Originally Posted by Guest

Thank you. I've never been called "little" before. And I know you wouldn't be calling me anything, if you knew me. At least not to my face, coward.

You talk very big...impressive if you like that sort of thing.

Again, please share those thread titles younstarted

Originally Posted by Guest

Fuel economy rules do nothing other than "save" oil and reduce oil company profits.

And with the oil that has been discovered lately there is no need to shoot for 100 mpg cars. We have more than enough for 400 years.

Originally Posted by Guest

You talk very big...impressive if you like that sort of thing.

Again, please share those thread titles younstarted

Your fingers do not seem to be broken. Are you a needy libtard? Does momma cut your steak up for you into little bites?

Originally Posted by Guest

Your fingers do not seem to be broken. Are you a needy libtard? Does momma cut your steak up for you into little bites?

Trolls like you are soooo easy.

You know nothing but these little sub teen remarks, and you have no ability and the best thing is you keep on posting and showing everyone how dumb you really are.

And don't forget...you are going to supply a few of those threads you said you began

Originally Posted by Guest

Trolls like you are soooo easy.

You know nothing but these little sub teen remarks, and you have no ability and the best thing is you keep on posting and showing everyone how dumb you really are.

And don't forget...you are going to supply a few of those threads you said you began

And what has been your major contribution to this forum? At least, I have started threads with news articles with links, for discussion. Don't throw stones before opening your windows, liberal.

Originally Posted by Guest

And with the oil that has been discovered lately there is no need to shoot for 100 mpg cars. We have more than enough for 400 years.

There's plenty of oil...maybe...but that's not the problem...the problem is getting enough out EVERY day to supply the worlds insatiable demand.

We burn through almost 400 MILLION gallons of gasoline a DAY. JUST in the US

"In 2015, about 140.43 billion gallons (or about 3.34 billion barrels1) of gasoline were consumed2 in the United States, a daily average of about 384.74 million gallons (or about 9.16 million barrels per day).Mar 17, 2016"

Why do you think they drill in harsh climates? Out in the ocean? Oil must be sucked out SLOWLY...you can't rush it...that is why there are so many oil wells...

"As of early 2015, the IEA Oil Market Report forecast average demand for the year of more than 93 million barrels of oil and liquid fuels per day worldwide – that works out to more than 34 billion barrels a year – with January 2015 production totalling just over 94 million barrels per day."

Originally Posted by Guest

There's plenty of oil...maybe...but that's not the problem...the problem is getting enough out EVERY day to supply the worlds insatiable demand.

We burn through almost 400 MILLION gallons of gasoline a DAY. JUST in the US

"In 2015, about 140.43 billion gallons (or about 3.34 billion barrels1) of gasoline were consumed2 in the United States, a daily average of about 384.74 million gallons (or about 9.16 million barrels per day).Mar 17, 2016"

Why do you think they drill in harsh climates? Out in the ocean? Oil must be sucked out SLOWLY...you can't rush it...that is why there are so many oil wells...

"As of early 2015, the IEA Oil Market Report forecast average demand for the year of more than 93 million barrels of oil and liquid fuels per day worldwide – that works out to more than 34 billion barrels a year – with January 2015 production totalling just over 94 million barrels per day."

Good post. Hard to argue with facts, unless one has disproving facts.

All these numbers are cool and stuff, but WHY is fuel economy "good" for the environment?
I stand by my assessment that fuel economy is simply a tool to hurt the oil industry.

Originally Posted by Guest

All these numbers are cool and stuff, but WHY is fuel economy "good" for the environment?
I stand by my assessment that fuel economy is simply a tool to hurt the oil industry.

Fossil fuels: carbon based liquids, gasses, and solids (oil, natural gas and coal for those who don't know) were formed millions of years ago by plants and animals that absorbed it from the prehistoric atmosphere that was saturated with carbon.
Think of those deposits, like bank deposits....sitting in the ground, not doing any harm, but now we have, in the past century, started to withdraw those deposits. The carbon does not get destroyed (chemical law that matter cannot be created nor destroyed), so when it is used in fossil fuels the carbon is released. It does NOT go back into the ground but rather when released into the atmosphere as CO, and C02, as well as Methane and other complex carbon molecules (by cars, trucks, power plants, et al) it STAYS there.

