Don't take my word for it. Here is the Wall Street Journal.
http://sec.online.wsj.com/article/SB122904040307499791.html
(He later told Congress he no longer held that view.)
This week he told Congress he deserves an A for his work on gas prices.
http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/217029-chu-stands-by-efforts-to-tackle-soaring-gas-prices?tmpl=component&page=
Where did Obama find this guy? I know. The same place he found all the other bozos in his administration. I think we need to get Chu back in the lab where he belongs.
Now that he's alive, we have to figure out how to get him in the car."
The similarities of the Carter administration and the Obama Administration become clear, with the appointment of Chu. Chu is plain stupid, as he dictates what we do at the pumps and he does not even drive or own a car. Now, Joan Claybrook, who headed NHTSA during Jimmy Carter's Administration came from the Ralph Nader club. Nader did not drive or own a car and wrote "Unsafe at Any Speed". Claybrook did not drive either. So, in her greatest stupidity, she regulated the speedometers in the U.S. to only go up to 80 MPH. This way, there would be no one speeding over the 80 MPH. Wrong!!! Most enthusiasts had tachometers and could read the speed from that instrument. There is a very close relation to the Squid who owns a Ferrari, which has
ReplyDeletean 80 MPH speedo thanks to Jimma and his lefty stupid *****. He complains every time he looks at the speedo, thanks to Jimma.
Squid
Findalis, you ought to know that "leftists" favor subsidized gas prices to keep it cheap for the benefit of the masses, paid for by taxes on the rich of course. Raise prices? What would the workers say?
ReplyDeletePeople who go out on a limb as Chu did should not be offered or accept politically sensitive government positions. These are distinct functions, and do not mix well.
On principle, Chu is right, if we really priced in the implications of limited supply, damage to the neighbors, CO2, etc. But, since I have driven a car for the last few years, of course I recognize this makes it difficult to keep within a limited budget. The rate at which newer and more efficient technologies are available, and the rate at which prices rise enough to change action, are not well synchronized.
For now, I don't really want to see gas prices go below $2.50 a gallon, I don't mind $3.00, I don't really like $4.00, and I hope $5.00 or $8.00 could wait a few years. But, in the long run, we need to move on to something else. Internal combustion was one of several options in 1900, and became dominant because the infrastructure got in place fustest with the mostest, and because oil used to be cheap, not because it was the best for all time.
@ Siarlys,
ReplyDeleteThe gas at the pump in Washington DC, as of today, is way over $5.00 a gallon. There are some stations in California that already have $5.00 a gallon gas prices. I think that $6.00 a gallon will be here by late Spring and definitely by Summer.
One point that can be made of the Chu factor and that is a lower number of cars are on the L.A. Freeways, making the downtown drive, just a bit easier.
I will not by the four-wheel fire hazard called a Chevy Volt.
The best bet for future sustainable fuel is hydrogen. If the scientists would work on water fusion, to break down the hydrogen, just look to two-thirds of the earth for your energy.
Squid
Here in the Great Middle America, gas just went over $4.00 a gallon. I filled up today for $4.25.
ReplyDeleteYour ideas are pretty good Squid, but charging electric vehicles overnight, when most electric utilities operate under capacity and quite inefficiently, would do a lot as well. If the owners pumped current into the grid in the daytime via photo=electric arrays on the roof, when demand is high, would be helpful also.
There is no magic formula. Using all available resources would go a long way.