Obama Is Right: It's Easy to Reduce the Nation's (and Your Own) Fuel Bill Dramatically

I believe it is hard for individuals to counteract the massive waste of war and social policy with small acts of personal responsibility. One show-off military jet flyover will probably eat up more fuel and spew more pollution than anyone can counteract in a year of careful driving.

Nonetheless, if we develop habits of thrift and using only what we need, that can have a cumulative effect on the environment and on our feelings about what is important in life.

Another idea Obama forgot to mention is drifting behind an 18 wheeler tractor trailer close enough to have the big rig break the wind for you. With less wind resistance your gas mileage should improve. Just be careful you don't get too close or you might end up in a nasty accident.

Sparkplug writes;
"Good article but please do not be so stupid as to poke a hole in your muffler!"

I was just wondering how small of a hole is small, heh.

I've had this fight many times with many people and it is never an easy one. For me, I will not vote third party because I am unwilling to take the chance. Cowardly, I know, but I am so in need of serious change, I have had such a deficit of hope, that I need to vote in a way that is most likely to bring about that change. Voting third party is not stupid, it is brave and it is patient. I am not a patient person.

crooked---

Thanks for your comments.

I do have real concerns, certainly, about the postions of the Democratic Party. It is NOT a labor/people's party, and the electoral system is a controlled one in which only D/R's can win. Those are real problems. As well, I DO very much understand where the folks voting for Nader are coming from.
I was a founding member of the Labor Party (which is sectarian, going no where) and have participated in numerous conferences, etc around the possibility of bldg a new political party.

However, I could not possibly disagree with Nader supporters today, for numerous reasons.

First, the point of this election is that our people are in horrible misery. Jobs have been destroyed, helath care in major crisis, the entire pension system has been nearly wiped out, two unjust wars are being conducted, we are in the worst economic crisis since the great depression and our people NEED REAL HELP, (not just words). In order to affect the possibility of real needed changes, (not just words that we like to hear), a massive, very real people's movement, led by labor and the minority communities, has been built and is fighting for a very real program of change. This includes, but not limited to; Natl health care, end the wars, 'green' jobs program, pension and bankruptcy reform for the people, the right of workers to organize into unions, jobs program to rebuild infrastructure.
The Democratic Platform has been opened up and over 20,000 folks participated in mtgs, calling for these demands, which are now reflected in the Democratic platform.

This people's movement is NOT just an electoral thing, it is set up to really kick in after Obama and a strong Democratic majority is elected. The movement has close ties to the progressive sector of the Democratic Party and can be in a position to pass these very real legislative goals if we are successful at the polls. You are certainly correct that there are obstacles, that there are conservative wall st folks in strong positions in the Democratic Party, as well as our folks. It will be a fight after the election. However, the first thing that MUST occur to be in position to pass progressive legislation is to DEFEAT OUR MAIN ENEMY---GOP/CORPORATE/ULTRA-RIGHT FORCES NOW IN CONTROL IN DC. That would set up the possibility, not the guarantee, of legislative vicories.

Second, the electoral system is what it is, until we can change it, but at this time there is no proportional representation. That means that Nader is just running as a spoiler. He absolutely cannot even get a single bill introduced. He has no members of congress, and, much, much more importantly, no ties to the mass peoples' movement. He has no ability to, in any way, concretely affect anything for the people. He can, however, concretely affect the ability of the people's movment to defeat our main enemy and win a new political balance of forces, favorable to the people.

As well, Nader does NOT aid the movement toward a new political party. He sets it back! A real new political party cannot just be a small isolated sect. It must come out of the real struggles of real people. Nader has no ties to the people's movement fighting for changes and is, in fact, dispised there. As someone who does favor a new labor/people's party, I regularly hear folks talk against it, using Nader as the example. "What, you want a new party like Nader. All he does is split the votes and help the Republicans. What the hell good is that?" Like it or not, that is really how Nader is viewed

You speak of what you think voting for Nader means "to you." A great many folks throughout history have fought for extremely bad causes, for good reasons. It really doesn't matter to reality what you think Nader means to you, it matters, in reality, what we are actually able to DO! In another piece I wrote about the Daily News strike in Detroit. A yg guy who considered himself "progressive," with a "Think Globally, Act Locally" bumper sticker, crossed the picket line. He says the union tactics weren't progressive enough and he was going to start a new union. In REALITY, not what he thought, all he did was help the co. break the strike and hurt all the workers.

Today, our people need REAL HELP! Org'd labor, the minority peole's movements, women, etc. have come together in a mighty coalition that is fighting for change. A national strategic plan has been developed in order to mobilize people and be able to win these changes. Now Nader bungles in, with NO ties to the peole's mvement, saying he have a "better" plan. In REALITY all he is a scab that is breaking the unity we need to defeat our enemies.

We don't have illusions about the Democratic Party and we aren't "depending on" the Democratic Party. We are depending on the powere of the organized massive people's movemnt. However, that movement needs to create the favorable conditions to be able to pass the gains the peo[ple need. We need YOUR help to win, as well!

edit won't work, should be

For me voting for Nader or any third party candidate is not a vote for McCain because given the choice between only McCain and Obama I would simply choose not to vote, because Obama like McCain is in favor of policy that I am unwilling to support.

