Are you annoyed with the high gas prices?

[CarWeenie]

Actually, I am more annoyed at:

1. The President and his lackey VP who could have used the bully pulpit to tell us to conserve (immediate effect on demand) but instead just want to drill, drill, and drill (lucky to see more supply in 10 years). What do you expect from the R. party.
2. The congress who has more than 25 years to address our energy issues but did nothing. Now, they are playing the populist card blaming everyone in sight - OPEC, Big Oil, speculators, etc (since we are at it, why don't we add the Jews to the list). What do you expect form the D. party.
3. The American public (R and D party) who collectively uses 144 billion gallons of gasoline every year and think cheap gas is our birthright.

I would expect all this from some third rate country - but from a great republic that won WWII and won the subsequent peace, put men on the moon, sent probes to Mars - amazing - must be all frigging stupid luck!

[sevenrd]

????

I mentioned nothing about air pollution or China being any sort of role model.

I was simply pointing out that comparisons of total square mileage vs. oil consumption made no sense to me with regards to a previous poster's quote of:

"...what im trying to get at is people always say that America uses the most oil, but if you were to compare sizes of the countries, it puts the oil consumption in perspective compared to the rest of the world...The numbers i mentioned earlier is so many can see that the US's consumption isnt as outrageous as they would like us to believe..."

The numbers I posted spell otherwise. That's all.

Originally Posted by charlesaferg

...Ya think?



Yay for China as a role model!
Terrible comparison. Why?
Well...

Chinese Air Pollution... Yet still more reccuring scars of Chinese dictatorship...
"Industrial pollution has its most severe impact on the poor and in China, pollution incidents have been so serious as to be the cause of rioting in recent years. The lack of democracy and the level of corruption in development of factories and plants is a source of tension."
The actual figured are staggering, over half a million and beyond die or die prematurely directly from various forms of industrial pollution.


Russia... The Baltic, and the irrepairable remnants of the Soviet Era.


Or, Chinese poor! While the upper class flourishes on the US's need for random junk...


...or better yet, lets talk about Russia...

[truzoom]

Originally Posted by CarWeenie

Actually, I am more annoyed at:

1. The President and his lackey VP who could have used the bully pulpit to tell us to conserve (immediate effect on demand) but instead just want to drill, drill, and drill (lucky to see more supply in 10 years). What do you expect from the R. party.
2. The congress who has more than 25 years to address our energy issues but did nothing. Now, they are playing the populist card blaming everyone in sight - OPEC, Big Oil, speculators, etc (since we are at it, why don't we add the Jews to the list). What do you expect form the D. party.
3. The American public (R and D party) who collectively uses 144 billion gallons of gasoline every year and think cheap gas is our birthright.

I would expect all this from some third rate country - but from a great republic that won WWII and won the subsequent peace, put men on the moon, sent probes to Mars - amazing - must be all frigging stupid luck!

Capitalism, by definition, derivatively breeds conflict of interest. I'm not a communist and I'm not anti-capitalistic -- I am just aware that most ideas are not 100% pure.

Maybe I'm a conspiracy theory nut, though. If we have bluetooth earpieces, iPhones and open MRIs, why don't we have cars that run on cheap, renewable fuel? If I had millions invested in oil companies, I'd want to make sure that I was earning a nice chunk of change -- I would maybe even support lobbying Congress to ignore alternative energy bills. I'm stickin' to this theory too because I'm convinced anyone who thinks otherwise is either oblivious to the global situation or has money invested in big oil.

[charlesaferg]

Originally Posted by truzoom

Capitalism, by definition, derivatively breeds conflict of interest. I'm not a communist and I'm not anti-capitalistic -- I am just aware that most ideas are not 100% pure.

Maybe I'm a conspiracy theory nut, though. If we have bluetooth earpieces, iPhones and open MRIs, why don't we have cars that run on cheap, renewable fuel? If I had millions invested in oil companies, I'd want to make sure that I was earning a nice chunk of change -- I would maybe even support lobbying Congress to ignore alternative energy bills. I'm stickin' to this theory too because I'm convinced anyone who thinks otherwise is either oblivious to the global situation or has money invested in big oil.

That's assuming supply really is running out...

Heck, take what Al Gore says as the current amount in the world, and then what some geologist will say, vastly different, not even close. That's what doesn't make sense..

In all honestly, how many areas are you finding to run dry that we know of... I mean, I don't hear stories of oil workers losing their jobs. I'm seeing a lot more bout GM plants closing, but there "peak oil" isn't convincing... The effects are obvious on our side from our wallets, but what about their side...? They aren't scrambling to meet the demands and find the oil because it will be cheaper - they're taking advantage of this "peak oil" theory, that somehow it's been established that we will run out of oil in 20 years. That's just from my observations from the news and even back home.