Yes, some of it gets redistributed into the plants that absorb it, but not in such magnitude as to make any difference in the concentration in the atmosphere. So, the more carbon molecules released into the atmosphere, the higher and higher the concentration...make sense?

Now, we have scientific proof that the Earth and its atmosphere are growing WARMER, by rather alarming rates compared with data that has been gathered by climate scientists. The warming of the atmosphere can be directly connected to the increase of carbon concentration in the atmosphere.

So, therefore, the question should never be: Is there enough oil to last our lifetime, or EPA standards to increase the mileage of cars and trucks is directed on "saving the oil", but rather, are we prepared to face the consequences of Global Warming: because those consequences are starting to appear.

Ocean levels are rising because of glacier melts, warmer air does allow more moisture to collect and when there are storms, they are much more violent, and more rainfall causes more flooding, and damage in some areas, but other areas will, and have experienced severe draught. Forests that experience those draughts are more susceptible to catastrophic fires, and the land that they once held is now susceptible to severe erosion and landslides.

Areas once rich with conditions allowing to grow copious amounts of food will be effected, and not only will food costs increase, but there will be a huge ripple effect that will be detrimental to the entire world.

Perhaps we should actually realize that this situation is one which needs our attention now, because without a healthy Earth, there will be no civilizations to occupy it.

There IS CLIMATE CHANGE. WHO CARES WHAT STARTED IT...WE NEED TO GET SOME STRATEGIES TO LIMIT OR REVERSE IT AND BURNING CARBON IS LIKE POURING GASOLINE ON A FIRE.

You've just explained why we should be against fuel economy - because it prolongs the agony.

Any environmentalist who is a realist and understands that we will burn fossil fuels until they are gone would want this this to happen as soon as possible and would advocate for lower fuel economy.

I continue to believe that high MPG requirements are in place to hurt the oil companies.

Side Question: If oil is a finite resource, why are we trying to use all of ours up first? Should we buy it from other companies and when they run out, we still have some left?

Originally Posted by Guest

You've just explained why we should be against fuel economy - because it prolongs the agony.

Any environmentalist who is a realist and understands that we will burn fossil fuels until they are gone would want this this to happen as soon as possible and would advocate for lower fuel economy.

I continue to believe that high MPG requirements are in place to hurt the oil companies.

Side Question: If oil is a finite resource, why are we trying to use all of ours up first? Should we buy it from other companies and when they run out, we still have some left?

We live in a time where there is active species extinction. We have seen, but now are diminished, many species of animal life. On our current course, our children, and grandchildren and their children will not see or experience those species that we have placed in such peril that they may become extinct. That will be the norm for them, and it is not only animal extinction that we give them as inheritance, but also Earth. Why is it that people like you do not see that we are actually killing the planet, or leaving it in such grave condition that our future children will not even conceive of having a healthy environment in which to live. The question is not using up the resource, but rather using so much of it that it has poisoned our only place that we live....there is no other planet that we can escape to...we will give our children an inheritance of a poisoned planet, with no escape.

Thanks for caring so much about not having good gas mileage....your concern is squarely centered on YOUR wallet, and not the lives of your, or any of our children.

You must be so proud.

Originally Posted by Guest

President Trump directed the Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday to shelve aggressive vehicle fuel economy targets that have been a foundation for battles against climate change and harmful pollution in California and across the country.

I simply want to know how "aggressive fuel economy targets" affect pollution.

No one has a sensible answer?

Originally Posted by Guest

We live in a time where there is active species extinction. We have seen, but now are diminished, many species of animal life. On our current course, our children, and grandchildren and their children will not see or experience those species that we have placed in such peril that they may become extinct. That will be the norm for them, and it is not only animal extinction that we give them as inheritance, but also Earth. Why is it that people like you do not see that we are actually killing the planet, or leaving it in such grave condition that our future children will not even conceive of having a healthy environment in which to live. The question is not using up the resource, but rather using so much of it that it has poisoned our only place that we live....there is no other planet that we can escape to...we will give our children an inheritance of a poisoned planet, with no escape.

