If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Obama predicts cars that can go coast to coast without a drop of oil, as long as you hunt enough deer and don't die of dysentery   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 137
    More: Unlikely, President Obama, congresses, Josh Earnest, energy development, Argonne National Laboratory, Fedex Corp., extreme temperatures, State of the Union  
•       •       •

1596 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Mar 2013 at 10:20 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



137 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-16 10:17:27 PM  
Krawczak named as cause and charged in 5... 4...
 
2013-03-16 10:24:16 PM  
fta Creation of the trust would require congressional approval...

Talk about a pipe dream
 
m00
2013-03-16 10:25:34 PM  
Eh, I actually support visionary energy policy... imagining what the world should look like in 50 years, what kind of workers we'll need, what kind of jobs we'll have, and planning accordingly.
 
2013-03-16 10:27:15 PM  
 
2013-03-16 10:27:34 PM  
Damn that dysentery...
 
2013-03-16 10:27:38 PM  
Epic Imbecile Obama is Epic.
 
2013-03-16 10:29:02 PM  

m00: Eh, I actually support visionary energy policy... imagining what the world should look like in 50 years, what kind of workers we'll need, what kind of jobs we'll have, and planning accordingly.


But that would require a long term mindset and our current business school of thought is for short term gains.

We would have to seriously rethink how our economy works. I don't think Wall Street is ready for that.
 
2013-03-16 10:30:34 PM  
Subby; I don't know what about sack of shiat car YOU drive, but I can drive coast to coast without having to add any oil.
 
2013-03-16 10:31:23 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Cars in the U.S. are more fuel-efficient than ever. Here's why.


Dnrtfa/

Tons/miles/gallon we're WAY ahead, but cars are heavier than ever due to safety requirements.

Where's my cookie?
 
2013-03-16 10:34:30 PM  
Freep's response to this was amusing, if predictable. You could sum it up as:

"Huh! That idiot must never have heard of lubrication! Or bearings! What a maroon!"

As the point zoomed by far overhead...
 
2013-03-16 10:34:34 PM  
Now wheres that list of congressmen who are lackeys of big oil?

/Meanwhile: Teabaggers foam at mouth calling President Obama dumb for thinking of the future, instead of thinking about the next bag of pigs ears and funions.
//Come on all you little rightwing trolls. You change your shiat stained pants and go out and get your welfare check from you mailbox. It may be dark and a cat may scare you, but be a big boy and prove that you can actually walk 100 feet without collapsing in a pool of your own vomit.
 
2013-03-16 10:35:26 PM  

Thingster: Dusk-You-n-Me: Cars in the U.S. are more fuel-efficient than ever. Here's why.

Dnrtfa/

Tons/miles/gallon we're WAY ahead, but cars are heavier than ever due to safety requirements.

Where's my cookie?


I would think just the opposite:  That cares are lighter than ever due to the materials we make them from now compared to what we made them from 30-40 years ago.
 
2013-03-16 10:38:51 PM  

Xetal: Thingster: Dusk-You-n-Me: Cars in the U.S. are more fuel-efficient than ever. Here's why.

Dnrtfa/

Tons/miles/gallon we're WAY ahead, but cars are heavier than ever due to safety requirements.

Where's my cookie?

I would think just the opposite:  That cares are lighter than ever due to the materials we make them from now compared to what we made them from 30-40 years ago.


And after some quick research it looks like cars have added tons of features, physical size, and greatly more powerful engines, the weight of which completely offsets the facts that we don't make everything out of steel anymore.
 
2013-03-16 10:41:01 PM  
lh3.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-03-16 10:42:02 PM  

Xetal: Thingster: Dusk-You-n-Me: Cars in the U.S. are more fuel-efficient than ever. Here's why.

Dnrtfa/

Tons/miles/gallon we're WAY ahead, but cars are heavier than ever due to safety requirements.

Where's my cookie?

I would think just the opposite:  That cares are lighter than ever due to the materials we make them from now compared to what we made them from 30-40 years ago.


Cars bodies are still mostly steel. It's really hard to beat steel when it comes to absorbing lots of energy and deforming in a controlled manner.

We have more aluminum blocks than we had back in the day, but cars are also bigger, compare a 2013 Camry to a 83 Camry..
 
2013-03-16 10:43:11 PM  
fta: The initiative, proposing to spend $200 million a year on research, would be paid for with revenue from federal oil and gas leases on offshore drilling and would not add to the deficit.

[okaywiththis]

fta: ...cars that can go 'coast to coast without using a drop of oil,

Meh, I guess that's pretty cool. Not flying car cool but cool nonetheless.
 
2013-03-16 10:43:18 PM  
We could do it today with LNG instead of oil.  Long term solutions will have to include long range hybrids, hydrogen fuel cells, and pure electrics, though these will require significant advances in battery technology.  Personally, I'm hopeful for graphene capacitors and algal biofuels within the next 15 - 20 years.
 
