President Barack Obama on Thursday outlined his administration's EV Everywhere plan designed to cut gas-powered vehicle use over the next decade.

Speaking at a Daimler truck plant in North Carolina, Obama set a 2022 goal of having the U.S. produce a five-passenger electric vehicle that would provide both a payback time – thanks to lower refueling costs – of less than five years and an ability to be recharged quickly enough to provide enough range for the typical American driver. Obama highlighted Envia Systems, which he said may be able to halve the cost of an EV battery providing a 300-mile single-charge range. The DOE notes that, since electricity beats gasoline on cost to power your car including savings on fuel costs, added convenience, and reduced maintenance costs. Electricity is cheaper than gasoline to power a vehicle and EVs "can also be more reliable, require less maintenance, and offer the same or better driving performance compared to today's gasoline-powered vehicles" this is a technology worth pursuing.

EV Everywhere is part of a plan the White House announced this week as part of its pitch for $4.7 billion to accelerate advanced-powertrain development. The Obama Administration proposed spending $3.7 billion on tax credits for alternative-fueled vehicles like compressed natural gas (CNG) cars and another $1 billion directed to a dozen or so local communities for infrastructure improvements that will speed up alt-fueled vehicle adoption. The White House specifically noted that driving an EV would save the typical American driver about $100 a month in refueling costs.

Such advances may allow automakers to meet more stringent greenhouse-gas emissions standards the White House set last year. President Obama last July reached a tentative agreement with the major automakers that would establish a 54.5 mile-per-gallon Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard for passenger vehicles – or about 40 miles per gallon in real-world EPA standards – in 2025. The White House is pushing for 5 percent annual fuel-economy increases in passengers cars starting in 2017, while light trucks would be subject to slightly less stringent standards.

As the Democratic presidential candidate in 2008, Obama set a goal of getting Americans to buy 1 million plug-in vehicles annually by 2015, and reiterated those goals in his late January State of the Union address.



Show full PR text
President Obama Launches EV-Everywhere Challenge as Part of Energy Department's Clean Energy Grand Challenges

Goal to develop electric vehicles more affordable and convenient than gas-powered vehicles for the average American family within a decade

Mt. Holly, N.C. – At an event today at the Daimler Truck factory in Mt. Holly, N.C., President Obama launched EV-Everywhere, the second in a series of Energy Department "Clean Energy Grand Challenges" aimed at addressing the most pressing energy challenges of our time. The EV Everywhere Challenge will bring together America's best and brightest scientists, engineers, and businesses to work collaboratively to make electric vehicles more affordable and convenient to own and drive than today's gasoline-powered vehicles within the next 10 years.

Today's announcement is part of President Obama's all-of-the-above approach energy strategy to protect American consumers from high gas prices over the long-term by offering consumers cost-effective alternatives to gasoline-powered vehicles and helping to reduce the country's dependence on foreign oil.

"The Energy Department's Clean Energy Grand Challenges will engage America's scientists, engineers and young people to solve some of the nation's biggest energy challenges and make clean energy technologies affordable and accessible to the vast majority of American families and businesses," said Secretary Chu. "The EV-Everywhere Challenge is focused on advancing electric vehicle technologies and continuing to reduce costs, so that a decade from now, electric vehicles will be more affordable and convenient to own than today's gasoline-powered vehicles."

Electric vehicles can offer consumers significant advantages over gasoline-powered vehicles, including savings on fuel costs, added convenience, and reduced maintenance costs. Electricity is cheaper than gasoline to power a vehicle – generally equivalent to less than $1 per gallon – and consumers are able to conveniently fuel up at home. Electric vehicles can also be more reliable, require less maintenance, and offer the same or better driving performance compared to today's gasoline-powered vehicles. And winning the EV-Everywhere Challenge will put the U.S. in the lead to manufacture and export the next generation of advanced electric vehicles and electric vehicle components, creating good paying manufacturing jobs and stimulating the American economy.

American automakers and automotive suppliers are currently pioneering the way forward in getting the first wave of electric vehicles into the hands of a significant number of U.S. drivers. But today, the prices of these cars are still out of reach for the majority of American families. This Department-wide initiative, which will bring together DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy's Vehicle Technologies Program, the Office of Science, and ARPA-E, will aim to make electric vehicles affordable to the average American family by specifically targeting dramatic technological and cost improvements in batteries, electric motors, power electronics, light-weight structures, and fast charging technology.

