Is it time to drive 55?
I like to drive fast, and I'm human, so I don't like to sacrifice. Who does? But isn't it time for politicians to stop pandering with ridiculous ideas like a federal gas-tax holiday and talk about measures that would lead to real fuel conservation instead of increased consumption?
Well, I guess not, because it isn't happening. Instead, we're being exhorted to take our rebate checks and start consuming again. No sacrifice required.
Not much would save more gas faster -- and perhaps put some downward price pressure on the oil companies and suppliers -- than all of us cutting our average driving speed.
Check out this San Francisco Chronicle story from 2005 -- when gas was "only" about $3 a gallon in Frisco. By driving 55 mph instead of 70 mph in a Chevy Malibu on an interstate trip, gas mileage improved by 10 mpg. That was about a $5 savings in gas just for that trip and two gallons less of gas. Imagine the impact of millions of motorists behaving that way.
Meanwhile, I'm trying (honest) to adjust my driving habits to go a bit slower and make fewer fast stops and starts. But I'm not going to dramatically reduce my speed if everyone else is whizzing past me, probably tailgating or flipping a finger in many cases as they do so. If 55 is too slow, how about 60? (That means most of us will be driving 65 anyway.)
Shouldn't we at least be talking about this stuff? There is no pain-free way out of this mess.
8 Comments:
i can't drive 55....
i drive a ford explorer and i have found on long distance driving that it is geared to give the highest mileage at a constant 72 to 75.
speed and car size is an economic choice and should remain that way. if you want to cut gas consumption get the trucks off the highway especially inside the beltway and get the construction crews to work outside of commuting hours.
Um... where was your concern when Ernie Fletcher wanted to increase speed limits to 70 mph in Kentucky?
"Today at the Forum" addressed it after it went into effect... but y'all didn't mention anything about fuel consumption concerns.
Huh. Go figure.
Feel free to drive 55 in the slow lane with the other silver hairs. Stay out of the high speed lanes or your will kill someone.
I we want a real solution to this problem, we need to invest in light rail, improved bus service, and streetcars.
Once again, the people are expected to sacrifice while the elites at the top and the windfall-profiteering oil barons continue on their merry way.
It is time for revolution.
55, 65, whatever. That's not the answer. Nobody wants to talk about the answer, especially George Bush. The answer is researching and developing renewable fuels.
Basically what the Bush administration has done, and it's not much, is make new rules. For example:
* The Renewable Fuels Mandate will increase the use of renewable
fuels by 500 percent, requiring fuel producers to supply at least
36 billion gallons of renewable fuel in the year 2022.
* The Vehicle Fuel Economy Mandate specifies a national mandatory
fuel economy standard of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, which will
save billions of gallons of fuel and increase efficiency by 40
percent.
Well that's great! "YOU VILL USE DEM UND YOU VILL LIKE IT!!"
Unfortunately, since Bush took office, the Federal Government has
spent about $12 billion total to research, develop, and promote
alternative energy sources.
$12 billion in eight years.
Meanwhile, according to the National Priorities Project (www.costofwar.com), the War On Iraq is costing us a little over $10 billion PER MONTH. How's that for some perspective, huh?
It's not enough to set goals. You have to then do what's necessary
to MEET those goals. Otherwise it's just bulldoody. And that's what the federal government's attitude toward researching renewable fuels is, a big ol' honkin' "Bulldoody!"
This is very much like the No Child Left Behind Act. Noble idea,
badly underfunded, planned, and executed.
Too little, too late. Big picture needed. You have people saying that these giant vehicles with drug dealer dark windows are "an economic choice". Why do we have such choices? Why are we consulted? True leadership would make the money flow the way it's supposed to go and the resulting choices would be better for ALL. Get ready for the Eastern Europeans, Chinese, Africans, et al. to have the same freedoms, or war with us over resources. That choice is being made NOW by us.
Good luck trying to make these folks change their behavior on a one by one basis. It will never happen.
I drive at, or under the speed limit, and when I am challenged by some road rage fueled idiot, I just keep my eyes on the road, and mentally dismiss them to their fate which could be fatal.
Let’s get the facts straight, the earth has been cooling for the last eight years and estimated and will cool for 10 to 12 years more. The Artic ice is at its largest coverage and depth since recorded history. The Alaskan caribou in 1966 had a population of 70,000 when the pipeline started its now up to 950,000. Oh yes the polar bear, "In the 1950s the polar bear population up north was estimated at 5,000. Today it's 20,000 to 25,000, a number that has either held steady over the last 20 years or has risen slightly. In Canada, the manager of wildlife resources for the Nunavut territory of Canada has found that the population there has increased by 25 percent. C02 makes up 5% of greenhouse gases, water vapor makes up 90%. So get out of my way DRIVE55, and get out of my life.
Have a good day!!
* Our online blogs currently are hosted and operated by a third party, namely, Blogger.com. You are now leaving the Cincinnati.Com website and will be linked to Blogger.com's registration page. The Blogger.com site and its associated services are not controlled by Cincinnati.Com and different terms of use and privacy policy will apply to your use of the Blogger.com site and services.
By proceeding and/or registering with Blogger.com you agree and understand that Cincinnati.Com is not responsible for the Blogger.com site you are about to access or for any service you may use while on the Blogger.com site. << Home