Unionguy

You seem unable or unwilling to understand where supporters of third part candidates are coming from. Like many others I don't see a huge difference between McCain and Obama (at least on issues that are important to me as well as many others). Like it or not Obama is essentially a right of center candidate. He is not interested in a speedy withdrawal from Iraq that the vast majority of Americans want. He is not interested in holding Bush accountable even though his constituency is overwhelming in support of impeachment. Nor is he in favor of single payer health insurance. Obama like McCain is a militant thug who is in favor of expanding US violence in the Middle East. His plans to send more troops to Afghanistan and his calls for US intervention in Pakistan will inevitably be a disaster. His position on Iran isn't much of a departure from that of Bush or McCain. His positions on Israel and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict are essentially unchanged from Bush's and in fact to the right of those supported by the American public. Do you see a problem here? Democrats by and large do not represent their constituency. While you criticize Nader for not be able to bring about change Obama makes clear that he has no intentional of doing so. For me voting for Nader or any third party candidate is not a vote for McCain because given the choice between only McCain and Obama I would simply choose not to vote, because Obama like McCain supports policy that I am unwilling to support. Democracy in this country is a joke. Corruption is endemic. Politicians overwhelmingly represent businesses and those that finance their elections not the voters that put them into office. Neither Democrats nor Republicans are interested in do anything about corruption or creating a more representational government (one that would allow greater inclusion of third parties). As long as Democrats refuse to make serious efforts to change these conditions many progressive voters will refuse to vote for them. While it is true that many progressive voters would vote Democrat in the absence of third party candidates, therefore increasing the Democratic Party's candidates prospects for president. Perhaps losing elections might give Democrats motivation to address the issues that are of importance to their constituency instead of relying on simply being the lesser of two evils to win elections. Democracy is about choose, it is unfortunate that our political system creates a duopoly on political power, therefore effectively limiting voters options.

It's just so NICE that the author gets to pat himself on the back for being a more 'relaxed' driver now and in the process is no longer scaring the bejeesus out of those of us who have always practiced being courteous and safe drivers anyway ! Please don't use your cruise control on icy roads in the winter, it's so very not safe . . .

And when parts of a house are 'shut off' for the winter it's VERY important to make sure that no pipes freeze in the process, also to check and make sure you are not getting mold growth and other nasties happening in the shut off portions . . .

I am planning to make heavy window quilts this winter for our bigger windows, these are usually HUGE sources of heat loss, even the double or triple pane windows commonly used here . . . that alone would save many homeowners much fuel . . . we have always built very tight houses because the temps here regularly get to 50 below zero . . . our current house uses an outdoor wood fired boiler with a monitor oil stove (these are very efficient and good for small places) for backup. . . However, there are many folks here who would move if they could because they can't afford to heat their homes, but they can't sell the homes either . . .

It's true that we just turn a blind eye to military and corporate waste of energy, perhaps there is just too much cognitive dissonance, as when we go out to our little cabin, light a fire in the woodstove, relax in the peace and quiet, and suddenly the sky is screaming overhead as the military flies through the valley really low and fast in whatever their latest boy-toy is, i can't keep up with the numbers, maybe F-24's ?
(Huge airforce base just south of here, named after early aviator Carl Ben Eielson)

Nannie---

You put slogans on the blog, instead of real discussion. That isn't helpful.

I'd like to ask HOW is Nader going to "change things?" He has no party, no power, no base, no ability to even get the most minor change even introduced and absolutely NO ties to the wider labor-led people's movement?

Nader supporters like to talk about Nader taking "good positions," but in reality, all Nader can actually do, concretely, is help McCain. The people that I live and work with, that I know are suffering horribly due to the actions of the corporate Bush, ultra-right wingers in power now. We need legislation (like Sherrod Brown, Dennis Kucinich, Betty Sutton and other progressive Democrats have introduced). Without a defeat for the GOP, our people continue to suffer horribly and no positive legislation can be passed.

Plesse, don't just write slogans. Discuss these real questions.

EUREKA, I'VE FOUND IT!!! The solution to our energy crisis. Since almost 70% of Americans are overweight...call a spade a spade...FAT AS HELL, lets start liposuction centers everywhere & convert all that blubber into fuel. Thin people would get a rebate based on the medical savings of being thin, and fat tubs of lard would be compensated according to how much body lard they contribute. See, every'body' wins under this plan.

Next, we need a vehicle that runs on ammonia. Think of all of it that just goes down our toilets every day (and wastes trillions of gallons of water, too). Wouldn't it be great if you could just pee in your tank at night for the next daily commute? Guys already have a spout, ladies would need an accomodation, but I wonder if there would still be any 'seat up, seat down' thingy?

All joking aside, folks (was I?), human feces is one of the best bio-fuel base materials available.

As far as slamming BO about his comment about proper tire inflation & tune-ups being one part of the solution for getting away from foreign oil he's correct. Insane McCain has even admitted it now. The DOE & EPA say it will save 3.3% overall, which translates to a 12 cent IMMEDIATE reduction in oil consumption, rather than their estimate of a 6 cent reduction, by 2030, drilling for oil in ANWR & the OCS. Sure, making sure you car is tuned & tires are inflated properly is not a sound comprehensive energy policy, but it beats the hell out of 'drill, drill, drill'.

There's another factor here that I didn't see discussed ...

Gasoline tax. If we cut back severely on our use, that tax money will dwindle.

I'm not suggesting that we not cut back, but just pointing out that if we do there are side effects that may not be pleasant.

.

Nader will change things.
Nader is our only hope.
Nader is the only choice.
Fight the Two-party system.
VOTE NADER 2008… You'll be glad you did and so will I…

.

Change only happens when people are organized. The work only starts after Election Day. Demonstrations, direct action, petitions, flooding your congressman with phone calls on behalf of your cause, works! If it didn't then the politicians of all stripes would be voting for more media ownership concentration. Now they don't dare do that because the traditional left - right, conservative - liberal divides have collapsed on this specific issue. When even a Trent Lott Republican is vociferous against media concentration and the same goes for his Democratic Party equivalent you have a movement.

This is the same type of movement that is forming around the push to get off of fossil fuels and move to renewables, efficiency and mass transit. The time is ripe and change is in the air but it will only be the change we want only if we demand it and, if I may paraphrase Eisenhower, governments had better listen.

"Pray for the dead and fight like hell for the living." Mary Harris "Mother" Jones.

