Some Thoughts for the Day-PGP

Paul Pollets

I was tremendously affected by 9/11 events and have pondered over the year the course of America, our national response and reactions, how it affected my business and its future effect within the heating world of N. America. I realize this forum is best for sharing HW or steam knowledge, but I'd be interested if anyone else sees what I see....
What I've noticed most is the fact that in one year's time, not once have I heard any call for fuel conservation from either the administration or from congress.
I've not seen or heard of one piece of legislation in front of Congress calling for fuel conservation, energy saving appliances or tax credits for reducing our dependence on oil.
I've seen gas prices rise to $2.00 and drop back to $1.25 in a year.
Do Americans fully realize that our government makes decisions largely to support our ability to obtain oil(and gas) at the lowest price possible and our economy will collapse if we can't?
Why are we doing nothing to reduce our dependence on oil, supporting energy saving appliances, solar, cars and of course, efficient heating systems?
Do you understand that most of the World sees us at being selfish "energy hogs" and unconcerned with any "world view" or "Big Picture"?
What's very wrong with this picture?
What are you doing about it?



<A HREF="http://www.heatinghelp.com/getListed.cfm?id=104&Step=30">To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"</A>

PJO

Excellent Point...

Paul. I, too have wondered about this, and the people I have disussed it with seem to shrug it off!

I am a bit on the environmental side - and proud of it - but I honestly feel that if we truly saw the TOTAL cost of using petroleum...including the military, politics, and pollution...we, as Americans would have our jaws drop open. An aircraft carrier parked near the middle east? That's over a million dollars a day, plus the cost of the support ships. Thousands of soldiers stationed there to protect our oil interests? A few more million a day. It goes on and on. As a military veteran, I believe in security for our nation's people...not our nation's ridiculous thirst for oil.

Drill in the Artic Wildlife Refuge? If we got 1 mpg improvement per car across the board, that would avoid it. Think about that...

Does anyone honestly believe that we truly would care about that region as much if there was no oil there, and we still were the "pigs" that we are? Does anyone agree that if we cut our use of oil in half we would not be a better country from a political, environmental, and security standpoint? This could be done in ten years...easy...if the thinking was right.

Ditch the big SUV's, use renewable energy, and keep those heating systems efficient!

I'll get off the soapbox now...thank you for listening. PJO

Patrick_2

question

It is easy to say that dumping SUV's is part of the answer but what about people who drive pick-up trucks that have never hauled a load in there life, or how about RV's, they use a lot of fuel. So if I agree to get rid of my 1995 Ford Bronco 4X4 with a 351, what are you going to give me to haul my trailer with, or even go in the mountains in the winter time. Will you compensate me for giving up part of my life, should I quit riding ATV's and enjoying nature with my wife and son and watch it on the nature chanel?? I would gladly turn over the keys if you show me something that will haul under those conditions. Should we also quit flying to a favorite vacation spot?? What about recreational boating and fishing?? Not only are some of them hogs but a lot of them are still 2 stroke, take that enviroment, use a lot of gas and leave a oil slick behind me. Why not ban people from ideling their cars and trucks in the winter time to pre-heat them?? I dont think that this even scratches the surface of fuel consupmtion, but I also dont think that saying to dump all SUV's is the right answer either, after all most of us are driving vans that can be grouped with the gas hogs as well.

Paul Pollets

Reducing dependence...

So how should we go about reducing our oil dependence as a nation?

To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"

Bill Clinton

ditching suvs

Probably don't have to. Hybrid technology can double mileage right out of the gate on just about any vehicle. Sure, sound public policy and personal choice are often in opposition. Still, when there is compelling reason to limit personal choice then limits do have to be placed--as sensibly and reasonably as possible. It seems to me we could halve our fuel consumption overall, reduce pollution and co2 emmissions dramatically, avoid wars, reduce costs, stimulate the economy, and be decent world citizens to boot.

All we gotta do is do it.

Bill

Mark Hunt

Here in New York we have a program called Energy Smart.

It goes hand in hand with the Energy Star program and is designed to help reduce our energy consumption.

We audit homes to locate the big energy eaters and provide the services to improve the overall efficiency of the home.

All of the manufacturers of major equipment are on board with this and I'm sure we have all seen the Energy Star label.

Energy conservation is more than a high efficiency boiler or furnace. If I put a 92% efficient furnace or boiler in a house that had no windows it would waste a ton of fuel.

The Energy Star program teaches contractors to look at the whole picture rather than the small portion that directly affects them. To look at the structure as a system rather than a box.

The Energy Star program is approved by and supported by the EPA and the DOE.

Now I do not for one second believe that the September 11 terrorist murders had a thing to do with our consumption of oil. SUV's were not bin laden's motivation for these attacks. Even if we imported no oil, bin laden and his ilk would still hate America. If we pulled out of the middle east completely, they would still hate us.

