George W, The Conservationist

Big step back from the administration's old position:

White House Press Briefing:

Q: ...does the President believe we need to correct our lifestyles to address the energy problem?

MR. FLEISCHER: That's a big no. The President believes that it's an American way of life, and that it should be the goal of policy makers to protect the American way of life.

 

ruh roh, the next flameware is about to begin

 

I'm not about to be schooled about energy by a failed oilman who doesn't think California was screwed by his Enron buddies and who starts a war in the oil-rich middle east on false pretenses.

Take the trillion dolalrs he is wasting and will waste in this war, and invest it in alternative energy: THAT's what a conservationist would have done.

An oilman just wants to change how we get oil, not reduce our dependence.

 

how does he plan on "improving" batteries for hybrid cars?

 

The ironic thing is that Bush is better placed to do something seriously constructive for conservation (like raise fuel taxes, tax aviation fuel etc) than a Democrat would be. If a Democrat government did it the Republicans would scream blue murder, but they'd just whinge a bit if Bush did it.

 

But he'd have to actually be willing to DO something substantial for it to make a difference. Anyone wanna bet money Bush does something substantial to help the environment? Stop laughing, now, surely you can come up with SOMEthing?

 

How about RETIRE - asap (and take his corporate croneys with him)

 

Bush will tell you to trade in your older SUV and buy a new GM Tahoe "hybrid"... big gas saving and hence reduce our dependence on foreign oil... :lol:

 

so someone currently driving an SUv that traded for a tohoe hybrid would not be lessening our dependence on foreign oil? Is it just the fact it isn't Prius or toyota that gnaws you so?

 

Nope, it's the fact that 95% of people driving a tahoe could easily use a honda insight, let alone a Prius for their day to day errands. It's the wasted energy that makes me cringe

 

I wonder if the speechwriters ran out of time, and 'repurposed' the tech will solve global warming drivel into tech will solve foreign oil reliance ?

Either that, or I expect to hear soon about new opportunities for the oil companies to destroy the coastlines.

 

More power! More oil! More technology!

Pardon me for being cynical, but this sounds like a definition of the problem, not the solution.

 

"so someone currently driving an SUv that traded for a tohoe hybrid would not be lessening our dependence on foreign oil?"

No, the 1-2 mpg increase is inconsequential.

 

This requires a steep learning curve and unhook from everyone as we have a 150-year legacy of "substituting oil for knowledge." Now the suggestion is to subsitute technology for knowledge. This brings to thought the statement that "we cannot solve a problem using the same methods that caused the problem in the first place." Sounds like business as usual with maximum corporate profits.

How about conservation, innovation, efficiency and strong support for education (i.e., Rocky Mountain Institute)?

 

But how is driving a Prius or Insight solve the oil problem?

Wouldn't walking or riding a bike be a better solution?

Man... some people are so thick. I was making fun of Bush and GM's hybrid schemes when I was talking about trading an old SUV for a new one.

 

Wow, an anti-technology Prius owner. Never thought that was possible!
Aside from the cynicism, do I also sense a bit of hypocrite?

Rick S

 

Hmm, fuzzy math? at 15mpg, 1-2mpg improvement is, lessee, about 10+% improvment
that would cover the 10% of mideast oil we bring in....and that's just cars. How about a solar panel on your roof and dropping the thermostat(like Carter said 30 years ago-hah!) 2-3' and save some there?

 

Actually, the Bush administration has already recanted this statement:

One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America's dependence on Middle East oil by cutting imports from there 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said Wednesday that the president didn't mean it literally.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington...shington_nation

 

Not anti-technology. Anti the belief that technology will solve all our problems. In the context of reducing dependence on 'foreign' oil, reducing consumption would be far more effective.

I don't think you have enough information to pin the hypocrisy label on me. I'm the co-owner of a Prius, but I hardly ever drive it. If it were up to me alone, I would have bought us each a really nice bicycle instead of a car. My wife absolutely refused to go along with this idea, so we bought the least polluting car we could find. I walk to work, either to my own office at the end of the hall, or about 15 minutes to a client's office. I use a push mower on the remainder of the lawn that hasn't been turned into garden, and our wee Deiter is electric. I buy local produce, recycle everything, and have several large composts on the go. I'm far from perfect, but I fail to see the hypocrisy. Care to elaborate?