Ready or not: 36 MPG by 2015 mandate from Feds

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Number 3

I don't believe it is that we are addicted to fossil fuels. We are addicted to "cheap" fuels.

The tar pits in Canada have something like 100 years worth of oil. The problem is it needs additional processing to make it oil and then gas and is therefor more expensive.

Turning Coal into oil has never been commercialized, but I believe in the U.S. alone we have a 500 year supply of Coal. An energy surplus that dwarfs the middle east. But again even more expensive to convert shale oil to oil.

What we want is the cheap stuff that you get when you stick a straw in the ground and oil comes out. Kind of like Jed Clampett.

If you want to discuss the environmental impacts of cars, then consider that it is only 15% or so of the total green house gasses. The rest comes from other stuff that no one wants to change because that would impact you personally.

So the easy answer is to blame the auto companies. Oh no one really wants a Camaro that big you should have made it smaller. But when you do please further defy physics so that when you crash it no one can get hurt.

It's a crazy world ladies and gentlemen and as someone said earlier, it's all about the money.

Even insurance companies have to balance between the cost of insuring a car and it's repairs vs. the cost of medical, hospitalization and death benefits. It's still about the money.

[Gentry78]

this is that someday soon the cars we love they will no longer be making new ones, why cant some gear heads be up in washington, so someone can speak for those of us that still want our cars the way we want them.

by the way i think all this going green is a bunch of crap they have been doing this in cally for years now and they have the worst smog in the nation, plus the earth is cooling not warming by little to no effect by Man (scientific fact), so whats the point

[manimsoblack]

Well is the average taken based on taking one of each model and averaging the EPA Estimates or is it done by taking the number produced of each type of vehicle and averaging them or by the amount of each sold the previous year and averaging them? Cause all three can have very different outcomes. I think the second would be most favorable for our interests.

Also is it by each brand or by each manufacturer? Exp Would GMC, Pontiac and Chevy each be rated separately or would it just be GM.

[AZCamaroFan]

I just wanna see all the limo's in Washington get 36mpg.


Right.

[Vash]

Just savor the moment ladies and gentlemen.

Get U a Camaro and just luv it.

Maybe the 6th Gen Camaro will be like Tesla, bitchin' fast electric car?

We will find a way around this leftist ********.

Hhhaha they will be begging for V8's when we get 200mph electrics that do 0-60 in 3 secs.

[Miamimatt]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

If GM continues its trend with making cars E85 capable, they would have no problems. They just can't make every car E85 capable or else the loophole will get closed -a sudden jump from 28 mpg to 53 mpg won't go unnoticed. But they should make every hybrid E85 capable -reinforce the green image

I have a 2000 GMC sonoma its flex fuel as is alot of GM cars. The problem with E85 is you get less output by 20-30% so when it only cost .10 less then reg fuel you are actually loosing money. i found this out a few years ago. using reg fuel is actually cheaper then e85 and that sucks.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Miamimatt

I have a 2000 GMC sonoma its flex fuel as is alot of GM cars. The problem with E85 is you get less output by 20-30% so when it only cost .10 less then reg fuel you are actually loosing money. i found this out a few years ago. using reg fuel is actually cheaper then e85 and that sucks.

I don't doubt thats true in Florida, might be different in Nebraska.