| Author | Thread |
|
|
08/17/2005 07:56:32 PM · #51 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
1) A lot...good luck getting the left leaning liberals to let us at it.
2) Well...depends on how you look at it. It certainly helps the economy.
3) Because nobody wants to pay for it. It would cost mucho dollars. Then again, you have to get "permission" to build something with environmental issues.
Originally posted by Travis99:
A few questions.
1. How much oil do we have in Alaska.
2. How does spending billions of dollars on war help anybody.
3. Why does the U.S. have little oil refineries |
|
There's no reason to let people at the oil in Alaska.. alternative fuels and transportation are THERE.. ready to be used.. but we continue to be lazy and let greedy oil barons line their pockets and destroy the environment and all that lovely crap.
I can't blame the politicians.. or the oil barons even, really.. but I do blame us. Humanity. Ourselves. Myself. We've become too dependant and complacent, and we'll eventually pay the ultimate price if we keep it up.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:02:46 PM · #52 |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:14:26 PM · #53 |
Originally posted by Artyste:
There's no reason to let people at the oil in Alaska.. alternative fuels and transportation are THERE.. ready to be used.. but we continue to be lazy and let greedy oil barons line their pockets and destroy the environment and all that lovely crap.
|
I agree its silly to go drill in Alaska if its a short term fix, and we find ourselves in the same predictament years down the road.
But I am not really sure what the alternate fuels and transportation you speek of. I drive 150 miles a day for my job. Cant really do that on a bike, or public transportation. I am not getting a hybred, to overpriced now.
I have however looked at the Camry that gets 24/34. I will probably get one that will replace my gas sucking V-8. |
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:24:40 PM · #54 |
Originally posted by Riggs:
Originally posted by Artyste:
There's no reason to let people at the oil in Alaska.. alternative fuels and transportation are THERE.. ready to be used.. but we continue to be lazy and let greedy oil barons line their pockets and destroy the environment and all that lovely crap.
|
I agree its silly to go drill in Alaska if its a short term fix, and we find ourselves in the same predictament years down the road.
But I am not really sure what the alternate fuels and transportation you speek of. I drive 150 miles a day for my job. Cant really do that on a bike, or public transportation. I am not getting a hybred, to overpriced now.
I have however looked at the Camry that gets 24/34. I will probably get one that will replace my gas sucking V-8. |
The alternate fuels/energy sources are (but not limited to):
Hydrogen based
Corn based (Ethanol)
Hydro-Electric
Solar (It's weak right now, but if more money had been put into it *years* ago)
Wind power
All of these have the potential to be as potent or more so than crude oil/fossil fuels, but the research and money was denied them for too many years. Too many people scoff at it, and too many people love their powerful muscle cars and over-sized status symbols (re: H2)
Alternate transportation methods are clear.. mass transit, smaller and more effecient vehicles.. etc. We, again, are to blame for this.. being adamantly opposed to losing our "personal" vehicles and/or sources of status.
It's sad.. but it's the way the world is I guess. I do my part. I walk wherever I can. I take the bus. I don't own a car.. It just seems to me that we have a mindset that just allows excess and largesse in the name of status and personal comfort.
(Oh, and as to your 150 miles to work.. I understand, but if our municipalities were to put far more energy into creating much better transportation services.. then you *could* rely on mass transit. Good luck though. *sigh*)
Message edited by author 2005-08-17 20:26:22.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:25:18 PM · #55 |
Partly supply & demand on the hybrids right now. From what I've heard you have to wait several months after ordering one...forget about trying to work the price at all. Don't know this first hand...
Need more production of hybrids to start bringing the price down. Bush signed something recently for a tax credit - helps a little to buy one (hybrid).
Other alternates need to be pushed harder also - like hydro/hydra power. Can't remember exactly the name - the byproduct of one of these is H2O.
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:35:07 PM · #56 |
I do it all the time. If it scares you that much, take the Metro.
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I've thought about it, but it scares the crap out of me to think about driving a small car out on I66 or I95 with all those tractor-trailers and SUV's!!!
