U.S. Transportation Secretary rolls up in big SUV to unveil new fuel economy stickers

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by Drew Wilson, May 25, 2011.

Watchers:
This thread is being watched by 5 users.
  1. Drew Wilson

    Drew Wilson AKA IceCube Staff Member Moderator Contributor

    [​IMG]

    U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood unveiled new fuel-economy window stickers for cars and trucks, saying "we're not just sitting around waiting for high gasoline prices to come down." His ride of choice to the unveiling: This 12-mpg Chevy Suburban SUV.

    More...

    Priceless.
  2. Atheist Icon

    Atheist Icon Member Established Member

    Come on, cut him some slack...it's really 12.5 mpg.
  3. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    The president could have used one of those yesterday.
    In fact, I'm surprised he didn't because he has several.
  4. sygreenblum

    sygreenblum Member

  5. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    It's kind of hard to get around to speaking engagements on a hang glider. [​IMG]
  6. Atheist Icon

    Atheist Icon Member Established Member

    Just as easy to get around on Commercial flights for speaking engagements...well, if you don't mind getting molested before you can board.
  7. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    Those jumbos are far worse for emissions and never go to smaller, closer airports.
    Smaller jets are more efficient for a small group who are travelling together.
  8. Atheist Icon

    Atheist Icon Member Established Member

    Much more efficient to travel with 200 people than with 20. And his Leer Jet is from the late 70's if I remember correctly.
  9. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    The inefficiency in jumbo jet travel is that not only does it take longer to do anything,
    like taxiing to take off (often ending up sitting around for awhile) or circling around
    waiting for their turn to land, they can only land at a tiny minority of airfields and then
    your crew has to produce more greenhouse gasses to make up the difference.

    A late seventies Lear jet is tiny when compared to more modern aircraft and sticking
    to a used aluminum plane instead of buying or renting a seat on a newer, larger and
    far costlier jet which took far more energy to build in the first place is a very green
    choice to make. Those little Lears get very good mileage too, if that matters at all. ;]
  10. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    Also, don't forget to check your sources for such a story. That group
    may claim to be non-partisan but on the topic of Al Gore or any other
    significant Democrat they are never going to be impartial or fully
    truthful when they start preaching their extreme-right gospel.
  11. sygreenblum

    sygreenblum Member

    I hate it when people defend this mans excesses. He just bought his fourth mansion last year. "Four". He is a slimy politician who used his power to greatly enrich himself, he is a hypocrite, just like any other politician.
  12. Atheist Icon

    Atheist Icon Member Established Member

    His private jet isn't that efficient. The new ones are much, much, much better.

    On top of that, a man that preaches against the evils of CO2 puts out as much as the average American for a year every time he flies. He is a hypocrite.

    It is just as bad as someone says eating fatty foods is bad, but then will go to the steakhouse and order a ribeye.
  13. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    Get to know the plane before you call it a gas guzzler. It's pretty tiny compared to current jets.
    Here's the 70s LearJet lineup: Learjet 25 - Learjet 28 - Learjet 35 - Learjet 55
    They are all roughly the same size and weight and use some of the smallest turbofan engines in the world.

    All new private jets are much bigger and cost many thousands of tons of greenhouse gasses to build each one.
    It doesn't matter if somebody says they are more efficient because they still burn much more fuel than a plane
    one quarter to one tenth their size as they fly higher, faster and carry a lot more weight while supplying power
    to more than ten times as much electronic and electrical equipment. Flying a small aluminum jet made over
    forty years ago makes more sense in terms of carbon footprint than does using any of the newer, bigger and
    faster business jets on the market. It's even greener than renting seats on commercial airlines when you
    only uses it when you have a small crew which happen to fill the little plane's seats more efficiently.

    Look it up yourself. Services that sell seats on business jets can afford much lower prices per seat because
    a proper match of load to plane will always be more efficient when you use smaller aircraft. Learjets from the
    seventies are smaller than those new jets and also beat piston and turboprop planes by going twice as fast
    with a comparable fuel burn rate.

