggesting that McCain differs from Bush and the GOP on important issues — without mentioning Bush by name.

In his appearance here, Obama also questioned McCain's claim to being a maverick.

While the Arizona senator has broken with his party on many issues in the past, he "reversed himself on position after position" to secure his party's nomination, Obama asserted.

"That doesn't meet my definition of a maverick."

McCain's campaign "ran an ad saying Washington is broken. No kidding. It took him 26 years to figure it out," Obama said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26057405/

[Florida_Bronco]

As a car enthusiast, I can tell you that proper tire pressure DOES have an impact on fuel mileage. One of the best ways to ensure your car is getting the best mileage it can.

[Spider]

Sorry Drek but someone bull****ting you on the 10 years on Shale .......
Drilling in ANWAR = 10 years
OSD = 10 years
Shale = 10 years .......... No way in hell does all 3 types of drilling takes 10 years ?
If we can put fat women in spandex , we can get oil

[Spider]

Spider calling someone an idiot. Laughable.

Maybe the fact that you piggy back ride on LABF & company's sack so often makes you look like one of the crowd.

As to the point of it all, Obama is saying drilling (period) is not the answer. Noone denies airing up your tires can't hurt, but he says drilling is not the answer. You say it is. Why avoid this topic if it contradicts your opinion? Oh, because your BFFs are here and Spider doesn't want to dissent from his idols.

LOL you are a total ****ing idiot ...... News flash you ****ing retard , neither side wants drilling , The left wants reusable fuel , What the rest of us have figured out and you are clueless to is , we wont get on reusable fuel as long as we have oil , Republicans dont want Drilling so they can continue on controlling supply ....... **** you have your head so far up your ass , you need to fart just to get some fresh air

[Spider]

As a car enthusiast, I can tell you that proper tire pressure DOES have an impact on fuel mileage. One of the best ways to ensure your car is getting the best mileage it can.

;D run your car at high RPMS and low on oil until you hear a banging noise , you will save on fuel ;D

[Drek]

Sorry Drek but someone bull****ting you on the 10 years on Shale .......
Drilling in ANWAR = 10 years
OSD = 10 years
Shale = 10 years .......... No way in hell does all 3 types of drilling takes 10 years ?
If we can put fat women in spandex , we can get oil

We can start seeing returns, sure. But to put an entirely new type of oil into development, with new drilling and mapping needed to conduct it on a large scale? Yeah, 7-10 years is a geological rule of thumb.

The problem is that over the last ~200 or so years that petrol has been a valuable resource we have gradually moved through the resource from most easily attained and are now onto the hardest 20% or so.

When people first started drilling for oil you didn't really need much science to find it. Pennsylvania and Texas are built on oil that typically was ~200' deep and under pressure. You poke it and it literally pumps itself.

Here in Illinois there are oil rigs popping up all over the place. Why did that just happen in the last few years? Because all the easily attainable, read cheap, places have dried up.

Big oil has not been investing in the next wave of infrastructure though, and so they seriously aren't prepared. Only Shell stuck with shale oil development and they obviously haven't invested the kinds of money into it that would let them safely and reliably predict where to drill, where to frac, etc. to produce large quantities of economically viable shale oil.

The technology is ready or very close to it, I'm pragmatically optimistic on that. But the groundwork in the field hasn't been done for the oil companies to roll out en masse on shale oil and make it happen yet. What's worse, since Shell is the only one who has been doing this kind of research and the others are just now starting to play catch up they're going to basically do what they've done with the 70 million acres of less economically viable land in the continental 48 they aren't messing with now and just sit on leases until they do catch up or steal enough employees from Shell to run it themselves.

This is a big reason why I'm a fan of Obama's windfall profits tax on oil companies. Does anyone seriously believe oil companies will let themselves continue to show that kind of profit if they'll pay additional taxes on it? Look at baseball, as soon as they instituted a luxury tax every team but the Yankees (richest of the rich) got under it. Boston, both L.A. teams, the Mets, etc. are all under it by just enough to fit a deadline move or two in, but not much. Its obvious why.

