Evaluation of the policies of George W. Bush and his Republican conservatives on America.
Published on February 5, 2005 By COL Gene In Politics

Restore the Café standards and make them apply to all cars, trucks and SUVs.

Establish new targets for increased miles per gallon for each type of vehicle over the next 10 years.

Establish tax credits for car manufacturers who achieve the established standards.

Establish tax surcharges to car manufacturers who fail to meet the new mileage standards.


Utilize the additional tax revenue from surcharges to help fund the tax credits to corporations who achieve the new Café standards.

Provide federal subsidies to more fully utilize available coal supplies to create the energy needed wherever possible. Subsidies should be used to help provide for clean air equipment and to research new methods of utilizing coal in a non polluting way. Tax credits should also be used to convert existing oil and gas fired generators to coal and with the cost of transporting coal from the source to the user.

Provide subsidies to help car manufacturers develop cars and trucks using alternate propulsion systems such as fuel cells and hybrid/electric vehicles.

Provide subsidies to develop long-term renewable energy supplies including geothermal, wind, direct solar conversion, cold fusion, fuel cells etc. The objective would be to reduce our dependence on foreign oil as well as provide for the sale of the new technology and equipment to other countries. This would have the obvious advantage of not only solving our energy problem but eliminating many of the political entanglements that our dependence on Middle East oil creates. In addition, a reduction in the purchase of foreign oil would help our balance of trade as would selling the new technology and equipment to other countries. Thus this strategy would be a win-win-win-win situation for our countries by enhancing employment, corporate profits, reduce our trade deficit as well as simplifying some of our political entanglements.

Encourage the development of natural gas in areas controlled by the United States

Encourage the development of additional oil supplies that are under the control of the United States and do not endanger the environment.

Carefully evaluate any new or renewed agreements to provide United States produced energy to other nations. Our objective should be to first provide for energy independence before pledging our assets, especially oil and gas, to other countries.




Comments
on Feb 05, 2005
Energy Policy

By: COL Gene
Posted: Saturday, February 05, 2005 on Bush Truth
Message Board: Politics

Restore the Café standards and make them apply to all cars, trucks and SUVs.

Establish new targets for increased miles per gallon for each type of vehicle over the next 10 years.

Establish tax credits for car manufacturers who achieve the established standards.

Establish tax surcharges to car manufacturers who fail to meet the new mileage standards.


Before you start going on about this maybe you should read this:


Dissecting CAFE's Numbers

FEV President and CEO, Gary Rogers gives AI an exclusive inside look at why a year-long study only scratched the surface of the complex CAFE numbers puzzle.

Q. What was the mission of the CAFE study and do you think it achieved its objectives?

A. Our mission was to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of CAFE and to identify possible changes or alternatives. We spent an incredibly short five months preparing an initial draft and then a few months reviewing issues raised by interested parties. What we learned and attempted to communicate in our report was the enormity and complexity of this issue. Our study cites and my personal opinion supports that we don't have a definitive answer or final solution. If we did, we would have put it in the report. However, I strongly believe we identified all the important issues and hot buttons that must be addressed as this extremely complex issue is passed on to the DOT or some other governmental agency to determine what the right course of action should be.

Q. Based on your research do you think it is possible to raise CAFE standards by 25 or even 50 percent as Senators Kerry and McCain proposed?

A. That gets back to the complexity issue. If you look on a vehicle-by-vehicle basis one could conclude theoretically that it might be possible to improve the fuel economy of a particular vehicle -- depending on how bad it is to start with -- by 25 percent or more. But CAFE doesn't work that way. You don't calculate fuel economy based on a particular vehicle, you calculate it based on a sales weighted average of all vehicles sold by a manufacturer. This sales mix can have a far greater impact than the effect of individual improvement.

Q. What's the difference if the technology exists to do it?

A. If you are a full-line vehicle manufacturer and you have to go from an average of 24 mpg across the entire fleet of vehicles sold to 36 mpg -- a 50 percent increase -- in a short period of time by auto industry standards, say 10 years, it would require simultaneously redesigning all vehicles, all engines and all powertrains. Not even GM has the resources to begin that kind of work. The cost would be astronomical and in my opinion would bring this nation to its knees from an economic perspective.

