Category: Automobile

We were having a discussion in a political forum and I wrote up the following to explain the situation with ‘alternative fuels’. I think I covered most of the points nicely so I figured I’d share it here as well:

Now seriously, if you think “alternative energy creation has just scratched
the surface and can be developed, we just haven’t spent enough time on it.”
then tell us what it is? If you don’t have any idea then it’s just a talking
point. We know wind, solar, and electric are a joke, what is left?

Let me elaborate on my remark that alternative fuel is a liberals wet dream.
That really only applies to the run of the mill liberal that doesn’t
actually do any independent thinking, they just repeat the liberal talking
points that Algore and others spew while they are burning MASSIVE amounts of
energy while living high on the hog.
For the political liberal, alternative energy is merely a political tool to
control the public with. They are able to use it to pass regulation,
allocate monies to their buddies that take advantage of the ‘green
movement’, a method of shoveling taxpayers cash to their cronies, and
advance a political agenda that includes restricting our mobility.

The unpopular fact is, oil IS the alternative energy. When we first started
building cars and trains they were steam powered. Coal was dirty, steam
engines were unreliable, slow, and unsafe. Oil was plentiful, cheap, clean,
and enabled us to build a better engine.

There is nothing today that is in the quantities needed to moved the
industrial world. And since the political machine has its fingers in
everything there is likely not going to be. Government is the obstacle, not
the solution. An example is the electric car, it is a failure, they tried it
in the late 1800’s, it was slow, unreliable, and inconvenient. Guess what,
in over 100 years there has been very little improvement. A private entity
would be inclined to give up on the bad idea and look for something better.
What does the government do?  The government’s answer is its same answer to
anything, if something fails, throw more money at it. Subsidize it, issue
tax breaks to the people foolish enough to buy into it, monkey with an
economy so there becomes a false need for it via high fuel prices.

Government did not subsidize Luis Pasteur, Alexander Graham Bell, Thomas
Edison, Samuel Morris, or Henry Ford. They didn’t get tax breaks, they
didn’t have governmental mandates. The government(s) stayed the hell out of
the way and let these people invent and create a better world for us to live

Think about it, if you were to create an engine today that could run off of
water would you have solved the alternative energy problem?
Let’s see, the government would pass a tax per gallon because they couldn’t
lose the taxes per gallon that they currently have on fuel. That means there
would have to be a water fueling station. There would have to be anyways,
because people that live in apartments couldn’t fuel the cars of umpteen
families from one or two spigots and while your traveling you couldn’t just
pull up to someone’s house to top off. And why waste filtered drinking water
to fuel your car?
Then the government would have to monitor your water usage in your home to
make sure you’re not illegally filling your car at home. That month you fill
your pool or take a long shower the government H2O Fuel Regulators will pay
you  a visit. Watch out if you have to ever explain why you have a bucket
with you while you are at the beach or lake. And if you’re caught hording
rainwater the IRS will be on you like stink on poop for tax evasion.
Cities and communities in the dryer parts of the country would have problems
with water conservation, some already are, Nevada promotes rock lawn
landscapes instead of green lawns. These areas would have to truck or
pipeline their water in. Then the water wars between states would begin.

And then lastly the enviro-kooks would be throwing up their hands and crying
the sky is falling because we are using up the world’s water resources.

Oil is our friend, my friend, and unless you have a specific alternative
fuel that will work and you can NAME it, then it’s just a talking point.
It’s just politics as usual.

I’ve said it before, closing the CARB and repealing every bit of regulation they ever passed would be one of the biggest steps California could take to get back in its feet. The CARB is run by a bunch of eco-terrorists with an agenda, they do NOT have California’s best interests at heart.

Scandal Surrounding the California Air Resources Board
By Andy Caldwell
Created 08/31/2010 – 07:22

Many politicians and pundits pin the economic travails of the State of California upon our tax rates.  However, my experience leads me to believe that the number one cause for the economic malaise of our once great State emanates from our regulatory climate.  Here is but one example.

It is most unfortunate that few Californians are aware of the scandal surrounding the California Air Resources Board (CARB).  CARB has been in the process of establishing a Diesel Engine Rule that will require all engines in the State of CA to be replaced twice in the next ten years.

The fiscal impact of this rule can easily cost the California economy in excess of $40 billion.  It will impact trucking, construction, and farming, as these industries rely heavily upon diesel engines.  Is the expense for this rule justified?

CARB has been arguing that the particulate emissions from diesel engine exhaust causes premature deaths in the State of California. However, Dr. James Enstrom of UCLA, has proven there is no such health impact and his research has been peer reviewed and replicated by other scholars.  Dr. Enstrom has a PhD in Physics from Stanford, and he has been a research scientist in the University of Ca. for nearly 40 years!

Additionally, Dr. Enstrom discovered that the lead researcher working for CARB on this project, Hien T. Tran, faked his Ph.D, having purchased it on-line!  Further, the Chair of CARB, Mary Nichols help conceal this fraud from her fellow board members!

Yet, after all this, the person being fired is Dr. Enstrom! Despite the fact that he has been with UCLA for some 34 years, he has been slated for termination simply because his colleagues don’t like the effects of his research.

This episode mirrors the international Climategate scandal.  As you recall, the leaders of the movement to curtail greenhouse gas emissions were caught in email exchanges discussing how to squelch and punish any researchers who dared challenge their scientific findings.

These efforts to squelch debate and silence opposition are an affront to the honesty and integrity of academia and undermine the very foundation of the regulatory efforts underway.

Dr. Enstrom is a fine gentlemen having had the courage to been one of the only scientists out there who has been willing to go against the current of politically correct junk science.  His research has been a great help to the business community as they attempt to resist the onslaught of regulations threatening to overrun our economy.  He was fired by fellow staff members in a closed meeting.  Some of these fellow staff members have a grudge against him for his work associated with this scandal at CARB!

We are asking the Chancellor of UCLA to give Dr. Enstrom the due process of a fair hearing that will enable him to hear the charges against him and the opportunity to defend himself.

Please email the Chancellor and ask him to hold a FAIR Hearing on this matter. The contact for UCLA Chancellor Gene Block is [1]

To hear an interview with Dr. Enstrom follow this link [2]. [3]

I am all for clean air and clean water.  Nobody in their right mind supports indiscriminate pollution.  However, here in California we are pushing the envelope so hard in our attempt to be green that our economy is failing and so is the integrity of government and the science which serves to justify regulations.

What does it say about us if we sit idly by as our fellow Americans are wrongly defrauded of their jobs, their business and their livelihood?

Please get involved.