Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Environment Environmental Politics Forum - Environmental issues, global warming, pollution, and proposals


Thanks Tree46Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 14th, 2017, 06:32 PM   #71
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 5,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
There is a breaking point with diesel engines and gasoline. Today's gasoline engines get almost as good of mileage in a comparative pickup truck as their diesel counterparts do. No diesel is very clean. Black/wet stacking is just starving your engine for air and letting diesel flash off in the stack. Or dumping excess fuel into the cylinder and getting the same result. Unless you need the torque for towing in my opinion by the time you began to reap in your cost savings your vehicle will be well over 100k miles. I see no reason at all to own a 3/4 ton diesel pickup truck unless you are towing a considerable payload.

When it comes to American and their big ass pickup trucks I wholeheartedly agree with you. I truly do not understand why people want them as daily drivers. And you are correct that it takes a long time to offset the additional costs, especially if you aren't towing on a regular basis.

However, I was specifically referring to the small bore diesels found in 50% of cars in Europe. Those will pay the offset in just a two to three years of normal driving at their current fuel prices. When I was there 4 years ago fuel was almost $9 a gallon. At that price the offset will be paid off in as little as one year.
BubbaJones is online now  
Old July 14th, 2017, 06:40 PM   #72
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 24,945
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
When did environmentalists decide that diesel engines would be better and more friendly than gasoline engines?
It was in the few years when diesel engines had better mileage. The technology of DGI for gas engines has now essentially caught up to the true mileage delivered by the diesels.
Thanks from imaginethat
RNG is offline  
Old July 15th, 2017, 02:25 AM   #73
Senior Member
 
baloney_detector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 4,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
You never provided a single source to refute anything. You just sounded off in a manner that was to be dismissive and considered correct. Then you went off on a tangent about how the numbers was not right because of unknown variables that you never bothered to demonstrate or source in any manner. Do you have any facts to support anything you said?
Probably not.


HaIl KeK
Hmmm...you mean like the source that you had cited, of which quite clearly and accurately stated, "the amount of money indicated does not reflect how much was actually received or spent but how much was offered?"

List: 36 Of Obama?s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures - Fox Nation



And, regarding the DOE loan program and that variable cost that I pointed out...

Quote:
...

Regarding administrative costs, our April 2015 report found that such costs for the programs have totaled about $312 million from fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2014, including approximately $251.6 million for LGP and $60.6 million for the ATVM loan program.17 We also found that, for the LGP, the fees DOE has collected have not been sufficient to cover all of its administrative expenses for the program, in part because the maintenance fees on the current loan guarantees were too low to cover ongoing monitoring costs.18 As a result, some of the administrative expenses have been paid with taxpayer funds. DOE addressed the low maintenance fee levels by changing the fee structure in its new solicitations, announced from December 2013 to December 2014, to allow increased maintenance fees—up to $500,000 per year. DOE officials told us that the new fee structure should allow DOE to cover a greater portion of LGP monitoring costs on new loan guarantees. However, the actual fee amounts will depend on the individual loan guarantees and negotiation of the loan guarantee agreements, making predictions of future fee income a challenge. It is now too early to tell whether DOE’s actions will result in sufficient funds to offset LGP’s future administrative costs.

...


http://www.gao.gov/assets/680/675595.pdf
Apparently, doing actual research on these matters is...well...fundamental with regards to someone actually having a clue about what he or she is talking about.

baloney_detector is offline  
Old July 15th, 2017, 02:42 AM   #74
Senior Member
 
baloney_detector's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 4,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubbaJones View Post
This whole program is a PRIME example of PRIVATE PROFIT and but government LOSS.

If the government collected even a portion of the interest that was collected by the banks that actually make the loans (the government doesn't actually make the loans, they simply guarantee them) the program WOULD HAVE MADE MONEY. Many many other companies (INCLUDING FORD) took out these government back loans and repaid them with interest.
But the DOE loan program has actually consisted of a combination of direct government loans and loan guarantees, with a greater portion of the monies involved, if I am not mistaken, being direct loans rather than loan guarantees.