America is the largest single contributor of humanitarian aid in the world, for the world. Do you really think that the average european wakes up every day and thinks, "Damn those Americans!!! They use too much oil!!"???? Surely you don't think that the people we buy the oil from are mad because we buy too much?

It doesn't happen.

Here's my question, if solar power is superior, why aren't the manufacturers of solar products promoting it?

And where are the wind power folks?

From my perspective, their silence indicates that they don't have viable options to what we now have.

We aren't energy hogs! We are a prosperous nation and our citizens enjoy freedoms that no other nation enjoys. And THAT is why they ENVY us. They can't figure it out. They don't understand it. So they have to condemn it.

I am sick and tired of the constant America bashing coming from abroad and within.

We are not the villians. We are not selfish. And if the the rest of the world chooses to believe those things, tough.

Mark H





To Learn More About This Contractor, Click Here to Visit Their Ad in "Find A Contractor"

PJO

I have to respectfully disagree...

with some of these comments, gentlemen.

1) Do the work of that '95 Bronco (with the 351), Patrick? How about a '95 Astro van with 4WD? I'd say a 20% mileage improvement is a good guess...and have more seating or cargo room.

2) Yes, Mark, we are, as a nation, energy pigs. Our mileage of our vehicles alone, as compared with the rest of the planet, is horrible. We have used more gas per vehicle in each of the past ten years or so...why? SUV's! While we have the technology to drive a 50 mpg car, it is more "stylish" to drive an Excursion/Suburban,etc...or a pickup. Do the companies love it? Of course thay do! This is their #1 profit vehicle.

Hybrid technology is a great thing, and it should be put into use for ALL vehicles. It is proving itself in the Prius and Civic, and will be expanded. But we still need to be reasonable...isn't it better to push a 2,500 lb. vehicle than a 3,000 lb. one...no matter what the engine? Of course! If I had to trade in my '99 Civic, it would be for a hybrid...taking me from 32 mpg average to 42 mpg. Yes, I'm a different thinker than most, but that extra 10 is important IMHO, and would be even more of an improvement for the average American.

Our use of vast amounts of fuel to heat our houses with cheap furnaces...I hear the complaining all the time on this website...why do you guys (mostly) love the European thinking on there better use of heating systems (including the comfort issue), but do not acknowledge their better thinking on cars? There is one and only one reason we are pigs...the price of oil and other petroleum-based items. If we paid like the rest of the world, do you guys honestly believe we would use as much? Of course not! Part of my argument was the TRUE cost of oil...

3) Recreational vehicles...IMHO, they are tiny compared to other things in the big picture, but I believe they are serious polluters. My son's dirt bike is a four stroke, and part of the reason is environmental (plus noise, maintenance, etc). They should also be updated with their emmisions...along with lawn mowers and the like.

4) Solar and wind...whoever says these companies are "silent" is just plain wrong. This technology is gaining momentum, and anyone that ignores it should open their eyes. Look at Denmark...about 10% of their power from renewables, and 20% by the end of the decade...are they that much smarter than us? Imagine if we started to look seriously at this...tough to do with the president coming from oil, but not impossible.

While it won't work for every situation, solar sure works for me...and I don't even have panels yet. Simply bt passive solar design of my home and it's correct orientation, on a cold but sunny day my boiler does not run for 6 to 10 hours...just wait until I put in some panels. My energy use is about half of my neighbors, and a big reason is just because of the sun. I fully intend to cut my use of oile in half again in the next five years. If one in ten houses did this, how much difference would that make? A bunch...

5) I disagree that our oil use has nothing to do with politics and September 11, 2001. We but a mojority of our oil from imported sources, and most of that is from OPEC. The millions of dollars flows from our country into Saudi Arabia, for example. Osama bin Laden is the son of a Saudi oil family, and he had (still has?) millions of dollars at his disposal...where did it come from? While he has definitely sought other sources for income, IMHO he has gotten a substantial amount from oil...and who (by far) uses the most oil on the planet? Look in the mirror, folks.

Imagine a world where the USA has half it's current oil consumption...and we currently import about 60% of our oil, I believe. Does anyone think the rest of the world would less jealous of us whether we used as much oil or not?

Folks, it's all in the way we think...and I'm not calling for the "removal" of all large vehicles. Just by doing a few simple things, I believe we could cut our use in half in ten years. That's not unreasonable.

Thank you and take care, PJO

steve gates

I too agree with simple steps, like a bullet between osmas eyes. He did not do it for oil(others have) he did it because of hatred jealousy ect.

My problem with suv's. I don't use the s part.

How many politicians drive an electric/hybrid car?

I like more front end for life protection than a van provides.