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
If demand is high, price is high. If you want cheaper gas, buy a smaller car, and use it less. |
|
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:39:55 PM · #57 |
Originally posted by Travis99:
Dont give me all that supply and demand BS, what makes this year any different from last year. |
30% or more year over year growth in oil consumption in China and India, the two most populous countries in the world.
-Terry
|
|
|
|
08/17/2005 08:58:38 PM · #58 |
Nope ... Rt3 -> Rt29 -> little bit 66. Spotsy Co.
Can't get to work location using Metro anyway...not that that is much less scary nowadays anyway. ;^)
Originally posted by ClubJuggle:
I do it all the time. If it scares you that much, take the Metro.
Originally posted by glad2badad:
I've thought about it, but it scares the crap out of me to think about driving a small car out on I66 or I95 with all those tractor-trailers and SUV's!!!
Originally posted by PaulMdx:
If demand is high, price is high. If you want cheaper gas, buy a smaller car, and use it less. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 07:56:29 AM · #59 |
I was just sent this site...
//www.gasbuddy.com/
What really bugs me is when I check state wide prices Sheetz gas is $2.39 in one area of the state and I live less less than 3 miles from where Sheetz gas is stored and Sheetz here is $2.56....hmmm you'd think the price here would reflect the fact that we are so close rather than a place 120 miles away being so much cheaper
Message edited by author 2005-08-18 07:57:03. |
|
|
|
08/18/2005 08:06:14 AM · #60 |
Local and county taxes play a large part in the variance...
Originally posted by OneSweetSin:
I was just sent this site...
//www.gasbuddy.com/
What really bugs me is when I check state wide prices Sheetz gas is $2.39 in one area of the state and I live less less than 3 miles from where Sheetz gas is stored and Sheetz here is $2.56....hmmm you'd think the price here would reflect the fact that we are so close rather than a place 120 miles away being so much cheaper |
|
|
|
|
08/18/2005 10:44:32 AM · #61 |
Originally posted by "SJCarter":
Unfortunately, the path that the USA has taken in the last 6 years has been to consume more and more oil-based products - thanks to our illustrious leader |
Bologne Carter..... the last 6 yrs? Try last 6 decades. To our illustrious leader? No....too our affluent culture. It's not our leaders who are for the oil - it's us!
The consumers.....
In fact, no other president beside our illustrious leader as you call him has ever devoted more funding toward alternative vehicle systems.
The main reasons for the price increase are as follows:
a) instability in the middle-east and global security
b) dramatic increase in consumption on the part of China (soon to surpass if it hasn't already America's consumption)
c) reduced refinery capability (often even when they have the crude they're just not able to produce enough processed fules - we need to build up the refinery infrastructure)
d) Venezuela's situation (which was one of our biggest suppliers of oil)
Now, even with a dramatic rise we are still paying less than almost any other country. One of the main reasons is that we have our own reserves and quite a bit of them. However, we endeavor to spare those if possible. Another aspect that few Americans are aware of is that our illustrious leader is restoring the Federal oil reserves. These had been significantly depleted over the past decade or two. This is our "emergency reservse" and where as in times past most presidents opened the reserve to help reduce prices our illustrious leader decided it's more prudent with the world situation to make sure that such a reserve is fully stocked (for the first time in years). It is estimated that sometime toward the end of this year (August/September/October) that the reserve will be filled. Though I do believe some are considering increasing the reserve. Which would not be a bad idea either.
Originally posted by "SJCarter":
I currently drive a hybrid car (despite the economic hardships placed on this choice by the USA's current government and its refusal to endorse the Kyoto Protocol) |
What in the world are you talking about Carter? Economic hardships for driving a hybrid? Like what???? Tax breaks, free parking at meters, and many more caterings? I don't know of a single hardship for driving a hybrid due to the government. You are off your rocker...
Originally posted by "SJCarter":
IMHO, it's sad that the (current-soon to change I hope) most powerful economy in the world refuses to acknowledge the FACTS that world scientists have come to accept. |
Enjoy your life under communist China....