Well, speaking of that... This was interesting history.
Oil is well: The shortage is a myth, and not a new one

With oil prices reaching record levels, the left is up to its old tricks, blaming the President and calling for lots of expensive big government "solutions."

As part of this push, they argue that we're running out of oil.

But clearly, this argument is not new — and it's dead wrong.

In 1874, Pennsylvania's state geologist fretted that America had only a four-year supply of oil left.

He was wrong.

In 1914, Washington claimed we had only a ten-year supply.

It was wrong.

In 1940, the government announced that reserves would be depleted within 15 years.

Wrong again.

In 1977, President Jimmy Carter lamented that within a decade, we wouldn't be able to import enough oil, "from any country, at any acceptable price," to meet our needs.

Hardly shocking, the peanut farmer from Plains was wrong too.

Truth be told, the world's estimated oil reserves grew from 60 billion barrels in 1920 to 600 billion by 1950, 2,000 billion by 1990, and 3,000 billion by the year 2000.

And in the next few years, they'll keep rising.

Why? Because when demand increases and prices rise, companies explore for more. When oil is cheap, they don't. Why should they?

The rest of the article is rather interesting too. From the research I've done to verify this, it's quote informative and correct. I just wish he listed his specific readings to make it easier. Seriously though, it makes a lot of sense.

Also, I udnerstand the scientists obviously couldn't find reserves because the technology restricted them, but it's still a good point he makes, as it's all based on the market demand.

"Thursday, September 14, 2006
Oil shortage a myth - petrol chief
THE world has an abundant supply of oil, and high petrol prices are just the reality of a globally traded commodity, ExxonMobil Australia chairman Mark Nolan says.
Mr Nolan used his speech to the Asia Pacific oil and gas conference in Adelaide today to debunk the theory of peak oil, which suggests oil supplies have peaked and will dwindle over the next 20 years.

Such predictions, he said, had been around since the 1920s, particularly at times of high oil prices."

[Yal]

Like I said in an earlier post, every country on this planet has oil if they want it. There is no cut in supply and there is no shortage. OPEC isn't increasing production because they do not have to. The only reason for them to increase production is to reduce prices. But OPEC does not want to become some kind of world financial bank that controls world prices and nor should they want to be.

The solution is economic. Our currency is devalued, the housing crisis is forcing investors to safe havens like gold and oil (the price off gold has shot up too), demand has risen especially with the war. Its purely market forces driving this. One thing is for sure, we won't see gas under $3 ever again by the time its all over.

[toyotaguy]

too much money being made by big business for alternative fuels to come into play...

what happened to the electric car? last I heard is that it performed TOO well and it would have put the big oil companies out of business. so all the electric cars were destroyed (again, just what I heard, but have no proof)

but think about it...

some person comes up with a way to make a car that runs perfectly fine off just water, yes WATER! do you think that he will be alive long enough to share his idea and mass produce the car? NOPE, big business will have the person removed from society and the idea will never hit the market. Why, because big business makes too much money off oil for that to happen...

its sad, there is a lot of things that our government can do for us, but doesn't. instead, we try to help out other countries who dont necessarily want our help and we are in just as bad a situation as they are...(more aspects than the current war) We have our own problems, lets fix those first and then everyone else

[truzoom]

Originally Posted by toyotaguy

too much money being made by big business for alternative fuels to come into play...

what happened to the electric car? last I heard is that it performed TOO well and it would have put the big oil companies out of business. so all the electric cars were destroyed (again, just what I heard, but have no proof)

but think about it...

some person comes up with a way to make a car that runs perfectly fine off just water, yes WATER! do you think that he will be alive long enough to share his idea and mass produce the car? NOPE, big business will have the person removed from society and the idea will never hit the market. Why, because big business makes too much money off oil for that to happen...

its sad, there is a lot of things that our government can do for us, but doesn't. instead, we try to help out other countries who dont necessarily want our help and we are in just as bad a situation as they are...(more aspects than the current war) We have our own problems, lets fix those first and then everyone else

My thoughts exactly.

[charlesaferg]

"Land of the Blind."
It's about revolution, and I found it quite intriguing.
Some things never change.

It's a good movie.
Don't just read reviews, you've got to watch it.

Seriously, somebody watch it you won't be disappointed.
Oh, and it's not one of those documentaries made by special interest groups, it's a regular movie, touching on a general point of revolution and how much it actually changes things.

[sevenrd]

Originally Posted by Yal

Like I said in an earlier post, every country on this planet has oil if they want it. There is no cut in supply and there is no shortage. OPEC isn't increasing production because they do not have to. The only reason for them to increase production is to reduce prices. But OPEC does not want to become some kind of world financial bank that controls world prices and nor should they want to be.

