Posted on 06/08/2009 2:55:47 PM PDT by pissant
A new study indicates that new fuel economy standards announced last month by President Barack Obama will give New England's economy a $10 billion dollar boost over the next 15 years. The new standards will increase the average mileage for light-duty vehicles from 25.4 to 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016.
That will save enough fuel to free up billions of dollars to reinvestment back into the local and regional economy, say researchers from the University of New Hampshire's Carbon Solutions New England. CSNE Director Cameron Wake, the report's author, says light-duty motor vehicles, which include passenger cars, light trucks, and sport utility vehicles, account for 48 million tons of carbon dioxide, or a quarter of New England's CO2 emissions.
"Our analysis clearly shows that investing in fuel-efficient vehicles is good for the environment and good for the economy," Wake says in a statement.
(Excerpt) Read more at mpbn.net ...
Mindless idiots!
This is absolute BS. The added cost of cars and fuel will more than compensate for the savings in fuel usage. And the deaths caused by small, fragile cars will also be a drain on the economy. I can think of many offsetting factors.
... not unless they UP the state fuel tax on gasoline. That’ll be “necessary” to offset the decrease in gasoline sales. Either that or they’ll strangle themselves with some sort of highway use fee.
No bias from that outfit, I tell you...
Can we just divide into two without having a civil war first? Obviously, we can’t agree on anything, anymore.
They really believe this stuff?????
No. But they need to sell their marxism to the masses.
good when Taxachusetts revenue plummets to zero when their workforce can no longer afford it’s morning commute in from New Hampshire?
(A new study indicates that new fuel economy standards announced last month by President Barack Obama will give New England’s economy a $10 billion dollar boost over the next 15 years. The new standards will increase the average mileage for light-duty vehicles from 25.4 to 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016.)
Right............
Hang on to that thought....
“What a bunch of BS. If you believe this I have ocean front property to sell you in Omaha.”
Wait...you mean...but I just bought a nice place on the sand in West Omaha...from J. Biden Realty Trust...
Seems they forgot to calculate the additional costs of the fuel efficient vehicles. Once that is factored in, I don’t think they will be rejoicing so much.
Of course you can never tell these people things like this. They stick their fingers in their ears and go “loolooloolooicanthearrrryou”.
The carbon taxes will more than make up the difference, and that money will have been spent ten times before the first doallar is ever collected.
This study is based on lies.
Then make it 100 mpg and make 30 billion available. Sheesh.
Oooooh, cool. Is there anyplace to plug in my electric car that magically charges? But won’t the river be in the way??
And yes, they believe this to the point of blindly walking off a cliff ‘cause Obama says so.
So where does the money currently spent on fuel in the "local and regional economy" go? It goes right into the "local and regional economy"!
These guys have to hang onto a crumb of sanity when they put out this foolishness.
Not to worry though. Energy pricing is coming back up to where it belongs, and that's a good thing. If it remains where it should be there will be more profits and more jobs - and if we must suffer a government imposed mileage standard and it actually does increase average mileage, average folks will drive more.
That's a rising tide that will lift more boats than decreased consumption ever did. If New England doesn't want to get in on that I'll take it (and I could sure use it right now).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.