Videos: Goober and Gomer in a flex fuel, plug-in hybrid? (Republicans debate PHEVs)
Last night's NBC Republican presidential debate took an unexpected turn to the green. For almost half an hour, the candidates talked about alternatives to oil and ethanol. Senator Sam Brownback even talked about a flex-fuel, plug-in hybrid car. Sam went into specifics saying he would like to see an electric-only range of 20 to 30 miles on plug-in hybrids. You can watch the video of Sam talking about plug-in, flex fuels below the fold. Here is the quote:
"We've got to get more electricity involved in our car fleet. There's a Chevy Malibu parked out front here that's a hybrid flex fuel. They've got hybrid cars; they've got flex fuel cars. I think that's a big part of the answer. I'd like to see us move forward with getting those first 20 to 30 miles off of electricity that you plug into at night. That's technology. We're putting forward tax credits and incentives to try to move that forward. That's something Detroit here needs to grab on, and is. And that can move us forward as an industry and as a country."
As for ethanol, Ron Paul does not support subsidies and neither does John McCain even though he drinks a glass of ethanol daily. In one of the funnier moments of the night, Mike Huckabee said we have to increase the pace of our support for ethanol. All the ethanol plans, Mike says, are for 15, 20 years in the future. Mike thinks we can do it in less than a decade if we worked at it like a mission to the moon or (because Huckabee knows his audience) a Nascar pit stop. You can also watch that video below the fold. Here is the quote.
"We can't wait until another generation. Instead of running it like Nascar, we've been running it like taking the family station wagon in for letting Goober and Gomer take a look at it when they get time, under the shade tree."
So, is Bush Goober or Gomer?
[Source: Mother Jones, Wall Street Journal]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kardax 5:02PM (10/10/2007)
I'm happy to see Republicans becoming more serious about our energy sources. They're starting to realize that waging war and burning cash on hydrogen fantasies is not a long term solution.
Reply
tim 5:20PM (10/10/2007)
Dr. Paul believes in letting market competition choose technologies instead of insisting that government "Goober and Gomers" choose them through grants, tax subsidies & loopholes. Considering how Congress screws everything else up, maybe he's right. I’m sure that democratic-socialists and neocons will trust government to look out for the citizen’s best interests, but apparently these elitists politicians only look out for their own best interests. Where's the damn boarder fence?
Reply
marguerite manteau-rao 5:42PM (10/10/2007)
I just included Autobloggreen in my list of 'Top 15 Green Guys Blogs'
La Marguerite
http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com
Reply
MarkR 5:40PM (10/10/2007)
I see Billery Clinton and Barack all talk no action Obama as goobers and gommers before I'll go there Linton.
TFWIW, thats from a self proclaimed green conservative republican.
Reply
Benson Leung 1:11PM (10/11/2007)
Tim :
I like Ron Paul because he's really a different breed of politician, and is not afraid to take a bold stance on things...
But I disagree with his idea of just letting the free market sort out the green issue.
Take, for instance, CAFE. We have government regulation of fleet wide fuel economy in this country, but the last time it was increased was 20 years ago. Since then, CAFE standard has not been increased, so the market forces dominate... But the market didn't care about fuel economy. The market sold big SUVs, bigger cars, more powerful engines, and the actual CAFE dropped slightly since the peak 20 years ago.
The problem with just throwing everything to the free market, is that the free market sometimes ignores perceived externalities like our impact on the environment, which has no near-term (as in quarter per quarter or year over year) impact on profit or revenue.
Reply
tim 1:01PM (10/11/2007)
Brenson - You'll see what free market forces can do once oil reaches $100/barrel or more.
Yes, there is a place for LIMITED government, but it's NOT in choosing technologies, placing standing armies all over the world or bankrupting it's citizens with 50% taxes and endless failed social engineering projects. These kinds of things destroyed the Soviets and they’re destroying US too.
Our politicians are writing checks that we can’t cash.
Reply
Lascelles Linton 1:20PM (10/11/2007)
Brenson, Good point. So until oil get to $100 as Tim said, what about requiring corporations to think about the environment without making it a tax or requirement? Seen the movie the Corporation? I am not sure exactly how it might look but something like we won't tax your SUVs but if you are going to buy a car for a fleet and a flex fuel option exist, you have to get that one. Or even requiring companies to consider environmental impact and potential legal ramifications as part of the corporate structure. All this talk of picking winners and taxes always seemed limited too me. I personally think global warming could be solved by changing a hand full land use, zoning and corporate laws to favor nature. I don't think anyone would really notice but it will never happen because A LOT of business would be lost in the short term and the lobby spending on the fight would be amazing.
Reply
Mik_Cal 2:21PM (10/11/2007)
Unfortunately support from unregulated markets has become something of a religion: it is supposed to solve all problems...like a god.
Some people looking for religion are dissatisfied with the truism: markets, like any tool, are good at some things and not so good at other things.
This is not radical enough a statement for people looking for certainty in the world.
Paul did make some good points and he does point out inconsistencies in other Republicans who are for subsidizing the projects they believe in. On the other hand his solutions are not always viable.
Reply