Q. But the Senator's proposals didn't begin until 2007 and took full effect by 2015.

A. Products you are going to build in 2005 are already defined today. Products for 2006 are almost completely defined. It takes four years to develop a vehicle once you know exactly what's going to be in it. If you add new technologies, even if they are in production in foreign markets you have to resolve issues of durability, safety, warranty and reliability. So the idea of targeting huge CAFE improvements, especially with the changes proposed by Senators Kerry and McCain, even 10 or 13 years from now, are in my opinion essentially impossible.


Link

And BTW just where do you expect to get the funding for these new subsidies? You going to make the deficit even more?
on Feb 05, 2005
I do not doubt that the improvement in overall mileage would take time and money. That is why I believe government help is needed. However, the very poor mileage of the SUV's have had a great impact on the oil we are consuming. Some manufacturers are producing vehicles that get much higher mileage than the SUV's. If the cost is a factor, than a surcharge on the purchase price of vehicles that get low mileage could help pay the cost of developing higherr mileage cars and trucks. About 1/2 the total oil is used in the internal combustion engine. We need to begin doing more to improve mileage. That is something Bush has refused to do and he only wants to look at adding to the suppy. Even his drilling in Alaska would take 10 years to produce oil and the best estimate I have sceen of the potential oil where he wants to drill amounts to 3% of our comsumption.
on Feb 05, 2005

Reply #2 By: COL Gene - 2/5/2005 7:52:24 PM
I do not doubt that the improvement in overall mileage would take time and money. That is why I believe government help is needed. However, the very poor mileage of the SUV's have had a great impact on the oil we are consuming. Some manufacturers are producing vehicles that get much higher mileage than the SUV's. If the cost is a factor, than a surcharge on the purchase price of vehicles that get low mileage could help pay the cost of developing higherr mileage cars and trucks. About 1/2 the total oil is used in the internal combustion engine. We need to begin doing more to improve mileage. That is something Bush has refused to do and he only wants to look at adding to the suppy. Even his drilling in Alaska would take 10 years to produce oil and the best estimate I have sceen of the potential oil where he wants to drill amounts to 3% of our comsumption.


Ain't going to happen because the consumer won't pay it. And as always R & D cost is a BIG factor. And maybe you missed this part.

Q. What's the difference if the technology exists to do it?

A. If you are a full-line vehicle manufacturer and you have to go from an average of 24 mpg across the entire fleet of vehicles sold to 36 mpg -- a 50 percent increase -- in a short period of time by auto industry standards, say 10 years, it would require simultaneously redesigning all vehicles, all engines and all powertrains. Not even GM has the resources to begin that kind of work. The cost would be astronomical and in my opinion would bring this nation to its knees from an economic perspective.

on Feb 06, 2005
drmiler

I did not say we had to increase the mileage by 50%. A one mile improvement in mileage would produce more oil than all the New oil Bush wants to get in Alaska. There are steps that could be taken to improve mileage especially in SUV's and that will help reduce our consumption. Look at the other parts of my suggestions. All you ever do is support the Bush policy that is doing NOTHING to solve the problem. If you look at his proposed Energy Policy, the vast majority of the money was a gift to mature energy companies to pay them for exploration expense that already were incurring. That would not produce more oil only improve their bottom line and Bush would add it to the National Debt. This is a place where we need to use our tax system to reward those companies who meet an established goal and charge those that do not. It will not happen without some government regulation. We have sceen the price of gasoline go up about 50% in this country and there is very little the marketplace has done to improve overall mileage. For the marketplace to act would require oil prices at levels that would destroy our economy and drive inflation off the scale.
on Feb 06, 2005

Reply #4 By: COL Gene - 2/6/2005 7:56:51 AM
drmiler

I did not say we had to increase the mileage by 50%. .


