Well, not exactly "take" 10 Downing Street....they used the residence of the British Prime Minister as a backdrop for filming a Top Gear Challenge. Jeremy Clarkson and British Prime Minister David Cameron are friends and it was all done to highlight British Goods via a road trip to India for the Top Gear Boffins.The US version of Top Gear was dreadful and the presenters they had could not replicate the chemistry that goes on between Clarkson, Hammond and May.Can't wait until this episode shows up on BBC America. They are Brilliant.
Don't mind us Prime Minister: Jeremy Clarkson and crew films Top Gear's Christmas special... outside Number 10
By Amy Oliver UK Mail
29th November 2011
Those worried that Jeremy Clarkson has designs on Number 10 and a new career in politics shouldn't panic.
The 51-year-old presenter was only outside the Prime Minister's residence today to shoot scenes for the Top Gear Christmas special.
He was joined by fellow presenters James May, 48, and Richard Hammond, 41.
All were tight-lipped about the reason for their visit and a BBC spokesman refused to confirm or deny whether David Cameron is likely to star in the 90-minute show. They had to stop filming when Mr Cameron emerged from Number 10 to go to hear George Osborne's Autumn Statement.
Clarkson is a friend of the Prime Minister and the pair exchanged a few words before Mr Cameron was driven away.
They had to stop a second time because of a news helicopter hoping to film Mr Cameron's journey, that was hovering overhead.
The Top Gear trio journey to India this year in yet another epic adventure that sees them try to fix Britain's economy through trade promotion.
The show's producer Andy Wilman, today explained on the Top Gear blog that the team were trying to assist Mr Cameron, who a few months ago, said Britain must become a favoured trading partner of India.
'Top Gear, we thought, could help solve this problem with a trade mission, flying the flag for UKPLC,' Wilman wrote.
'Our plan was to drive across India, drumming up interest in British goods, advertising the peerless standards of British skills, British nous, British Britishness.
'We would make the Indians think: “No, we shall not buy mayonnaise from Belgium, but Angel Delight and Kendal Mint Cake from the British."'The three men were given a rather handsome budget of £7,000 each to purchase a car that would not only get them from one end of India to the other, but also represent dear old Blighty.
Clarkson chose a 1995 Celebration edition Jaguar XJS 4.0 litre, while Hammond purchased a classic Mini Cooper.Meanwhile May decided he wanted a Rolls-Royce, but had to make do with a 1976 Rolls-Royce Shadow.
They started in Mumbai before driving North through Delhi and into the Himalayas.
Whether all three motors made it to 14,000 feet is unknown.
'You'll just have to tune in to find out,' the BBC spokesman said.
All three presenters say they are recognised in countries around the world, but Hammond insists they never set out to make such a popular show.
Speaking to the Huffington Post he said: 'All we set out to do ten years ago was make the best car show we possibly could. The minute we start trying to contrive it to be something else, I'm sure it will stop working.'
And of the unique chemistry between the threesome he added: 'It's never changed. From day one, if Jeremy crashes into something, I will laugh, and I expect him to in return. You couldn't fake it, people would soon suss us out.
Never say never......Looking at the GOP line-up, it is no wonder that Americans are looking closely at NJ Governor Chris Christie.... Born to Run is not just a line for Bruce Springsteen...
Slick Mitt and Gov. Perry look like fumbling idjits next to the straight talker from New Jersey.
We need to knock out the Fool who presently resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, (to quote Top Gear), " How hard can it be ??"
We need the BEST person, not the one who has raised the most $$$.
Christie: Face 'difficult truths'
MAGGIE HABERMAN / Politico.com
Here's Juana Summers' story on Chris Christie's Reagan Library speech, with a theme of "real American exceptionalism" that rapped political leaders adrift and singled out President Obama for criticism:
American exceptionalism, as Christie defined it, is a “vision followed by a set of principled actions that made us the envy of the world,” not a political punch-line.
“Not a re-election strategy, but an American revitalization strategy,” he called it.
During his remarks – interrupted numerous times by applause – Christie delivered several characteristically tough lines, including saying America must not become “a country that places comfortable lies ahead of difficult truths,” that showed the kind of swagger that’s defined his persona and won the hearts of the people who are desperate to see him come off the sidelines of the campaign.
Obama, Christie said comparing his approach now to the then-Illinois state Senator’s address to the 2004 Democratic National Convention, is willing to divide the country to win re-election.
“This is not a leadership style, this is a reelection strategy,” Christie said of Obama’s actions in the Oval Office. “Telling those who are scared and struggling that the only way their lives can get better is to diminish the success of others….That may turn out to be a good re-election strategy for President Obama, but is a demoralizing message for America. What happened to state Sen. Obama? When did he decide to become one of the ‘dividers’ he spoke of so eloquently in 2004?”
