Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : President Barack Obama -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (59940)	8/2/2009 11:48:57 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Not all auto recyclers are relishing the government's new cash for clunkers program, which requires car dealers to destroy the gas-guzzlers they get as trade-ins from new car buyers. Used engines and drivetrains are a big part of recyclers' income from each scrapped car, and under the federal program those engines must be destroyed. The idea is to promote fuel efficiency and help automakers, but it comes at a time when more than a dozen U.S. auto parts suppliers have filed for bankruptcy this year. . . Under cash for clunkers, the government is advising car dealers to replace a trade-in's engine oil with a sodium silicate solution and run the engine to ruin it before giving or selling the car to a scrap dealer. The Automotive Recyclers Association says that can damage otherwise sellable parts like pistons - and mean smaller profits for scrap yards, considering it can cost $700 to $1,200 to process a car, including transport and removing toxic items like mercury, Wilson said. Recyclers' profits vary but can reach several hundred dollars for a 6-year-old car. Message 25827638

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (59940)	8/2/2009 3:21:12 PM
From: sylvester80	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

I want one. Based on the article's comment that they are targeting the C-class platform price range, we should be talking in the $10-13,000 range. But that's just a guess. Can't wait. It's about time for a zero emissions electric vehicle for the 21st century. Most households have at least 2 cars. So 1 can easily be the one that you use around town and one for very long trips (more than 160km range).

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (59940)	8/2/2009 3:47:51 PM
From: sylvester80	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 149317

Exxon Spends More On Lobbying Than Entire Clean Energy Industry Combined treehugger.com Guess it pays to be the biggest oil company in the world--even though their profits are at the lowest they've been in six years, Exxon still managed to spend more money on lobbying efforts for the climate bill than the entire clean energy industry combined. Even with their gargantuan effort, the oil company still felt slighted in the version of the climate bill that passed the House last month (coal and agriculture got far more free permits to pollute than the oil company). Perhaps they at least got a consolation prize? Maybe an "I Spent $15 Million on Lobbying and All I Got Was This Lousy T-Shirt" tee, or something? Because that's how much the oil giant shelled out--$14.9 million over the last six months. As Bloomberg points out, that's a solid 23% more than the $12.1 million clean energy companies spent all told. Altogether, oil and gas companies spent $82.2 million on Washington lobbyists, dwarfing the wind, solar, and biofuel companies that nonetheless spent more than ever before. From Bloomberg: Clean-energy companies spent $21.8 million on lobbying in 2008, five times as much as in 2006, New Energy Finance said. Wind power developers account for more than one fifth of the total. It should be noted as well that not all of Exxon's (and other oil companies') spending on lobbyists was strictly to obtain more lenient emissions standards for their oil operations (though I haven't seen the breakdown, and assume that most of it was): Petroleum producers and clean-energy companies don’t necessarily lobby on opposite sides of issues. Oil companies are investing in biofuels to meet alternative-energy mandates. Earlier this month, Exxon said it would seek to create a “new source of oil” in a $600 million project to make gasoline from algae. Royal Dutch Shell Plc, based in the Netherlands, second to Exxon Mobil in global refining capacity, announced plans in December for an algae project in Hawaii. However, we can certainly expect high spending from the oil industry as the Senate resumes crafting its climate bill this September--and it's a pretty sure bet they'll be upping their efforts to secure more free pollution permits this go-round.