The aggressive goal of this initiative is, by the year 2022, to enable companies in the United States to be the first in the world to produce a 5-passenger affordable American electric vehicle with a payback time of less than 5 years and sufficient range and fast-charging ability to enable average Americans everywhere to meet their daily transportation needs more conveniently and at lower cost.

The Challenge will involve working with industry, universities, our national laboratories and government partners to set technical goals for cutting costs for the batteries and electric drivetrain systems, including motors and power electronics, reducing the vehicle weights while maintaining safety, and increasing fast-charge rates. As part of this process and to inspire and recruit the best and brightest American scientists, engineers, and businesses to tackle this electric vehicle grand challenge Secretary Chu and the Department of Energy will be organizing a series of EV-EVerywhere Challenge workshops across the country over the next few months.

With support from the Energy Department, private industry and DOE's national laboratories have already achieved significant advances in electric vehicle and advanced battery technologies, reducing costs and improving performance significantly from even a few years before. For example, one of the Department's grantees, Envia Systems, announced last week at the ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit that they have achieved a major breakthrough in battery R&D: doubling the energy density for lithium-ion batteries and setting the world record for energy density in rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. The breakthrough could result in a 50 percent reduction in the price of the battery on a 300-mile range electric vehicle, and came several years ahead of initial projections.

