Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
oh please. You've been misinformed.The embargo was not the case.Not relevant.Conspiracy theories don't count.It started back in the 70's with the oil embargo... a totally manufactured crisis.
Got any actual facts?
"The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are regulations in the United States, first enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1975,[1] in the wake of the Arab Oil Embargo, to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks (trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles) produced for sale in the United States."
Hope that helps.
What? You asked me "Why the change to more efficient Mpg?" I told you it was due to t he oil embargo to which you commented was a "conspiracy theory".
So, my answer is very relevant, unless you of course don't understand your own question?
It was effect.
Private enterprise did not stop the Nazis. It didn't put a man on the Moon and, thus, accelerate the advancement of metallurgy, computers and much else. Where appropriate, there is nothing wrong with collective effort and an involvement of government. Being ideologically allergic or addicted are mistakes. Excesses occur, it's true, such as all the government funding for ridiculous weapons and boondoggle projects.
The present consumption of petroleum products is absurd. The entire technology around it is only excusable as a step toward sustainable forms. These are available and only need refinement. Remaining reliant on a filthy, stinking energy source doesn't make sense, but it does make thousand dollar per second net profit years for Exxon.
oh please. You've been misinformed.The embargo was not the case.Not relevant.Conspiracy theories don't count.
Got any actual facts?
"The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are regulations in the United States, first enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1975,[1] in the wake of the Arab Oil Embargo, to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks (trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles) produced for sale in the United States."
Hope that helps.
What? You asked me "Why the change to more efficient Mpg?" I told you it was due to t he oil embargo to which you commented was a "conspiracy theory".
So, my answer is very relevant, unless you of course don't understand your own question?
It was effect.
The Arabs got pissed off at the US over our support of Israel. So they cut off oil shipments to the US. The result was the development of fuel efficient vehicles.
The Arabs saw their global income from the sale of oil tumble. They even decided to allow the price of oil to float on an open global marketplace because they could not longer afford to fix the price of oil as they saw fit.
oh please. You've been misinformed.The embargo was not the case.Not relevant.Conspiracy theories don't count.
Got any actual facts?
"The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are regulations in the United States, first enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1975,[1] in the wake of the Arab Oil Embargo, to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks (trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles) produced for sale in the United States."
Hope that helps.
What? You asked me "Why the change to more efficient Mpg?" I told you it was due to t he oil embargo to which you commented was a "conspiracy theory".
So, my answer is very relevant, unless you of course don't understand your own question?
It was effect.
The Arabs got pissed off at the US over our support of Israel. So they cut off oil shipments to the US. The result was the development of fuel efficient vehicles.
The Arabs saw their global income from the sale of oil tumble. They even decided to allow the price of oil to float on an open global marketplace because they could not longer afford to fix the price of oil as they saw fit.
Common knowledge like common sense is a myth.In 1900, the airplane was a long time away from being practical as either in war or peace. That was hardly a good reason to put it on the shelf.
In the late 1800s electric cars were more popular then gasoline ones, So what's your point?
.
WTF?
You didn't know that? I thought you were a Yankee that went to skool?
Common knowledge.
.
People who use those terms have neither knowledge or sense.
WTF asshole, I know history and I know cars among a host of other things, you act like you are 12 years old and now don't even know what the 70s oil crisis was about?
THE BIRTH OF THE ELECTRIC VEHICLE
It’s hard to pinpoint the invention of the electric car to one inventor or country. Instead it was a series of breakthroughs -- from the battery to the electric motor -- in the 1800s that led to the first electric vehicle on the road.
In the early part of the century, innovators in Hungary, the Netherlands and the United States -- including a blacksmith from Vermont -- began toying with the concept of a battery-powered vehicle and created some of the first small-scale electric cars. And while Robert Anderson, a British inventor, developed the first crude electric carriage around this same time, it wasn’t until the second half of the 19th century that French and English inventors built some of the first practical electric cars.
Here in the U.S., the first successful electric car made its debut around 1890 thanks to William Morrison, a chemist who lived in Des Moines, Iowa. His six-passenger vehicle capable of a top speed of 14 miles per hour was little more than an electrified wagon, but it helped spark interest in electric vehicles.
Over the next few years, electric vehicles from different automakers began popping up across the U.S. New York City even had a fleet of more than 60 electric taxis. By 1900, electric cars were at their heyday, accounting for around a third of all vehicles on the road. During the next 10 years, they continued to show strong sales.
.
Why? you guys prove it for me with each postit's not a theory.Conspiracy theories don't count.Keep dreamin. if it were then why aren't we using oil at the same rate as we did during it's peak production?
Why the change to more efficient Mpg?
It started back in the 70's with the oil embargo... a totally manufactured crisis.
Got any actual facts?
funny, coming from a clown who buys the theory of AGW.
you do know what AGW stands for don't you, clown?
The only clowns here are you folks.
Only the ignorant fight the facts.
PROVE it twinkle toes....
.
No it looked like crap too.oh please. You've been misinformed.The embargo was not the case.Not relevant."The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are regulations in the United States, first enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1975,[1] in the wake of the Arab Oil Embargo, to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks (trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles) produced for sale in the United States."
Hope that helps.
What? You asked me "Why the change to more efficient Mpg?" I told you it was due to t he oil embargo to which you commented was a "conspiracy theory".
So, my answer is very relevant, unless you of course don't understand your own question?
It was effect.
The Arabs got pissed off at the US over our support of Israel. So they cut off oil shipments to the US. The result was the development of fuel efficient vehicles.
The Arabs saw their global income from the sale of oil tumble. They even decided to allow the price of oil to float on an open global marketplace because they could not longer afford to fix the price of oil as they saw fit.
