AND 
BUSH: U.S. Must Get Off Oil, and Mentions the Chevy Volt (sort of)
Yesterday President Bush attended the Washington Renewable Energy Conference and made a speech.
Some key comments:
“We’ve got to get off oil”
“dependency on oil presents a real challenge to our economy.”
“The dependency upon oil also puts us at the mercy of terrorist”
“our dependence on fossil fuels like oil presents a challenge to our environment”
and most relevant to us:
“We’re also investing in plug-in hybrids. We want our city people driving not on gasoline but on electricity. And the goal, the short-term goal, is to have vehicles that are capable of driving the first 40 miles on electricity — vehicles that don’t look like a golf cart, by the way; vehicles that meet consumer demand. And that day is coming. The battery technologies are amazing, and the United States is investing millions of dollars to hasten the day. The battery technology is more efficient and competitive.”
48 Responses to “BUSH: U.S. Must Get Off Oil, and Mentions the Chevy Volt (sort of)”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
March 6th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
One reason why I’m not too keen on politicans is that they say one thing but do another…
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
“dependency on oil presents a real challenge to our economy.”“The dependency upon oil also puts us at the mercy of terrorist”“our dependence on fossil fuels like oil presents a challenge to our environment”Wow. Our president has demonstrated a keen grasp of the obvious.
W has this annoying habit of thinking that just because he says something, it’s true…. like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Now he’s saying we’re investing in hybrids etc…. but the modest sums of money this adminsitration is putting into energy R&D is a pittance compared to how much we spend every week in Iraq.
The cliche holds true: Talk is cheap.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
So does that mean that the President has changed his mind about vetoing the Renewable Energy and Energy Conservation bill of 2008 (H.R. 5351) ?
Or is it a case of all talk and no action?
Or worse, all talk, but doing the opposite?
Either way there are some nice quotes to use for lobbying Republican senators who are against HR 5351.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I agree with Jay.
How can you tell when a politician is lying?
Their lips are moving.
There will be NO change after the election. Why?
None of these politicians will obey their OATH of office to defend and obey the US Constitution INCLUDING it’s limits on THEIR Federal power.
NONE will lay down “Executive Orders” which circumvent balance of powers and NONE will lay down “Signing Statements” which allow them to ignore the parts of bills that they don’t like and NONE will lay down “Executive Privileges” which allow them to act in secret. The ALL want to tap our phones and emails for “Homeland Security” which is the EXACT phrase used by Hitler to do the very same acts prior to WWII. All that’s left is collecting guns so that we are defenseless against tyranny.
Change? MY BUTT!
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
… sounds like he may sign that energy bill – I better go fill my gas tank before prices go up.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
President Bush was not lying, he was telling us the truth, we do need to transition to hybrids with significant AER. But action speaks louder the words, and we have known how to end our dependence on foreign oil (through the use of Hybrids with significant AER) for years, yet no program to achieve that victory has been implemented. Mr. President, to little to late.
And sadly, none of the contenders has offered a program either.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
FYI… the resending of the tax breaks for the big evil oil companies…
a. Is not really a bill targeted at just big oil. It applies to a lot more companies than just oil companies. Companies that have NOTHING to do with oil or energy.
b. The bill was in part originally put in place to help the United States develop domestic sources of oil instead of having us rely more and more on Opec oil. Resending these incorrectly called tax breaks for oil companies will drive the smaller American Oil companies out of business and make us more dependant on Opec.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
IMHO, unfortunately the skills to get elected and the skills to run the country are often rather different.
That said, Bush and many of the conservatives are good at jumping on (or off) bandwagons once they realize they can’t politically afford it – despite how they feel personally. For example, Strom Thurmond and segregation, Reagan and civil rights in the 60’s, etc.
So I don’t see Bush as a leader on this, I see him more as a follower. I remember during his first term he talked about how high oil consumption was an American tradition that should be preserved. In fairness, he was probably talking about consumers spending money to keep the economy going, but he (and many others) were idiots to not see the current oil problem coming, and to not address it sooner.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
It is up to US in the U.S.
I have not and will not buy another new car until it is electric. I will convert one of my old cars to electric (spending $7 to $10K) before Detroit gets another $ from me. Even with existing lead bathed batteries people are driving pickups and 4 adult passenger cars for 30 to 40 miles on a charge.
I want a Volt and would love an Aptera ER-Ev. But i’m ready to do what ever it takes with out government help.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Yes we need to get off of oil. But Big Oil Bush is not about to do it. He is all talk, no action.
Anyone seen ‘Who killed the Electric Car’? One of the culprits was the Bush Administration, who helped Big Oil and Big Auto kill the California zero emissions policy back in 1997. If anything, Bush is pushing for hydrogen fuel-cells because Big Oil is behind them.
