# The new fuel economy standards congress passed **URL:** \ **Category:** NYSpeed Automotive\ **Created:** [December 18, 2007, 12:02pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451 "2007-12-18T12:02:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Muckman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@Muckman](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Muckman)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 9:59am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/61 "2007-12-19T09:59:03Z")
> [@JayS](#): > > What I would like to see is our demand for oil go down so we could tell the Ahmadinejads and Chavezs of the world to go fuck themselves. Amen to that! Thats the best way to combat tyrants and terrorism, let their economies fall apart. :ohyeah: ---
**Author:** ![Rx3](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/rx3/32/7194_2.png) [@Rx3](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Rx3)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 11:04am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/62 "2007-12-19T11:04:10Z")
If these regs are for new car manufacturs only, then I don’t have a problem with it. We need to start depending less on foreign oil there is no question about that. > [@AWDrifter](#): > > Side note… > If I remember correctly corn is about the worst for making fuel and sugar cane is the best sooooo now we will still be depending on foreign fuel, it will just be from different foreigners(Brazil).:gotme::biglaugh: Good point, I thought I had heard that too. Besides Hawaii and possibly Florida, are there any states with the year round climate that could consistently produce sugar cane? There will obviously be some incentive to push ethanol since corn is a major resource here, we would be able to put to use all the corn that gets wasted/not exported and farmers would be allowed to grow more (and make more money), and if ethanol were to be used worldwide the USA would have more demand for that export. Speaking of ethanol, there was an article in today’s Buffalo News that said a judge gave the go-ahead for the site with the grain towers on the waterfront to be used for a new ethanol processing plant. **EDIT: Buffalo News Story [here.](http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/232361.html)** What I would like to see is more research into other methods. It just seems like they keep pushing ethanol like it’s the only answer. For instance, what about hydro power, or HHO? I know BMW was working on a hydro powered car, what ever became of that? Check this out: > **[Just delivering](http://killsometime.com/video/just-delivering)** > > Watch the video and don’t miss out all the fun – join the community at KillSomeTime That seems like it has a lot of potential. ---
**Author:** ![JayS](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/jays/32/15375_2.png) [@JayS](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/JayS)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 11:24am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/63 "2007-12-19T11:24:23Z")
:tdown: to adding more industry to the waterfront. This city will NEVER learn. Our kids will be looking at the waterfront and saying “why did they put windmills and ethanol plants there” the same way we look at it and say, “why did they put steel mills and highways there”. ---
**Author:** ![Muckman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@Muckman](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Muckman)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 11:53am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/64 "2007-12-19T11:53:34Z")
> [@The Buffalo News](#): > > "The fuel would then be transported by train to Albany. Why not sell it locally? MF’ers :shrug: Wasnt there another big Ethanol plant built last year in this region? Yet the public cant get ethanol anywhere. ---
**Author:** ![JayS](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/jays/32/15375_2.png) [@JayS](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/JayS)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 11:57am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/65 "2007-12-19T11:57:16Z")
^ Rochester, out in the middle of nowhere right where industrial plants belong. Even Rochester is smart enough not to put them on the waterfront, and they tried to buy a fast ferry. :picard: ---
**Author:** ![Muckman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@Muckman](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Muckman)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 11:59am UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/66 "2007-12-19T11:59:48Z")
Is that were that other plant is? I thought it was somewhere near Batavia. The Fast Ferry could have been successful if they had started smaller and not with a 100 mill $ ship. ---
**Author:** ![reliant\_turbo](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/reliant_turbo/32/7189_2.png) [@reliant\_turbo](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/reliant_turbo)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 12:33pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/67 "2007-12-19T12:33:58Z")
> [@Bigairskier1580](#): > > You = Idiot > > Sure global warming isn’t 100% proved, but how can you actually sit there and confidently say that what we are doing to the environment thru pollution is a good thing? > > Ever seen the cute “little” smog cloud that hovers over large cities on warm days? I’m sure that is good, and healthy. > > Even if “global warming” isn’t a major issue, why not do something to reduce the excessive pollution we create? youre an idiot, idiot 😉 im not against trying to make things less polluting. im tired of the increases in costs and political bullcrap from those claiming theories as facts and the increases in attempts at control of everything over their faith that humans cause climate change. its stupid. Brian ---
**Author:** ![reliant\_turbo](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/reliant_turbo/32/7189_2.png) [@reliant\_turbo](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/reliant_turbo)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 12:34pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/68 "2007-12-19T12:34:26Z")
the newest ethanol plant is in Medina. Brian ---
