Obama camp spies endgame in Oregon

#51
#51
TennNC said:
We use 25% of the world's energy. Our GDP is about 25% of the world's. Yet, what we produce is not enough to keep our country running. So we MUST import (input) far more to produce what we do and live the way we do.

The argument isn't just about production. It's about total energy efficiency. Yes, we're efficient producers. But we're highly inefficient users. And the net result is that as a country, we're the 7th least energy efficient country in the world (at 7,000+ kg of oil equivalent per person per year).

Where's the hole?
Click to expand...
The driver of your entire debate is our automobile culture. Urban sprawl has driven our country, moreso than any other, away from mass transit and has driven the "need" for mulitple vehicles for every family.

The auto becoming a ginormous status symbol in our society hasn't helped the issue.

If you'd like to see us back away from auto use, knock yourself out.
 
#52
#52
TennNC said:
Good. I'm simply talking about exploring how we can use less energy/resources and still live the same way we currently do. As a minor, minor example, look at how much more efficient cars are now compared to, say, 30 years ago. We've made huge strides there. No reason we can't make more.

On the imports/input question, what about the fact that it requires additional energy to produce the items we import and subsequently consume?
Click to expand...
but you're not not accounting for the export of our cash that paid for the consumable. The exported cash is just as important to the world economy as any energy savings we might generate.

We went to energy efficient cars in a big way after the late 70s oil shocks, but that lasted about 10 years because people don't like 110hp vehicles with no air conditioning.
 
#53
#53
TennNC said:
That might be true in the long run, but the Netherlands have figured out how to generate useful energy from them. Maybe we could learn something from them.

And I disagree with your point about government involvement in some cases. The government (through the military in many cases) has funded many of the biggest breakthroughs that would have had a much more difficult chance of becoming real through private funding alone.
Click to expand...
but aside from the military, which government funded operations of the nature we're discussing have gone on to produce breakthroughs without becoming bloated, massively inefficient, overly beaurocratic operations that cost more money than they were ever worth?
 
#54
#54
BigPapaVol said:
The driver of your entire debate is our automobile culture.
Click to expand...

Nope - the measurement is kg of oil equivalent, not just oil. Just a standard energy unit to measure it by, that's all.

I know we love our cars, but if I'm not mistaken I believe most of the energy consumed here is still commercial/industrial. But we can become more efficient in all areas - autos, homes, factories all included. Why not?
 
#55
#55
BigPapaVol said:
but you're not not accounting for the export of our cash that paid for the consumable. The exported cash is just as important to the world economy as any energy savings we might generate.

We went to energy efficient cars in a big way after the late 70s oil shocks, but that lasted about 10 years because people don't like 110hp vehicles with no air conditioning.
Click to expand...

I buy the first graf.

Today's cars are far, far more efficient than they have ever been. Relative to 30-40-50 years ago we're now driving cars that are much faster, have greater pickup, and have all the bells and whistles that anyone could want, at much higher mileage per gallon. We've made a ton of progress, and there's no reason to think we couldn't do even more.
 
#56
#56
TennNC said:
Nope - the measurement is kg of oil equivalent, not just oil. Just a standard energy unit to measure it by, that's all.

I know we love our cars, but if I'm not mistaken I believe most of the energy consumed here is still commercial/industrial. But we can become more efficient in all areas - autos, homes, factories all included. Why not?
Click to expand...
surely you're not going to try and imply that on the commercial / industrial front that we aren't far and away the efficiency leader. There's room for improvement, but our bogus 'inefficiency rating' is all about our penchant for guzzling vehicles and commutes from the suburbs.
 
#60
#60
BigPapaVol said:
surely you're not going to try and imply that on the commercial / industrial front that we aren't far and away the efficiency leader. There's room for improvement, but our bogus 'inefficiency rating' is all about our penchant for guzzling vehicles and commutes from the suburbs.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that, but industry is the biggest energy user in the U.S. (at 33% I believe) and presents a huge opportunity to become more efficient. Just heard this this morning:

'Recycling' Energy Seen Saving Companies Money : NPR
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top