The EV-Everywhere Challenge is the second of the Energy Department's Grand Challenges, following the model of the $1/watt SunShot Challenge, which seeks to make solar power directly cost-competitive with electricity from fossil fuels by the end of the decade. Over the next few months, the Department of Energy will announce a series of additional Grand Challenges, each focused on pursuing technical innovations and reductions in cost that will enable clean energy technologies to compete directly, without subsidies, with the energy technologies that are currently in wide use today.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 94 Comments
      EZEE
      • 3 Years Ago
      I would buy the car minus drive train, hand it to 2wheel or Marco with a wad of cash and say, 'make it go, kthnxbai' and totally beat the system.
      • 3 Years Ago
      Spending the working man's billions well into the future. It's the socialists way!!!
        Ford Future
        • 3 Years Ago
        Not investing in Future Technologies, that aren't oil: Republican Failure. Spending the working mans money on War and Oil and Oil Wars, the Capitalist's Failure. Spending 4 Trillion in Iraq, Failure. Seriously, you guy's need to see Reality.
        EJ
        • 3 Years Ago
        "Spending the working man's billions well into the future. It's the socialists way!!!" Yeah, I much prefer it the Corporatocracy way, where I drive around for free in my solar sourced EV that I bought with my Oil & Gas dividends, that you clueless gas sippers continue to prop up and defend like they're your first born. Ooh-rah! Keep it burning baby!
          pmpjunkie
          • 8 Months Ago
          @EJ
          While you're at it, get some McD and pharma stock as well, works wonders for my portfolio next to oil and gas.
      harlanx6
      • 3 Years Ago
      I have some "inconvenient" questions. I am sorry, but they need to be asked. Where is this electrical energy going to come from? You going to burn coal to produce it? How much of this energy from the burning of coal is lost in transmission? With an EV program of this extent, what is the effect of this additional electrical energy demand going to do to the price of electricity? Do we think this transtion by government decree instead of allowing the market to deal with this through economic imperative isn't going to have unintended consequences? What a bunch of clueless clowns we have elected!
        PR
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Looks like harlanx6 has gone into 100% complete stick-head-in-ground mode. This is basic stuff you could find answers to in the "Greenlings" posts designed for complete newbies.
        Dave R
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Going to answer harlanx6's questions here for fun: 1. Where is this electrical energy going to come from? You going to burn coal to produce it? The electricity will come from a variety of sources depending on your local grid mix. This could be hydro in the north west, it could be coal in the mid-west, but it's most likely to be natural gas in most of the country. 2. How much of this energy from the burning of coal is lost in transmission? Grid losses are somewhere around 7% from power plant to your plug. Distributed generation can reduce these losses significantly by putting generation close to where the electricity is used. 3. With an EV program of this extent, what is the effect of this additional electrical energy demand going to do to the price of electricity? The vast majority of charging is done off-peak at night if you give the EV owner any amount of financial incentive to do so. This is typically done today with existing TOU rate schedules. The existing grid can handle millions and millions of EVs charging at off-peak hours without any change. Since this additional use will serve to level out demand (thanks to TOU incentives), it will tend to reduce the price of electricity as it will allow utilities to deliver more electricity using the same infrastructure. 4. Do we think this transtion by government decree instead of allowing the market to deal with this through economic imperative isn't going to have unintended consequences? Until "the market" is able to pay for externalities resulting from excessive fossil fuel consumption, the market will never be able to deal with this effectively. 5. What a bunch of clueless clowns we have elected! Given that we the people have elected these clueless clowns as a representative democracy, you can squarely lay the blame on yourself for not doing enough to elect someone you deem better.
        mapoftazifosho
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        We all now know those unintended consequences...the death of mass-transit, the adoption of the highway system and the urban sprawl that has made us entirely ependent on oil. It was all with the best of intentions, but the inevitable outcome of our quandary today shows that the best of intentions don't always work out... That said, we're committed to this system we have and said system will require us to have EV, Partial EV, and hydrogen cars in the future.
        Ford Future
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Let me just add that Wind and Solar, are now making you Electricity Rates Go Down Today. Why? Because the cost of peak energy from coal/ natural gas/ nuclear is more expensive then the cost of the wind and solar[ which comes online during peak hours ] putting a CAP on the price carbon sources can charge for the additional incremental increase in energy flow. Secondly, you're getting less mercury pollution in your area form coal. Eliminate coal and in 20-40 years, you'll be able to go fishing and actually eat the fish. That's an economic benefit. The benefit of not losing IQ points to mercury pollution should also be added into the equation.
        mapoftazifosho
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Ah yes and to answer your question...our coal usage is in decline. http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=5331&src=email
        DaveMart
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Not good at reading answers, are you? It is only worthwhile answering intelligent, sincere questions. If you want to troll then don't waste people's time with fake questions.
        Ford Future
