Why not spend federal R&D money to help the industry get reasonable vehicles that use NO gasoline at all instead? Oh, right, the Evil Bush Administration as already doing that so we can't bring that up at all.

I watched ABC that night and the whole program was horribly one sided. I mean more than usual. I thought Gibson was going to cry over the immigration bill with this "if this doesn't pass nothing will". Then put all the blame on "conservative radio". If he wonders why "conservative radio" is popular, its because that's where you need to go to get the rest of the story. Certainly not ABC. They should go ahead and change their name to ABCKos.

All of this federally mandated CAFE stuff is nonsense. These are laws being drafted and endorsed by people without even the most cursory understanding of economics or engineering.

I design internal combustion engines for a living. What most people fail to realize, including the feeble-minded members of Congress, is that the internal combustion engine has been getting cleaner and more efficient, year after year. With regards to efficiency, the modern, digitally-controlled diesel internal combustion engine is more effecient than a fuel cell, when considered on well-to-wheel basis. In fact, the internal combustion engine is making faster progress on effeciency than the fuel cell, at a much lower cost.

As for emissions, the exhaust gas coming out of the tail pipe of a modern, catalytic converter equipped, gasoline-engined car is lower in some forms of emissions, such as NOx, than the air going in. Especially in some cities like Houston or L.A.

It's no easy matter to improve the efficiency of an automobile. To make the car more efficient, you need to make it smaller with less aerodynamic drag, and make it lighter. Both of these make the car less safe.

To paraphrase the old joke: Efficiency, reasonable cost, safety..... Pick any two.

What the so-called "journalists" failed to mention is that Americans have already voted, in part, with their pocket books.  Honda, the maker of the Accord Hybrid, stated that they are dropping the Hybrid version.  The reason: people aren't buying them!  Even the leader, in terms of sales, Toyota, is taking a bath on every Hybrid sold and they aren't exactly rushing out the door.  Of the 16.5 million cars sold here in the US. their Hybrid take was about 100,000. 

Keep in mind that the MPG ratings on Hybrids are skewed in their favour.  The federal tax incentives have been reduced.  The replacement of the batteries at anywhere from 3-5 years after purchase is thousands of dollars.  And, there is the unknown cost of the disposal fee for getting rid of the hundreds of pounds of toxic, but useless junk batteries. 

How can the MRC, which runs this site and is heavily funded by Exxon, not simply recuse themselves from this kind of discussion? How can anyone think they are being objective about this issue?