Houston now has trains. DFW has trains. Austin voted for trains (on rail in 2008). The public transportation system in Austin is very good.

Would you be willing to live in Fort Worth and ride The T? There is a train station north of Arlington if you want to ride the train into Fort Worth.

My opinion is, considering the USA is the wealthiest, most resource laden, highly advanced nation in the world, that with a little bit of LEADERSHIP and some effort, we could have practical alternative fuel sources in place by 2012. Drilling in the arctic or off Florida would be moot points. Unfortunately, we don't have a leader with enough vision or drive to remove the crutch of relying on petroleum as a fuel source. If a private company alone can produce hydrogen cars by 2012, then a combined private-public effort of the US Government and the big automakers could easily have millions of such vehicles on the market in the same time frame.

[ March 17, 2005, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: HotlantaTarheel ]

LEADERSHIP? UMMMM, you gotta shittin me.

Invention is created via the marketplace, not the gov't. throwing money at something that is not cost effective for a company to do.. aint gonna happen. I dont care how much money the govt throws at a problem, it wont fix it.

You see, those people over at Ford/GM they are kinda smart guys. Don't you think they are both looking for the most cost effect fuel cell to put in the market? I know you guys live in some pretend world of make believe most of the time.. but really...

Pretty soon i'm going to offer to pay for some of you people to take some classes at the community college to understand how the market works.

Keep in mind that the Repugnant Party is still struggling with the fact that there is such a thing as global warming. If President Gasman even came close to supporting a program to create gas-alternative cars, his oil-rich party would have him removed from office.

Ever heard of something called nuclear energy?

The need to remove our reliance on (foreign) fuel sources is in some sense a threat to our long term security and economic health. Therefore, the research and development of alternative fuel sources is very much something that could/should be tackled with a coordinated public-private effort.

You know i'm sorry, i could be totally offbase and i'm not looking this up, but didnt we research nukler (w) bombs to kick the crap out of someone in a war (which in turn won the war).. rather than the creation of another energy source????? Maybe i'm wrong on that...

The way i saw it, was pretty much a race to see which country got the bomb first, the winner won the war...

but hey what do i know, i'm just a dumb republican.. you know the party who just keeps increasing their numbers in elected office. Why you libs can do nothing while you become more out of touch with society as a whole.

OH MY GOSH! LittleFilly has embraced the truth. Such a touching moment...I might start to cry.

Dear boobster,

How'd those last few elections treat ya?

Love,

The Republican Party

Philly, I'm talking about wanting to improve our nation and society by advancing our fuel resources and technology. You talk like thats something negative and that I'm a "liberal" or "out of touch" for promoting such an idea...????

Yes, the drive for the nuclear bomb was for war activities. But the conversion to/push for nuclear energy was taken on by the government for the 15 years following the war. And like I said, the need to remove our reliance on foreign fuel sources is also a national security type issue.

But you see the component that will dictate this type of energy source is not going to be the govt but rather company invention and consumer demand... those two trump any amount of money the govt can pump into a program.

Much like the evolution of computers...

Bobby, thanks for the info...unfortunately, I work in far west Fort Worth (actually White Settlement). The T that you mentioned doesn't go near my workplace. This would be a great idea, and I wish I could utilize it (what a gas/money saver). I don't even think a city bus or anything comes close to where I work.

Ford developed a ICE hydrogen engine that compensated for the fuel density quite nicely. Even better yet they made it pratical and mountable in the Focus line of cars. They said "nice job" and shelved it. Of course there is no infrastructure. But why would the nationwide network of Ford dealerships want to supply hydrogen for fuel for their automobiles. Could it be the gauranteed customers flow in and out of their dealerships. Now what business would want that kind of "customer" traffic? Apparently not Republican endorsing businesses.

Based on the work of a physicist, electric motors have now been completely revitalized. Rewiring the things has made them super-efficient and half the size. With current battery technology ICE's are almost obsolete. So why isn't this technology coming to market?

The solution is out there. You just have to do some work. You just have to think. Your freedom from oil tyrrany may be worth that little sacrifice you make. Especially now that clean air and water are becoming an unavoidable concern.

Most people will tell you that without government money through education and schools, Apple Computer would likely be out of busiiness years ago. Sorry no iPod for your iLifestyle. Consumer demand is highly speculative and depends on reaching your potential market. Thus creating the want, hence demand. Most "consumers" are oblivious to what is really out there on the market. As far as business goes, anything that makes more money or cuts cost is usually an easy sell. Unless government oil cartelling mandates using "crude" technology.

You can still be a dumb Republican if it suits you. However you should try to "know". Just to provide a little clarity on your nuclear confusion, the power plant technology had to come first. You need to enrich the uranium and create the plutonium for the atomic bomb materials. The intent was always to make the bomb first. If you really get into it, we would have won the war anyway. The enemy had it's supply lines cut off and had spread themselves thin. Using nuclear energy for electricity is an entire area of environmental devastation all it's own. Everything from the mining of the uranium to the disposing of the spent byproducts is a big no-no. We have plenty of power to decommission every nuclear power plant worldwide. Then we can decide who gets to store the high-level nuclear wast while it spends it's half-life. Nuclear "fission" energy is a no win source for everyone. The creators of the bomb knew this. It sunk in after they watch the first test. These folks were much smarter than you or I. They were given no choice, really. I do not really want to get into it. But you can do a little googling on Thorium and Thalium in tilings from uranium mining operations on the Colorado highland plain. That you should get you started.