What have the successful teams in that group, Boston and both L.A. teams, done with that extra revenue they're holding back from 25 man salaries? They reinvested it into player development.

We need to effectively soft cap the oil industry. It'll force them to get serious about legitimately researching the viability of all our resources and getting the groundwork in place. Our government subsidized them for years and they didn't do anything but cash the checks. Time for them to make up all those tax dollars they walked away with.

Its late in the game now and if we opened up ANWR, OCS, and shale oil tomorrow in some idyllic solution where oil companies banded together sharing resources and technology we still couldn't get the research, testing, and infrastructure up to speed quickly enough within the 5 year short term window to add enough oil to the global market for OPEC to not just game the system like I've said before and drop their contribution to the global market.

Personally I think we should hold OCS and ANWR back as the big sticks to keep OPEC honest, so they can't just keep rationing and letting everyone else bleed out their oil knowing that in 20-30 years they'll be the only game in town. In reality OCS and ANWR are small drops in the bucket by today's consumption standards of petrol, but if we work to make a more conservative energy network with more renewables and higher efficiency standards we can make those resources go a lot further when OPEC is busy making Europe pay them hand over fist to get bent over at the pumps.

Meanwhile we need to get shale oil up to speed as our legitimate bridge resource as it has much lower projected costs and much higher maximum yields than OCS and ANWR combined. It is the economical bridge we've been seeking, but we need to fast track that technology from the test site to the market.

Basically we should have three priorities over the next year or two. 1. start reducing consumption 2. grow our renewables, and 3. throw billions of dollars behind shale oil so that not only are we quick to the market here in America but that American owned companies and professionals are sought after around the world to do the same for other countries with shale oil.

That is how shale oil can pay off in the short term. We can't suddenly go from next to zero barrels of oil from kerogen now to billions a year overnight, but we can get the ball rolling and make sure that American based companies and American born and educated workers are pioneering and controlling the field. Same with renewables. If we pioneer it, patent it, and sell it to the rest of the world we see economic gains immediately as they start funneling money into OUR economy, not the other way around, as we put the infrastructure in place for them, long before the barrels of oil and watts from solar and wind start running through their towns and cities, with big fat "MADE IN AMERICA" brands all over them.

[Spider]

We can start seeing returns, sure. But to put an entirely new type of oil into development, with new drilling and mapping needed to conduct it on a large scale? Yeah, 7-10 years is a geological rule of thumb.

The problem is that over the last ~200 or so years that petrol has been a valuable resource we have gradually moved through the resource from most easily attained and are now onto the hardest 20% or so.

When people first started drilling for oil you didn't really need much science to find it. Pennsylvania and Texas are built on oil that typically was ~200' deep and under pressure. You poke it and it literally pumps itself.

Here in Illinois there are oil rigs popping up all over the place. Why did that just happen in the last few years? Because all the easily attainable, read cheap, places have dried up.

Big oil has not been investing in the next wave of infrastructure though, and so they seriously aren't prepared. Only Shell stuck with shale oil development and they obviously haven't invested the kinds of money into it that would let them safely and reliably predict where to drill, where to frac, etc. to produce large quantities of economically viable shale oil.

The technology is ready or very close to it, I'm pragmatically optimistic on that. But the groundwork in the field hasn't been done for the oil companies to roll out en masse on shale oil and make it happen yet. What's worse, since Shell is the only one who has been doing this kind of research and the others are just now starting to play catch up they're going to basically do what they've done with the 70 million acres of less economically viable land in the continental 48 they aren't messing with now and just sit on leases until they do catch up or steal enough employees from Shell to run it themselves.