Many people may easily overlook the importance of keeping correct tire pressure, but in fact, maintaining proper tire pressure is important for many reasons other than reducing the potential of a flat tire or a blowout, but also for achieving optimam handling from your vehicle and saving fuel cost from your budget.

poopdeck-alas, but a lot of folks want to complain about the little things not doing anything and shout about the bigger stuff when anyone who knows anything about human nature knows that people will not, of their own accord, change their lives drastically. They may, however, check their tire pressure, switch to CFLs and do as you did and update old systems.

I'll be voting for Obama for president in Novemeber. He's not my ideal choice, but he's a heck of a lot better than the alternative and I feel we have a better chance at getting the change we need with him in office as opposed to McCain.

Thanks, Dave.

We recently replaced our aging air conditioning system with a much more efficient one. Our electric bills for June and July are already from 50 to 60 dollars lower than last year and that does not even take into account the increased price of electricity. We expect that the gas bill for heating this winter will also be lower. The bill for purchase and installation was near 5400 dollars. If one replaces one million older AC's the savings in power could be as much as $ 0.2 billion annually. Hence, people who replace their AC with the new and much more efficient one should get a Federal Tax Rebate or else a Refund up to, say, $ 7000.- (two weeks of war in Iraq!) That would be far easier to do than Obama's silly car phantasm. Of course we could also return to horse-and-buggy and no AC. That would really help our Earth!

"A left-wing vote for Nader is the same as a vote for McCain. Why don't you sorry fucks skip the damned middleman and vote Republican already? At least then you'd be honest."

kitty_tc,

Please allow me to say something regarding your words: They don't help.

I'm a fairly recent convert to the Obama camp. However, I know full well how corrupt and corporate the Democratic Party is. They are on the take and they drum out any and all dissenters (I know a couple of hard-working Democrats who this recently happened to).

By essentially telling people that their vote for someone other than your guy is a waste, or vote for the other guy, you are insulting the very people who you may be calling on to get your back someday. It's also condescending as hell.

Come election day, many people who (rightly) decry their lack of choice will consider voting for Obama. I'm sure more than a few of them will remember your words and think otherwise.

Surely a nation with the largest pool of scientific and technical manpower doesn't need an Obama to tell them that .

In the Third World country where I live ( where petrol has always been frightfully expensive ) many people ,have ever since I can remember, been doing precisely that viz. frequent checking of tyre pressures and regular tune-ups.

In fact many here have gone one better on the esteemed Mr.Obama- they've begun changing over to CFL lights.

'Someone mentioned "Waiting for Godot." There's a line in the play that perfectly reflects what we've all come to, under this criminal Bush regime. The two characters are bickering and accusing each other of being insufficiently vigilant in their persistent waiting for the personage who never comes to fulfill them. One says to the other, "That's it, let's abuse each other." Common Dreamers.'

Touchè.

scheiber6923 August 6th, 2008 10:03 pm

"Thanks Pissantnobody, for bringing up a point I've been meaning to address for awhile. Yes of course we should all do what we we should be doing to conserve energy and lessen our toll on this planet's resources, but what I never seem to hear, here or in the MSM, is anyone calling to reign in the corporations."

I'm not sure where you've been for the last 10 or 15 years, but I've heard MANY call to reign in corporations. Hell, that's what POCLAD is all about. Moyers and Korten and Soros et al have also warned us of corporate power. With all these heavy-hitters, we are still owned by corporate power.

The problem is two-fold:

1. We have a political system that is corporate owned.
2. We have a populace which by-and-large want someone else to fix it. However, refer to item number 1.

Whether it be corporate control or who will be our next president, it is WE who decide what we get. Every purchase is a vote. Every one.

What people fail to see (or maybe it's willful myopia) is that it really is up to each one of us, every day, to make the kind of society we want. What we have now is the result of billions of individual choices. It all starts to change when we start to change.

Good article.

Common sense behavioral adjustments which improve the efficiency of everyday systems are not really a political issue. You needn't vote one way or the other to implement these changes in your life so I don't understand some posters going off half-cocked at the author when, aside from the headline, only twice he mentioned the candidates' names and also pointed out flaws in their respective campaigns.

This site is quickly becoming a home for reactionary yahoos who cannot at this time take any article at face value.

Dept. of Pneumatics News Flash:

AMERICA HAS AN "UNDER INFLATION" PROBLEM...
Under-Inflated tires can be found on nearly eight out of every ten vehicles on the road today. Under inflated tires use more fuel, wear out quicker, lead to premature tire failures, and are a detriment to the environment. For many years consumers were advised to regularly check their tire pressure, yet most motorists will admit that they rarely do.

THERE IS A BETTER WAY...
High-Purity Nitrogen tire inflation has been used for many years by industry professionals. They used the gas primarily for increased safety, better pressure retention and increased pressure stability. While High-Purity Nitrogen inflation does not relieve the motorist from checking their tire pressure regularly, it will on average maintain a safe level of tire pressure for a much longer period of time. In addition, it will reduce tire aging, wheel oxidation and reduce pressure swings caused by moisture found in regular compressed air.

What a joy it is to be part of the liberal hate fest! Nader is Stalin, as kitty reminds us! More air in my tires means a vote for Obama! Less air means I love McCain! David Lindorff is a liberal who hates liberals! Of course, nobody really knows anything but me! I alone have all the answers and the rest of you are fools! If I'm for Obama I'm called a fool and if I have serious problems with Obama for being like every other pandering Democrat I'm also a fool!

Someone mentioned "Waiting for Godot." There's a line in the play that perfectly reflects what we've all come to, under this criminal Bush regime. The two characters are bickering and accusing each other of being insufficiently vigilant in their persistent waiting for the personage who never comes to fulfill them. One says to the other, "That's it, let's abuse each other." Common Dreamers.