2013-03-16 10:45:20 PM  
fark you, subby.  Buffalo and bears are where it's at.
 
2013-03-16 10:47:31 PM  
Xetal:

Xetal: Thingster: Dusk-You-n-Me: Cars in the U.S. are more fuel-efficient than ever. Here's why.

Dnrtfa/

Tons/miles/gallon we're WAY ahead, but cars are heavier than ever due to safety requirements.

Where's my cookie?

I would think just the opposite: That cares are lighter than ever due to the materials we make them from now compared to what we made them from 30-40 years ago.

And after some quick research it looks like cars have added tons of features, physical size, and greatly more powerful engines, the weight of which completely offsets the facts that we don't make everything out of steel anymore.


You're half right... 1973's cars were *VERY* different in intent and design than 1983's, so using 30-40 years as a window to compare to 2013's cars gives you a sort of quantum-superposition of answers to whether cars are lighter than ever.
 
2013-03-16 10:49:07 PM  
We've certainly improved so much since 1977.... We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?


imageshack.us
 
2013-03-16 10:50:15 PM  
Of course it might take  a while
.farm6.static.flickr.com
 
2013-03-16 10:51:25 PM  
Sure could, if you park it on a train's flatbed
 
2013-03-16 10:51:35 PM  

Stile4aly: We could do it today with LNG instead of oil.  Long term solutions will have to include long range hybrids, hydrogen fuel cells, and pure electrics, though these will require significant advances in battery technology.  Personally, I'm hopeful for graphene capacitors and algal biofuels within the next 15 - 20 yearsagree

I agree, we have NGVs available right now that can go over 200 miles on a tank, and they cost less than 30k. all we need is a commitment to roll out more NG service stations. If even 1 in 10 current gas stations had a NG pump it would quickly become a visible option. We would need to import any of it. the part of the trade deficit that goes to foreign oil, gone... We are burning it off at the wellhead at an alarming rate, what a waste..

 
2013-03-16 10:52:44 PM  

armoredbulldozer: Epic Imbecile Obama is Epic.


Your logic is flawless.
 
2013-03-16 10:53:06 PM  

Virtual Pariah: We would have to seriously rethink how our economy works. I don't think Wall Street is ready for that.


Wall Street isn't ready? Wall Street will do whatever they can do inside of the boundaries we give them.

Until the people in this nation can realize who the REAL takers in our system are and get off their fat asses about it;

you'll have an entire nation, economy and business sector that looks only to the next fiscal quarter and thinks only how much of an inflated value they can create for themselves.

Long term investiment is for the birds, this has been replaced by gambling, theft and fraud. And if people can't get their heads out of their asses and stop blaming the economic victims instead of the Snidely Whiplashes, this nation will get everything it deserves.

We need businesses and markets and innovators working towards actual products and services... WE NEED A PRODUCT if we want a gross domestic product.

This shiat where we just magically create money out of thin air and nail the taxpayers to the wall every time the bubble pops has to go.. or eventually we won't be able to distinguish the bubble growth from the real growth and eventually a financial event will be large enough to bring us all down to our knees

... except for the 'got mines' that cause the mess. Who yes, will lose more money than anyone (just as they pay more taxes), but will still have such a disgustingly massive amount of assets and properties squirreled away to parachute into the sunset.
 
2013-03-16 10:54:09 PM  

Xetal: Xetal: Thingster: Dusk-You-n-Me: Cars in the U.S. are more fuel-efficient than ever. Here's why.

Dnrtfa/

Tons/miles/gallon we're WAY ahead, but cars are heavier than ever due to safety requirements.

Where's my cookie?

I would think just the opposite:  That cares are lighter than ever due to the materials we make them from now compared to what we made them from 30-40 years ago.

And after some quick research it looks like cars have added tons of features, physical size, and greatly more powerful engines, the weight of which completely offsets the facts that we don't make everything out of steel anymore.


it's both. We have higher standards for safety and emissions on diesel. That's why the Smart Car took so much longer to be sold here.
 
2013-03-16 10:56:01 PM  
Electrified roads.
 
2013-03-16 10:57:17 PM  
$2 billion?  Still dwarfed by oil subsidies...and the GOP won't ever let it happen in any event.
 
2013-03-16 10:57:28 PM  

armoredbulldozer: Epic Imbecile Obama is Epic.


You do realize there is a finite amount of oil in the earth right?  You do realize that soon we will run out of it completely.  Don't you think it might be a good idea to start planning for that day before it gets here.
 
2013-03-16 11:00:36 PM  

Emposter: $2 billion?  Still dwarfed by oil subsidies...and the GOP won't ever let it happen in any event.


It's long since time we found them a good hill to die charging.
 