[ March 17, 2005, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: Erik G ]

[ March 17, 2005, 03:48 PM: Message edited by: Erik G ]

Lots of anger there, Little Man. If you're going to quote me, make sure you do so completely and don't doctor up what I write like Hillary Clinton redacting the Rose Firm's billing records. Your dishonesty in formulating your arguments is so obvious it's ludicrous.

Go jump back on board your Bible-bred bandwagon and start thumping about some new imagined persecution. The item may change, but your mode of delivery remains the same. No wonder most folks see the package and mark it "damaged goods - return to sender."

That is apples and oranges there bub.

What was said that the Govt should pump money into creating one of these thingies. Assisting with education puts people out there who are capable of creating these thingies.. 2 different things.

Perhaps it's time to have "the captain" clear up the matter, i hear he is quite the economic whiz kid.

We have a corporate welfare system in this country. I do not think we should be compensatng Haliburton $80 for a sheet of $13 plywood. Pharmaceutical companies get to sell drugs patented and researched by university hospitals. Private communication companies get to use satellite technology we paid for through NASA. Much of which is pirated through government subcontracting. That new cordless phone is declassified military technolgy. As is that Scandium aluminum that is being used for bicycle tubing. The examples are almost endless and not all are bad. A peaceful constructive use of technology is never bad, especially when profitable too. I just do not like paying $50 for a medicaton that I can get from Canada for $15. When the stuff was patented at the University of Iowa using public money from tuitions and grants.

Simply do not buy oil products when possible. Make sure they are durable and take care of them when you do. The first action you should take is to shift your investments to social and environmentally responsible ones. That alone will get the attention of the marketplace

I was supposed to gas up my car (fuel-efficient Toyota Corolla) yesterday but I was running late and figured it could go one more day.
Yesterday regular was $2.06 per gallon.
Today it was $2.22.

Here is the entire stupid quote with the useless omitted part in bold...

Get ready for price increases at the pump again. Just when we thought they may stabilize? Nope, the price for oil is nearing $60 a barrel, so this translates to pump increases soon, just before the summer travel season. frown

This may mark the end of Bush's approval numbers in the 40's - I predict 39% by the end of July.

The price of gas is going nowhere but up.

There are a couple billion people in India and China who are starting to demand their share.

Here (Europe) gas is about $6-7US a gallon depending on country.

Since 1994, for instance, oil consumption has dropped 5 percent in Japan and 7 percent in Germany and risen about 1 percent in most of the industrialized countries of Europe. By 2020, Germany's Petroleum Industry Group projects that nation's oil consumption will drop an additional 14 percent due to a shift to alternative fuels.

In comparison, consumption in the United States has risen 16 percent, and analysts see no decrease on the horizon.

In 2000, the German government estimated that if the average U.S. car got the average mileage of a German car, the savings in oil would equal the annual total consumption of petroleum in Africa, China and India together.

That calculation is probably no longer valid, after a recent rise in consumption in China and India. But Europeans remain convinced that their conservation measures could save substantial amounts of fuel if they were adopted by the United States.

From the SD Union-Tribune:

"Efforts to increase fuel-efficiency have been stalled on Capitol Hill.

This month, for instance, Sen. Dianne Feinstein lost in her bid to amend this year's energy bill to boost fuel-efficiency standards on SUVs and light trucks.

The California Democrat had proposed that by 2011, SUVs and other light trucks should have to meet the same 27.5 mpg rule that passenger cars must meet. SUVs are required to get 21 mpg.

Opponents said imposing the higher fuel standard would put too much of a burden on U.S. automakers. And they said the government should not dictate what vehicles consumers buy.

"I think mothers and fathers can make those decisions themselves," said Sen. George Allen, R-Va. "

I frequently hire taxi's here - the usual taxi is the size of a Ford Escort - when was the last time you saw an Escort used as a taxi at home?

Rob

As an aside - here in DC, where taxi regulation is, to put it kindly, "hands-off," we have every conceivable type of car used for taxis - INCLUDING Toyota subcompacts - some of which make an Escort look huge.

I personally prefer larger taxis, because I am a tall person, but then again, I don't drive much so I often rely on them. I own a 10-year-old VW with about 65K miles on it - and I will be keeping it at least two more years. The next car will again be a compact hatchback, because that is the best car the best car that fits my needs.

The vast majority of mammoth SUVs I see being driven around DC are commuter cars - they are certainly NOT being used off-road. IMHO, having driven my sister's Isuzu Trooper, I'd prefer the big wagons our parents used to drive - I hate the way these trucks are top-heavy and difficult to control on all but straightaways.