Glad to see the EPA is not waiting for cap and trade and moved forward to support the biggest reduction in greenhouse gases in US history:
Who needs democracy when you have beurocracy? :roll:
Not that it matters, the EPA has done nothing since that December 2009 article, nor will they, hopefully.
Here's a question for those coming across all defensive about the right to drive the car you want and protecting the right of car manufacturers to build the cars they want.
Why do cars sold in the US all guzzle much more gas than their equivalents elsewhere? I just did some research. The best possible consumption you can get in a VW Passat sold in the US is 22 MPG (in a 1.9L gas burner). The worst possible consumption you can get on a European spec Passat is 28.5 MPG (in a 1.8L gas burner). The best available is 52.3 MPG (in a 1.6L diesel). Why should it be that US motorists aren't even given the option of buying a more economical, environment-friendly car?
Check the stats and tell me why you think this is?
Passat - Complete Specs
The Official Website for Volkswagen UK : Volkswagen UK
If you worry that saving energy erodes your personal freedom, why not ask the car manufacturers why you aren't being given the freedom to choose a greener car if you want one?
The US Gallon is different from the Imperial gallon by about 3/4 of a liter less.
Here's a question for those coming across all defensive about the right to drive the car you want and protecting the right of car manufacturers to build the cars they want.
Why do cars sold in the US all guzzle much more gas than their equivalents elsewhere? I just did some research. The best possible consumption you can get in a VW Passat sold in the US is 22 MPG (in a 1.9L gas burner). The worst possible consumption you can get on a European spec Passat is 28.5 MPG (in a 1.8L gas burner). The best available is 52.3 MPG (in a 1.6L diesel). Why should it be that US motorists aren't even given the option of buying a more economical, environment-friendly car?
Check the stats and tell me why you think this is?
Passat - Complete Specs
The Official Website for Volkswagen UK : Volkswagen UK
If you worry that saving energy erodes your personal freedom, why not ask the car manufacturers why you aren't being given the freedom to choose a greener car if you want one?
US consumers ARE given those options, they are just to stupid and self-absorbed with their 5 ton SUVs to take any notice.
People complain at the very last minute in the country.
Because our politicians have been receiving their marching orders from their corporate backers and car manufactures here that make more money from big gas guzzlers and they have a public here willing to buy them because they have convinced them that it would infringe on our liberty to invade and occupy countries to supply the oil needed so that we have the liberty to be wasteful to the detriment of future generations.
Does it all make sense now?
Yes, yes I am.
I then asked you:
You have since only dodged those questions.
Kinda. In a kinda, "How ****ed up is that" kinda way, yeah.
That doesn't really answer the question. I just did the conversion. That means that the best US Passat does 22 MPG and the worst European now does 24 MPG. It really doesn't explain why a US driver can't choose a version that does 44 MPG (53 European MPG).
They are doing what we put them in office to do. Hard to get a handle on that huh?
One's diesel and one's petrol. Our petrol vehicles are comparable to the European petrol vehicles. People out here have a thing against Diesel for some reason I'm not sure of, so it's basic supply and demand for why we don't get the Diesels. I owned a diesel work van for years and it was way better than a petrol van)
Also, the way MPG are calculated was recently changed in the US. I'm not sure if they adopted a standard similar to the European standard or not. I do know that the changes caused a downward shift in MPG ratings for all vehicles.
Well, since we didn't put the EPA people in office, no, they're not. They're bypassing democracy and the Constitution to regulate a concern that was on hardly anyone's minds when they voted in 2008. So no matter how you look at it, they're not "doing what we put them in office to do".
I hope that the IPCC dissolves so prosperity can thrive... Drill for oil on US soil, use natural gas, and use coal. It would revive the economically depressed areas of PN, OH, and WV. We would be less Dependant on foreign oil, we could sell our surplus oil to make money and pay back our debts too. It's a win win win situation. But oh no, some lying bunch of scientists need to lobby in favor of a global hoax in order to control the world's governments and put more power in the hands of the UN.
Wow. I didn't know US drivers don't like diesels. Here they comprise about 40% of the private car market and about 95% of the commercial vehicle market. Also, diesel's cheaper than gas. Here in Andalucia (one of the poorest, hence cheapest regions of Spain) 95 octane gas is $1.50 per litre ($5.68 per gallon), 98 octane is $1.70 a litre. Diesel is $1.35.
I guess you can understand now how come Europe has reduced its fossil fuel consumption and chooses more economical engines.
When in doubt, stick with conspiracy theories, eh? So much more comfortable than considering you might have to change your behaviour for the good of others.
I hope that the IPCC dissolves so prosperity can thrive... Drill for oil on US soil, use natural gas, and use coal. It would revive the economically depressed areas of PN, OH, and WV. We would be less Dependant on foreign oil, we could sell our surplus oil to make money and pay back our debts too. It's a win win win situation. But oh no, some lying bunch of scientists need to lobby in favor of a global hoax in order to control the world's governments and put more power in the hands of the UN.
If we had not passed peak oil in the 70's, and were not faced with future consequences of Climate change, that would be a good plan!
We aren't faced with future consequences of climate change though... However we do face consequences by being dependent on foreign oil and by listening and implementing the policies that the UN wants to push.
That is your opinion completely without facts to back it up. Even the EPA appointed under Bush made that determination.
The effects of greenhouse gases were first discovered in 1824, and now includes a consensus of scientists from 180 countries. So in your opinion did the world wide conspiracy begin then, or was time travel involved?
Robinson spoke about his petition signed by 31,000 U.S. scientists who reject the claims that “human release of greenhouse gases is damaging our climate.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?