Tom Bevan: Imagine what could happen with real leadership on alternative fuel issue
Following up on yesterday's post about the public opinion polls showing that American's want alternative fuels, and are even willing to pay a higher gas tax to make the U.S. more energy independent, I wanted to link to this opinion piece by Tom Bevan in last Friday's Real Clear Politics. Bevan takes a "no kidding" approach to looking at the history and possibilities of real political leadership which brought us the space program and the atomic bomb. He then ties this in with the alternative energy market, asking why cars today get about the same miles per gallon as a 1908 Model T. Bevan basically argues there is no such thing as a "post-9/11 mindset" when it comes to getting off of oil, but there should be, and there most certainly could be.
[Source: Real Clear Politics]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Frankenstein Black 9:13AM (5/10/2006)
Well done friend Tom. What we have here is ?say one thing in prepared speeches and doing another in actual policy?. There is no real leadership when it comes to energy independence. Why would you expect different from oil men and their greedy friends. At this point anyone calling themselves A REPUBLICAN IS EITHER A MILLIONARE OR A FOOL!!
http://www.cbsnews.com/images/2005/04/25/image690875x.jpg
Reply
RJ 11:52AM (5/10/2006)
I agree with both of you that the republicans really are a total waste of time when it comes to an energy policy, but I honestly cannot remember any breakthroughs during the democratic '90s either. Both parties consist of oil stock holders. It will be really pathetic when some third world country designs alternatives before us.
Reply
Clarence 9:38PM (5/10/2006)
"He then ties this in with the alternative energy market, asking why cars today get about the same miles per gallon as a 1908 Model T."
This author loses credibility with me when he makes such a foolish statement.
Modern cars get far better mileage than the Model T, when you compare apples with apples. If a Model T had to pull the weight and accessories of a modern car, it might be able to move at 5 mph and get around 2 mpg. I was around for the transition from carburetors to fuel injection and that alone made a huge difference in fuel efficency as well as improving air quality.
Reply
davet 2:11AM (5/11/2006)
but I honestly cannot remember any breakthroughs during the democratic '90s either
Check out http://ncseonline.org/NLE/CRSreports/energy/eng-9.cfm.
They didn't quite make 80 mpg, but they got pretty close, and they were mostly on track for hard deliverables of a working prototype at 6 years and production models by 2004 before it was killed in the first 100 days of this administration, much to the relief of the car makers. Of course, had they stuck the course, today they would be leading the world and wouldn't be able to make the things fast enough: instead, one of them is owned by a foreign company, and the other two are bleeding red by the billions.
It would certainly have been nice if they had seriously invested in a real energy policy in the 90s, but it's hard enough to get anything done when your VP is derided as Mr Ozone. And ultimately, we the public wanted our cheap gas, huge cars, and McMansions in the exurbs -- the politicians were just giving us what we wanted.
Reply