People like you are the number one reason why America won't accept the Kyoto accords. And very few scientists deny that global warming is occurring. What they question is the cause. Especially if you look at the history of ice ages and warm periods - and realize that the peak between ice ages is much warmer than it is now. And we're still on the upward path. The other reason, is that America does not see a point in a treaty that says you have to reduce your pollution to below "x" amount but hey China, or Malaysia or some developing nation can reduce as much as they want. It defeats the purpose. I believe it has been expressed if a universal treaty was done then America would support it.
You know what we need instead of the Kyoto Accord? (a Honda Accord..*ha ha* just kidding) No, but actually what we need is an accord that states such limits for all nations. And also, opens up technologies to all. (In otherwords, patents for technologies for environmental cleanup would be available without license to all developing nations.) This way the more advanced and developed western world nations would support the brunt of the technology development but all nations would have to strive for the guidelines.
And I'll explain why this is important. In America, I live in a state called Connecticut. We will often fail our air pollution goals. However, even if we quit polluting entirely we'd fail. Why? Cause neighbors about 500 miles to the west output pollution. So what point is there in stopping our pollution if we're just going to receive it from neighbors after all of our hard work and investment. Make it so that neighbors, all alike, have to reduce and we'll be there.
Originally posted by "deapee":
Jump on the bandwagon though -- the rich are getting richer, and the middle class is struggling harder and harder to make ends meet. |
Try being working poor. Yup....my family spent the boom of the 80's in San Diego as working poor. The family car for 5 yrs was a moped. Ever seen a family of three all riding one moped. I imagine many a mexican had their laugh "hey....Jose....look at that...have you ever seen such a sight." Middle-class just need to give up luxury....working poor...they have to give up food.
I'd like to say that I DID vote for him....
(I would also say I did not vote for Clinton who fought a war in Yugoslavia in order to put that region under international control so that a pipeline could be built across it to bring over oil from Russia. Yugoslavia...now that was a war for oil.)
"LIBERAL IDIOTS AND HYPOCRITES" - get a life... you !@#$% about high oil prices....than you !@#$% about President Bush holding hands with Saudi Arabia in order to convince them to help lower those prices. Which do you want.... you want your cake and to eat it too, but worse....you want to eat your neighbor's cake on top of it all.
As for the profits of local gas stations....I had a friend who worked as a manager of one. He explained they work on about nickel margin. They (the individual shops) get pressed as hard as we do with the price increases.
"He may not controll gas prices, but he has enough power to put pressure on the people that do. Open your eyes."
Yup...and you guys !@#$% him out for doing so. He lended support and presence in friendly gesture to Saudi Arabia's ruling government to help reduce the price per barrel by increasing output. And you label him evil for it. What would you like him to do instead?
Originally posted by "Travis99":
BS, what makes this year any different from last year. Explain to me, why in the 70's there was a suposed fuel shortage and the years that follow seem to have plenty of fuel. |
We've had 2-3 refineries damaged/destroyed over the past few years and no knew ones built. China has increased consumption dramatically. The 70's shortage was reduced largely thanks to technology. We developed advanced equipment that allows for us to find "oil resevoirs". Quotes like "we have reserves for 20 more years" are bogus as those were known reserves, we've since discovered many more. It's no longer a "hit or miss" it is now a scientific analysis for finding oil.
Originally posted by "Travis99":
A few questions.
1. How much oil do we have in Alaska.
2. How does spending billions of dollars on war help anybody.
3. Why does the U.S. have little oil refineries
|
1. Quite a bit, however we have been unable to tap most of it due to environmental restrictions. Which is foolish. Yes, we can look at the Valdez and point to potential environmental disaster. But the solution is NOT to stop the extraction but to put high requirements on the extraction facilities. (Ie: don't stopping using oil tankers, but ensure that the only tankers that are allowed to carry the oil are double/triple hulled.)