Speaking of lemmings, accepting the status quo hardly equates as a choice. But such is the rationale of those infected with the disease of lesser evilism. The sheeple all drink from the same polluted well, and then pontificate to the only free beings on the planet. Hilarious!

Oh yah, Congress does nothing and we are asked to put air in our tires. I hope my Congressman does not come near me if I have an air hose in my hand. Also, would somebody pullleeeeseee let the air out of Obama.

Same old bullshit... same refusal to acknowledge the absolute FACT that no matter how many lemmings vote for Nader, there WILL BE either a Democratic or a Republican president come November. Those are your choices. Fucking deal with it already. Obama and McCain ARE your ONLY choices. One of them WILL BE president. Nader will NOT.

A left-wing vote for Nader is the same as a vote for McCain. Why don't you sorry fucks skip the damned middleman and vote Republican already? At least then you'd be honest.

I've been driving at 50 on a 55 mph two-lane Midwest US highway to and from work (15 miles RT) for about a year now. At first angry drivers would pull up behind me and then gun their engines when they had a chance to pass. Not so much any more! Many are starting to calculate what it costs to pass me only to then end up stopped by WalMart's private traffic light at the edge of the city, where while they are waiting for a green light I am now right behind them but usually never come to a full stop like they had to do (wasted inertia). They've surged passing me and wasted gas and then they have come to a full stop and wasted gas; I haven't. Metaphor for the Occupation of Iraq?

Some are starting to learn. That's a good thing.

Love Lindorff's last line: "As for the people behind me cursing and honking, as they look at the back of my car, like it or not they're seeing the future." He is getting better and better.
-30-

Obama offers good suggestions for reducing our fuel bills will succumbing to corporate interests that will destroy our planet. Here is his environmental record:

n May of 1998, Obama voted for a Bill condemning the Kyoto Treaty while in the Illinois Senate.

Obama pays lip service to the issue of environmental sustainability (no argument here) saying that climate change is "one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation." Yet while he was an Illinois state Senator he supported numerous Bills drafted on behalf of the Coal Industry according to legislative records. He also acknowledged his very strong support for coal during his run for the US Senate in 2004 by affirming in a speech, "There is always going to be a role for coal."

Furthermore, Obama's campaign has accepted contributions from the coal industry to the tune of $539,597.00 for both Presidential and Senate campaigns as reported by the Center for Responsive Politics.

A key feature of Obama's environmental plan calls for "technologies to reduce coal emissions." But any authentic environmentalist will tell you of the scope of obfuscation in his statement: in the words of Meg Boyle (Global Warming Policy expert for Green Peace) recently noted, "Those technologies are risky and expensive" and "They cannot deliver in time to avoid the most dangerous impacts of climate change." Nor are they support by the Coal Industry who would need to implement them to be effective. Obama's environmental agenda is what is called "green washing" of which he and his handlers have become masters. The lip service environmentalists you might find on this site believe the tripe ad nausea.

Frank O'Donnell, President of the non-partisan Clean Air Watch noted that Obama is "Trying to straddle two political irreconcilable positions: taking decisive action against global warming while keeping a healthy coal industry" and "Obama's record certainly suggests that environmentalists aren't going to be calling the shots in his Administration without input from the [coal] industry."

In the Illinois State Senate Obama cast the following votes:

1997, he voted to divert sales taxes to fund grants to reopen closed mines.

2001, Voted for legislation that offered 3.5 billion in loan guarantees to build coal fired power plants with no concomitant protections to control carbon emissions.

2003, he voted to allow 300 million in taxpayer backed bonds to build or expand coal fired power plants

In 2005 in the US Senate, Obama voted for a Bill opposed by most Democrats which contained 9 billion in Coal subsidies.

In 2007, Obama sponsored a Bill calling for 8 billion in subsidies to a technology to convert coal to liquid fuel which the Sierra Club said that liquid coal, "releases almost double the global warming emissions per gallon as regular gasoline."

Obama's Presidential campaign asserts his views on coal, nuclear, and bio fuels. All of which are hostile to our Earth Mother. Nuclear has never resolved the spent fuel problem, i.e., radioactive waste outlives the containers they are stored in by hundreds of years, and the current political solution is to bury the waste. With regard to bio fuels, as more arable land transitions to higher paying crops for bio fuels, thus taking away land for food crops, food prices will soar, and worldwide starvation increase. Bio fuels also create as many unsustainable results as fossil fuels.

Obama, like McCain, are both against the environment, and whose policy objectives will diminish life on planet Earth. Hope may get a lot of mileage in the belt way where most of the herd feeds from the same polluted trough, but it has nothing to do with the reality of Obama and his contradictory and anti environmental record.

"Of course it makes sense to keep your car in shape, but rather than turn my half-hour commute into 45 minutes with eco-driving, we might better consider how much energy 'our' military is using to spread murder near and far."

Thanks Pissantnobody, for bringing up a point I've been meaning to address for awhile. Yes of course we should all do what we we should be doing to conserve energy and lessen our toll on this planet's resources, but what I never seem to hear, here or in the MSM, is anyone calling to reign in the corporations.

It's weird, kind of like the whole "welfare queen" debacle- we are some how turned upon each other while the real giants plunder and pillage with seeming impunity. I know I'm not the world's greenest individual, but when I look at corporate waste, I'm absolutely appalled, even at the local level of business. Just an observation.

Feeling pressure from constituents to do something about the rising cost of gas Sen. Obama (D-Il) has intoduced legislation that would create a new federal agency called the Dept of Pneumatics that in turn would provide a free Universal Tire Inflation Center or UTIC on every busy intersection in the US.

Sen Obama said, "I have heard you pleas for help and believe UTICs are the answer. He also called for homeowner subsidies so families could grow their own corn. The corn would be harvested when ripe and taken to Biofuel Production Sites or a BPS. At a BPS customers would receive a liter of ethanol for every six ears of corn.