**Author:** ![JEG](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/jeg/32/7246_2.png) [@JEG](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/JEG)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 12:43pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/69 "2007-12-19T12:43:57Z")
> [@Bigairskier1580](#): > > You = Idiot > > Sure global warming isn’t 100% proved, but how can you actually sit there and confidently say that what we are doing to the environment thru pollution is a good thing? > > Ever seen the cute “little” smog cloud that hovers over large cities on warm days? I’m sure that is good, and healthy. > > Even if “global warming” isn’t a major issue, why not do something to reduce the excessive pollution we create? Here in lies the problem. Trying to reduce pollution is a major :tup:. Wasting billions on a political agenda that is complete bullshit and 100% made up to look good in the public eye :tdown:. Yes the Earth is going through a climate change, but it is 100% natural. We are coming out of a mini ice age, hence it gets warmer. > [@reliant\_turbo](#): > > the newest ethanol plant is in Medina. > > Brian Yeah, when I was working at Darien lake this summer, I would often see these huge ass trucks moving parts for the plant. :tup: its going to creat alot of good jobs for the area. ---
**Author:** ![Muckman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@Muckman](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Muckman)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 12:57pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/70 "2007-12-19T12:57:48Z")
So its not online yet? ---
**Author:** ![chino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/bcef8e/32.png) [@chino](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/chino)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 1:00pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/71 "2007-12-19T13:00:10Z")
> [@JayS](#): > > It goes by production volume. So you need to sell a bunch of 40 mpg cars to make up for one 15 mpg car. shouldn’t be a problem for the example you used… they don’t sell many STI’s compared to other models. people love hybrids, all the companies have to do is release a few hybrids to balance out the average and then no big deal. Vast majority of people could give less of a F about how fast their car is 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Bigairskier1580](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/bigairskier1580/32/7612_2.png) [@Bigairskier1580](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Bigairskier1580)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 1:10pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/72 "2007-12-19T13:10:35Z")
It’s a good thing JEG is a global climate scientist. I’m not going to argue the point of global climate change because that’s not what this thread is about. This thread is about increasing automotive fuel economy, reducing excess, consumption and pollution, which in no way can be argued as being a bad thing. Quit bitching about the financial aspect because the track we’re currently on will have precious oil costing a shitload more down the line if measures aren’t taken. ---
**Author:** ![Blue\_Eyed\_Devil](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/blue_eyed_devil/32/7292_2.png) [@Blue\_Eyed\_Devil](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Blue_Eyed_Devil)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 1:17pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/73 "2007-12-19T13:17:40Z")
I have no scientific proof but I have a gut feel on 2 things 1)Gas prices will increase significantly even with better fuel economy 2)The technology to increase to 35mpg has existed for many, many years. This is just politics as usual and we are paying the price to feel good. This gives automotive producers an excuse to make more money. ---
**Author:** ![RedGoober4Life](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/redgoober4life/32/7610_2.png) [@RedGoober4Life](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/RedGoober4Life)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 1:59pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/74 "2007-12-19T13:59:37Z")
> [@Rx3](#): > > If these regs are for new car manufacturs only, then I don’t have a problem with it. We need to start depending less on foreign oil there is no question about that. > > Good point, I thought I had heard that too. Besides Hawaii and possibly Florida, are there any states with the year round climate that could consistently produce sugar cane? There will obviously be some incentive to push ethanol since corn is a major resource here, we would be able to put to use all the corn that gets wasted/not exported and farmers would be allowed to grow more (and make more money), and if ethanol were to be used worldwide the USA would have more demand for that export. > > Speaking of ethanol, there was an article in today’s Buffalo News that said a judge gave the go-ahead for the site with the grain towers on the waterfront to be used for a new ethanol processing plant. > > **EDIT: Buffalo News Story [here.](http://www.buffalonews.com/home/story/232361.html)** > > What I would like to see is more research into other methods. It just seems like they keep pushing ethanol like it’s the only answer. > > For instance, what about hydro power, or HHO? I know BMW was working on a hydro powered car, what ever became of that? > > Check this out: > > [This is Schiba](http://www.killsometime.com/video/video.asp?ID=576) > > That seems like it has a lot of potential. Honda has the FCX, but hydrogen is really inefficient as a medium to “store” energy. Also, good luck with the research hopes and dreams. Research spending growth is stagnant for 2008. ---
**Author:** ![BrockwayMT](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/brockwaymt/32/5060_2.png) [@BrockwayMT](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/BrockwayMT)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 2:49pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/75 "2007-12-19T14:49:27Z")
> [@Zer0DazE](#): > > you enjoy that job, it wont be long before that goes to india as well Hope to hell I don’t ever meet you asshole! ---