I quote:

Restore the Café standards and make them apply to all cars, trucks and SUVs.


Sorry but *you did* call for a 50% increase by calling for the cafe standards. Cafe standards called for a 50% increase in mileage To me this looks suspiciously like a bash Bush reply..
on Feb 06, 2005
As I said, "establish new targets for increased miles per galon"... That does not mean a 50% increase it means establish NEW standards. I also said the NEW standards need to be enforced with tax credits or surcharges. That is what Bush will not do!
on Feb 06, 2005

Reply #6 By: COL Gene - 2/6/2005 2:29:59 PM
As I said, "establish new targets for increased miles per galon"... That does not mean a 50% increase it means establish NEW standards. I also said the NEW standards need to be enforced with tax credits or surcharges. That is what Bush will not do!


Then you can't call for the cafe standards to be applied. Altough you are asking for something simular. You can only take that so far though. Basic physics would make doing any serious mileage improvements on trucks extremely difficult. Work=horsepower=more fuel=less mileage, yada-yada- yada.
on Feb 06, 2005
My point, we need to do more than pay mature oil companies to look for more Oil . That is erspecially true if the new oil is not in our country and than must be purchased which impacts the balance of trade.

By using tax dollars to help develop new technology, we not only help meet our energy needs but have that new technonlgy to sell to others and improve our balance of trade and job growth. The use of our coal also reduces foreign oil purchases.

Because Bush insisted on the Alaska drilling in his energy bill, nothing got done including the electric grid issue. We should move ahead with those elements of the energy needs and allow the drilling issue to stand alone. Bush looks at this as giving in and is why we have NO ENERGY POLICY during his first term!
on Feb 06, 2005

Reply #8 By: COL Gene - 2/6/2005 3:45:06 PM
My point, we need to do more than pay mature oil companies to look for more Oil . That is erspecially true if the new oil is not in our country and than must be purchased which impacts the balance of trade.

By using tax dollars to help develop new technology


Just where are these "tax" dollars coming from? We have no energy policy from his first term because the dems controlled both the house AND senate and refused to work with him. He couldn't then and can't now do it all by himself.
on Feb 07, 2005
The Tax dollars come from the tax cuts to the top 5%. The reason nothing passed is because Bush insisted the Alaska Drilling was included which is opposed in both houses of Congress and by both parties.
on Feb 07, 2005
Just where are these "tax" dollars coming from? We have no energy policy from his first term because the dems controlled both the house AND senate and refused to work with him. He couldn't then and can't now do it all by himself.


They did, did they?
on Feb 07, 2005

Establish tax surcharges to car manufacturers who fail to meet the new mileage standards.


Yeah, that'll work. When the manufacturer pays a tax, it's really the END CONSUMER that ends up paying it. When the manufacturer gets a credit, they pocket it themselves (and usually charge us more for the "economy" model).

on Feb 07, 2005
That could happen unless another manufacturer meets the standards and sell their cars for less. That will limit passing on the surtax for those that fail to meet the standards.
on Feb 07, 2005

COL,


But if you think that would happen, you don't understand American economics.


As an example: as we are beginning gardening, we will, essentially be gardening using organic methods. We cannot label our foods "organic"; however, without going through a stringent certification process. If we do this, not only do we get the "organic" label, but we are virtually required (through price controls) to sell our produce at vastly inflated prices for the organic labelling, regardless of our poroduction costs.


Price controls, in other words, virtually guarantee the "greener" car will not be the better deal.

on Feb 07, 2005
What I described was competition. If company A under the same rules including tax structure make something successfully for less it limits the ability of company B to increase their prices. It forces them to be competitive in the sense of making a product it meets the requirements and is competitive in price.

Today there is no incentive for companies to improve mileage unless the price of gasoline got so high that people would either stop driving for reduced purchasing automobiles. For that to happen the price of gasoline would need to skyrocket causing other significant problems for the economy.

The issue is we need to more effectively use the fuel under our control, reduce foreign purchases and seek to produce new technology we can sell to the rest of the world.