Neighborhood volunteers groups called Tire Inflater Fuel Savers or TIFS would routinely check their neighbor's tire's air pressure and if found low would inflate them with government provided portable air compressors.

The programs would not be mandatory and families opting out of the federal program would receive a check for $100.00 every six months.

"I am convinced that the combined fuel savings from UTICs along with the BPSs and homegrown corn will relieve some of the burden off struggling families! Yes we can! Yes we can!", said Sen. Obama at a news conference, as he polished off a corn on the cob.

"I'm not talking brilliant, visionary ideas, I'd settle for simple sanity. "

And what do you propose? I think it's high time those calling for all-or-nothing start ponying up and suggesting just how we are to realize your dreams (that haven't already been tried, ad-infinitum).

While we're waiting for Godot (who, by the way, never comes!), why don't we support the good and let the perfect take care of itself.

Obama is good. What he is not, it perfect (or Godot). That's what we have. It's in front of us, it's as real as we're going to get in the immediate future, and it's good enough for me.

Obama is right... Right wing, that is!

Of course it makes sense to keep your car in shape, but rather than turn my half-hour commute into 45 minutes with eco-driving, we might better consider how much energy 'our' military is using to spread murder near and far.

Quoting jlocke in a previous post:

"Wow brilliant 'strategic thinking.' Hand the keys to the US military machine to a guy that wants to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan indefinitely and is threatening Pakistan and Iran, because, he is talking about a simple behavior that would slow, not reverse global warming."

Well said!

Or, put another way -- cut the crap, David Lindorff! Barack Obama is Corporate America's "new and improved" apparatchik-mouthpiece. (And you, of all people, know it.)

Keep advising people to "vote for the lesser of the two evils" and watch the American political consensus continue to move further and further to the right.

How much longer can "all this" go on, David Lindorff? ... And I assume you are aware of what "all this" refers to.

Obama is four-for-four, man! ... As "jlocke" points out: "(Let's) hand the keys to the US military machine to a guy that wants to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan indefinitely and is threatening Pakistan and Iran ..."

How can a corporatist/militarist like Barack Obama possibly be good for the planet; his band-aid "changes" a macabre joke.

How can a corporatist/militarist like Barack Obama possibly be good for the planet -- a planet that, by all accounts, is running out of time.

Do we, as a species, have the time it would take to move the political oligarchy in the United States onto a path of, at a minimum, SANITY?

I'm not talking brilliant, visionary ideas, I'd settle for simple sanity.

You know as well as anyone else, David Lindorff, that neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party HAS ANY MEANINGFUL PLAN WHATSOEVER to save this planet.

What makes sense? To, on the one hand, stay with the same political oligarchy that got us into this mess? Or, is a new political order, based on the establishment in the United States of a viable third party movement, our only hope?

Asking your grandchildren that question make be problematic, in that they may not be around to answer it.

"PROBLEMS CANNOT BE SOLVED BY THE SAME LEVEL OF THINKING THAT CREATED THEM." ... Albert Einstein

It's important to understand the context in which this whole ridiculous media circus started over tire gauges.

First Obama is right about tire inflation and all the other tips to cut fuel consumption in our cars. The Energy Information Agency has published its results on this and if every American driver implement these suggestions it would have an immediate effect and save us twice what we would yield from ANWR. I have increased my fuel mileage by 33% over its 24 mpg city rating to 32 mpg. I'm not as good at it as Dave Lindorff but I will eventually match or beat him.

Tire inflation, however, was not all that Barack Obama mentioned. He was responding to a member of his audience who having heard his program for introducing renewable energy programs, energy efficiency and energy reduction asked what we can do now to effect how we use petroleum in relation to our cars he responded in kind. Of course that's not a program. A program is what he laid out during the speech.

Second will he unilaterally implement such a program? The answer is yes but only if we put immense political pressure on him and Congress to make this change. There is precedent evidence for believing that we can make the change to a carbon free future. First there is tremendous pressure on Congress to halt concentration of media ownership. This issue is so radioactive that anyone who votes to concentrate media ownership is gone in the next election. FCC Chairs beware too because Michael Powell lost his job by going against the wishes of the people.

There is a growing political convergence on renewables like wind and solar like I have never seen in 35 years and it's developing across the political spectrum. When the hawks, the neocons (whom you don't have to love just because they want to get off of oil), the evangelical Christians, the environmentalists and the gear heads are all excited about this stuff, there is great reason for hope and those who oppose the switch from a fossil fuel based economy to a post-fossil fuel based society do so at their own political peril.

Most of the agribusiness food grown in this country is exported to higher paying European and other 'developed' countries. Most of the food we get is imported from 'cheap labor' 'developing' countries. That is why the cost of food is going up. Imported food requires fuel, much more so than if agribusiness sold the food it grows here.

As for the quality of the corn grown in the mid-west? I'll take the stuff I grow in the backyard.

Anybody here can grow better food than what you buy in a supermarket. It actually has flavor!

"Think about this a minute. If American drivers, who are nearly all congenital speeders, were to suddenly start driving according to the posted signs, and better yet, if the nation were intelligent enough to go back to a 55 mpg national speed limit, we would gain far more than all the offshore drilling and North Slope drilling that could possibly be done."

I do think about this, and it's important to consider and to do. Conservation is the lowest hanging fruit and the one with the most payback. Before we talk about whether photovoltaics is ready or when the hydrogen fuel cell car will be massed produced, we should each be doing what we can to drive slower (and less) with the most fuel efficient cars we can. Biking and walking are great too!

I'd love to go back to the 55mph speed limit (and I'd love to see my Prius getting 60mpg). Like slow foods, slow transportation tends to humanize us more. God knows we could use more of that!