People like Artyste are part of the problem. He claims "There's no reason to let people at the oil in Alaska.. alternative fuels and transportation are THERE" I would like to see these alternative fuels? Does he mean bio-diesel? we're not able to produce enough and it's also a temp. measure as it is still a very high pollutant or electric cars (mind you most people forget electric cars run on oil...the only difference is the oil is burned in a large highly efficient powerplant, but you still need oil). Does he mean solar powered cars? Haven't seen one yet that was feasible. In fact, it's very easy for Astyste to claim such but much harder for him to give any examples. Perhaps the best one is fuel cells. And President Bush saw that and dumped $5 billion and made additional committments to providing more funds to help construct a delivery infrastructure. But fuel cells are still immature and the technology, although improving, is not quite ready for market. Corn based ethanol....we simply can't produce enough to meet our needs. Nor does this eliminate the environmental pollution problem. Never seen a wind powered car...but wind power has it's own problems. Including killing many animals and causing the ground to heat up. (Most people do not know that there are environmental problems at many wind farms where the farms have caused an increase in temperature.) Another great option is "nuclear power" but environmentalists in America prevent this one from being pursued. We have not built a new nuclear power plant in several decades. Mind you, Europe has advanced this technology greatly. With new plants a) being immune to meltdowns (their design ensures a meltdown actually triggers a stop of the reaction) b) they are so much more efficient they can use the waste of our old plants for fuel (which would allow us to reduce our nuclear waste) c) they produce more power d) most nuclear plants have high security, the result is several miles around them usually gets designated as a nature preserve.
Furthermore, people forget that they're plastic cups, plastic bowls, car mouldings, pens, etc are all made out of oil. We need oil for manufacturing of plastics.
The biggest problem we have in solving this dilemna is an intellectual problem. It's called "intellectual property" (or more familiarly - patents). If we freed up the patent database in this area innovation could progress and small time inventors could invent units that could meet our needs without the oil dependency.
2. Actually, billions of dollars spent on war....perhaps you should go discover how many schools and facilities we've built in Iraq. I know where I am it often costs about $10-$40 million to build a school building for schools that have less than a couple thousand students. That's one city. Try a nation worth. I believe we've built and or are building over 350 schools. Another part of the extreme cost of this war is that during the Clinton administration the military service was neglected and did not receive upkeep. The result, much of the current equipment was sub-par and is being replaced, upgraded, etc. In other words, in order to take this action we have to pay the $$$ that was supposed to be invested over the 90's.
3. Once again, environmentalism gone amuk. Refineries are high pollutant structures. And they're massive. We don't want them next to us (ever been in northern New Jersey...*bleck*) Very few places have the room for them (without putting them in the mist of wilderness. And there are many restrictions cause of the pollution. The time it takes to get all the EPA and state environmental approvals is probably close to 10 yrs. President Bush has proposed a high speed by-pass on this, and that is to utilize several military base facilities that are being closed. These bases have the "land requirements" and are already "high pollution plots". Hopefully, this will get approved and we'll add several major refineries.
We've also lost several refinery facilities in the last 2-3 yrs. And although all have been attributed to "accidents" there are many who suspect that they were sabotaged by terrorists. But that's a whole nother question in and of itself.
ANYWAYS....
The issue is way more complex than "EVIL BUSH!!!"
In fact, President Bush is one of the first presidents to think "long term". His policies have been to invest in new technology (fuel cells) as opposed to a few MPG increase laws for ICE (internal combustion engines). And in the short term tap local reserves to reduce dependence until new technology would free us from our reliance. It's actually the smart, logical strategy....
Message edited by author 2005-08-18 13:03:30. |
|
|
|
08/20/2005 04:29:06 PM · #62 |
Originally posted by glad2badad:
Isn't China the worlds largest consumer of oil now? Anyone confirm/deny please? Yes, USA is a major player at the oil card table, but I think the seats at the table are being filled quite rapidly.
No chance to research it personally right now...thanks. |
No China is #4. The US is still the champ using more than the entire European Union combined and almost 4x as much as China. -CIA World Fact Book
The real problem is 2 words you wont ever hear on main stream news; Peak Oil.
This is what the wars in the Middle East are for. To secure the last major oil reserves.