This is a big reason why I'm a fan of Obama's windfall profits tax on oil companies. Does anyone seriously believe oil companies will let themselves continue to show that kind of profit if they'll pay additional taxes on it? Look at baseball, as soon as they instituted a luxury tax every team but the Yankees (richest of the rich) got under it. Boston, both L.A. teams, the Mets, etc. are all under it by just enough to fit a deadline move or two in, but not much. Its obvious why.

What have the successful teams in that group, Boston and both L.A. teams, done with that extra revenue they're holding back from 25 man salaries? They reinvested it into player development.

We need to effectively soft cap the oil industry. It'll force them to get serious about legitimately researching the viability of all our resources and getting the groundwork in place. Our government subsidized them for years and they didn't do anything but cash the checks. Time for them to make up all those tax dollars they walked away with.

Its late in the game now and if we opened up ANWR, OCS, and shale oil tomorrow in some idyllic solution where oil companies banded together sharing resources and technology we still couldn't get the research, testing, and infrastructure up to speed quickly enough within the 5 year short term window to add enough oil to the global market for OPEC to not just game the system like I've said before and drop their contribution to the global market.

Personally I think we should hold OCS and ANWR back as the big sticks to keep OPEC honest, so they can't just keep rationing and letting everyone else bleed out their oil knowing that in 20-30 years they'll be the only game in town. In reality OCS and ANWR are small drops in the bucket by today's consumption standards of petrol, but if we work to make a more conservative energy network with more renewables and higher efficiency standards we can make those resources go a lot further when OPEC is busy making Europe pay them hand over fist to get bent over at the pumps.

Meanwhile we need to get shale oil up to speed as our legitimate bridge resource as it has much lower projected costs and much higher maximum yields than OCS and ANWR combined. It is the economical bridge we've been seeking, but we need to fast track that technology from the test site to the market.

Basically we should have three priorities over the next year or two. 1. start reducing consumption 2. grow our renewables, and 3. throw billions of dollars behind shale oil so that not only are we quick to the market here in America but that American owned companies and professionals are sought after around the world to do the same for other countries with shale oil.

That is how shale oil can pay off in the short term. We can't suddenly go from next to zero barrels of oil from kerogen now to billions a year overnight, but we can get the ball rolling and make sure that American based companies and American born and educated workers are pioneering and controlling the field. Same with renewables. If we pioneer it, patent it, and sell it to the rest of the world we see economic gains immediately as they start funneling money into OUR economy, not the other way around, as we put the infrastructure in place for them, long before the barrels of oil and watts from solar and wind start running through their towns and cities, with big fat "MADE IN AMERICA" brands all over them.hmmmmm ok I will buy this

[Drek]

hmmmmm ok I will buy this

What really pisses me off is that the oil companies basically shut up shop on further research and mapping in order to save a few bucks through the 80's and 90's.

Fun fact. Over half the current oil industry's geologists are within 5 years of retirement. Another fun fact, nationally we graduate enough to fill about 10% of that in those 5 years, and that is if EVERYONE goes into oil.

I graduated in a class of four. Would've been five but one guy was in the marines and got called away half way through our last semester, so he had to defer and take incompletes that he finished later. That was at a good sized state school that has A. one of the world's best climatology labs and B. a couple elite geophysicists and structural geologists who pull down mad grant money. Hell, the top structural guy flat out admitted that he gets high six figure offers with insane stock options from big oil on at least an annual basis, but turns them down because he likes the collegiate lifestyle and has tenure, so its not like he's hurting for dough.

Thats one of the better programs in our country, and we turned out FOUR geological professionals. Two of them went on to grad school. The other two of us? We're working in environmental fields other than oil, despite a strong structure and subsurface mapping background all the way around.

You want your college age kids to be set for life? Have them get a masters in structural geology or geophysics. Its not easy, but by the time they come out the oil industry is going to be so desperate for employees that they'll basically be able to name a price. I'll probably be doing just that in a little while here.