"Then we can move on to serious steps. Instead of spending hundreds of billions of dollars to repair the highway infrastructure over the next 20 years, for example, as politicians are talking about doing, why not admit that 20 years from now we're not going to be using all those highways and bridges?"

This is right on. We don't need a bunch of electric cars. We need good, electrically powered steel on steel ubiquitous mass transit. We need a buried DC current power grid. We need grid tied photovoltaics on every new home and business and retrofitted on the existing homes and businesses. We need a few million wind turbines. And some sort of small, electrically powered transport device for those who can't ride bikes to the street cars.

I, for one, would prefer that life.

Obama is right about conserving energy by inflating your tires to the required level, getting a tune-up, and driving slower. Before he came up with this advice, however, a friend drove with his car fully loaded with his belongings across the United States, keeping his compact car at 55 mph and keeping the air conditioner on, for about $300.00! When he arrived, he showed me his receipts. . . and yes, the gas was $4.00 plus all the way. I think it is important for everyone to do their part to make sure that this winter, there will be enough oil to keep the elderly frail and the very young warm. Of course, Congress and the Senate must make some changes on the side of the people. As far as big oil and T. (Swiftboat) Boone Pickens -- who wants to take advice from him? Not I!

Checking your tire pressure takes maybe 5 minutes tops.
A fill-up of gas costs lets say $40.
Checking your tire pressures every time you fill up saves you 5%, which is $2 of that $40.
That equates to making $24 an hour when you save $2 for 5 min work.

In this era of cheap energy, sure, people don't take the time to check their tire pressures. But to say that will continue it forward when it equates to working for $24 an hour is not logical. The world is changing. Sure, people didn't do it when the cost of gas made the task the equivalent of a minimum wage job.
---------------
I generally like Mr. Lindorff's writings, at least when not in an election season. But from his comment I think the pressure of writing an Obama-suck-up piece every week until the election must be getting to him.

And ya just figured all this out two whole weeks ago, did ya?

Pathetic.

What does Obama have to do with this?

Since the Dems are also all signing on en masse to the Republican 'drill-for-oil-and-cover-our-beaches-with-oil' plan, this article and anything Obama is saying on the topic just seems like a distraction.

The magician stands in front of the crowd making a great show of caring about conservation, while distracting the audience from the government taking real, concrete actions to give the oil companies exactly what they want.

The technology exists already to increase mileage by 100%. It won't see the light of day as long as the oil companies have the means to buy the rights to it and sit on it as they are already doing. There is no oil problem, only a greed problem.

Interesting... back to Gulliver's Travels... Yahoos, Winnoms and Cloud Cuckooland. I don't think people have the time to check tire pressure weekly for a measly 1 to 4% saving.(Mind you the oil companies might make a killing, charging you a buck a pop for the puff!)
Nor would I recommend you drive Canadian 400 series of highways with a smart car or at a speed any less than 120 kilometers per hour unless you want to have a 12 wheeler on your bumper staring you down as future roadkill. Yep, drive a Civic or other Japaneese 4 cylinder...preferably made in North America, but let's not be idiotic!

Any slight mention of increasing biofuel use keeps pushing grain futures to new highs.It may be mostly speculation-driven, but it is a fact that we are seeing 40 to 70% increases in the cost of staple foods throughout the third world, already, aided by middlemen who take advantage and take their own cut of the projected shift from food to fuel production to rip off the consumers.
One assumes that corn grown for fuel displaces corn grown for food or cattle fodder, but even if it's grown on net new land the perception will be that there is in fact less food being produced; this has an effect on prices of wheat and other grains.
In other countries biofuel=blood. In Colombia and some parts of Africa, African palm for biofuel is being planted on land from which peasants are being displaced. often by paramilitary groups or economic pressures that are leaving thousands upon thousands as internal refugees with no subsistence farming possibility or work.

I would be in favour of trying small experiments with limited production of biofuel (e.g., sugar cane, using the bagasse or the alcohol) to run small farm machinery and transport for co-op farms - keep it contained and restricted to making food production independent of toxic oil and gas (which pollutes as you farm, as you transport oil to the farm, and as you transport food to market).

Don't let Obama or anyone else get away with the biofuel boondoggle.
In fact, simply turn over more farmland to GM-free, agribusiness-free, diversified, community-monitored food.

Press your local auto dealers and biofuel dealers to find out where the fuel is coming from.

Thanks, Mr. Lindorff.

jlocke123 August 6th, 2008 3:58 pm writes, A more appropriate one would include two Bin Ladens, both spouting truisms like "drive your suicide vehicles slower to save gas"
-well said, tight post

ezeflyer displays the basically right-wing slant typical Democrats possess. They cannot conceive of anything to the left of a centrist Democrat which is actually similar to a moderate Republican.

To them, the thought that there exists the possibility of anything to the left of Democrats and opposed to war and the erosion of civil rights is completely alien. They live in a black and white, Republican vs Democratgood vs evil, Lakers vs Celtics, world where anything outside the artificial construct designed as a trap by the PTB (powers that be) is not possible. It must be a Republican trick called Limbaugh's Operation Chaos!

-Dave Lindorff: "Does it say anywhere in my piece that someone should vote for Obama because he was right that keeping proper air pressure in American car tires and doing other obvious things to improve mpg we should vote for him?"

Oh excuse me. It is just a coincidence, is it, that Obama is running for office? Because I see no other reason for highlighting his less than stellar green credentials. What is his next energy saving brainwave going to be? Will he scold us for not recycling? On that note I see he is recycling Bush's foreign policy of demonizing Iran.

-"Is it worth nothing that he was correct, and that the GOP and McCain campaign, by waving tire gauges, are displaying a Yahoo mentality?"