Thanks for caring so much about not having good gas mileage....your concern is squarely centered on YOUR wallet, and not the lives of your, or any of our children.

You must be so proud.

Yes we are...the active extinction of white people.

Here in America alone, we've gone from 90% white to 49%...the future is NOT very bright.

Originally Posted by Guest

I simply want to know how "aggressive fuel economy targets" affect pollution.

No one has a sensible answer?

If total miles driven remain constant, the higher the fuel economy, the less fuel burned and the less emissions released.

Originally Posted by Guest

Fossil fuels: carbon based liquids, gasses, and solids (oil, natural gas and coal for those who don't know) were formed millions of years ago by plants and animals that absorbed it from the prehistoric atmosphere that was saturated with carbon.
Think of those deposits, like bank deposits....sitting in the ground, not doing any harm, but now we have, in the past century, started to withdraw those deposits. The carbon does not get destroyed (chemical law that matter cannot be created nor destroyed), so when it is used in fossil fuels the carbon is released. It does NOT go back into the ground but rather when released into the atmosphere as CO, and C02, as well as Methane and other complex carbon molecules (by cars, trucks, power plants, et al) it STAYS there.

Yes, some of it gets redistributed into the plants that absorb it, but not in such magnitude as to make any difference in the concentration in the atmosphere. So, the more carbon molecules released into the atmosphere, the higher and higher the concentration...make sense?

Now, we have scientific proof that the Earth and its atmosphere are growing WARMER, by rather alarming rates compared with data that has been gathered by climate scientists. The warming of the atmosphere can be directly connected to the increase of carbon concentration in the atmosphere.

So, therefore, the question should never be: Is there enough oil to last our lifetime, or EPA standards to increase the mileage of cars and trucks is directed on "saving the oil", but rather, are we prepared to face the consequences of Global Warming: because those consequences are starting to appear.

Ocean levels are rising because of glacier melts, warmer air does allow more moisture to collect and when there are storms, they are much more violent, and more rainfall causes more flooding, and damage in some areas, but other areas will, and have experienced severe draught. Forests that experience those draughts are more susceptible to catastrophic fires, and the land that they once held is now susceptible to severe erosion and landslides.

Areas once rich with conditions allowing to grow copious amounts of food will be effected, and not only will food costs increase, but there will be a huge ripple effect that will be detrimental to the entire world.

Perhaps we should actually realize that this situation is one which needs our attention now, because without a healthy Earth, there will be no civilizations to occupy it.

There IS CLIMATE CHANGE. WHO CARES WHAT STARTED IT...WE NEED TO GET SOME STRATEGIES TO LIMIT OR REVERSE IT AND BURNING CARBON IS LIKE POURING GASOLINE ON A FIRE.

Maybe... MANY also say hydrocarbons are CREATED inside the earth (abiotic oil).

abiotic oil - Google Search

If hydrocarbons came from the "dinosaurs", then why does Titan a moon around Saturn have a TON of hydrocarbons?

hydrocarbons in space - Google Search

CO2 has been MUCH higher in the past.

CO2 isn't really that great of a greenhouse gas.

Water vapor is a much "stronger" greenhouse gas and it's all around.

Earths temperature has been MUCH higher in the past. It may continue to rise until it begins to fall in preparation for the next ice age...which WILL come.

Things work in cycles. Things are also chaotic in the small and short term scale.

The more pressing problem is the white genocide and rising populations of minorities. What's the point of saving the world when the world will become a 3rd world cesspool full of the worst of "humanity"? 80% of the worlds 9 billion people are poor.

"Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day. At least 80% of humanity lives on less than $10 a day. More than 80 percent of the world's population lives in countries where income differentials are widening."

what percent of worlds population is poor? - Google Search

Civilization is doomed...like every one of them before us.

Originally Posted by Guest

If total miles driven remain constant, the higher the fuel economy, the less fuel burned and the less emissions released.

Less fuel burned - true
Less emissions released - Less true than anything any politician ever said. Confusing emissions controls with fuel economy is like confusing carbon monoxide with carbon dioxide.