And since some people mentioned Jimmy Carter, let me post a speech by him from 1977 entitled "The President's Proposed Energy Policy." Had we taken the action proposed in that speech back in 1977 we would not be targets of terrorism and invading Middle East countries today. |
|
|
|
08/20/2005 04:53:07 PM · #63 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
The real problem is 2 words you wont ever hear on main stream news; Peak Oil.
|
We're workin' on that, MadMordegon. My new job involves updating content at PostCarbon.org with related Peak Oil stories, as well as editing and posting audio interviews with peak oil experts and others at GlobalPublicMedia.com. A lot of people get their energy related news from these two sites, and you'll notice that many of the news articles at the first site come from relatively mainstream media sources.
I would suggest anyone that is concerned about the rising costs of fuels (and other things, seeing as how the price & availability of oil affects literally everything in our lives, from gas prices to cost of plastic goodies, food, electricity, etc.) look into joining their local Relocalization Outpost, or if one doesn't exist for your area yet, start one.
Things like community supported agriculture, energy farms and car co-ops are going to be "the wave of the future". Starting a local network for these things will make your life much easier as the energy crunch really starts crunching.
As an aside, folks in Minnesota might want to join this bank. This is essentially a prepaid gas card. This was on the news a couple days ago. A man bought $3000 worth of gas credit from the fuel bank three years ago, at a price of, I believe, 91 cents... and he's only half way through his credit today. Prices are only going to continue rising.
Message edited by author 2005-08-20 16:56:16.
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 05:10:12 PM · #64 |
| Great post ahaze. If you guys need another web designer over there, hit me up ;) |
|
|
|
08/20/2005 05:20:11 PM · #65 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Great post ahaze. If you guys need another web designer over there, hit me up ;) |
Thanks Mad. It's a pretty tight operation! PCI and GPM cover operating costs (paying me, the other staff members, and contractors) with money made through purchases at Post Carbon Books. If anyone wants to help support the continued life of these sites- and me- please buy a book or two ;)
However, if anyone wants to volunteer to translate or transcribe our audio & video content, you can get free DVDs for it!
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 06:38:12 PM · #66 |
I find it really amusing when yankies start bitching about fuelprice, it's them that control the world price on fuel.
and to start complaning when the gallon is well below $3 is just funny..
the local price on gas here in Iceland is $6.88 gallon and people are just starting to complain ;)
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 06:48:47 PM · #67 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
I find it really amusing when yankies start bitching about fuelprice, it's them that control the world price on fuel. |
I'd be interested to hear your take on what the average, individual American (me for instance) can do to lower (or for that matter raise) the price of fuel worldwide. I had no idea I had that kind of power.
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 06:56:15 PM · #68 |
Originally posted by ahaze:
Originally posted by DanSig:
I find it really amusing when yankies start bitching about fuelprice, it's them that control the world price on fuel. |
I'd be interested to hear your take on what the average, individual American (me for instance) can do to lower (or for that matter raise) the price of fuel worldwide. I had no idea I had that kind of power. |
actually you DO have that power, not alone but if 100.000.000 americans refuse to pay more than $2/gallon then the price will drop to $2/gallon or the gascompanies will go bankrupt :)
the power of the consumer has no limit, but it's unfortunately only a handful of people that control world gas prices, and none of them has to pay for their own gas..
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 07:03:13 PM · #69 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
actually you DO have that power, not alone but if 100.000.000 americans refuse to pay more than $2/gallon then the price will drop to $2/gallon or the gascompanies will go bankrupt :) |
What stopped a large number of Icelanders from refusing to pay more than $6/gallon?
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 07:24:57 PM · #70 |
You might be aware that gas/petrol/diesel or whatever fossil fuel we put in our cars comes from crude oil pulled out of the ground. Thus, the price of fuel is directly linked to the price of oil.
But did you also know that the price of the food we eat is also directly linked to the price of oil?
"In the United States, 400 gallons of oil equivalents are expended annually to feed each American (as of data provided in 1994)
Agricultural energy consumption is broken down as follows:
· 31% for the manufacture of inorganic fertilizer
· 19% for the operation of field machinery
· 16% for transportation
· 13% for irrigation
· 08% for raising livestock (not including livestock feed)
· 05% for crop drying
· 05% for pesticide production
· 08% miscellaneous
Energy costs for packaging, refrigeration, transportation to retail outlets, and household cooking are not considered in these figures. "
(The above information from this site.)