If he is serious about investing in plug-ins and the electrification of cars in the U.S..he will sign the bill. If he doesn’t, we know it’s all talk just to boost his already pathetically low ratings.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Hmmm … It’s Thursday and time for more political debate!
Incidentally, Canada is the biggest exporter of oil imported in to the USA:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Nothing like a W Bush speech to bring out the best in people!!
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 2:57 pm
I tried to post this to the appropriate thread, but for some reason that one’s sitting in limbo saying "awaiting moderation". It’s kind of relevant here as well as the Bush admin directed tons of tax payer money into the hydrogen hoax as it benefits big oil. In any case here was my post…
Bob Lutz himself now says he doesn’t believe in hydrogen fuel cell powered Volt…. see http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120468405514712501.html with Bob’s comments at the Geneva auto show yesterday.
Bob actually sees 300 mile (on battery) range Volt before hydrogen fuel cells are even remotely viable.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
are all posts now moderated or did Lyle not like my comments about his so called "waiting" list?
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Bush is not all talk. He’s done more than any other President to create an alternative fuel industry, and he’s behind the federal funding of lots of research into batteries, ect. Get your facts straight or keep your opinion to your self.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Well I thought I had some pretty insightful comments, but you guys have beaten me to it again!
14 Wise Golden:
Once again, too little, too late. Or, once again, does this mean that Dubya will sign H.R. 5351?
If he will not put his money and his signature where his mouth is, he should keep his opinions to himself.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
Wise, if you are so wise on Bush’s battery research funding, please fill us in… when and how much funding has been given?
I think you are confusing the Bush admin’s big oil policy of spending and prompting the hydrogen hoax. Yes, tons of our tax dollars have been spent into that so called "alternative"… but in reality it’s just another way to peddle big oil’s fossil fuels as the most economical source of hydrogen is natural gas (CH4).
Does anyone really think that oil man Bush, oil man Cheney, oil woman Condy Rice, etc, would really do anything that could substantially take us off oil? It completely contridicts the Bush admin who put in place and wants to continue huge tax credits to big oil at the same time they are making record profits.
It’s going to take another administration, be it one of the dems or mccain, to change our governments energy policy. Hopefully the next time it won’t be done in secret meetings with big oil execs like the Bush/Cheney admin did.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
Whether you like the president or not, his rhetoric on this topic doesn’t hurt our chances of getting a Volt. With or without, government help, the market is driving us into a Volt-age.
I don’t want to get any more political than that in a Volt forum. Yelling heads, please seek like minded blogs.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
#3 Mark. I agree. Why is he going to veto subsidies for volts etc, and instead keep the $18 billion of subsidies for the oil industry? Talk about being asleep at the wheel. My 2c worth.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Jeff — do you mean another administration like all of the ones in the past that have worked to get us off oil? Because I must have been sleeping while that was going on. Bush helped to create our 7 billion gallon per year ethanol industry that is destined to grow to 36 billion per year, and which was less than 500 million per yea when he took office. Bush helped to create our current 3 billion gallon per year bio deisle industry which will double in the next two years. Bush has tried to get permission to drill in ANWR, off the coast of Florida and Virginia. The Department of energy, under Bush, provided GM with somewhere in the neighborhood of 30 million to research batteries. Bush has doubled the size of our strategic oil reserve. Bush approved the energy bill of 2005 and again the energy bill of 2007 calling for CAFE of 35. And lastly, Bush is the person today who is saying "America needs to get off oil," so get off his case.
I’ll say it again — get your facts straight or keep your opinion to yourself.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
By the way Jeff, all of the Dems and McCain are against driling in ANWR, Florida and Virginia. Hillary and Obama are against nuclear power.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
I think Lyle puts topics like these up every now and then, just to let some people vent…..
So, vent away!!!
:)
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Bush is full of youknowwhat.
March 05, 2008
Oil prices reached a record close, surging above $104 after OPEC decided Wednesday to keep its production unchanged. The cartel ignored calls from President Bush to pump more oil into an ailing economy.
March 06, 2008
U.S. must get off oil.
Hmm…
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
For all you great thinkers here… Do you think a Govt. Program would produce the Volt faster than GM will through natural business pressures? Bwahahahahahhahahhaha
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
We should have learned from the 73-4 oil embargo, but we didn’t. Even at that time steady progress could have been made with a commitment but no one was really committed. We were ready with ethanol even back then but it never caught on. The price of oil dropped back down and we went about our merry way.