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Come on Harlanx6, these questions have been asked and answered. EV's are a profitable additional nightly load on utilities. The efficiency of the electric motor outweighs the additional coal burn, if coal is your power source. Secondly, it makes nuclear more profitable, and finally you get the biggest bang for your buck by powering your EV with your own Solar Panels. Solar panels now on sale are at 20% efficiency, and buying the car first, paying it off, then buying solar panels later, you'll get higher efficiency, and safe a forture. Many are now "investing" in home solar, as a sure return on their investment, instead of dumping the money into 401k plans, where you're at the Mercy of the mostly Unregulated Wall Street Mafia.
        Spec
        • 8 Months Ago
        @harlanx6
        Well . . . as usual, harlanx6 fails to respond to all the good information given. But he'll be back to post the same talking points he got off his AM radio in the next thread.
      Dan Frederiksen
      • 3 Years Ago
      alas Obama turned out to be just another politician. whoring to aipac. it would probably be in the jewish interest for more jews to speak out against aipac's undue influence on american politics. if USA knew what Israel had done to them and they had the mind to understand it, Israel would be in trouble. and even though USA is too absent minded to notice, God is watching as the jews have still not learned their lesson. quick to be heavy handed, whiny when God pays them back for their misdeeds. a wise man would wonder how many chances he gets before the judgment is final.
        EVSUPERHERO
        • 8 Months Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        Lay off Bam bam. Who is president of Holland? I bet he is not a Harvord grad.
        Ford Future
        • 8 Months Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        Dan, you've been saying some crazy things lately. Are you on medication? First the F150 = A Porsche. Now, "if the USA knew what Israel had done".... You're not quite yourself these days. Please check in with your doctor. I'm serious man, you're logical reasoning is going. There could be a medical explanation. We want you health, to tell us about light-weight vehicles and aerodynamics.
        EZEE
        • 8 Months Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        Wait, what? I thought the story was on electric cars ( that usually elicits a Happy Dan)
        hodad66
        • 8 Months Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        GOD? Give me a frickin break!
        Actionable Mango
        • 8 Months Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        Wow, that's a whole new side of you we haven't seen before.
      Vince
      • 3 Years Ago
      i want to see this happen, i just hope that all the voters that want $2 gas dont vote obama out and tear down all the future proofing changes he has made so far, history may repeat itself.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Vince
        Fortunately even most of the drill, baby, drill crowd realizes that the $2/gallon gasoline promises are nothing but empty rhetoric. Newt is having less success with that empty promise than he did with the moon base promise.
          marcopolo
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          @Spec, Hey! I like the Moon base idea.
      DaveMart
      • 3 Years Ago
      This should be fairly easy to do. Adjusted to US figures the Zoe costs $16k ex battery. Renault reckon they can do the car at around the same price as the subsides expire with volume and after the development is amortised. Taking the Toyota FT-Bh as the kind of approach for the lightweight body, which Toyota designed for low cost as well as lightness, and sticking a 30kwh or so battery in it you should get an EPA rating of about 75 miles, and perhaps 150 miles even at freeway speeds. The battery at $200kwh would cost another $6,000, and it seems clear from the work of Envia and others that we should hit that cost way before 2022. So that is $22,000 for a car that has tiny maintenance, and would cost a couple of hundred dollars a year for fuel, and around $100 pa to cover road maintenance if the latter remained at present inadequate levels.
        marcopolo
        • 3 Years Ago
        @DaveMart
        @ Dave Mart Whoa ! Just because a car is on at one price in one part of the world, doesn't mean you can do a quick currency conversion and assume it will be the same price in another ! The entire concept of battery leasing has yet to be proven. The Zoe performs no better than the Leaf or who would buy the Leaf? The Leaf is selling about as cheaply as is viable for Nissan. The Zoe's range and performance are unknown quantities, especially in a market like the US. You may be right, the Renault Zoe may perform terrifically. however, it also may not! Before any certainty can be established, real world testing is needed.
          DaveMart
          • 8 Months Ago
          @marcopolo
          Hi marco. Sorry I was a bit testy yesterday. My haemorrhoids must have been playing up, and unless you are very good indeed I WILL post photographic evidence of this! Most of what you are posting on the Renault's is not a mystery at all. They use exactly the same battery, produced in the same places as do Nissan for the Leaf. A lot of the performance data can be inferred just as surely as it is for a new combustion engine car, where if you know the engine size and so on you will, if you know about cars, be able to work out what it will do. You don't know the subtle things, of course, like how it feels, but broadly from the specs what it will do is plain. For instance the cold weather range is clearly going to be better than on the Leaf, due to the use of a heat pump, which means that for every kwh that the Zoe has to pump out to heat the cabin, the Leaf has to pump out three. I've got a heat pump in my flat, and am here to say that they work, although of course their application in cars is relatively new. I don't know whether the Zoe is a dog or a great car, but I do have a reasonable idea of the gross performance parameters. Similarly relative costings between the US and Europe in car production are no impenetrable mystery, and indeed a fair few models mainly from US manufacturers are produced in both continents, and the relative prices for the same model are normally substantially less in the US even after VAT is taken out. If I seek to make an argument, I almost always give my figures a very conservative bias, so if the argument passes that it is inherently strong. This is no different. I have simply used the price in US terms that Renault sells an electric vehicle in Europe for this year and used that for 2022 for the US! I can't imagine how I could be more conservative. In fact and for a closer appreciation of probable costs have a look at the list I posted of the vast number of bits in a combustion engine vehicle which are simply not needed in an electric one. Its extremely difficult to see how that would not lead to a cost advantage of at least 20% in electric cars versus combustion engine cars as soon as the bits are made in volume. That cost advantage will actually pay quite a lot towards the battery cost, but my figures did not allow for that at all. The bottom line is that there are about 4 moving parts in an electric motor, depending on the design, and you throw out all the complication of a combustion engine. If the US by 2022 can't build and sell an electric car for what France does today, they might as well shut up shop.
