All well and good. Conserving gasoline would reduce CO2 output, if you’re a firm believer of the catastrophic man made climate change theory. That’s where the conversation started. Some say “we must act before it’s too late”, etc. Yet some of the same folks who supposedly believe this theory couldn’t be bothered to reduce their speed by 10 mph.
I’m not too concerned with it either way. I’m not buying into the man made climate disaster yet. But if people who cry “eminent climate disaster” wouldn’t even entertain the notion of dropping their speed during their commute, it surely doesn’t further my belief in the theory.
I do believe that CO2 is a major reason why we’re seeing such drastic climate change. I drive a Camry, my wife drives an Escape. We keep them both maintained and take care of the CELs when they arise right away. Our previous car was our 09 Focus which was a PZEV model fully California spec’d, so as efficient emissions-wise as we could get from that car. Now that the kids are out of the monstrous car seats we downgraded from the minivans to the Escape. I don’t drop my speed because 1, where we live now I drive on major highways only a few times a month, so my speeding is quite rare now anyway, 2. I don’t think our family’s fleet of vehicles make that big of a difference in the grand scheme of everything. As an aggregate, yes cars make up a major source of CO2 emissions. Honestly, once I have my Camry paid off, I’ll probably swap it for a Prius or Camry Hybrid (mine has the wonderful 2AZ-FE engine and because I bought it used, I don’t think it’s eligible for any recall work/ring jobs), which will help reduce our CO2 production further.
Yeah, I wasn’t trying to call you out particularly. I’m sure you’re fuel efficient and all that. I don’t see my driving as a big contributor, either. I do think that if the avg speed across the nation were dropped (cars, trucks, semi’s and everything on the road), say 10 mph (whether you believe speed limits change people’s speed at all or not), that would have a fairly significant impact on the amount of fuel burned.
Apparently the government thought so too during the oil shortage.
When the speed limit was 55 MPH it was unusual to see vehicles travelling 80 MPH, wouldn’t take long before losing your drivers license. Commercial drivers generally keep their speed within 10 MPH of the limit.
I was cited for driving 74 MPH when the speed limit was 55 MPH, 6 points on my license, that was my last speeding ticket. The speed limit has an affect on driving behavior.
I got about a quarter of the way through the video, and I couldn’t take anymore. The solar cycle has been going on for billions of years. They spent a lot of time discussing solar flares. Yes, they emit lots of energy and solar particles, but it is almost never directed towards Earth. Do you think that serious scientists have missed that? The people that made that video use lots of scientific concepts in an unscientific way. They have an ulterior motive. I’d really like to know who paid for this video. Someone that profits from the confusion it creates, I’d say. I don’t expect everyone to understand that, and I do not think you are trying to hoodwink us the way the video makers are.
Ben Davidson is NOT a scientist. He has no education in science. People who listen to him have ZERO understanding of science. But it makes them feel good. He is considered a total quack. Right up there with Flat-Earthers.
What historical facts is it based on? The fact that they eventually raised the speed limits once the oil shortage was over proves that lowering the speed limit doesn’t do anything to reduce speed?
This is a fact that you stated:
“Once the oil embargo went away back in the 70’s the national average speed limit went back up after Nixon’s 55 national speed limit.”
Yep, they did. That is a fact. Good job.
This is either an opinion or just an untruth:
“Also the FACT speeds didn’t go UP when the 55 speed limit was removed.”
I highly doubt you can substantiate the claim that speeds didn’t increase nationally when they raised the speed limit from 55 mph. As a matter of fact, I think that’s a pretty absurd claim.
“if people who cry “eminent climate disaster” wouldn’t even entertain the notion of dropping their speed during their commute, it surely doesn’t further my belief in the theory.”
“If” doesn’t assert anything. I’m not claiming that people wouldn’t drop their speed if asked to do so by the government. Apparently Mike is. I am saying that “if” they wouldn’t even be hindered by a drop of 10 mph to help avoid the climate disaster, that would definitely make me question their belief in said impending disaster.
How about another choice. In many parts of this country we don’t have too many options on how we travel. That does NOT mean we don’t want it. I’d love to be able to take public transportation to work. It’s IMPOSSIBLE. I do drive over the speed limit to work because that’s the prevailing traffic speed limit. To do otherwise is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.
That is NOT what I said. Back in the 70’s dropping the speed limit when a mid-size vehicle averaged 16mpg really was a good gas savings. Today with the same weight vehicle getting more then double that with better performance and handling - dropping the speed limit won’t have the same impact. We want other solutions.
One more thing. Back in the 70’s gas prices almost tripled over night. That’s a HUGE deal for a family on a budget. With today’s better gas mileage vehicles and gas prices (even though they’ve risen a lot lately) are still lower then the 70’s if you account for inflation. In 1975 Nixon also started the Cafe’ standards. This by far has a better impact on our overall gas usage. But it hasn’t changed much in the past 20+ years.
During the testing of an expression, when the result of the test is false, then an exception can be raised. Which is what you thought and did!
It was an assertion but the general evidence is so suggestive it might not need to be proved. The road and sky are filled with John Kerrys and Al Gores whose personal luxury is more important than the ideals they otherwise exclaim.
I’m with you that man-influenced climate change is real. But what is doable and what works is the question. People adopting a cause for their team is what’s killing all of us. Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, is laughing all the way back from the bank in his airplanes.
Ok, then it is an assertion. I don’t know what evidence you’d want for it. The “if” is something that hasn’t taken place (the speed limit hasn’t dropped, so people haven’t had an opportunity to ignore it) and the “then” would be what I’d think. Am I supposed to give evidence for what my thoughts would be?
No…the “if” is what happens…the “then” is the result of the “if”.
The problem is you making assertion that IF this happens THEN this will happen.
Based on past evidence that didn’t happen…and I don’t think it will again. You do. Both are assertions. One is based on past evidence…the other is based on conjecture.
You’ve said numerous times that speed limits didn’t work to reduce speed. That is what I was referring to.
“ Back in the 70’s dropping the speed limit when a mid-size vehicle averaged 16mpg really was a good gas savings. Today with the same weight vehicle getting more then double that with better performance and handling - dropping the speed limit won’t have the same impact. We want other solutions.”
Drive your Highlander at 65 mph vs 80 mph and look at the instant mpg readout. There’d still be a huge savings in the amount of fuel burnt if the speed limit were dropped across the entire nation, assuming people would drop their speed to go along with the drop in speed limit, which you’ve said numerous times that they will not.
What is the “then” in my original statement? The “then” would be my resulting thoughts brought on by the “if”. Not a “then this will happen”, but a “then this is what I’ll think”.