Yup. Thanks!
This is why my very first car was a frigg'n Chevy Vega... what a piece of crap. But it looked cool!
View attachment 71606
No it looked like crap too.oh please. You've been misinformed.The embargo was not the case.Not relevant.
What? You asked me "Why the change to more efficient Mpg?" I told you it was due to t he oil embargo to which you commented was a "conspiracy theory".
So, my answer is very relevant, unless you of course don't understand your own question?
It was effect.
The Arabs got pissed off at the US over our support of Israel. So they cut off oil shipments to the US. The result was the development of fuel efficient vehicles.
The Arabs saw their global income from the sale of oil tumble. They even decided to allow the price of oil to float on an open global marketplace because they could not longer afford to fix the price of oil as they saw fit.
Yup. Thanks!
This is why my very first car was a frigg'n Chevy Vega... what a piece of crap. But it looked cool!
View attachment 71606
No it looked like crap too.oh please. You've been misinformed.The embargo was not the case.What? You asked me "Why the change to more efficient Mpg?" I told you it was due to t he oil embargo to which you commented was a "conspiracy theory".
So, my answer is very relevant, unless you of course don't understand your own question?
It was effect.
The Arabs got pissed off at the US over our support of Israel. So they cut off oil shipments to the US. The result was the development of fuel efficient vehicles.
The Arabs saw their global income from the sale of oil tumble. They even decided to allow the price of oil to float on an open global marketplace because they could not longer afford to fix the price of oil as they saw fit.
Yup. Thanks!
This is why my very first car was a frigg'n Chevy Vega... what a piece of crap. But it looked cool!
View attachment 71606
Gee, you sure are one bundle of joy.
[
The US and Canada are two of the cleanest industrialized nations on the planet.
On the other hand China, India and Japan, to this day still foul the air to the point where people have to don surgical masks on certain days just to go outside.
In China, the Yangtzee River is so fouled, the people who depend on the aquatic creatures for food are starving because they cannot safely eat the fish.
Stop lying about what I believe:
you are welcome to believe all the lies you want to, none of us truth telling honest conservatives will try to stop your belief of pure
I said no such thing.
Why don't you tell us why pollution will decrease if the EPA is abolished.
first: what did you mean by this
"Everyone won't hop on the pollution bandwagon. Polluters fight the government every step of the way, if there's more money in polluting than not."
second: I never said that the EPA should be abolished or that doing so would decrease pollution. I think the EPA should enforce reasonable pollution limitations.
So why are you going to vote for a presidential candidate who wants to abolish the EPA?
Are you also admitting that the EPA is constitutional, contrary to the rants by your RW pals?
I am going to vote against Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders----------that is my voting priority for 2016.
Whether the EPA is constitutional is not the question. The question is whether it is effectively limiting pollution without destroying our economy. Destroying the coal industry is neither effective or good for the economy.
I asked you how abolishing the EPA would decrease pollution. You added that to you many question dodges.
since I never said that abolishing the EPA would decrease pollution, your question is moot.
Ready to further pollute the human values of beauty and purity.
No one is in favor of polluted water and air. why not find non-polluting ways to use fossil fuels until alternates are economically viable?
Its foolish to demand that we all change before there is anything to change to.
BTW, do you flush your waste products into a sewage system? or do you recycle them?
[
The US and Canada are two of the cleanest industrialized nations on the planet.
On the other hand China, India and Japan, to this day still foul the air to the point where people have to don surgical masks on certain days just to go outside.
In China, the Yangtzee River is so fouled, the people who depend on the aquatic creatures for food are starving because they cannot safely eat the fish.
Oh look, here's a RWnut who admits that pollution is a serious problem and needs to be dealt with by governments.
first: what did you mean by this
"Everyone won't hop on the pollution bandwagon. Polluters fight the government every step of the way, if there's more money in polluting than not."
second: I never said that the EPA should be abolished or that doing so would decrease pollution. I think the EPA should enforce reasonable pollution limitations.
So why are you going to vote for a presidential candidate who wants to abolish the EPA?
Are you also admitting that the EPA is constitutional, contrary to the rants by your RW pals?
I am going to vote against Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders----------that is my voting priority for 2016.
Whether the EPA is constitutional is not the question. The question is whether it is effectively limiting pollution without destroying our economy. Destroying the coal industry is neither effective or good for the economy.
I asked you how abolishing the EPA would decrease pollution. You added that to you many question dodges.
since I never said that abolishing the EPA would decrease pollution, your question is moot.
So you acknowledge that all your RWnut pals who insist that things will be better once the EPA is abolished are full of shit.
Good for you.
Fossil fuel pollution certainly does.Of course the point is to go after pollution, especially from fossil fuels.
Get real, its densely populated liberal inner cities spewing the pollution. Pouring raw sewage into waterways. Exporting mountains of garbage and waste. Fouling the air. Paving over nature and overloading the ecosystem. Liberal run inner cities are pollution factories.
Yes, pollution = bad
Pollution does not cause climate change-----------that's the point.
Fossil fuel pollution certainly does.Of course the point is to go after pollution, especially from fossil fuels.
Get real, its densely populated liberal inner cities spewing the pollution. Pouring raw sewage into waterways. Exporting mountains of garbage and waste. Fouling the air. Paving over nature and overloading the ecosystem. Liberal run inner cities are pollution factories.
Yes, pollution = bad
Pollution does not cause climate change-----------that's the point.
ACTUALLY, the old rust belt Dem cities have lost so much manufacturing they have very clean air.
He's a crank just like you.daws101: Educate yourself, dumb ass......
The Rise of the Petrodollar System: “Dollars for Oil” | Jerry Robinson | FINANCIAL SENSE
