Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The Tire-Gauge Solution: No Joke


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

#1    __Kratos__

__Kratos__

    -Staring-

  • Member
  • 25,876 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside the moon

Posted 05 August 2008 - 05:41 AM

How out of touch is Barack Obama? He's so out of touch that he suggested that if all Americans inflated their tires properly and took their cars for regular tune-ups, they could save as much oil as new offshore drilling would produce. Gleeful Republicans have made this their daily talking point; Rush Limbaugh is having a field day; and the Republican National Committee is sending tire gauges labeled "Barack Obama's Energy Plan" to Washington reporters.

But who's really out of touch? The Bush Administration estimates that expanded offshore drilling could increase oil production by 200,000 bbl. per day by 2030. We use about 20 million bbl. per day, so that would meet about 1% of our demand two decades from now. Meanwhile, efficiency experts say that keeping tires inflated can improve gas mileage 3%, and regular maintenance can add another 4%. Many drivers already follow their advice, but if everyone did, we could immediately reduce demand several percentage points. In other words: Obama is right.

Politics ain't beanbag, and Obama has defended himself against worse smears. The real problem with the attacks on his tire-gauge plan is that efforts to improve conservation and efficiency happen to be the best approaches to dealing with the energy crisis — the cheapest, cleanest, quickest and easiest ways to ease our addiction to oil, reduce our pain at the pump and address global warming. It's a pretty simple concept: if our use of fossil fuels is increasing our reliance on Middle Eastern dictators while destroying the planet, maybe we ought to use less.

The RNC is trying to make the tire gauge a symbol of unseriousness, as if only the fatuous believed we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil without doing the bidding of Big Oil. But the tire gauge is really a symbol of a very serious piece of good news: we can use significantly less energy without significantly changing our lifestyle. The energy guru Amory Lovins has shown that investment in "nega-watts" — reduced electricity use through efficiency improvements — is much more cost-effective than investment in new megawatts, and the same is clearly true of nega-barrels. It might not fit the worldviews of right-wingers who deny the existence of global warming and insist that reducing emissions would destroy our economy, or of left-wing Earth-firsters who insist that maintaining our creature comforts would destroy the world, but there's a lot of simple things we can do on the demand side before we start rushing to ratchet up supply.

We can use those twisty carbon fluorescent lightbulbs. We can unplug our televisions, computers and phone chargers when we're not using them. We can seal our windows, install more insulation and adjust our thermostats so that we waste less heat and air-conditioning. We can use more-efficient appliances, build more-efficient homes and drive more-efficient cars, preferably with government assistance. And, yes, we can inflate our tires and tune our engines, as Republican governors Arnold Schwarzenegger of California and Charlie Crist of Florida have urged, apparently without consulting the RNC. While we're at it, we can cut down on idling, which can improve fuel economy another 5%, and cut down on speeding and unnecessary acceleration, which can increase mileage as much as 20%.

More of the article here: Link

--------------------------------------------
Every little bit helps...

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." ~Philip K. Dick

#2    AROCES

AROCES

    Forum Divinity

  • Banned
  • 16,312 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 August 2008 - 05:50 AM

__Kratos__ on Aug 5 2008, 05:41 AM, said:

How out of touch is Barack Obama? He's so out of touch that he suggested that if all Americans inflated their tires properly and took their cars for regular tune-ups,

This is really one of the best idea ever presented by any candidate for office or any President. I can just imagine OPEC now so worried about the future of Oil.
I think I am for Obama now..... rofl.gif



#3    Guardsman Bass

Guardsman Bass

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,222 posts
  • Joined:02 Sep 2005

  • Don't spam me, but feel free to drop a line.

Posted 05 August 2008 - 07:20 AM

The sad thing is, it's fairly common knowledge that you get more mileage with better inflated tires. I guess I wouldn't expect many Republicans, and particularly McCain, to know that; I doubt he's done any kind of repairs on a car within the last 20 years.

Obviously, this isn't a complete solution, but it helps. It's one of several possible "wedges" into reducing America's oil dependency. But conservation tends to be unpopular with most Americans once it actually affects their lifestyles, and even American environmentalism in general seems to have this trait, where we want to have our cake and eat it too in the forms of environmental "conspicuous consumption" (like buying a whole bunch of efficient lightbulbs for a house that probably wastes more energy in a month's worth of heating that is lost by inefficient lightbulbs over a year, and so forth).



Edited by Guardsman Bass, 05 August 2008 - 07:22 AM.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours." -Sir Charles Napier

"The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted."  — D.H. Lawrence

#4    __Kratos__

__Kratos__

    -Staring-

  • Member
  • 25,876 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Inside the moon

Posted 05 August 2008 - 07:46 AM

AROCES on Aug 5 2008, 12:50 AM, said:

This is really one of the best idea ever presented by any candidate for office or any President. I can just imagine OPEC now so worried about the future of Oil.
I think I am for Obama now..... rofl.gif


Well even if we cut back on just 1% of our gas use that's around 120 million in loss to Exxon per quarter.