The waving campaign of McCain, yahoo or otherwise won't change global warming or global war. I find facts more relevant. The fact is that both Obama and McCain are signed up for more of the same. Previous posters on various articles have done a better job than I could of listing the numerous issues on which both of them have identical positions. Why not use at least some of the valuable space on this website to publicize the party leaders who are progressive, green and anti-war?

-"if Osama Bin Laden were to point out that Americans are idiots for not mandating better gas mileage for its vehicles I'd do a story on that, because he would be right. Does that mean I'd be endorsing jihad?"

This is a false analogy. A more appropriate one would include two Bin Ladens, both spouting truisms like "drive your suicide vehicles slower to save gas" and you praising one of them because his stale advice was less "yahoo" than the other.

Easy Dave. We're caught in the midst of Limbaugh's Operation Chaos.

You go Mr. Lindorff! Sock it to 'em!

So many angles for liberal lemmings to push for voting the DP! A drilling we should all go!

Listen, you dorks. Does it say anywhere in my piece that someone should vote for Obama because he was right that keeping proper air pressure in American car tires and doing other obvious things to improve mpg we should vote for him?

Answer: no.

Is it worth nothing that he was correct, and that the GOP and McCain campaign, by waving tire gauges, are displaying a Yahoo mentality?

Answer: yes.

I mean Christ, if Osama Bin Laden were to point out that Americans are idiots for not mandating better gas mileage for its vehicles I'd do a story on that, because he would be right. Does that mean I'd be endorsing jihad?

Answer: no.

What is the matter with you people? Have you been siphoning gas at night and forgetting to spit?

Dave Lindorff
http://www.thiscantbehappening.net

OMG, Obama's energy-saving tips came right out of already-published and easily available info produced years ago ! AAA has a great little brochure it put out in 2007 and probably every year prior for the past decade or two.

While these tips are great, they will not lower the price of fuel. Nor will more drilling.

After Obama becomes President, he should appoint Paris Hilton as an energy consultant. I'll bet she is an expert at drilling.

Obama can do nothing right.

John McCain, Paris Hilton, and the Politics of Nothing
stumble digg reddit del.ico.us news trust

Posted August 6, 2008 | 02:47 PM (EST)

With just ninety days left in the election it's come down to this: our energy policy and a good deal of this presidential campaign are being discussed through the lens of Paris Hilton. What a big goof it all is! If you just ignore all the soldiers and civilians dying in the Mideast, and all the millions losing their homes and their jobs at home, you could really see the lighter side of it all.

It all started with McCain's ad comparing Obama to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. And then we had Paris Hilton's "response," followed by the McCain camp's response to Paris Hilton: "It sounds like Paris Hilton supports John McCain's 'all of the above' approach to America's energy crisis -- including both alternatives and drilling. Paris Hilton might not be as big a celebrity as Barack Obama, but she obviously has a better energy plan."

Who ever thought this election wasn't going to be about the issues?

Of course, it's not exactly a surprise that the Republican election machine would resort to trying to make the entire election into an issueless sideshow. I mean, what else do they have?

But it is still a sad spectacle to see John McCain going along with it with such glib eagerness. The man who once pledged to run a "respectful campaign" and who said that Obama "would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign" has made it clear that he'd rather lose everything he has stood for than lose the White House.

As New York Magazine's John Heilemann noted, "we now have an inkling of just how deep in the mud McCain and his people are willing to wallow in order to win in November: right up to their Republican eyeballs."

The problem is, we're right down there with him. That's because all it takes is one of the two candidates to decide to yank the discourse into the ditch and the media -- and as a result, the public -- follow.

Instead of the media calling the McCain campaign on its pathetic trivialization of the presidential race, they have been engaging in meaningless horse-race analysis of "did the ad work?" The conventional wisdom appears to be that it did.

There was Gloria Borger on CNN, saying, "They put out this ad, and we're running this ad and we're talking about it, which from their point of view, actually works for them."

And there was Dana Milbank with Campbell Brown declaring, "They work and they always work. And we always go through this little dance when everybody says, I'm a different kind of politician, I'm post partisan, I'm a maverick. And of course when it comes right down to it, you need to drive the other guy's numbers down. If anything, they haven't gone negative enough just yet."

As Huffpost's Seth Colters Walls reports, this is nonsense, period. Indeed, to the extent that eventually the ad may "work," it will be only because of the media saying that it worked. It's not even horse-race analysis. It's the Observer Effect.

Even though the media play this game every election cycle, this time, I honestly thought it would be different. That the problems we're facing -- a disastrous never-ending war, the recession, the near collapse of our banking system, etc., etc. -- were just too big to ignore.

But it now appears that the bigger the problems, the more likely it is that they'll be completely ignored. So here we are: huge problems and a correspondingly empty election. It's the politics of nothing.

The McCain camp knows that the only way they can win this election is to turn it into a carnival sideshow.

Here's the question the media should be asking John McCain: "do you think the frivolous, jeering tone of your campaign matches the problems being faced by this country and the sacrifices being made right now by our soldiers overseas?"

And here's another question: what's next for John McCain? Where does he and his campaign go from here? If this is where they have taken the political discourse in early August, what have they got for us come October? Here is a preview -- our best guess -- of what the McCain has in store for us:

"Too Tall." An ad claiming that proof of Obama's arrogance is his refusal to be as short as McCain (5' 6").

"Sex Tape." An ad comparing Obama to Paris Hilton's sex tape to make the point that, well, no point, just that Paris had a sex tape and Obama is, you know, like it.

"Sex Tape II." An ad with Obama digitally inserted into Paris Hilton's sex tape.

"Rhymes with Iraq." An ad pointing out that Obama's first name almost rhymes with Iraq. The ad is pulled after it's pointed out that it comes close to mentioning an issue.

"Michelle Obama: a man?" An ad that's not making any claims, "just asking a question." The ad succeeds in getting the typical media treatment: "As many have noted, the ad uses hyperbole. Still, however, it raises the question, is Michelle Obama a woman?"