The solution is economic. Our currency is devalued, the housing crisis is forcing investors to safe havens like gold and oil (the price off gold has shot up too), demand has risen especially with the war. Its purely market forces driving this. One thing is for sure, we won't see gas under $3 ever again by the time its all over.

Incorrect.

There are not elephant sized fields underneath every country. We have been finding fewer and fewer fields since 1964. U.S. oil production peaked in 1970 and had been declining ever since. Yes, there is ANWR and the continental shelf, but they would be a relative drop in the bucket at today's consumption rates.

List of countries that have hit their peak in production and are now in decline...

* Japan: 1932 (assumed; source does not specify)
* Germany: 1966
* Libya: 1970
* Venezuela: 1970
* USA: 1970
* Iran: 1974
* Nigeria: 1979
* Tobago: 1981
* Egypt: 1987
* Russia: an artificial peak occurred in 1987 shortly before the Collapse of the Soviet Union, but production subsequently recovered, making Russia the second largest oil exporter in the world. Figures from early 2008, statements by officials, and analysis suggest that production may have peaked in 2006/2007.[141][142]
* France: 1988
* Indonesia: 1991
* Syria: 1996
* India: 1997
* New Zealand: 1997
* UK: 1999
* Norway: 2000
* Oman: 2000
* Mexico: 2003
* Australia (disputed): 2004; 2001

Source: Peak oil - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The U.S. is also extremely vulnerable to the Export Land Model:Export Land Model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
What the Export Land Model Means for Energy Prices

Mexico, which supplies the U.S. with approximately 14% of its oil imports is in terminal decline:
UPDATE 2-Mexico sees lower oil exports for 2008 | Markets | Markets News | Reuters

Where is the new supply going to come from? Brazil? It's extremely expensive and energy intensive to extract that oil. Bloomberg.com: Exclusive

Peak oil isn't about running out of oil. We will never run out of oil. It is about running out of easily accessible, high-quality oil.

[CarWeenie]

I am sorry - I just don't buy this conspiracy theory stuff.
Actually I am rather frustrated by this kind of thinking.
It is really trivializing various engineering challenges.
Have you tried to tweak the manufacturing process of the solar cell to improve the efficiency? This is not trivial at all.
Battery technology is also very difficult to master. You are trying to put something together that can move a 3-5 thousand pounds object for 300 miles. And the darn thing cannot blow up when it gets into an accident. You think this is trivial? (You know why Tesla costs $100,000?
They came up with elaborate ways to make their Li batteries safe so that it does not do the thermal runaway and blow up their billionaire clients - the failsafe system is incredibly expensive).
Believe me, even I can build a nuclear power plant that will produce electricity that is too cheap to meter but I assure you that you don't want to live near it.

It is also a myth that "alternative" energy is going nowhere or being suppressed. Texas is generating a huge amount of energy (not enough - yet) from wind. I did not see "Big Oil" sending their cruise missiles against these wind farms. Also, Canada is extracting a tremendous amount of oil from their tar sand deposit (at an incredible cost to the environment). They can do this now because the oil is > $100 a barrel. I did not see Big Oil sending their private armies to seize these fields.

If these "Big Oil" guys were so powerful, why did they allow the oil to fall to $10 a barrel during the '90? Are they so powerful that even the Chinese needs to kowtow to them? (Believe me, the Chinese is painfully aware that their economy is at the mercy of the oil price and that's why they are so nice with some of the nastier regimes in the world who happens to own a lot of oil).

I don't believe in peak oil either. I think somebody on this forum is right in stating that there will always be oil - but it is going to be "affordable" to only some. Imagine China (4x our population) has the same petroleum usage as us: 4 x 144 billion ~= 600 billion gallons of oil a year. Add in the Indians and it is game over. I suspect that a lot of people can do the math and that's why I guess they think the oil would be a precious commodity.

In this current situation, I will continue to conserve as much as possible. The alternative energy will mature soon (I suspect much sooner than anyone anticipates) and we can bid adieu to those despotic countries and stupid oil corporations - good riddance and I suspect they will not be mourned.

[jetset4me]

Gas is now $4.49 a gallon for regular here in Southern California. Soon it's going to be cheaper to buy 20 year old Scotch than gas.

[keesue]

Gas is $4.45 a gallon here in Northern California and the cost of oil just shot up again. Morgan Stanley predicts oil at $150.00/barrell by July 4th. I have no reason to doubt it will get there inevitably. The demand for oil, the weakened dollar and the instability in the OPEC regions are driving oil higher every day. That will mean $5.00 a gallon at least!!!

I've been riding my bike on all errands and whenever its practical letting my 35mpg Yaris sits as much as possible. (I know not everyone can, it is just my antedote for my pain at the pump).