2013-03-16 11:00:40 PM  

Mister Bobo: We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?


I betcha the '78 Chevette that got 43 mpg highway didn't have an air conditioner installed.
 
2013-03-16 11:01:36 PM  
Mister Bobo:

We've certainly improved so much since 1977.... We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?

To be fair...

A) That Chevette is a low-powered tinfoil-over-unibody deathtrap, and anyone who time-warped back to 1977 and got into one would hate it, and probably be terrified to go on the highway in it.

B) There's only so many joules to be had from a 14.7 parts air / 1 part gasoline mixture, and gas engines had been worked on and tweaked for 77 years before that car. Gasoline engines hit their point of diminishing returns a long time ago.

C) A well designed and maintained carburated engine can be as efficient (and clean) or better than a computer-controlled, fuel-injected one. The problem is that 99% of people aren't going to tune their engine once a week. Hence computer-controlled FI.
 
2013-03-16 11:02:04 PM  

Kumana Wanalaia: Electrified roads.


Potholes.
 
2013-03-16 11:02:46 PM  
So.... natural gas powered vehicles?
 
2013-03-16 11:03:10 PM  

MurphyMurphy: Virtual Pariah: We would have to seriously rethink how our economy works. I don't think Wall Street is ready for that.

Wall Street isn't ready? Wall Street will do whatever they can do inside of the boundaries we give them.

Until the people in this nation can realize who the REAL takers in our system are and get off their fat asses about it;

you'll have an entire nation, economy and business sector that looks only to the next fiscal quarter and thinks only how much of an inflated value they can create for themselves.

Long term investiment is for the birds, this has been replaced by gambling, theft and fraud. And if people can't get their heads out of their asses and stop blaming the economic victims instead of the Snidely Whiplashes, this nation will get everything it deserves.

We need businesses and markets and innovators working towards actual products and services... WE NEED A PRODUCT if we want a gross domestic product.

This shiat where we just magically create money out of thin air and nail the taxpayers to the wall every time the bubble pops has to go.. or eventually we won't be able to distinguish the bubble growth from the real growth and eventually a financial event will be large enough to bring us all down to our knees

... except for the 'got mines' that cause the mess. Who yes, will lose more money than anyone (just as they pay more taxes), but will still have such a disgustingly massive amount of assets and properties squirreled away to parachute into the sunset.


I agree with you,
My point is that those in "power" be it real or assumed, aren't going to change their mindset.

We have to flush them out of the system, but they are so ingrained that I'm unsure we could do that.
Until then quarter over quarter thinking is what will dominate the system and those with long term aspirations will find that they are pushed out of their own businesses by those who invested the start-up money.

Unless the govt invests in them, but... Socialism ...
 
2013-03-16 11:05:54 PM  

maxheck: Mister Bobo:

We've certainly improved so much since 1977.... We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?

To be fair...

A) That Chevette is a low-powered tinfoil-over-unibody deathtrap, and anyone who time-warped back to 1977 and got into one would hate it, and probably be terrified to go on the highway in it.

B) There's only so many joules to be had from a 14.7 parts air / 1 part gasoline mixture, and gas engines had been worked on and tweaked for 77 years before that car. Gasoline engines hit their point of diminishing returns a long time ago.

C) A well designed and maintained carburated engine can be as efficient (and clean) or better than a computer-controlled, fuel-injected one. The problem is that 99% of people aren't going to tune their engine once a week. Hence computer-controlled FI.


Exactly. Add in a few hundred pounds of armor and components so it can meet modern emission and safety regulations and test it on the new methods and we'll see how it does
 
2013-03-16 11:11:08 PM  

maxheck: Mister Bobo:

We've certainly improved so much since 1977.... We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?

To be fair...

A) That Chevette is a low-powered tinfoil-over-unibody deathtrap, and anyone who time-warped back to 1977 and got into one would hate it, and probably be terrified to go on the highway in it.

B) There's only so many joules to be had from a 14.7 parts air / 1 part gasoline mixture, and gas engines had been worked on and tweaked for 77 years before that car. Gasoline engines hit their point of diminishing returns a long time ago.

C) A well designed and maintained carburated engine can be as efficient (and clean) or better than a computer-controlled, fuel-injected one. The problem is that 99% of people aren't going to tune their engine once a week. Hence computer-controlled FI.


You are correct. We've continued to invest in obsolete technology due to convenience.
 
2013-03-16 11:14:45 PM  

Warlordtrooper: armoredbulldozer: Epic Imbecile Obama is Epic.

You do realize there is a finite amount of oil in the earth right?  You do realize that soon we will run out of it completely.  Don't you think it might be a good idea to start planning for that day before it gets here.


