You Can't Eat a Computer

California fuels rule sparks controversy

My son and I were discussing the above article that starts with the word button "California fuels..." and his response was "You can't Eat a Computer" which basically means that even though computers are fun and kind of addicting, in the end they are in the same category as a television or a radio. They are entertainment, and no matter how much fun they might be you can't eat them. In other words unless you have a job or an income they are only entertainment. So, the California fuel rules controversy is that the rules here in California were designed before the Great Recession, during which time people might have economically had enough money to actually comply with these rules. For example I was driving north towards the Bay area from Santa Barbara where I was on business. I said to my wife, "I'm amazed! There must be about 1/4 the cars I've ever seen on any Sunday if it were before 2008 traveling up Hiway 101 north.

begin quote from above article:"

inShare

“To us, it’s the most credible and powerful mechanism we can put in place,” said Dan Sperling, a member of California’s Air Resources Board and director of the Institute of Transportation Studies at University of California-Davis. “It’s an incentive to invest in other things besides oil.”
Many oil industry officials in the United States and overseas say the standards are too complex, will drive up gas prices and cannot be met given the current supply of petroleum alternatives.
Charles T. Drevna, president of the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, said the policy “sounds really good at the 30,000-foot level” but added, “When you get down to terra firma, it’s a giant energy tax and a fuel rationing scheme.”
The premise of California’s rule — as well as its European counterpart, the “E.U. Fuel Quality Directive” — is that goals for cutting greenhouse gases can only be met if the transportation sector begins to move away from fossil fuels.
The new standards assign carbon intensity values to roughly 250 types of crude (higher carbon) along with other fuels — including ethanol, electricity and hydrogen, all lower carbon— that power cars and trucks.
They call for reducing the overall carbon content of fuel sold in the state 10 percent by 2020. Refiners will either have to mix low-carbon fuels into what they sell over time in order to make the required cuts or buy credits to offset the amount by which the fuel they sell exceeds the standards.
The state projects that the standard would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 23 million metric tons in 2020, according to Simon Mui, a scientist at the advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council. end quote.

So by reducing the carbon in fuels the hope was to create less carbon in the sky by moving people away from Gasoline to hybrids and electric cars and fuel cell cars and Hydrogen powered cars. But the reality is that the present Unemployment rate in California is 11.1 % And this rate if adjusted for all the people working part time who want full time jobs or who have given up looking for work might take this rate up to 15% or even 17% for the state to be realistic about who isn't employed or fully employed. And this doesn't even give you kids 15 to 20 who can't even get their very first part time job because people over 20 years old already have them. Under these conditions and the fact that the average car in the U.S. is now 10.8 years old (which is the oldest the average car has EVER been in history) it isn't a very good time to be changing fuels. However, on the other hand Oil is on its way out over the next 25 years and because of that the price of oil can only go up because that is just the Law of Supply and Demand. When everyone wants something that there is not enough of the Price can Only go UP! So, because of this switching fuels isn't an option, it is a necessity if  we want civilization to continue here on earth. Because of this the most sustainable culture in the U.S. is actually the Amish culture in Pennsylvania because they are NOT an Oil based culture. This is all something we all should be thinking about if we want civilization to continue.


Also, I would say that if you look at both the Tea Party and the Occupy movement, both movements are the direct result of rising oil prices, Global Climate Change and reduced food supplies making food cost more just like Oil is costing more worldwide. I would also say that the Arab Spring which has brought down countries all across the middle east is also a part of reduced oil and reduced food and a burgeoning young population in those areas.