In addition, "In the US, the average piece of food is transported almost 1,500 miles before it gets to your plate. In Canada, the average piece of food is transported 5,000 miles from where it is produced to where it is consumed." ( Matt Savinar, sources listed in the article).
So refusing to pay a certain gas price to drive to work doesn't curb our oil thirst much. And we can't exactly refuse to eat.
This is why localization- growing and buying local food, etc- is so vitally important. It is, literally, the only way we can "refuse" to pay for oil. More to the point, it's the only way we can have a sustainable future.
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 08:25:57 PM · #71 |
I managed to pay £1.19/litre ($4.50/US Gallon) for 4* petrol the other day - the price of a classic car that does not run on unleaded. [From an environmental standpoint, however, I understand that it is very efficient overall, as I understand that the environmental cost of manufacturing a car is very substantial, and by not disposing of and replacing a car that is 36 years old, I am doing my bit!]
Petrol is expensive, and not going to get substantially cheaper as time goes on. I read the other day that peak oil production is nearing its predicted zenith, as it has followed a bell curve very accurately for the last 50 years, which should peak and start to decline between now and 2010. The pace of oilfield discovery is slowing and all indicators point towards the beginning of the slowdown in production.
I am not sure what the solution is - except that work must be done now (through effective mechanisms such as Kyoto rather than hand wringing and investment in nothing more than technology with a fruition date of 20+ years). The explosion in Chinese and Indian energy demand threatens us all with dozens more cheap and heavy polluting coal plants. I believe that Hilary Clinton has been speaking on the same subject recently, and said something along the lines of the question not being whether damage will be caused, but how long we will prevaricate before doing something to limit it, and thus how extensive that damage will be.
As a collective of responsible nations that are the substantial cause of existing pollutant levels, the West must lead from the front. We cannot, for example, ask China to limit its growth and not to build coal plants while we do not share the pain of taking active steps to reduce pollution output.
|
|
|
|
08/20/2005 08:35:53 PM · #72 |
Originally posted by ahaze:
Originally posted by DanSig:
actually you DO have that power, not alone but if 100.000.000 americans refuse to pay more than $2/gallon then the price will drop to $2/gallon or the gascompanies will go bankrupt :) |
What stopped a large number of Icelanders from refusing to pay more than $6/gallon? |
there are 3 companies here that sell fuel, the fourth started last year and is still very small, the other 3 was charged with conspiracy to control fuel prices and were found guilty and fined 23.5 million $ and are now facing puplic procecution and may have to repay the public close to 1 billion $ if found guilty.
so it was useless to try to force them to lower prices
|
|
|
|
08/21/2005 12:47:27 PM · #73 |
| Why is it when the thread turns from just bitching about high gas, to analyzing why it̢۪s high and exposing the real factors, the discussion stops? |
|
|
|
08/21/2005 01:47:31 PM · #74 |
Originally posted by MadMordegon:
Why is it when the thread turns from just bitching about high gas, to analyzing why it̢۪s high and exposing the real factors, the discussion stops? |
Could it be that the cessation of discussions is related to the amount of thinking involved in having a battle of wit, versus the ramblings associated with a venting session.
Just a thought,
Ray |
|
|
|
08/21/2005 04:04:25 PM · #75 |
I owned a Land Rover Discovery and a Range Rover (both 11-16 mpg). Two weeks ago I filled up the Disco's 23 gallon tank and it was over $50.00 USD. I was doing this every week. I drove to the Honda Dealership and traded it in after owning it for 6 years. I now am the happy owner of a Honda Civic Hybrid and getting 40+ mpg. I will keep the Range Rover (classic) for hauling my trailer when needed but I am really digging getting 500-600 mles to a tank of gas. I dont think the price of fuel is coming back down. We need to start changing our use and the auto industry will respond.
|
|