Three words: Drill, Baby, Drill.

winkingsarahpalin.jpg
 
2013-03-16 11:15:03 PM  

maxheck: A) That Chevette is a low-powered tinfoil-over-unibody deathtrap, and anyone who time-warped back to 1977 and got into one would hate it, and probably be terrified to go on the highway in it.


This. Anyone who wanted that kind of mileage in a decent car back in '77 would have gotten a Honda Civic or a Diesel VW Rabbit.
 
2013-03-16 11:15:45 PM  

Mister Bobo: maxheck: Mister Bobo:

We've certainly improved so much since 1977.... We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?

To be fair...

A) That Chevette is a low-powered tinfoil-over-unibody deathtrap, and anyone who time-warped back to 1977 and got into one would hate it, and probably be terrified to go on the highway in it.

B) There's only so many joules to be had from a 14.7 parts air / 1 part gasoline mixture, and gas engines had been worked on and tweaked for 77 years before that car. Gasoline engines hit their point of diminishing returns a long time ago.

C) A well designed and maintained carburated engine can be as efficient (and clean) or better than a computer-controlled, fuel-injected one. The problem is that 99% of people aren't going to tune their engine once a week. Hence computer-controlled FI.

You are correct. We've continued to invest in obsolete technology due to convenience.


Not convenience. Sunk Cost.
 
2013-03-16 11:16:17 PM  

Mister Bobo: You are correct. We've continued to invest in obsolete technology due to convenience.


Are you seriously contending that fuel-injection is an obsolete technology?
 
2013-03-16 11:16:30 PM  
2 billion dollars to help us in a goal of energy independence?  this is an outra...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 
2013-03-16 11:17:17 PM  
Obama will get his political contribution$ from them up front and let them go bankrupt in the future.

This is the worst of crony socialism.
 
2013-03-16 11:18:09 PM  

theknuckler_33: 2 billion dollars to help us in a goal of energy independence?  this is an outra...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


...over the next decade?  wow. this is definitely snore worthy.
 
2013-03-16 11:18:41 PM  

aegean: Obama will get his political contribution$ from them up front and let them go bankrupt in the future.

This is the worst of crony socialism.


Crony Capitalism = Private profits and public losses.

/not capitalism at all.
 
2013-03-16 11:19:06 PM  
So I guess it never hits the anus?
 
2013-03-16 11:23:31 PM  

MurphyMurphy: Emposter: $2 billion?  Still dwarfed by oil subsidies...and the GOP won't ever let it happen in any event.

It's long since time we found them a good hill to die charging.


One day, the GOP will meet the hill that ends them...but since they've been charging this one for decades, I doubt this is it.
 
2013-03-16 11:24:39 PM  

Virtual Pariah: We have to flush them out of the system, but they are so ingrained that I'm unsure we could do that


That first part was basically what I was trying to say. We must, or we get what we deserve.

We might not be the ones causing the damage to the economy and our future... but we have a (literally) revolutionary concept in democracy that we all must accept a measure of responsibility for what happens at a national level because, as a free and democratic people, things regarding policy, law and economic (de)regulation only happen when we permit to happen.

Unsure we could? When I look at the accomplishments of the human race, I'm not at all intimidated at the idea of throwing out some ingrained corrupt fat cats and their pet politicians. Our only enemy there is and has been apathy and the ignorance it spawns.

Warlordtrooper: armoredbulldozer: Epic Imbecile Obama is Epic.

You do realize there is a finite amount of oil in the earth right?  You do realize that soon we will run out of it completely.  Don't you think it might be a good idea to start planning for that day before it gets here.


What's going to suck is if 4-5 generations from now we do run out and they can't find acceptable alternatives for the thousands upon thousands of other products and uses we need petroleum for.

It'll all work out of course in the long long long run. We keep our slash and burn approach to civilization with these population levels... there will be a correction. Perhaps it will be best we burn through all the fossil fuels?

A new age can start after ours burns out, one that will be forced into building communities, industries and technologies of a type we haven't imagined. It probably won't be as booming and fast to develop as the past 200 years but theirs will be the house of brick (balanced existence) while ours appears to be the one of (burning) straw.

The candle that burns twice as bright type of thing... and we have been burning pretty damned bright for some time now.

Perhaps a civilization that must live closer to how the American Indians did than the Colonials? Teepees are cool.

/I'd never survive, I'm a creature of our comfortable world
//I'll keep holding my breath for technological saviors
 
2013-03-16 11:24:58 PM  

aegean: Obama will get his political contribution$ from them up front and let them go bankrupt in the future.

This is the worst of crony socialism.


So we just need to keep driving more SUVs?
 
2013-03-16 11:27:27 PM  

theorellior: Mister Bobo: We've developed so many improvements in car and engine design yet can't beat an old carbureted Chevette?

I betcha the '78 Chevette that got 43 mpg highway didn't have an air conditioner installed.


It also wouldn't go up a steep hill.
 
Displayed 50 of 137 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report