Re: HOW FORD PLANS TO CUT AUTO EMISSIONS

From: Dirk Bruere at Neopax (dirk_at_neopax.com)
Date: 10/11/04 

Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:58:14 +0100

hanson wrote:
> "Dirk Bruere at Neopax" <dirk@neopax.com> wrote in message
> news:2svl71F1qds3dU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>>hanson citing a Ford news release:
>>
>>>>California adopted a regulation that will force automakers to reduce
>>>>global warming emissions in the state by 30 percent by the 2016
>>>>model year.
>>>
>>hanson wrote
>>
>>>So, what if that goal is not achieved? Does anyone really think that
>>>Californians will go for bicycles, pedaling 8 hrs to work and another
>>>8 hrs back.....ahahaha.... If there is a stop going to be put onto
>>>new car sales in 2016.... then from then on Californians will drive
>>>older and older cars that pollute more and more....ahahaha...
>>>and at next election there will be initiatives to get rid of any politician
>>>that is green.......ahahahaha....Californians maybe nutty but they
>>>ain't crazy lunatics....well, the green shits amongst them of are.
>>
> [Dirk]
>
>>I think the peak oil crisis will be well upon us by then, with oil at
>>$100 a barrel. That should take care of it nicely.
>>
>
> [hanson]
> Right and wrong, Dirk. It's just a temporary crisis. Look at the history
> of oil prices. They will not be over $30 by 2016, give or take inflation.
> The current $spike is 90% due to commodity futures speculators and
> 10% due to delays in production increases because of those
> *contemporary* expansion demands from Indian & Chinese industries.
> Oil is a money game, the biggest one there is. The oil itself is just the
> gimmick. Hence, like in any other game, there are always ups & downs.

I doubt that China and India are going to slow economic growth over the next
decade, barring nuclear war. That means 10% pa for China alone.

And the problem is not fossil fuels in general, but cheap *oil*. 

-- 
Dirk
The Consensus:-
The political party for the new millenium
http://www.theconsensus.org
Quantcast