**Author:** ![RedrRocket](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/redrrocket/32/7193_2.png) [@RedrRocket](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/RedrRocket)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 2:51pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/76 "2007-12-19T14:51:21Z")
> [@JayS](#): > > :tdown: to adding more industry to the waterfront. This city will NEVER learn. Our kids will be looking at the waterfront and saying “why did they put windmills and ethanol plants there” the same way we look at it and say, “why did they put steel mills and highways there”. steel mills and wind mills finantially are a good thing to have on the edge of a body of water. no one cared about asthetics during the industrial revolution. steel & the materials required for it are hard to transport. water makes transportation easy. it is unfortunate that things arent pretty as they could be by the water. i dont see why they shouldnt build an ethanol plant in the Steel belt of buffalo. Jobs bring money in to make things prettier. ---
**Author:** ![reliant\_turbo](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/reliant_turbo/32/7189_2.png) [@reliant\_turbo](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/reliant_turbo)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 3:57pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/77 "2007-12-19T15:57:08Z")
> [@Bigairskier1580](#): > > This thread is about increasing automotive fuel economy, reducing excess, consumption and pollution, which in no way can be argued as being a bad thing… what if i dont want to reduce fuel consumption? it isnt the governments place to MANDATE fuel economy standards. the government is supposed to restrain evil, bottom line. controlling everyone cause you are a power hungry butthole and pushing your idiotic pet projects is not the governments true role and it pisses me off. BTW, the medina ethanol plant has been online for a few weeks now. it takes about a week for a batch of eth to be made according to a report I read in the local paper up there so there should have been a few batches made by now. Brian ---
**Author:** ![Rx3](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/rx3/32/7194_2.png) [@Rx3](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Rx3)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 4:04pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/78 "2007-12-19T16:04:13Z")
> [@reliant\_turbo](#): > > the government is supposed to restrain evil, bottom line. Unnecessary fuel consumption is evil so to speak. Resources will run out at some point. ---
**Author:** ![JayS](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/jays/32/15375_2.png) [@JayS](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/JayS)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 4:12pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/79 "2007-12-19T16:12:07Z")
> [@RedrRocket](#): > > steel mills and wind mills finantially are a good thing to have on the edge of a body of water. no one cared about asthetics during the industrial revolution. > > steel & the materials required for it are hard to transport. water makes transportation easy. > > it is unfortunate that things arent pretty as they could be by the water. > > i dont see why they shouldnt build an ethanol plant in the Steel belt of buffalo. Jobs bring money in to make things prettier. Yeah, I understand why steel mills went there. The windmills though could just as easily been put out in the rolling hill country where they get lots of wind, or even moved down the lake farther. Buffalo is doing all this work to rebuild the waterfront. Sure, it may never get done, but if it does you’ve really limited yourself on how far this rebuilding can go by sticking those windmills right there. They may very well be our generations “skyway fuckup”. At least the ethanol plant should be inland a ways since most of the grain elevators are up the buffalo river. But again, it’s waterfront. The one they built in Medina is in the middle of nowhere next to a major highway. That’s a great location for an ugly industrial complex. ---
**Author:** ![Nikuk](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex034/user_avatar/forums.speedlife.net/nikuk/32/7254_2.png) [@Nikuk](https://forums.speedlife.net/u/Nikuk)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2007, 4:42pm UTC](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451/80 "2007-12-19T16:42:55Z")
> [@reliant\_turbo](#): > > it isnt the governments place to MANDATE fuel economy standards. > > the government is supposed to restrain evil, bottom line. its funny that you use the term bottom line. Bottom line is that while some of our corporations profit Billions, they could profit even more if a huge chunk of revenue didn’t have to walk out the door get on a boat and go overseas. Bottom line is that unemployment rates might actually go down if there is a sudden & justifiable boom in a stateside industry. Not to mention the possibility of that industry supporting the aforementionted industry. Bottomline is that the gvt has to protect the future of the country, and it’s citizens. Could that mean decreasing pollution? Sure, why couldn’t it? The government is responsible for the Dwight D Eisenhower interstate highway system. Regulating the primary users of that system effects the bottom line (maintenance, design, failures, death rates, the effect of lost productivity on businesses & therefor citizens, etc…). The government is elected (regardless of the faults in the system) by the citizens. If enough of the highly visible constituents demand that the gov’t look at regulating mileage, then it must do so. I could quite easily go on… but I would hope that you are starting to see the light outside of your mousehole. oh, and IB4YourConspiracyTheory [Previous page](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451.md?page=3) [Next page](https://forums.speedlife.net/t/the-new-fuel-economy-standards-congress-passed/40451.md?page=5)