"Barack Obama: gay?" Hard to say, but, per the last ad, if Michelle is indeed a man, then that makes Obama gay.

"Barack Obama: black gay man." Previous ad forgot to mention Obama's race.

"akludfilkakmeitceks." An ad with random letters coming up on the screen. The media declares it "a home run."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/john-mccain-paris-hilto...

A lot of people are too busy trying to survive to spend hours and hours reading about global warming and peak oil. Some people have enough stress as it is.

If Dave Lindorff had any common sense, first he would have entitled his article, "Those who say...are right", and second, he'd blame the politicians for not investing in a good public transportation system.

Yet again, the burden must be borne by the ordinary citizen, who is expected to read up on all this, act on all this, while the politicians merely repeat what others have been saying for a long time, then sit on their butts and lap up all the praise and take all the money, along with their corporate friends.

I'd love to be president - everyone thinks you're great for doing absolutely nothing.

If you drive an automatic and have a tachometer, note each gear's revs as it shifts to the next higher gear during gentle acceleration; then try easing up on the accelerator before each anticipated shift. Your transmission should take the hint and upshift a bit earlier, putting you sooner into a more economical gear. Plus, you can enjoy all those single-finger salutes as the less pacient floor it to fly by.

*** OBAMA IS RIGHT! OBAMA IS RIGHT! ***

Dave Lindorff says OBAMA IS RIGHT!

Dave Lindorff, stop fawning all over the politicians who are no good.

Of all 300,000,000 American citizens, only OBAMA has thought it all through and concluded that people need to use less energy to make a dramatic difference. That's what you're saying!

I suppose Al Gore figured out the science of global warming all by himself and then told the world. Thanks Al Gore! - none of the scientists could figure out what you figured out.

Where would the world be without these smart, brainy politicians who make top theoretical physicists look stupid? A hell of a lot better off, that's where!

If CommonDreams can't do better than this, it should close shop.

I would not be too quick to say Obama is right on this one, because if you do, you would have to acknowledge that Bill O'Reilly of Fox News has been right for years, because he has been saying the same thing about conservation. We would NEVER want to say O'Reilly is right about anything.

Actually, slowing down, tuning up, and combining trips do work. There is a side benefit too.... Vehicle deaths drop.

Something else to look for is ethanol in gasoline. Engines are different. Some get 15% less mpg with a 10% ethanol blend. Some engines see only the theoretical drop of a few percent. Ethanol has less energy than gasoline gallon for gallon, but burning efficiencies can produce negative mileage. Ethanol also absorbs water which can increase internal rusting. Actually, no matter how you look at it, corn to ethanol for fuel is a stupid idea (not so bad for whiskey). Some engines use more gasoline to burn it to go a given distance (we need miles, not gallons). It uses almost as much energy to produce as it gives off in an engine designed for it. It causes food prices to rise all over the world, and will ultimately induce starvation in some parts.

Another good option for alternative energy is to use solar water heaters. They are cheap (build one yourself for a few dollars) and they work to supplement traditional heating.

We need to get commuters out of their cars and into street cars and trains again. That would conserve oil and lower the price of gas considerably.

Obama's website: In January 2007, Senator Obama joined Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa in reintroducing the Biofuels Security Act, which calls for 60 billion gallons of renewable biofuels in the nation's vehicle fuel supply by the year 2030. Senator Obama also authored legislation with Senator Cochran, the Alternative Diesel Standard, to require 2 billion gallons of alternative diesels - - including agriculture feedstocks such as biodiesel - - as part of the 40 billion gallon national diesel pool.
http://obama.senate.gov/issues/energy/

What a stupid idea. Yea lets take and burn our corn instead of foreign oil! Put a magnetic American flag on your car while your at it! The corn burned as bio-fuel could be used to keep escalating food prices down. What an idiot!

Slower highway speeds results in fewer deaths (this is a true fact) - another benefit of reduced highway speeds, besides saving money.

Too bad Obama won't help Ron Paul pass the HEMP FARMING bill. When you people have had enough of both parties preventing you from growing your own hemp for fuel, let us know. Until then, stop complaining because you're enabling them by continuing to fall for the "vote for the lesser of the evils" trap. Besides, when all push comes to shove, Obama and Mccain are nothing more than birds of the same feather that flock together !

I don't get the point of this article. It defends Obama's words in praise of common everyday energy saving habits such as reducing speed on the road. I'm assuming that this is supposed to be enough to make him worthy of voting for?

Wow brilliant "strategic thinking". Hand the keys to the US military machine to a guy that wants to stay in Iraq and Afghanistan indefinitely and is threatening Pakistan and Iran, because, he is talking about a simple behavior that would slow, not reverse global warming.

I hate to break it to you but you don't need Obama to drive under the speed limit. If you want to reverse the climate change damage that occurred under Obama's and McCain's party's watch, and not just slow it, you will need to vote for someone who is interested in using government to serve your interests, rather than conquering foreign oil fields for the benefit of the super wealthy.

Those of you who are themselves super wealthy and couldn't give a rat's arse, good for you, I hope for your sake everybody votes Obama/McCain and you can acquire a place of abode well above sea level.

My parents had a Blue Chevy Nova-had to double clutch it, which I never got the hang of...

We have started to drive more "conservatively" too, that is, when we drive and don't walk/bike. I haven't yet started driving 55mph when the posted speed limit is 65, but I'll get there.

Our Toyota Corolla got over 40mpg while driving around yellowstone this summer with top speeds of only 40mph. I figure that must be our car's sweet spot for speed.

Obama is in the pocket of Bio-fuel industry and rabid Hedge Fund speculators...what a catstrophe!

Good article but please do not be so stupid as to poke a hole in your muffler!