For how long have we been talking about getting off oil? The worst part about this is that it won’t happen over night, and this is exactly why we’re in this mess. Obviously our Gov has no real plan, or they’d have exercised it decades ago.
This is why I believe the Volt will be one of the most influential vehicles in history, and competition will ensure that it’s not alone. It’s a shame it didn’t happen sooner, but it’s never too late.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Id feel better if he said the US was investing billions into this tech instead of millions. Any number of millions is pocket change compared to the money spent on foreign wars.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Be happy the price of oil is high otherwise the Volt could be dead. The higher the oil prices the higher the demand for the Volt and vehicles like it. If oil prices fell sharply, back to 60-70 dollars a barrel and gas was around $2.50 we would be back to big SUV’s.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
Bush could never acknowledge that GM is working on the Volt. My guess is that he probably drives a Lexus or some other foreign car. I find it hard to believe that I voted for him. He’s been a do nothing president. When the oil companies rape the people by making windfall profits (43 billion dollars) it’s not too hard to figure out he’s a do nothing president.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Yeah – So let me get this straight – we want GM to provide for our common defense, and the government to develop the new technology for producing electric cars? How many decades are we willing to wait on the government for an electric car? All we need to do is rewrite a little thing called the constitution of the US and reassign all the responsibilities. Then we can all go stand in line and buy our electric cars and energy and medical care and housing and food from the post office. Do not be so "political" with every breath we take – it is stifling. Fortunately GM doesn’t listen to or have time for our political rants. GM won’t wait for us to celebrate their technological victories with pervasive negativism. They will go on and develop their products and put them in the market place while we stand around complaining and wondering what happened. Our society wants to surrender to enemies abroad and have "big brother" take our money for defense and pay for everything we need in life – food/health/lodging/energy/infrastructure – but let our freedom go down the drain, even as our men bleed on the battle fields for the freedom of the country they love. What good is this electric car if we allow our country to be attacked by terrorists and lose our freedom? Do we still appreciate the genius of our system, our creativity rooted in a free enterprise system – capitalism – which exists because of the protection provided by our government and the sacrifices our heroes fight and bleed to protect? So why can’t our government leader, the president, speak the truth without all this pessimism and negativism? I am thrilled with the progress of the electric car – thrilled with the performance of GM – thrilled that it is our free enterprise system that is developing it and not the government – and – thrilled when some of our political leaders recognize and applaud the achievements and benefits of industry for our nation. Heaven help us if we come to rely on governors, representatives, senators, supreme court justices, presidents, the post office, to take over and run our precious unrivaled economic system, a system individuals of this great country have produced. Look at the corrupt leaders in the senate and house – their criminal records – is it any wonder government gets anything right? So when good and truthful comments come from our government leadership – are you so blinded by hate that you can’t recognize truth even when it supports your own self interests? This is not a forum for politics, it is a forum to discuss the pinnacles of technological achievement at GM, to brainstorm with them the ideas they share with us, to be a small part of this evolving technology. This is a forum for offering testimony to the genius of our free enterprise system, that is able to rise above all obstacles and set this nation on an important new path for a new day.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Submit
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
This is what Bush should say, "Our country is addicted to oil, etc. but… I’m not going to do anything about. I’m sorry but it would hurt those who put me in and keep me in office. Good luck doing it on your own. Oh, in addition I’m actually going to try to stop you to the best of my ability. Sorry again. " Now wouldn’t you at least respect him more for that? Everyone can agree that it’s true and that he is in quite a pickle on the matter. This is the truth that we Americans probably know in our hearts but don’t really want talk about. How about we just fact the facts and move on. We have to do this on our own and face not only huge technical obstacles but also resistance from the status quo. Give it a try! I did and it feels great. It in no way reduced my motivation and actually was quite liberating. You will no longer feel anger or frustration but start thinking about ways to deal with the current situation. The fact is Mother Nature decides global policy. The US government might be strong but Mother Nature is much stronger. Don’t listen to her at your own peril.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
[quote]$18 billion of subsidies for the oil industry?[/quote]
Once again for political reasons the truth of what this bill does/is being skewed/misrepresented. And as usual the Democrats single line slogans and stances sound good at first until you dig deep and find out the truth of the matter.
I am not going to make any friends with this statement but it is true. Democrat = Communist. Sounds good but just doesn’t work. Let the bashing begin.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
Tim #4 “NONE will lay down “Executive Orders” which circumvent balance of powers”. On Jan. 24th 2007, Pres. Bush signed an “Executive Order” to “purchase Plug-in hybrids, as soon as they hit the market.” http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:VbmOtr4Lj9IJ:watthead.blogspot.com/2007/01/president-bush-issues-executive-order.html+Executive+Orders+bush+phev+government&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
George, Here is what Bush actually said:
"President Bush issued an executive order to Federal Agencies that, among other things, requires a 2% reduction in consumption of petroleum products per year through the end of 2015 in fleets larger than 20 vehicles.