    Of course, the spin factory that tried this smear never mentioned that Gore flies commercially whenever
    it makes more sense to go that route. No, their promo copy tends to be very shy on details they don't like.
    That's why they only pick the bigger jets and don't count seats when they pretend to crunch the numbers:

    The best, newest commercial jets generate 150-200 pounds/hour CO[size=-2]2[/size] per seat if fully loaded
    Commercial airlines don't have the option of changing planes to fit the need. They will go anyway.
    How many times have you ridden a big jet that was less than fully packed? Half empty?

    Now let's dial down the size through the typical options:
    Bombardier Q-400 twin turboprop: 250 pounds/hour per seat only if all 78 seats are full.
    Gulfstream G-IV: 600-1500 pounds/hour for 14-21 seats, depending on model, at the very worst.
    All 70s Learjets: 150-450 pounds/hour for 8-12 seats, depending on model, at the very worst.
    Piper PA-34-220T Seneca V piston engine twin: 500 pounds/hour for 6-7 seats at half the speed.

    When you are travelling alone, commercial is usually the least costly way in dollars and sometimes CO[size=-2]2[/size].
    When you have a group and have the options, smaller aircraft win hands down for emissions and time
    even though it may cost more per seat on short trips. Learjets save both ways by being both small and fast.

    Trying to measure a man's actions by an imaginary yardstick supplied by a hostile spin factory doesn't work.
    If an "average American" had to do what he does but couldn't afford to pay what he did to do it more efficiently
    then he would be stuck with less efficient commercial airlines plus more miles in less efficient buses and taxis.
    Since this guy has no choice but to travel extensively to do what he does he makes a good choice when he
    chooses a smaller plane and commits to using it in the most efficient way he can and not when he cannot.
    Spending more money up front to reduce his carbon footprint instead of always cheaping out is not hypocrisy.
  14. mfgbypooter

    mfgbypooter Super Pooper Staff Member Moderator

    With some gold spinners and a plasma in the back that would be sweet

    *
  15. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    Pretty affordable too. It's not hard to find a few to choose from at about the price of a 3-4 bedroom house.
  16. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    Personally if I could afford a personal jet to go around the world I would get
    the unarmed version of this one and damn the critics because it's way too cool:
    Russian_Air_Force_Su-34.jpg
  17. grab_grab_the_haddock

    grab_grab_the_haddock The Voice Of Reason Established Member

    Curious how so many republicans can give you the skinny on everything Al Gore: his travel arrangements, the vehicles he drives, the money he earns, the stock he owns, the home he stays in, his carbon footprint. You name it, there is no detail insignificant enough for them to ignore. Yet ask the same people about the science behind global warming and a long, ignorant silence is the best you can expect.
  18. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    "Great minds discuss ideas.
    Average minds discuss events.
    Small minds discuss people."
    -- Eleanor Roosevelt [​IMG]
  19. Atheist Icon

    Atheist Icon Member Established Member

    Curious how so many people can defend a man who does not practice what he preaches. If he needs to be at an event to speak, he doesn't have to drive to his personal jet, fly to the city, then drive to the event. He can have someone set up a projector or a screen at the event and talk from his webcam *gasp*. To me, that would be the first step in eliminating quite a bit of CO2. Then after that, he can get rid of his homes and downsize to a more conservative house, say, 1700-2000 sq ft. Until he accomplishes those two small, very small, steps, I will continue to call him a hypocrite.

    AW - If I could afford a plane, much less the fuel to run it this would be my choice.
    [​IMG]
  20. Aaron_Walkhouse

    Aaron_Walkhouse The Legendary Axeman Established Member

    Those are not available and remaining airframes are beyond refurbishment.
    Not only that but even if you could get one the fuel is not available to civilians.

    The Su-34, on the other hand, is in production today, brand spanking new,
    burns good old cheap kerosene or any jet fuel you can find and have the
    typical rugged reliability and simplicity of all Russian planes.

    It is amusing to see you continue to blindly demand that the guy you obviously
    envy be pulled down to living within your means instead of his own. Let's see
    you give up your house and car for a tent and a bicycle for a few years.

    One would easily get the impression you either failed to understand or refused
    to read what has been written on the subject unless it was either devoid of
    information or heavily slanted towards politically motivated libel and hatred.

    Oh well. If you can't participate at the adult level you may as well go back to the
    teabaggers or Faux News blogs and forums where you may be more comfortable. [​IMG]

Share This Page