Christie decried a Washington that isn’t working, saying Congress is “at war with itself because they are unwilling to leave campaign-style politics at the Capitol’s door” and said the nation’s capitol drifts from “conflict to conflict with little resolution.”
And if domestic issues suffer, the world’s opinion of America is damaged, Christie said.
“Without strong leadership at home, without our domestic house in order, we are taking ourselves out of the equation,” he said. “Over and over, we are allowing the rest of the world to set the tone without American influence because of our failings.”
To some extent, it was a version his American Enterprise Institute speech from March writ global. But it was also not ideologically specific.
He seemed to laud Bowles-Simpson, for instance, in terms of fiscal issues. But in the portion of his speech that dealt with foreign policy, he moved away from the neocon hawkish position and sounded closer to the one espoused most loudly in the GOP field by Jon Huntsman, in terms of not fighting the world's fights.
It highlights why Christie appeals to conservative elites and some major donors. But it is also a reminder that he would face some of the same challenges as any other candidate in this hard-right moment in the Republican party in a national race.
At the same time, it underscores what those who want Christie to run find appealing - a straight message, and one that's not ideologically based.
ROGER THAT !
My Daughter wants a Diesel Automobile simply because she wants to run her car on used cooking oil....I admire her desire to do something good for the environment and to tap into a source of almost free fuel.....I let her know that I will assist her when she gets to that age.....
With the price of Regular Fuel, it could be a way to fight the rising prices as the restaurants need to get rid of the stuff and many will give it to you for free as they have to pay to dispose of it....
As the guys on TOP GEAR say all the time, " How hard can it be ???"
Here's how you do it.....
How to run a car on cooking oil
As petrol prices reach a record high, Christopher Middleton discovers the hazardous art of converting used oil from breakfast fry-ups into biodiesel.
Christopher Middleton 22 Mar 2011
UK Telegraph
From the outside, James Morfee’s headquarters are hardly a match for those of BP, Shell or any of the other global energy giants. Instead of operating from a 40-storey glass tower in the capital, he works in an oily, little outhouse at his parents’ home in rural Somerset. Instead of a massive petrochemical complex, he has a couple of metal drums and a collection of polythene containers.
The big difference, though, is that whereas the big, international companies charge £1.40 per litre for what they produce, Morfee makes his own biodiesel for just 18p per litre. What is more, he is happy to pass on the recipe to anyone who is interested in cutting the cost of driving.
These days, this applies to almost everyone, given that oil prices have, in the past year, risen from US$85 to US$115, and show no inclination to stop. The price of petrol is expected to reach an average of 133.17p per litre in Britain by the end of this week. Even those of us with the smoothest-running financial engines will have spluttered and choked at the size of the sums being demanded at the nation’s petrol pumps.
So, given the level of savings offered by the Morfee method, I filled up my car and headed for the West Country, viewing the cost of doing so (£84, as against £69 before Christmas) more as an investment than an expense.
On arrival, my first impression was that I had arrived at the premises of a catering supplies company. Stacked in the back of Morfee’s car are half a dozen large containers of cooking oil. Used cooking oil, too, with little pieces of frazzled bacon floating in it. “Technical term for those is BCBs,” he informs me. “Burnt, crispy bits.”
My first step in the fuel-production process is to strain the oil through a plastic sieve, in order to achieve a 100 per cent pure, BCB-free liquid. It doesn’t smell very pure, mind you. But that is because Morfee’s raw material comes not gushing straight from the geological substrata of the Arabian Desert, but in plastic tubs, from local restaurants.
“Two of my best suppliers are the Parrot Cafe in Langport, and the Unicorn Hotel in Somerton,” he says. “I pay them 10p a litre and take as much oil as they can give me.”
But does the oil have to be pre-used? Given that the chicken-dipper and fish-finger fragments don’t actually contribute anything to the petro-brew, why not just buy cooking oil straight from the shelves?
“You could, no problem,” comes the reply. “The oil would work just as well. The trouble is, the price of fresh cooking oil is around £1.10 per litre, so you’re not much better off. Time was, supermarkets would treat cooking oil as a loss leader, and charge 30p to 40p a litre, but they’ve stopped doing that now. So used oil is the only viable alternative.”
Now 26, Morfee began making biodiesel in earnest a year ago, driven both by the rising costs of running his own car, and by a lifelong interest in oily engines (“as a child, I was irresistibly drawn to fuel-powered lawnmowers”).
He learnt the basics of DIY diesel-making from a specialist website (of which there are many). These demonstrate that, while the process starts off quite simply, things soon get seriously scientific. Removing bits of fried breakfast is one thing; titration, it emerges, is another.