[Traveler]

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii273/Papi728/glez.jpg

[Traveler]

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii273/Papi728/zyglis.gif

[spdirty]

Anyone here know what one of the main ingredients is to even make tires? Anyone?

And how will Obama go about getting that main ingredient to make tires?

I parked the F-250 and got a puny little toy Ranger that cant even be called a truck. Almost doubled my gas milage by making this sacrifice. And no, I'm not happy about it. So **** him. He is gonna have to bend a little when it comes to drilling if he wants me to bend a little more.

[Rigs11]

Anyone here know what one of the main ingredients is to even make tires? Anyone?

And how will Obama go about getting that main ingredient to make tires?

I parked the F-250 and got a puny little toy Ranger that cant even be called a truck. Almost doubled my gas milage by making this sacrifice. And no, I'm not happy about it. So **** him. He is gonna have to bend a little when it comes to drilling if he wants me to bend a little more.

boo hoo, I can't drive my big freaking truck. suck it up.even with mccanes' plan you're going to have to drive that ranger for a long time. Cheap oil is gone, drill all you want, we don't even have the refineries for that 1% of extra oil that we will get in 7 years.Add the costs of exploration and extraction to the mix and we will be paying more for that 1% than if we just imported it from the midlle east.

[sisterhellfyre]

Basically we should have three priorities over the next year or two. 1. start reducing consumption 2. grow our renewables, and 3. throw billions of dollars behind shale oil so that not only are we quick to the market here in America but that American owned companies and professionals are sought after around the world to do the same for other countries with shale oil.

Bravo, Drek. That's the best-sounding energy plan I've heard yet. :-) I wonder if Obama has anybody whispering something similar in his ear? Let's hope.

Regards,
m.

[That One Guy]

LOL you are a total ****ing idiot ...... News flash you ****ing retard , neither side wants drilling , The left wants reusable fuel , What the rest of us have figured out and you are clueless to is , we wont get on reusable fuel as long as we have oil , Republicans dont want Drilling so they can continue on controlling supply ....... **** you have your head so far up your ass , you need to fart just to get some fresh air

Spider Spider Spider... so glad you got into the profession you did. Independant thinking apparently isn't your game. Have your puppetmasters pull their hands out and let you form an opinion on your own one of these days, it might be refreshing. I swear all we ever get out of you is bad english, lame insults, and LABF & company's opinions.

Everybody agrees that reuseable energy would be great. The stance right now is whether it's worthy or not to try to bridge the gap between current high fuel prices and reuseable energy. Mccain has been a proponent of more drilling to bridge that gap. The conspiracy crap you guys love to subscribe to is more of your "everything wrong in the world is Bush's fault" programming that LABF has you spouting. Bah... why even argue it, I'll discuss it with LABF one day rather than listen to you employing that 4th grade education to try and call me names again. It's sad, you stopped developing your education and your insults at the same time. Get a life, big guy. You're really showing up lame these days and as much as you want to believe you're something special and have the greatest fights on the "form"... you're actually really lame and in need of actual personal opinions. Just something to think about while you're contemplating whether you can smell your breakfast in your farts or whatever it is that ever sophisticated mind of yours thinks about while you cruise down the road.

In short, quit being a tool.

[Spider]

Spider Spider Spider... so glad you got into the profession you did. Independant thinking apparently isn't your game. Have your puppetmasters pull their hands out and let you form an opinion on your own one of these days, it might be refreshing. I swear all we ever get out of you is bad english, lame insults, and LABF & company's opinions.

Everybody agrees that reuseable energy would be great. The stance right now is whether it's worthy or not to try to bridge the gap between current high fuel prices and reuseable energy. Mccain has been a proponent of more drilling to bridge that gap. The conspiracy crap you guys love to subscribe to is more of your "everything wrong in the world is Bush's fault" programming that LABF has you spouting. Bah... why even argue it, I'll discuss it with LABF one day rather than listen to you employing that 4th grade education to try and call me names again. It's sad, you stopped developing your education and your insults at the same time. Get a life, big guy. You're really showing up lame these days and as much as you want to believe you're something special and have the greatest fights on the "form"... you're actually really lame and in need of actual personal opinions. Just something to think about while you're contemplating whether you can smell your breakfast in your farts or whatever it is that ever sophisticated mind of yours thinks about while you cruise down the road.

