Reduce Gas Consumption by 20% With a Smartphone

[thrasher32]

[citation][nom]reggieray[/nom]And with all the Marxist tree huggers the Obama regime has put in the EPA and the EPA working on shutting down coal plants and others they don't like, what are you going to charge your freaking electric car with. Oh thats right fairy dust and hemp.[/citation]

MMmmmm, grape kool-aid is good, isn't it??

 

[sykozis]

[citation][nom]reggieray[/nom]And with all the Marxist tree huggers the Obama regime has put in the EPA and the EPA working on shutting down coal plants and others they don't like, what are you going to charge your freaking electric car with. Oh thats right fairy dust and hemp.[/citation]
Oh yeah....we were MUCH better off with the Bush administration taking pay-offs from the coal burning power plants to ignore the laws they broke for 2 decades.... For those that are lost, the clean air act required ALL coal burning power plants to install scrubber systems when major maintenance was done to the plants. These scrubber systems were proven to reduce the plant emissions by up to 90%. Now, consider the fact that coal burning power plants produce more than 50% of the pollution in the US, that "up to 90%" reduction in emissions for coal burning power plants would make a considerably larger impact on the environment than any other stupid idea the US Gov't has ever conceived. Now, instead of worrying about the environmental impact of the coal burning power plants....the Bush administration accepted millions of dollars in brides to ignore the fact that more than 50% of the coal burning power plants in the US completely ignored the Clean Air Act.

Before you start spouting bullshit regarding politics, at least have some sort of clue. The Obama administration gave GE BILLIONS of dollars to build new plants in the US and hire people to develop "green energy technologies". Instead of using that money for the purpose it was intended. The CEO of GE decided it was a better use of the money to shutdown plants in the US, leaving 35,000 more people unemployed, and use OUR TAX MONEY to move their operation to China. The CEO of GE is a Republican..... This is on top of the tax bill that Bush signed giving tax breaks to companies willing to move jobs overseas.... So, again, at least have a clue what you're talking about before you start spouting your political BS....

 

[reggieray]

[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]Oh yeah....we were MUCH better off with the Bush administration taking pay-offs from the coal burning power plants to ignore the laws they broke for 2 decades.... For those that are lost, the clean air act required ALL coal burning power plants to install scrubber systems when major maintenance was done to the plants. These scrubber systems were proven to reduce the plant emissions by up to 90%. Now, consider the fact that coal burning power plants produce more than 50% of the pollution in the US, that "up to 90%" reduction in emissions for coal burning power plants would make a considerably larger impact on the environment than any other stupid idea the US Gov't has ever conceived. Now, instead of worrying about the environmental impact of the coal burning power plants....the Bush administration accepted millions of dollars in brides to ignore the fact that more than 50% of the coal burning power plants in the US completely ignored the Clean Air Act.Before you start spouting bullshit regarding politics, at least have some sort of clue. The Obama administration gave GE BILLIONS of dollars to build new plants in the US and hire people to develop "green energy technologies". Instead of using that money for the purpose it was intended. The CEO of GE decided it was a better use of the money to shutdown plants in the US, leaving 35,000 more people unemployed, and use OUR TAX MONEY to move their operation to China. The CEO of GE is a Republican..... This is on top of the tax bill that Bush signed giving tax breaks to companies willing to move jobs overseas.... So, again, at least have a clue what you're talking about before you start spouting your political BS....[/citation]

And Obozo's green energy companies are going belly up you tool.

 

[Mathos]

On the contrary to what others are saying. You don't need an app to time stop lights. Most of the computer timer controlled ones right in two different modes. One's for peak traffic hours, Lunch rush and work/evening rush. Other than that they're on a pretty standard either 30 second to 1 minute rotation. I don't think timing stop lights will have a real effect on accident rate going up, as I've been doing so for a long time. Most of the weight detected or magnetic plate detecting lights in my area have a 2 minute delay if there's only one car, bit faster if there are multiple cars.

Have to laugh every time I look forward and see the next light red or going to turn red, to see the idiot beside me rush and blow by me to the next light while I just accelerate at a steady rate and go right by em as the light turns green. The difference is I do speed up the speed limit, usually faster than most ppl, unless of course I seen the next lights turning red then I kinda just coast after about mid way. Some times I have to stop, most of the time I don't. That's how I average 18-20mpg out of my 1997 4d 4wd automatic tranny 4.3L V6 blazer, when if you look it up it's only suppose to average 15city 17-18hwy with that setup. Cold hard reality is internal combustion engines weren't made for stop and go, idle then accelerate operation. They were designed to run at a set rpm speed for peak power and efficiency. In most vehicles the peak efficiency rpm band is between 2000 and 2500-3000rpm. Which is why if you watch what rpm range your automatic shifts at, it will almost always be within that range unless your doing a hard accelerate. The longer you keep it within that range, the better your gas mileage will be.

 

[mikem_90]

[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]....the Bush administration accepted millions of dollars in brides to ignore the fact that more than 50% of the coal burning power plants in the US completely ignored the Clean Air Act.[/citation]

No wonder Russia was gaining power again, all those billions of dollars in Russian Mail order Brides!

Though seriously. We use far more fossil fuel than we can hope earth to be producing. Even if you don't buy into climate change or how dumping tons of CO2, heavy metals, etc into the atmosphere is bad, for the human race to survive long term, we HAVE to develop better and cleaner technology. What happens if we have a global catastrophe? Will we have enough easy to access energy in the case we need to rebuild our way of life that won't severely compromise our environment? Preserve what we have, keep it in case we end up in big trouble.

On the internet its hard to tell who is legitimately being obtuse and who is an industry shill (paid bloggers and people trolling web boards). The sad thing is that they only need a few and some websites that deliberately misrepresent facts, the rest come from real people hearing things they like to hear. The fossil fuel industry has been doing this for decades. Even in the 80s using "research" that was later proven to just be PR.

 

[thrasher32]

[citation][nom]reggieray[/nom]And Obozo's green energy companies are going belly up you tool.[/citation]

Moron

 

[scuba dave]

If this country was really interested in energy efficieny, we would have moved to thorium reactors instead of uranium, or coal for that matter. A guy can dream at least..