... was appearantly Tuesday night's SOTU speech. Did anyone see it (I had class)?
I read a couple commentaries, and I've skimmed the <a href="http://www.c-span.org/executive/transcript.asp?cat=current_event&code=bush_admin&year=2006">transcript</a>.
I'm impressed. Bush mentioned bin Laden by name (which I always give a thumbs up); legitimately talked about education; was truthful discussing his illegal wire-tapping saying, "Previous Presidents have used the same constitutional authority I have, and federal courts have approved the use of that authority. Appropriate members of Congress have been kept informed" (Note: he never claimed his acts were in fact legal, nor did he state he "briefed Congress"); told a decent joke about Bush Sr. and Clinton being great friends... but the best was the energy/oil/environment talk.
If you told me in 1991 that George H.W. Bush's oil-business-failure-son was going to be president (of the country) and you told me that during a State of the Union speech, he would say "America is addicted to oil" (in a bad way) and talk about reducing our oil dependency, I would not have believed you. It's been a interesting 15 years hasn't it?
I have this image of Bill Ford, CEO of Ford Motors, shaking in bed, watching Tuesday's SOTU speech, guzzling California Pinot Noir in his right hand, washing it down with Pepto-bismol in his left, whispering, "Not now, America can't really make cars now, we don't have the hybrid thing down yet, no corn oil engines, not now, not this decade, please..." (Note: I own Ford stock, hasn't been a banner 4 years.)
So Bush <a href="http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/13767738.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nation">got a bit over zealous with the numbers ('Most Awkward Opening Paragraph': 2006 nominee)</a>, but Kennedy did too in '62 with his pledge of going to the moon by '70 (something NASA wasn't prepared for). I'm going to give it up for G.W. this time. He's optimistic about a war he's going to win, but also about an energy policy.
Seriously: how convenient is it for Bush to mention a need for less reliance on oil during a winter when everyone is getting gouged on heating costs? Easy points in the polls.
And I think the technology for hybrids is ready, but not yeat availible because every dollar needs to be milked out of oil first. No facts or basis- just a hunch.
Don't believe the hype. Maybe fuel cells?
The problem with hydrogen fuel cells (are there other kinds?):
* No hydrogen delivery infrastructure.
* Hydrogen is even more dangerous to handle than gasoline.
* The energy it takes to create hydrogen is enormous, the net result would be far less efficient than gasoline. Granted, it would make it easier to control pollution; transfering emissions from all those tailpipes to single smokestacks at the hydrogen factories.
I'm ready for bio-diesel. Americans will have to accept lower performance standards in order to afford to drive cars.
Electric is probably the way to go, once batteries are improved.
With electric as well as any sort of fuel cell, you move the energy generation problem outside of the car. Currently, that's most likely to be oil dependent or nuclear. However, by separating them, the generation problem becomes modular, and as new technologies arise can become better aside from the development of the vehicles.
Bio-diesel is not the answer.
If I have an electric car, that I charge at home with solar panels, can I call it a solar car?
Isn't the goal to generate hydrogen at home with your solar panel/wind farm/fusion system, and put a charged fuel cell to your car? Big oil hates the idea, one time shopping, but it makes sense.
Even more presently reasonable than with the automobile, is the fuel cell in basements, generating electricity for offices and homes.
You want a Prius because Larry David has one and because it looks cool on the highway.
The altruistic motorist - that sounds like a phrase akin to fighting a sensitive war.
If I were to buy a new hybrid, I would have to drive crazy distances to save enough gas money to make up the cost difference between it and my '71 Satellite. In addition, it's not even clear that it would be good for the environment for me to do so.
Things like that drive me out of my mind.
Ive got me a Chrysler, it seats about 20 so hurry up and bring your ozone depleting gas money!