Time to stop my soapbox, I might get tooooo carried away.

Patrick_2

and I disagree with you also

You stated (How about a '95 Astro van with 4WD? I'd say a 20% mileage improvement is a good guess...and have more seating or cargo room.) Have you driven any of these?? Do yoy know what the MPG difference is between the two?? Minimal at best by the time you put people, cargo and hook a trailer to it, if anything it could be worse when you hit the mountains, and if you figure the wear and tear on a smaller engine it does not add up in my mind. Not to mention that I am 6'3" 220lbs with a sore back and knees, there is no room for legs, and as stated, I like having some front end in case of a accident. I also

When I stated RV's I was talking about motorhomes and conversion buses. All of my ATV's are 4 stroke, I have been arguing with my son who wants a 2 stroke but I will have no part of it. Ans as long as we are here why not harp on motor-sports. For the most part it is recreational until you get to the pro's where a lot of design comes in for future cars.

I am all for alternative energy sources and would love to change out or add on solar heating for my home, unfortunately everytime i look i can not afford. I also have to agree with Mark, they have been very quiet.

I also have to get off here, my head is spinning, This is a very large topic and it has many possible areas for improvment.

PJO

Patrick...

Yes, I have driven these vans. One of our best friends owns one (a '98). He is a former linebacker (6'2", 240lb) and it will pull 5,500 pounds. I have seen this engine and drivetrain last 250,000 miles on an electrician's work van.
I bet your Bronco gets about 10 mpg city and 15 hoghway...this van gets 15 city and 21 highway. They LIVE in the mountains. I guarantee you it won't get worse mileage than yours.

It's all about choices...

As for motor sports, inventions for cars come from everywhere, and to try and relate the use of absurd amounts of gasoline, oil, pollution, noise, etc. to this is funny....it's just for sport/entertainment...which I also enjoy occasionally.

I applaud your refusal to get a 2-stroke. I also applaud your interest in renewables. If you could make a $4,000 investment that GUARANTEED a 10% return, reduced pollution, and needed minimal maintenance (no problem with 99% of the Wallies I'm sure)...would you do it? Guess what - solar hot water is what I'm talking about, but you have to be in the right situation for it (orientaion, area, etc). How did your 401k do last year? Hopefully better than mine - which was less than 10%.

Silence by the industry? Check these out...some of the numbers are different than I've read elsewhere, but it's an interesting read. It's from Solar Times


ENERGY SECURITY: IT TAKES MORE THAN DRILLING...Excerpted from Amory & Hunter Lovins
Two decades ago, Amory and Hunter Lovins authored a Pentagon study called Brittle Power: Energy Strategy for National Security. It found - and little has changed since - that a handful of people could shut down three-quarters of the oil and gas supplies to the Eastern states without leaving Louisiana, cut the power to any major city, or kill millions by causing major destruction to a nuclear power plant. Expanding centralized and vulnerable energy systems didn't protect national security then, and it won't now.
Energy security starts with using less energy far more efficiently to do the same tasks. The next step is to obtain more energy from sources that are inherently invulnerable because they're dispersed, diverse, and increasingly renewable. Meanwhile, we must not increase reliance on existing vulnerable systems. This strategy doesn't cost more; indeed, it's already winning in the marketplace. Oil fuels 97 percent of U.S. mobility. Relying for 13 percent of
U.S. oil supply on the pathological predators and vulnerable autocrats of the Mideast - home of at least two-thirds of the world's reserves - is a tragedy waiting to happen. We need not just another crude-oil source, but also an inherently secure supply chain delivering useful transportation fuels all the way to customers, then using those fuels productively so we need less. Alternatives can supply a bigger share, and stockpiles last longer.
EFFICIENCY is the first and cheapest rapid-deployment energy resource. In 2000, America used 40 percent less energy and 49 percent less oil to produce each dollar of GDP than in 1975. Those savings are now the nation's largest "source" - five times domestic oil output. Most were achieved in just six years, from 1979 to 1985, when gross domestic product grew 16 percent, total oil use fell 15 percent and Gulf imports fell 87 percent. Modern efficiency technologies can put another $300 billion a year back into Americans' pockets. Just a 2.7-mpg better light-vehicle fleet could save as much petroleum as we import from the Persian Gulf.
Saving oil is the fastest way to blunt OPEC's market power, beat down prices, and expand invulnerable sources' share of energy supply. New ways to supply fuel from renewable sources can be secure, fast, and competitive. Urban, industrial, farm and forest wastes and soil-replenishing crops, such as prairie grass, can yield clean transportation fuels, electricity, fertilizer, and substitutes for petrochemicals. Done properly, this can also improve topsoil, enhance farmers' incomes, preserve rural culture, and stabilize the climate. Producing such biofuels locally bypasses vulnerable pipelines, employs Americans and keeps dollars at home. Hydrogen fuel cells based on natural gas (but without using more) or renewable energy could also save about $1 trillion of investment
for transportation fuel infrastructure in the next 40 years while displacing oil promptly, securely, profitably - and in the long run, almost completely.
Drilling for more oil in the United States might be a useful but limited step, since the U.S. uses 25 percent of the world's oil but owns only 3 percent. New domestic oil is generally costly and far from customers. Of the some 4 million oil wells drilled since the 1860s, 3 million have been drilled in the lower 48 states. Alaska has been less exploited, so the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge might yield oil - albeit, says the U.S. Geological Survey, uneconomically, a decade off, and briefly cutting imports by up to only five percentage points.