This is the process whereby one can determine the acid content of each batch of cooking oil (an essential prerequisite for successful bio-brewing). It involves some nifty pipette work, as well as measuring the precise amount of pre-mixed indicator solution it takes to turn the oil slightly pink (a sign of pH neutrality). There then follows a spot of arithmetical calculation on Morfee’s dog-eared notepad, which results in the conclusion that, for us, instead of mixing the standard 550 grams of sodium hydroxide with each 100 litres of de-BCB’d oil, we need to use 610 grams.
“It’s now,” he warns, “that this all starts to get a bit dangerous.”
I have been warned about this in advance, having mugged up on the Biofuels and Other Fuel Substitutes Regulations 2004, which read: “Making biodiesel is a potentially hazardous process that should only be carried out in controlled conditions by people with the proper training and experience.” And you can see what they mean.
“What we’ve got in this first barrel is methanol,” announces Morfee, who at this point reveals his degree was in mechanical engineering, not chemistry. “This stuff is more flammable than petrol, and lethal to swallow; drink 25 millilitres of it, and it’ll kill you.
“Meanwhile, what we’ve got in this second barrel is sodium hydroxide, otherwise known as caustic soda. Get it on your skin, it will burn you; get it in your eyes, and it will corrode your eyeballs.
“These materials are volatile, they’re hazardous, and we’re going to mix them together.”
Not a job for the apprentice, then. Although Morfee says the worst biodiesel-related injury he has ever suffered was when he was stung by an insect trapped inside one of his rubber gloves, I step well back as he pours the gloopy, clear methanol on to the flaky, salt-like sodium hydroxide, and begins shaking the mixture together. “The process generates quite a lot of heat,” he says, in the sort of way that TV chefs talk to camera. “Feel how warm the barrel’s getting.”
It is true. Even half an hour later, as we sit on the plastic container and pose for pictures, there is an unnervingly warm glow still emanating from the liquid below.
This, it transpires, is because it still has work to do. Once the mixture (known as sodium methoxide) has been added to the cooking oil, and heated up, the process of “transesterification” begins. This involves the sodium methoxide not only achieving the required reduction in viscosity (cooking oil is much thicker than diesel), but also altering the oil’s chemical make-up, splitting it into, on the one hand, a carbon-neutral biodiesel that will fuel a car, and, on the other, a mass of soap-like, solid brown glycerol (which Morfee uses as fuel for his outhouse stove).
The process is by no means immediate, though. After a few hours of simmering, the brew then needs at least a seven-day calming-down period in the settling tank, before it can be used.
This is one of the reasons why Morfee has not become a bulk producer; during the week he works in Southampton as a marine engineer, and cannot always get home to his parents’ place at weekends.
The other reason is financial; under current H M Customs and Revenue regulations, you don’t have to pay any duty on privately produced biofuel, provided you don’t make more than 2,500 litres per year.
“I brew about 150 litres a month, just for myself, and that’s all I need to keep my car on the road,” says Morfee, filling up his Volvo with some biodiesel he made earlier. “I get about 45-50 miles per gallon out of my stuff, as opposed to 55mpg from the diesel you buy at the pumps.
“The big difference is, that once I’ve paid the 10p per litre for the used cooking oil, it only costs me 7p per litre to make the fuel.
“Though, actually, you’d better make that 8p. My parents pay for the electricity.”
For more details of James Morfee’s operation, visit www.staroil.com. The website has links to 18 other small firms and individuals across the UK who collect cooking oil to make biodiesel
The British Press pretty much calls it like it is....Now if FOX NEWS had published this story, it would be seen as partisan and racist....The Brits don't really have a stake in the game and this view falls under the standard of the "3rd disinterested observer's point-of-view" which is usually the most accurate.
The hosts of TOP GEAR are always asking the following question when they see something going horribly wrong and it would seem to be appropriate regarding the feckless "empty suit" sitting in the White House;
" HOW HARD CAN IT BE ????"
BARACK OBAMA: THE WEAKEST PRESIDENT IN HISTORY?
President Barack Obama's supporters believed that he had the vision to transform America
Friday March 18,2011
By Anna Pukas
INEFFECTUAL, invisible, unable to honour pledges and now blamed for letting Gaddafi off the hook. Why Obama’s gone from ‘Yes we can’ to ‘Er, maybe we shouldn’t’...
Let us cast our minds back to those remarkable days in November 2008 when the son of a Kenyan goatherd was elected to the White House. It was a bright new dawn.....
Obama’s campaign slogan was mesmerisingly simple and brimming with self-belief: “Yes we can.” His presidency, however, is turning out to be more about “no we won’t.” Even more worryingly, it seems to be very much about: “Maybe we can… do what, exactly?“ The world feels like a dangerous place when leaders are seen to lack certitude but the only thing President Obama seems decisive about is his indecision. What should the US do about Libya? What should the US do about the Middle East in general? What about the country’s crippling debts? What is the US going to do about Afghanistan, about Iran?