Indeed, here is where the DOE loan program portfolio summary can be found, of which shows which projects-and their approved for funding amounts-consisted of direct loans versus loan guarantees.:

https://energy.gov/lpo/portfolio/portfolio-projects

And, here is the latest performance summary from the DOE regarding said loan program.:

Thanks from RNG

Last edited by baloney_detector; July 15th, 2017 at 02:45 AM.
baloney_detector is offline  
Old July 15th, 2017, 09:12 AM   #75
Senior Member
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: in that one house at that location over there
Posts: 1,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by baloney_detector View Post
Hmmm...you mean like the source that you had cited, of which quite clearly and accurately stated, "the amount of money indicated does not reflect how much was actually received or spent but how much was offered?"

List: 36 Of Obama?s Taxpayer-Funded Green Energy Failures - Fox Nation



And, regarding the DOE loan program and that variable cost that I pointed out...



Apparently, doing actual research on these matters is...well...fundamental with regards to someone actually having a clue about what he or she is talking about.

That is impressive! Other than you pulled a switch and began sourcing GAO in regards to Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing loan program which has no regards or connection to the list I originally posted.
guy39 is offline  
Old July 15th, 2017, 09:40 AM   #76
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
Green energy is advancing by leaps and bounds, and the cheap fossil fuel is being burned off.
By 2040, the price advantage of green energy, including nuclear,(France produces 80% of it's electricity with nuclear, they are way ahead of us on that count ) will be pronounced.
Really? Your trying to tell us nuclear energy is green energy?! By fare the most dangerous type of energy. How about the stats on ethanol? How did that work out? Windmills, give those astronomical energy saving numbers!
caconservative is offline  
Old July 15th, 2017, 05:47 PM   #77
Senior Member
 
Hollywood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Memphis, Tn.
Posts: 17,156
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
How much has green produced, 1 or 2%? I would love to see viable alternatives to oil but, we're nowhere near that.
What does that have to do with my statement?
Hollywood is offline  
Old July 15th, 2017, 08:12 PM   #78
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 15,959
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
What does that have to do with my statement?
You served up a statement? I tend to overlook your ramblings. I'll go back and look. Not promising anything but, I'll look.
Thanks from Sabcat
caconservative is offline  
Old July 16th, 2017, 01:20 AM   #79
Senior Member
 
jetson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Adelaide. South Australia.
Posts: 2,587
I am surprised that America (leader of the free world for 10 more seconds) has done nothing to support diesel free cars. Australia just released a study taken over 30 years. The study proved if you drive a diesel car, You are 20 times more likely 2 die than a person driving a non diesel car. It went on to say, if you have a diesel car, drive it with the windows up and aircon on. Because otherwise you are poisoning your self, and your passengers. But what about the people behind your tail pipe ??
jetson is offline  
Old July 16th, 2017, 07:14 AM   #80
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 5,849
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetson View Post
I am surprised that America (leader of the free world for 10 more seconds) has done nothing to support diesel free cars. Australia just released a study taken over 30 years. The study proved if you drive a diesel car, You are 20 times more likely 2 die than a person driving a non diesel car. It went on to say, if you have a diesel car, drive it with the windows up and aircon on. Because otherwise you are poisoning your self, and your passengers. But what about the people behind your tail pipe ??
If you think tRump and his merry band of corporate billionaire CEO's are gong to protect the environment YOU'RE COMPLETELY DELUSIONAL !!

They want to ROLL BACK REGULATIONS, DEFUND and eventually do away with our Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). They would sacrifice every river, lake, stream, national forest, every acre of farmable land, every breath of breathable air, down to the last blade of grass in my front yard, to the GOD of corporate profit.

The current head of the the EPA appointed by tRump is a man whose linkin page describes himself as an advocate AGAINST the EPA. Much of his political contributions came from the fossil fuel industry. He was part of lawsuits AGAINST the EPA.

If you think they're going to do anything about diesels or anything else protecting the environment, you've been smoking or eating some serious hallucinogens !!!!!!
BubbaJones is online now  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Environment

Tags
2040, ban, diesel, france, petrol, sale, set, vehicles



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Four major cities move to ban diesel vehicles by 2025 RNG Environment 1 December 2nd, 2016 09:37 AM
Cooling Trend Through 2040? excalibur Current Events 80 February 1st, 2014 12:00 AM
Petrol dollar death rattle. pana8 Current Events 0 November 11th, 2013 04:32 AM
Obama Budget Slashes Clean Diesel Funding npr Current Events 0 February 16th, 2011 12:00 AM
Daily Petrol Consumption per Country tadpole256 Business & Industries 7 August 2nd, 2010 12:05 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.