Source: R. James Woolsey, Amory B. Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins - Christian Science Monitor 2002.3.29 R. James Woolsey, an attorney, was Director of Central Intelligence from 1993 to 1995. The Lovinses, who lead the nonprofit Rocky Mountain Institute, have long advised major oil companies and the Energy and Defense Departments. For more information on this subject, go to www.rmi.org/sitepages/pid533.php and www.nepinitiative.org.


I'd like to thank Hot Rod and (whom HR recommended) Mike at Aspen Solar for getting me more into this stuff.
Duncan, you also have my respect as to this issue, based on our short conversations of last month on this (solar) subject.

Patrick, my head is spinning too. But I do like the conversation. Hopefully we can continue in this "gentlemanly" discussion. E-mail me directly if you'd like.

Take Care, PJO

Patrick_2

I test drove a Astro for a week before I bought the Bronco, I dont know how your buddy does it. I am more comfortable in the Dakota I drive for work than that, but I respectfully acknowledge your points. I really did want to get something that had better MPG ratings but had no luck. I am not knocking the Astro or Safari, I was just not comfie driving it. Anything else was outrageous in price and I could not afford at this time.

As for the 2 stroke, thanks, he currently is riding a 4 stroke and wants something with more get up and go, so I changed sprockets on it and he seems to complain a little less. Also I told him the all the top manufacturers are racing to get a 4 stroke to compete against the rest. He is a little impatient (wonder where he gets that from, ha-ha) and does nto want to wait for 1 in his size, did not like it when I told him patience is a virtue "AH DAD!!!" I think he will survive.

Would liek a little more on the payback but that is not bad, does it escalate as energy gets more expensive?? I have been thinking about solar like you were saying, do these small windmills you see in peoples yards generate a lot of power?? Guess I will have to check on that. It would make me estatic to open bills and see smaller figures on them, but then again everyone could say that.

Thanks for the points to chew on, hope you did not think I was knocking your ideas, I get a little defensive when it comes to my rides. I am a bit of a motor head!!! Dont think I want to tell you the pride of my fleet. God help me, I LOVE TO BURN RUBBER!!! Take care.

Patrick

PJO

Please, you can tell me...

the "pride" of your fleet. Probably an old piece of American iron...car ('67 Pontiac Tempest) or truck ('72 Chevy w/ 454). I'm a GM guy if you haven't noticed :-)

My personal pride for years were the Opel GT's...my first car. They rusted like crazy, had lousy factory carbs and electric, and the manual flip lights were a nightmare...but they were the best balanced (and pretty fast) car I ever drove. The engine was tucked so far back they tilted it 15 degrees of center so the driver had room for the pedals...this put the weight distribution near 50/50 but you could still fishtail it nicely if needed. Want to pull the engine for a re-build? Lift the car and take it from underneath...that's how tight they tucked the motor in.

My Dad wouldn't let me buy a '71 Callenger 340 ("Not only no but hell no!") and he thought a four cylinder might be okay...little did he know that car could rip down the road at 120 mph - not that I ever went that fast :-) I have owned three of them, and long to someday find another to fix-up and give to my son...management will prevent that from ever happening - especially because I would need a second one just for parts because of scarcity.

No need to feel any remorse about defending your rides...they are one of the most "American" of personal values. I'm more concerned with the cars that are driven everyday, and just want to see a steady improvement in our environmental thinking as it relates to everything...cars are just an important one. Besides, with a first name like that, how can I be upset? If your Irish, how can I even argue? Very well, thank you! :-)

Take Care, PJO



Yes, the payback is better for solar as energy prices go up. It also saves on taxes because your energy bill goes down, but now you're splitting hairs. Wind power is also great from what I've read about, but the location is more important than solar, and to be effective the tower has to be pretty high...not popular with neighbors I would think. If I lived in a remote area I would have a mix of solar and wind, and either sell back my "extra" juice when needed or be off the grid completely. This takes a heavy up-front cost, abd therefore the dollar payback isn't nearly as important as the environmental payback.