What is President Obama doing about anything? The most alarming answer – your guess is as good as mine – is also, frankly, the most accurate one. What the President is not doing is being clear, resolute and pro-active, which is surely a big part of his job description. This is what he has to say about the popular uprising in Libya: “Gaddafi must go.” At least, that was his position on March 3.
Since then, other countries – most notably Britain and France – have been calling for some kind of intervention. Even the Arab League, a notoriously conservative organisation, has declared support for sanctions. But from the White House has come only the blah-blah of bland statements filled with meaningless expressions
and vague phrases. Of decisive action and leadership – even of clearly defined opinion – there is precious little sign.
What is the Obama administration’s position on the protests in the Gulf island state of Bahrain, which the authorities there are savagely suppressing with the help of troops shipped in from Saudi Arabia? What is the White House view on the alarming prospect of the unrest spreading to Saudi Arabia itself? Who knows? Certainly not the American people, nor the leaders of nations which would consider themselves allies of America.
The President has not really shared his views, which leads us to conclude that he either doesn’t know or chooses, for reasons best known to himself, not to say. The result is that a very real opportunity to remove an unpredictable despot from power may well have been lost. Who knows when or if such an opportunity will come along again?
Every day for almost the last two months our television screens, radio broadcasts and the pages of our newspapers have been filled with the pictures, sounds and words of the most tumultuous events any of us can remember in the Arab world. The outcome of these events, once the dust has settled, could literally change the world. Yet Obama seems content to sit this one out. He has barely engaged in the debate. Such ostrich-like behaviour is not untypical of the 49-year-old President who burst through America’s colour barrier to become the first African-American to occupy the White House.
Two days after taking office in January 2009, he pledged to close down the prison camp in Guantanamo Bay, which has become notorious for holding detainees for years without trial. Obama promised to lose the prison within 12 months and to abolish the practice of military trials of terrorism suspects. It was an important promise. America’s reputation had been severely tarnished by revelations about the conditions at Guantanamo, by reports of waterboarding and extraordinary rendition (transporting prisoners to a third country for torture) and by the appalling treatment of detainees in Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
Closing Guantanamo was a redemptive gesture. Two years on, not only is the prison still in use but its future is as assured as ever. Ten days ago, the President signed an executive order reinstating the military commissions at the island prison. Human rights organisations were outraged. “With the stroke of a pen, President Obama extinguished any lingering hope that his administration would return the United States to the rule of law,” said Amnesty International while Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union, declared the President’s action to be “unlawful, unwise and un-American.”
White House spokesmen insisted the President was still committed to closing Guantanamo, which currently has 172 detainees in custody. It was Congress, they said, that had refused to sanction the transfer of the prisoners to the US mainland for trial, leaving no option but to keep the prison open in Cuba. Very little has been achieved in the quest to secure peace in the Middle East. Under Obama, US foreign policy is founded on extreme caution. At first this cool-headedness was a welcome change from the naked aggression of George W Bush and his henchmen Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.
It is also true that the President is constantly stymied by a hostile, Republican-ruled Congress. But Obama’s apparent reluctance to engage with momentous events is starting to look like more than aloofness. Some tempering of America’s role as the world’s No1 busybody may be no bad thing but under Obama the US appears to be heading towards isolationism. He is hardly doing much better at home. Economically, the US is in big trouble but the national debt is not shrinking.
Ditto the country’s ecological health; the American love affair with the car and oil remains undiminished despite any alleged commitment. But the White House appears to shy away from any tough action. The energy with which Obama entered the White House seems to have all gone in the push to bring in health care reform, which many Americans didn’t want (or still don’t realise they want).
All of which means that it is starting to look as if Obama and the Democratic Party have but one aim in mind for the rest of this presidential term: to get elected for a second. That means not doing anything that might upset any number of special interest or niche groups, which in effect means not doing very much at all. So, not too many harsh but necessary measures to tackle the financial deficit; no clear direction on where America goes with Afghanistan, even though the war there is going nowhere except from bad to worse.
The Obama government can’t even give clear direction on whether the American people are in danger of exposure to nuclear fallout from Japan following the devastating earthquake and tsunami. The US Surgeon General Regina Benjamin advised San Francisco residents to stock up on radiation antidotes, prompting a run on potassium iodide pills, while the President said experts had assured him that any harmful radiation would have receded long before reaching the Western shores of the US.
Yes we can was a noble and powerful mantra which secured for Barack Obama the leadership of the free world. Those than can, do. It is time he started doing
Well, not exactly "take" 10 Downing Street....they used the residence of the British Prime Minister as a backdrop for filming a Top Gear Challenge. Jeremy Clarkson and British Prime Minister David Cameron are friends and it was all done to highlight British Goods via a road trip to India for the Top Gear Boffins.