It saves you money as well because you fill up less and your car runs better.

I fail to see the downside to this...

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." ~Philip K. Dick

#5    AROCES

AROCES

    Forum Divinity

  • Banned
  • 16,312 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 August 2008 - 08:03 AM

__Kratos__ on Aug 5 2008, 07:46 AM, said:

Well even if we cut back on just 1% of our gas use that's around 120 million in loss to Exxon per quarter.

It saves you money as well because you fill up less and your car runs better.

I fail to see the downside to this...

The thing is tire manufacturers always suggesting that and car tune up is basically a regular maintenance suggested by car manufaturers and sevice centers ever since car was invented.
Just make Obama sound like he has no better idea.

Edited by AROCES, 05 August 2008 - 08:30 PM.


#6    Aztec Warrior

Aztec Warrior

    Ancient Order of Hibernians Grand Master

  • Member
  • 3,339 posts
  • Joined:24 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Mexico City

  • A neoconservative is a "liberal mugged by reality," one who became more conservative after seeing the results of liberal policies.Iriving Kristol

Posted 05 August 2008 - 03:12 PM

Where does this 200,000 barrel a day figure come from? That is not accurate, unless your talking about a few tiny wells.

Shell's Usa-Princess field over the past 10 years has produced over 400 million barrels. That is only one company in one zone, so all that stuff about 200,000 b/d is fabricated by the liberal Dems. Link

Posted ImageBlurring and Stirring the truth and the lies

So I don't know what's real and what's not
Always confusing the thoughts in my head
So I can't trust myself anymore
I'm dying again

#7    Mr Honeybadger

Mr Honeybadger

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,838 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 August 2008 - 05:19 PM

Obama could be correct if everyone now currently drives around on totally flat tires.



#8    Incorrigible1

Incorrigible1

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,393 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern Nebraska, USA

  • Champanya?

Posted 05 August 2008 - 05:55 PM

Aztec Warrior on Aug 5 2008, 10:12 AM, said:

Where does this 200,000 barrel a day figure come from? That is not accurate, unless your talking about a few tiny wells.

I wondered that, too. It's in the OP source "article." Kinda calls into question the entire article's validity.

The pressure gauges are a humorous accent on BHO's vapid energy plan.

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too. -- W. Somerset Maugham
Posted Image

#9    BiffSplitkins

BiffSplitkins

    Vertically Challenged

  • Member
  • 7,605 posts
  • Joined:09 Aug 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Home of 'The Orange'

  • We all have a song inside us, it tells us who we are.

    'John Doeber' fellow musician

Posted 05 August 2008 - 06:50 PM

Scenerio: Many Americans will now OVER inflate their tires causing them to wear out quickly. What are tires made of? A by product of what? Tires themselves are a petrolium product. More wear and tear on tires will cause the demand for tires to go up still not solving the problem entirely. Not only that, but old tires are difficult to dispose of so new environmental issues will arise from this idea as well.

I wonder if Obama has stock in Firestone or something?

"The problem with internet quotes is that you cant always depend on their accuracy" -Abraham Lincoln, 1864

Posted Image


#10    Startraveler

Startraveler

    Fleet Captain

  • Member
  • 4,539 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New England

  • Knowledge Brings Fear.

Posted 05 August 2008 - 09:57 PM

Quote

Where does this 200,000 barrel a day figure come from? That is not accurate, unless your talking about a few tiny wells.


It comes from the U.S. Department of Energy:

The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.  


linked-image


#11    Incorrigible1

Incorrigible1

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,393 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eastern Nebraska, USA

  • Champanya?

Posted 10 August 2008 - 06:25 PM

The Democrats Resist Logic -- and Politics

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, August 8, 2008



Let's see: housing meltdown, credit crunch, oil shock not seen since the 1970s. The economy is slowing, unemployment growing and inflation increasing. It's the sixth year of a highly unpopular war, and the president's approval rating is at 30 percent.

The Italian Communist Party could win this election. The American Democratic Party is trying its best to lose it.

Democrats have the advantage on just about every domestic issue from health care to education. However, Americans' greatest concern is the economy, and their greatest economic concern is energy (by a significant margin: 37 percent to 21 percent for inflation). Yet Democrats have gratuitously forfeited the issue of increased drilling for domestic oil and gas. By an overwhelming margin of 2 to 1, Americans want to lift the moratorium preventing drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, thus unlocking vast energy resources shut down for the past 27 years.

Democrats have been adamantly opposed. They say that we cannot drill our way out of the oil crisis. Of course not. But it is equally obvious that we cannot solar or wind or biomass our way out. Does this mean that because any one measure cannot solve a problem, it needs to be rejected?