In short, quit being a tool.

LOL you and thinking ........ like oil and water ........ but if you could think you wouldnt be considered by most to be a racist and a retard .........

[Drek]

Bravo, Drek. That's the best-sounding energy plan I've heard yet. :-) I wonder if Obama has anybody whispering something similar in his ear? Let's hope.

Regards,
m.

Actually, thats basically his exact energy plan, paraphrased.

A bit more fleshed out:

1. Cut governmental energy consumption 25% within 5 years (our government is by far our nation's largest energy consumer, and obviously need to lead the way in this).

Further, give discounts to every company that follows DuPont's lead. FYI, DuPont recently finished a company wide energy plan overhaul that has seen the company decrease energy usage by 30% while at the same time increasing productivity in only 3 years. Speed the adoption of energy saving light bulbs and other small items across American homes. Small drops individually, big bucket when filled. Also give a tax break to people who buy electric or high efficiency vehicles.

2. Put billions into R&D and commercialization. Tens of billions for the later, 2 billion annually and then more for the former.

What McCain's little $300M bounty for a battery doesn't actually resolve is how to get that product to the market. Most new technologies have an initial production cost hump associated, building factories, getting stable yields, etc.. Hell, look at Intel. They roll out a new chip series and they're basically selling at cost for about 6 months to a year. After that though they've already got the factories in place, the workers trained on the new process, and yields shoot up from 40-50% to 95%+. $300M isn't enough to eat the costs associated with that kind of new technology. Not even close. Our government stepping up with a couple billion a year though? Thats a real start. Best of all, his plan calls for the government to actually take an active share of the profits said technologies yield after the initial commercialization, and for those profits to then be rolled back in to this very plan.

3. Increase R&D for new expendable energies. Namely cleaner burning coal, natural gas, and shale oil. Put governmental funds into them while at the same time encouraging companies to further that funding, and give them tax breaks when they implement new technologies. At the same time fiscally punish those who do not update to cleaner more efficient technologies with stiffer taxes.

I'm voting for Obama not because he's a charismatic speaker, an intelligent man, or even a senator from the state I currently live in. I'm voting for Obama because unlike McCain he's got a 21st century energy plan built around 21st century technologies, while McCain is still rooted in the technologies of the 20th century that do not make any impact within the 5 year short term window and do not actually lead us into a foreign oil free future.

Its sad really. I was a massive McCain supporter in 2000. I seriously drove six hours each way from Orono, ME where I was going to school out to New Hampshire to go to one of his rallies. He was a breath of fresh air into a government that was more focused on political fencing than actual reform. But over the last 8 years he's turned his back on most of those reformation beliefs and is no longer in touch with what the real issues are in this country. He's simply out of touch with were society is today.

I'd have loved to see the past eight years of McCain. We wouldn't have gone on an Iraqi vendetta, instead we would've hit Afghanistan like a ton of bricks, then into northern Pakistan, and we would've drug Bin Laden out of his hole within months, not years. We would've presented Russia and China respectively with significantly bigger sticks when they started abusing their people's rights. And we wouldn't have pissed away all the global good will that was directed our way after 9/11.

McCain would've been a remarkable and iconic leader of a nation unknowingly heading into the war on terror and faced with new security challenges, especially as the man who still had his dignity and ideals in tact. Instead the right voted on morals and daddy Bush's old pals came to junior's aid to pull the necessary political strings. Now McCain is a bitter and jaded shadow of his former self, and our next president needs to face entirely different challenges. Ending a war, establishing energy independence, and leading this country into a new economic future. Those aren't McCain's strong suits and he's not the same John McCain regardless. Its a damn shame and its why our last eight years have been a mess. I'm just hoping this nation doesn't make the same mistake it made eight years ago in not nominating and then electing John McCain by now actually electing him.