The order also specifies an increase of total fuel consumption that is non-petroleum-based by 10% and requires the use of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) when the plug-ins are commercially available at a cost reasonably comparable, on the basis of life-cycle cost, to non-PHEVs."
WOW!!!! 2 whole percent!!!!! At a cost resonably compartable. You could argue that all day long as to what is resonable. Some order. Now I actually like the man Bush. He might be surrounded by some questionable advisers but he as a nice, shy guy when he was in Texas. However, he is powerless to do anything, as I have stated a few posts up. The only thing powerful enough to have real change is the will of the collective people, nature or disaster.
(Quote)
March 6th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
#10 Mark, it was also that worm from CARB who also killed the mandate. IMO he’s just as much to blame as the government. I don’t recal what his name was, but had an accent. You know who I’m talking about.
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 1:42 am
Why does my comment #33 say, " Your comment is awaiting moderation." ? Is big brother watching and tagged my post because it had the word Bush in it? Spooky.
Sorry Mr. computer… I was only saying nice things about Mr. Bush.
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 2:22 am
Maybe GM got the 40 mile range from here.
Advanced Energy Initiative Goals – Fueling Our Vehicles Develop advanced battery technologies that allow a plug-in hybrid-electric vehicle to have a 40-mile range operating solely on battery charge. Foster the breakthrough technologies needed to make cellulosic ethanol cost-competitive with corn-based ethanol by 2012. Accelerate progress towards the President’s goal of enabling large numbers of Americans to choose hydrogen fuel cell vehicles by 2020. G.W. Bush 2006
Looking back:
point one - on track
point two – maybe
point three – will never happen.
Source: http://www.whitehouse.gov/stateoftheunion/2006/energy/
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
19 Wise Golden,
Thanks for the facts. There are many people out there who just refuse to believe that Bush has actually done more than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT IN HISTORY to get us off oil.
29 Andy….I couldn’t have said it better myself. Our capitalist society, not the government, is the greatest force for technological advancement in this world. I dread the day that people start relying on our government to provide them with their wants/needs. In my opinion, everything the government touches has a way of becoming inefficient and overpriced. That’s why I don’t want them providing my healthcare.
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
First, all SUV owners and everyone else getting < 20 mpg should keep their mouths CLOSED. You are the culprit. Fly a lot, you too. Ride a mower, yes you too. Buy imported anything and out of U.S. season vegetables – you’re right, you too. As long as the Prius and Civic Hybrids were available and You did not buy one, yes, you too.
Legislate us into submission because we cannot chose for ourselves. Don’t make megabucks in office even if we voted for you, Knowing you are big oil? What???
And the Economy, not Environment is THE big issue this election? Point a finger at the other guy, lands three other fingers pointing back at you where they rightfully belong.
Banging our elected officials makes us all feel better though….
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Fuel cells are not as unlikely as many of you imply. EFlex, the technology in the volt, was first developed for fuel cells.
Read:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2005/01/22/mfburns22.xml
This article states that GM believes they will get the cost of a fuel cell stack down to almost the same as a internal combustion engine. That means the cost of the car will be similar to current cars.
Nuclear power is able to produce 10,000 PSI compressed hydrogen delivered to the pump for < $1. That is significantly cheaper than current gasoline prices. The reason: 1) nuclear power has to run at full load or it is wasted. 2) Hydrogen can be produced using fourth gen high temp reactors at efficiencies > 80%. So, these reactors can produce hydrogen at high efficiencies during off peak hours – in other words, very cheap. I wish I could find the article, but I recently read an article about a solar panel that could produce hydrogen at a similar cost to natural gas. Hydrogen today, produced using natural gas, can be delivered to the station for a gasoline equilivant of about $3/gallon.
There are already fuel cell vehicles on the road from almost every manufacturer of automobiles. Some of them are as capable as ICE’s. Note that the volt is not on the road yet. This puts the priorities of the major auto makers in perspective. They would not make this kind of investment unless they believe it to be a likely direction for the future.
The strongest argument against hydrogen is that it is less efficient than batteries. This is true. However, the current battery technology being used in the volt can only get us ~40 miles due to cost, space, and weight. Battery technology is not up to the task of competing in the US market with the ICE. Hydrogen cars, however, can compete directly with the ICE. While hydrogen is not as efficient as batteries, it can carry more energy in less space at a significantly lower cost (up front) than batteries. Efficiency doesn’t matter much if you can’t drive far enough to get to a fueling station. Current hydrogen technology can displace the ICE. Current battery technology can’t.
