Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/01/29

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: longand occasionally on topic
From: sethrosner at nycap.rr.com (Seth Rosner)
Date: Sun Jan 29 11:42:44 2006
References: <63CD409E-936D-45FB-AE56-6E23CB2D9470@shaw.ca> <1C76E288-3576-48D6-92A7-29B617687585@btinternet.com> <9b678e0601290559w38837c4dr9b9c4d3373f32f23@mail.gmail.com> <005201c624f0$f0ee2e10$56e74142@D1S9FY41> <9b678e0601291123p7f0b1ca2jfb69f7288c081f6e@mail.gmail.com>

Don, eighteen years ago (about the time of the October 1987 stock market 
swoon) I wrote an op-ed piece arguing that if it had the political will, the 
United States would impose a federal excise tax on fuel that would put the 
price at the pump to world levels, i.e. $4.-5./gallon. That it would have 
nothing but beneficial results: 1. only the very rich would buy gas-guzzler 
vehicles, dramatically reducing demand for the big users so that Detroit and 
others would design and build the most fuel-efficient cars, buses, etc.; 2. 
it would compel a prompt and serious search for alternative energy 
technologies and sources (even in fossil fuels, the U.S. has billions of 
gallons of oil locked up in the oil shale of the Colorado Rockies); 3. 
within a relatively short time, it would wipe out the national debt. 
Complaints about farmers and other car-dependent people who could not afford 
$4. gasoline are dealt with by coupons or credits. Even that bureaucratic 
problem is a tiny "problem" compared to what we've got.

Seth
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Don Dory" <don.dory@gmail.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: 
longand occasionally on topic


Seth,
I get the feeling that if we want to drive something resembling a car in ten
years or so, then the first manufacturer to figure out how to cut 1000 lbs
or 450 Kilo's from the current automobile will win a large slice of market
share.  Less weight means a smaller power source which opens up new
technologies for similar performance.  Even with an IC engine less mass
means less power inputs required for similar performance.

As the oil producing states become a little more radical, and as the world
demand for cheap energy grows, traditional hydrocarbon inputs will become
very expensive.  Up to now, the western world has been very resistant to
cutting back on life style, but has instead found alternative ways of doing
things.  We will see if the Western world is still up for challenges or
whether the baton will be passed on to other cultures.

Don
don.dory@gmail.com


On 1/29/06, Seth Rosner <sethrosner@nycap.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Frank is factually right; BUT - regulatory requirements have added a huge
> weight penalty to every automobile produced today. Crash-ability,
> bump-resistant bumpers, airbags (that entail electronics, motors and
> bags...
>

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



Replies: Reply from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: longand occasionally on topic)
In reply to: Message from jbcollier at shaw.ca (John Collier) ([Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: long and occasionally on topic)
Message from Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com (Frank Dernie) ([Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: long and occasionally on topic)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: long and occasionally on topic)
Message from sethrosner at nycap.rr.com (Seth Rosner) ([Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: longand occasionally on topic)
Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Further adventures of a completely screwed up guy: longand occasionally on topic)