Barack Obama remains opposed to new offshore drilling (although he now says he would accept a highly restricted version as part of a comprehensive package). Just last week, he claimed that if only Americans would inflate their tires properly and get regular tuneups, "we could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling."

This is bizarre. By any reasonable calculation of annual tire-inflation and tuneup savings, the Outer Continental Shelf holds nearly a hundred times as much oil. As for oil shale, also under federal moratorium, after a thousand years of driving with Obama-inflated tires and Obama-tuned engines, we would still have saved an amount equal to only one-fifth the oil shale available in the United States.

But forget the math. Why is this issue either/or? Who's against properly inflated tires? Let's start a national campaign, Cuban-style, with giant venceremos posters lining the highways. ("Inflate your tires. Victory or death!") Why must there be a choice between encouraging conservation and increasing supply? The logical answer is obvious: Do both.

Do everything. Wind and solar. A tire gauge in every mailbox. Hell, a team of oxen for every family (to pull their gasoline-drained SUVs). The consensus in the country, logically unassailable and politically unbeatable, is to do everything possible to both increase supply and reduce demand, because we have a problem that's been killing our economy and threatening our national security. And no one measure is sufficient.

The green fuels the Democrats insist we should be investing in are as yet uneconomical, speculative technologies, still far more expensive than extracted oil and natural gas. We could be decades away. And our economy is teetering. Why would you not drill to provide a steady supply of proven fuels for the next few decades as we make the huge technological and economic transition to renewable energy?

Congressional Democrats demand instead a clampdown on "speculators." The Democrats proposed this a month ago. In the meantime, "speculators" have driven the price down by $25 a barrel. Still want to stop them? In what universe do traders only bet on the price going up?

On Monday, Obama outlined a major plan with mandates and immense government investment in such things as electric cars and renewables. Fine, let's throw a few tens of billions at this and see what sticks. But success will require not just huge amounts of money. It will require equally huge amounts of time and luck.

On the other hand, drilling requires no government program, no newly created bureaucracy, no pie-in-the-sky technologies that no one has yet invented. It requires only one thing, only one act. Lift the moratorium. Private industry will do the rest. And far from draining the treasury, it will replenish it with direct taxes and with the indirect taxes from the thousands of non-subsidized new jobs created.

The problem for the Democrats is that the argument for "do everything" is not rocket science. It is common sense. Which is why House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, surveying the political rubble resulting from her insistence on not even permitting drilling to come to a floor vote, has quietly told her members that they can save their skins and vote for drilling when the pre-election Congress convenes next month. Pelosi says she wants to save the planet. Apparently saving her speakership comes first.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8080702900.html

If a nation values anything more than freedom, it will lose its freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort or money that it values more, it will lose that too. -- W. Somerset Maugham
Posted Image

#12    Mr Honeybadger

Mr Honeybadger

    Poltergeist

  • Closed
  • 2,838 posts
  • Joined:29 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 10 August 2008 - 07:42 PM

Until the greenies develop a windmill or solar cell that I can mount on my truck and propel me down the road,  I'm stuck with using gasoline. So do whatever it takes to bring the price of it down.



#13    Guardsman Bass

Guardsman Bass

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,222 posts
  • Joined:02 Sep 2005

  • Don't spam me, but feel free to drop a line.

Posted 11 August 2008 - 05:14 AM

ohio traveler on Aug 10 2008, 01:42 PM, said:

Until the greenies develop a windmill or solar cell that I can mount on my truck and propel me down the road,  I'm stuck with using gasoline. So do whatever it takes to bring the price of it down.


That's what we've been trying to point out, though - that all this new, vaunted drilling, should it ever get underway, won't bring it down in price - you're looking at an extra 3% in the supply of oil after at least 10 years.

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours." -Sir Charles Napier

"The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted."  — D.H. Lawrence

#14    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 11,278 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 11 August 2008 - 06:58 PM


You could trade in your gas guzzeling truck for something more efficient. Take public transportation. Ride share. Walk. Work from home. Trip plan. Tune up your engine. Inflate your tires. Grow your own. Recycle. All stuff you probably don't want to do but have to do out of necessity at some point.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#15    Dowdy

Dowdy

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,186 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2001
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Melbourne

  • "The one thing we have learnt from history is that we learn nothing from history." Albert Einstein

Posted 12 August 2008 - 08:05 AM

There is some merit to this. Although it won't solve all your problems.

The RACV states...

Quote

If your vehicle is running correctly, it will use less fuel and be more reliable.

# Keep your vehicle properly tuned and serviced in accordance with the owner's manual.
# Check engine oil and coolant levels weekly.
# Check tyre pressures, battery electrolyte and the fluid levels of automatic transmission, brake, clutch, and power steering monthly.
# Check for uneven wear of tyres as incorrect wheel alignment will increase the amount of fuel you use.


THE PAOMNNEHAL PWEOR OF THE HMUAN MNID Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdgnieg. Can you? ;)




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users