[baja]

Actually, thats basically his exact energy plan, paraphrased.

A bit more fleshed out:

1. Cut governmental energy consumption 25% within 5 years (our government is by far our nation's largest energy consumer, and obviously need to lead the way in this).

Further, give discounts to every company that follows DuPont's lead. FYI, DuPont recently finished a company wide energy plan overhaul that has seen the company decrease energy usage by 30% while at the same time increasing productivity in only 3 years. Speed the adoption of energy saving light bulbs and other small items across American homes. Small drops individually, big bucket when filled. Also give a tax break to people who buy electric or high efficiency vehicles.

2. Put billions into R&D and commercialization. Tens of billions for the later, 2 billion annually and then more for the former.

What McCain's little $300M bounty for a battery doesn't actually resolve is how to get that product to the market. Most new technologies have an initial production cost hump associated, building factories, getting stable yields, etc.. Hell, look at Intel. They roll out a new chip series and they're basically selling at cost for about 6 months to a year. After that though they've already got the factories in place, the workers trained on the new process, and yields shoot up from 40-50% to 95%+. $300M isn't enough to eat the costs associated with that kind of new technology. Not even close. Our government stepping up with a couple billion a year though? Thats a real start. Best of all, his plan calls for the government to actually take an active share of the profits said technologies yield after the initial commercialization, and for those profits to then be rolled back in to this very plan.

3. Increase R&D for new expendable energies. Namely cleaner burning coal, natural gas, and shale oil. Put governmental funds into them while at the same time encouraging companies to further that funding, and give them tax breaks when they implement new technologies. At the same time fiscally punish those who do not update to cleaner more efficient technologies with stiffer taxes.

I'm voting for Obama not because he's a charismatic speaker, an intelligent man, or even a senator from the state I currently live in. I'm voting for Obama because unlike McCain he's got a 21st century energy plan built around 21st century technologies, while McCain is still rooted in the technologies of the 20th century that do not make any impact within the 5 year short term window and do not actually lead us into a foreign oil free future.

Its sad really. I was a massive McCain supporter in 2000. I seriously drove six hours each way from Orono, ME where I was going to school out to New Hampshire to go to one of his rallies. He was a breath of fresh air into a government that was more focused on political fencing than actual reform. But over the last 8 years he's turned his back on most of those reformation beliefs and is no longer in touch with what the real issues are in this country. He's simply out of touch with were society is today.

I'd have loved to see the past eight years of McCain. We wouldn't have gone on an Iraqi vendetta, instead we would've hit Afghanistan like a ton of bricks, then into northern Pakistan, and we would've drug Bin Laden out of his hole within months, not years. We would've presented Russia and China respectively with significantly bigger sticks when they started abusing their people's rights. And we wouldn't have pissed away all the global good will that was directed our way after 9/11.

McCain would've been a remarkable and iconic leader of a nation unknowingly heading into the war on terror and faced with new security challenges, especially as the man who still had his dignity and ideals in tact. Instead the right voted on morals and daddy Bush's old pals came to junior's aid to pull the necessary political strings. Now McCain is a bitter and jaded shadow of his former self, and our next president needs to face entirely different challenges. Ending a war, establishing energy independence, and leading this country into a new economic future. Those aren't McCain's strong suits and he's not the same John McCain regardless. Its a damn shame and its why our last eight years have been a mess. I'm just hoping this nation doesn't make the same mistake it made eight years ago in not nominating and then electing John McCain by now actually electing him.

I wonder!


http://backinasecond.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/1-mccain_bush_hug1.jpg

[baja]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2r-njxcVt5U&eurl=http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/?p=742