        DaveMart
        • 3 Years Ago
        @DaveMart
        S/be EPA rating of about 175 miles.
      Jon
      • 3 Years Ago
      I am wondering in what way do the tesla model s and nissan leaf not already fit the bill (not that I think they do or dont). Both seat at least 5. The leaf could argue that ~90 miles with half hour recharge time is good enough for the typical american. I would say perhaps cut the charge time in half and double the range and you definitely have an appealing case (note, that means quadrupling charging power). How is the payback time on the leaf? What would be the cost of an equivalent conventional vehicle? The Tesla Model S definitely costs more than your average vehicle, but it should be compared to a similar conventional vehicle in the same class, premium luxury sedan. For 57k it is a damn good contender with low payback time. This version goes 160 miles which I think is the minimum I think would meet requirements. Unfortunately this version takes 3 hours to charge (61 mi/hr of charging). The 87k version will go 300 miles and charge in 2 hours (160 mi/hr or charging). Definitely meets the bill but definitely longer payback time. So very close already I think. Definitely achievable by 2022.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Jon
        The Model S is not affordable to most. The Nissan Leaf doesn't have a 5 year pay back time and is a bit short on range. The Leaf is relatively close but EVs still have to get better.
          Dave R
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          The LEAF is more than sufficient for most driving, and in a lot of other cases, a half-way decent DC quick charge infrastructure would handle nearly everything else. Even without DC quick charge, L1 and L2 can sufficient as it's very rare that you drive more than 60 miles without a significant layover. Good example is a drive I took yesterday - drove 40 miles on the freeway to visit friends and used a bit more than half the battery. They don't have a plug-in so no charging station, but do have an electric dryer so an hour plugged into that gave us more than enough to make it back home without worry (could have likely made it round-trip without topping off a bit but would have had to limit speeds to 60 mph to be safe). Without the L2 it would have taken 3 hours of L1 plugged into a regular socket to get the same charge - that would have been fine too since we were there for 4 hours but since L2 charging is a bit more efficient and right next to the 5-15 receptacle we were going to use why not! Even then - the LEAF won't work for everyone - but I do see plug-in hybrids really taking off once the price of the battery comes down some more. Plug-in hybrids with just 20 miles of EV range can easily knock off a huge chunk of oil consumption. Over 5 years the LEAF will save over $7,000 in gas compared to the car it replaced and the cost after tax credit and rebates was the same.
          EZEE
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          Yea, but the Model S does compete straight up with its ICE counter parts. Although not a mass market car, it is a pretty nifty achievement, and something that the best attempts of Ford, GM, and Nissan have not matched. Of course, the article talks about affordable to most, so your point is valid....
          DaveMart
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Spec
          @DaveR: How much difference would another 20% of range make? I reckon that is what the Zoe has, and I would be interested in the comments of Leaf owner on that. - I am talking about the increment in practicality obviously - sure you can go a bit further, but would it make a big difference in your use, for instance?
      Spec
      • 3 Years Ago
      "Obama set a 2022 goal of having the U.S. produce a five-passenger electric vehicle that would provide both a payback time – thanks to lower refueling costs – of less than five years" The 1 million EVs by 2015 goal will not be reached (and that has always been my prediction), but I predict that the above goal WILL be reached assuming the comparison is to a conventional gas (not hybrid car). However, sadly, it will mainly be reached due the fact that gasoline will cost much more in 2022 (due to depletion and demand from China). But there should be some EV cost reductions that will help as well.
        EZEE
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Spec
        Unless all current technologies are dead end technologies, one would have to assume that there will be better, cheaper versions in the coming years. And now that we have the big boys, as well as the startups trying, one would assume that there will be one of them that finds a way to get costs down, to which then everyone else will have to emulate, or license the technology. And, peak oil or not, we have been bugging India and china to free up their economy for years. Well guess what? They both said, 'okay, sure, wtf?' and now we have 2 billion people who are like, 'whoa, cars, and, I want that iPhone too!' In supply and demand, that is one heck of a tip toward 'demand.'
      Rick
      • 3 Years Ago
      Maybe Obama will get Helicopter Ben to print lots of money so everybody can afford to buy one. Batteries cost $30,000 to replace on the Nissan Leaf according to Nissans boss. Where is all this money coming from? Electric cars are way out of price range of the average buyer. Whilst l admire Obama's EV rhetoric, putting it into practice will be a completely different ball game. First they have to be affordable for the masses. With the best selling EV Nissan Leaf sales averaging just 576 sales a month so far in 2012, 1 million EV sales a year by 2015 seems a bit of a tall order from Obama. It certain would reduce the dependancy on Arab oil though.