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
I kept looking at articles after I wrote the above post.
This:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120468405514712501.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Seems to contradict my post from someone who would actually know.
Bob Lutz
"If we get lithium-ion to 300 miles, then you need to ask yourself, Why do you need fuel cells?"
I agree. I didn’t think we had a chance of doing this anytime soon. Maybe he does, and he would know.
"We are nowhere [near] where we need to be on the costs curve,"
If fuel cell cars aren’t competative in cost with ICE, they will never succeed. Numerous statements in the recent past had led me to believe that the cost target of $50/kw by 2010 was still on schedule. He seems to say otherwise.
I don’t know. I do know that most of the arguments I see against hydrogen are still wrong or badly thought out. It will all hinge on cost vs performance. The vast majority of people are not motivated by anything else. I’m happy for either technology to win. I just want off of oil.
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 6:47 pm
Oh such tired divisivness. I agree with posts #6 & #9. My next car will be electric no matter what.
I don’t understand the continued rejection of hydrogen. Honda’s FCX Clarity is already being leased and the dealer I spoke with on Monday says the Clarity is set for sale under $30,000 by 2010. He also test drove the Clarity in LA and raved about the handling, silence, and comfort. The hydrogen is said to be generated in the garage by a system hooked up to the natural gas line.
I love the Volt but market competition is the way to truly shift our oil dependence.
Bush is easy for many to hate, much like Clinton before. The power rests with us and our hard earned dollars. Vote with your money.
(Quote)
March 7th, 2008 at 11:39 pm
#40 Jason, I don’t want to fight but…
Reforming natural gas is fine, but even it is limited. Throw out nation on natural gas, and it’ll be gone – quick! Electric is good, and we have the infrastructure established, just add the outlets.
$30k is a good price, but look at thr trillions of dollars to spend on the pumps, etc…..
Doesn’t this country have enough debt without having to waste it on H2? It comes down to, natural gas is just another band-aid to the problem, and truth be told, I DON’T want to fill up at another gas station, but I see your point about filling up at home too.
Batteries have come a long, and in many respects have many advantages over H2, but they will get better and cheaper. I’m sure both technoliges will continue to get better over time. The question, which will be the better way to go in 5 years.
If I had to put money on it, I’d say in 5 years, batteries will be kick a**!!!
A123 is doing a good job, but IF we can employ nano technoligy more, no doubt we would be able to see 1k miles/charge.. And be able to charge your car on $40k of nano-solar array…..
The future will be very bright!!
(Quote)
March 8th, 2008 at 12:04 am
WRT Hydrogen and it’s future, you might find this article interesting:
http://www.evworld.com/news.cfm?newsid=17683
(Quote)
March 9th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Abe Lincoln once said, "You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time but not all of the people all of the time." These Bushies fall into the catagory, "some of the people all of the time!" There has never been a president who has done as much as Bush to harm the nation.
(Quote)
March 10th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Wise,
Your so dim! This is a message board, opinion is prevelant.
Bush’s entire family legacy all the way back to his grandfather herbert walker is based off of oil money, he has personally owned an oil company. (arbusto)
You want us to believe that he is being sincere about getting the country "off oil".
Just like he was being sincere when he lied and said we were going to attack iraq because if not we were in danger from him and his weapons of mass destruction.
When Cheny and the guys from enron and the rest of his corporate masters were writing our energy policy was he doing that in our best interest.
Your trying to defend the devil in the context of energy independence, not to mention the worst president ever.
So you made a bad choice in 00 & 04, no need to go down with the ship.
(Quote)
March 10th, 2008 at 9:32 am
#28 Jack.
"I find it hard to believe that I voted for him. He’s been a do nothing president."
I wish he was a do nothing president, we’d be alot better off if he didn’t do anything while in office.
(Quote)
March 13th, 2008 at 10:40 am
#46 Jon P, no need to insult anyone on this discussion board. I think what Wise was talking about is the fact that before bush, there really was no alternative fuels industry, and because of legislation passed by Bush, we will soon have 36 billion gallons of alternative fuels produced annually in this country. That’s a pretty noticeable chunk of the 140 billion gallons of fuel we currently consume. And which president did that? Was it Carter during the first oil crunch..nope. How about Reagan, or Bush senior? Nope. Not even Clinton did a damn thing to get us off oil. Funny that "big oil" man W has though.
There are plenty of reasons for people not to like Bush, but has done more to get us off of oil than any other president in history. That is a FACT Jon, not an opinion.
(Quote)