        DaveMart
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Rick
        You love making things up, don't you? If the identical batteries in the Renault's lease for under $100 mo for 24kwh equivalent, that it pretty remarkable value for a $30,000 pack, isn't it? They should recoup their money in only 25 years, according to your calculations. That might prove pretty difficult to hide in public companies like Renault and Nissan. You are using the figures for a replacement module as though it was representative in any way of the price for replacing the whole battery. Since this has been pointed out to your many times this can only be the result of a wonderful level of stupidity, or malignant intent.
        Spec
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Rick
        "Batteries cost $30,000 to replace on the Nissan Leaf according to Nissans boss." So you think the rest of car costs them $4K to build? Are you really this stupid? BTW, did you realize that the point of the effort is to reduce the costs of the EVs, not to sell extremely high cost EVs. Duh.
        Chris M
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Rick
        Sorry, Rick, you've got it wrong. Tesla Motors had announced that the battery pack on the Roadster cost $30,000 to replace - and that's more than twice the capacity of the Leaf battery pack. For the Leaf, it's gonna be less than half the price you mentioned.
      2 Wheeled Menace
      • 3 Years Ago
      Sigh.. Fuel prices are going up, but half of America still drives a big ol' car to work alone. I think the market, and personal choice of driving a more economical vehicle can provide a solution to our energy problems on the transportation side. 15 trillion in debt and we're still handing out money. I can't believe it. The 10-20k priuses get sold every month here in the US. That's with no federal or state cash on top of them anymore. Meanwhile with $7.5K on top of the Volt and Leaf, you get about a thousand sales. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. I say let the free market and high gas prices sort this out naturally. American Consumers have chosen bigger and bigger vehicles over time. I think you can make the switch to a different power source without throwing money ( that us taxpayers will pay interest on ) out there that we don't have.
        2 Wheeled Menace
        • 8 Months Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        Jon; hell yes I would agree! We should not be subsidizing any form of using energy. If people paid the real cost, we would conserve. Conservation & efficiency are the low hanging fruit of energy security / environmental preservation that is rarely, if ever, discussed. Instead, our govt would rather lose money so you can continue getting around on the same thing, but with a different power source. Seems absurd to me. Then again i car pool with my lady, drive a 4 cylinder car, and 90% of my miles are on a bicycle. I'm the statistical anomaly.
        Woody Becker
        • 8 Months Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        But it wasn't the free market. The Japanese gov subsidized development of the batteries.
          2 Wheeled Menace
          • 8 Months Ago
          @Woody Becker
          Frankly, that's their problem.. i just want to see my tax dollars i hand to my government spent well. Japan can do whatever they like. Obviously their government is making better bets than ours is, looking at the success of the Prius. Don't get me wrong. I'm not a free market purist; but look at our track record of making the shift over from foreign oil. We have failed for many decades. We just throw subsidies at everything, and refuse to tax anything or unsubsidize anything to penalize the use of it. I do believe this is throwing money into a black hole again. Meanwhile we'd like to go to war with Iran and meddle with Africa so we can get more oil - on our terms - from them, as well. All roads point to the money you give the federal government being wasted to encourage more energy use.
        Ford Future
        • 8 Months Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        All Economically Successful governments FUND Advance Research in new technologies to OWN those technologies for generations, generations of JOBS. Only in the US do we have a DEFEAT is Victory mentality. Sometimes, government spending is Not wasted, and is an Investment, with possibly 100 years of dividends of better trade balances with job creation. You need to ask yourself why the "Repubican" party has put itself in the position of fighting profitable investment for the Future of America. Hint: [ Exxon, Shell, BP and Chevron fund elections. ]
        Jon
        • 8 Months Ago
        @2 Wheeled Menace
        So you would agree that the government should stop subsidizing oil companies?
          Dave R
          • 8 Months Ago
          @Jon
          @mapoftazifosho - killing the oil subsidies will likely have little effect on the price of oil. While the subsidies may seem large in number - as a percentage of oil sales it's not too significant.
          mapoftazifosho
          • 8 Months Ago
          @Jon
          Even some republicans believe this now...although i don't believe they entirely understand what killing the subsidies will do to the price of oil...
      Ford Future
      • 8 Months Ago
      During Peak Enegy Demand Hours.
      Ford Future
      • 3 Years Ago
      Propaganda in America: Koch Industries. Note: Koch Industries is in Oil Extraction, Tar Sands and Coal, and Now OIL SPECULATION. Blaming Obama for high gas prices. Now, you wouldn't think that the very people SPECULATING in driving up oil prices would want the spot light on oil prices, but, that's what the Koch's are doing: http://climatecrocks.com/2012/03/12/flogging-the-lies-of-gas-prices/ The CFTC will not regulate the Oil Exchange until late 2012. Giving the Koch's Plenty of Time to attempt to push up oil prices. But, China is cutting back on infrastructure projects, and their rapid growth rate. China's growth will slow down and this should drive down global demand for oil. But, if the Koch's can corner current oil contracts, they could have the financial strength to push up prices, and Blame Obama. We'll see if America Falls for it.
    • Load More Comments
    Share This Photo X