General discussion

Locked

Gas Prices

By rkuhn ·
You know, I really just want to puke.

After reading the following two articles, I have come to the conclusion that the granola eating, hairy armpit, tree hugging crowd along with the professors, '60's flower power, and theoretical BS crowd just don't get it.

http://biz.yahoo.com/nytimes/080620/1194786578804.html?.v=19

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080619/sc_nm/fuel_efficiency_dc

I would agree as I think most would that we have to end our dependence on oil. For security reasons, for environmental reasons, for lots of reasons.

But what these people just don't get is that the rapid and largely unexplained raise in oil (gas, heating, electric...this is just the beginning) is killing the lower income crowd.

You know, as a hardcore independent, conservative (I'd be a Republican but they too like the Democrats have screwed everything up) I'd like to say "oh well, that's the free market".

But this is different. Poor people's lives are being screwed with. Imagine for a second (hopefully most of you are like me and aren't lower income, after all we are supposedly in a higher paying field). But imagine for a second that the one thing you can't do without (oil) is breaking the bank.

Imagine living in a city without a meaningful mass transit system. Imagine living in a city where your current home value has depreciated to the point where you can't move.

Imagine paying 20% of your income just to drive to work and keep the power on. Then, insult to injury...cereal, bread, milk...they all go up.

Imagine telling your son or daughter that there won't be any presents under the tree this year because all your present money went to some Saudi king.

What's next? Where's the next hurricane?

Imagine being a single parent with two kids making $30,000 a year. Imagine for a second.

What the **** have our "leaders" been doing for the last 30 years? It's time to kick them all out of office.

Where's the solar power? Nuclear? Where the **** is all the sources of power we need without paying the towel heads (sorry) all the money we give them so they can finance the guns, bombs and other crap to turn around and kill us?

I've had it. My ballot in November will be all write in's. No voting for the freaking Democrats or Republicans.

How did we get to this point? I'll tell you. We got here because all of our "leaders" are too busy being greedy, self serving and worthless. To them, it's not about what can I do for my country, it's about how many times they get get their ugly face on TV and how many special interest dollars they can get.

They need to stop talking and start getting something done.

I work my *** off for a living. I manage my house pretty darn well. All I ask is for our "leaders" to do the same.

P.S. Many books have been written about the next world war. It's not going to be about politics, nationality, race, whatever.

It'll be about resources. Prepare yourself.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

385 total posts (Page 5 of 39)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

It was misposted

by Oz_Media In reply to Had it not been for that ...

But you picked up the ball anyway, well done.

Collapse -

Increased Production

by TheChas In reply to Gas Prices

I have read and heard several reports from people identified as oil industry analysts that increasing US oil production would have little or no impact on the price of gas in the US.

Even if they could start pumping oil from restricted areas tomorrow, the limited amount available combined with limits to how fast it can be extracted would make for only a small percentage increase in supply.

I read once that the total amount of oil available in ANWR is something like a 90 day supply of crude for the US.

The only way we are going to bring down the price of gas while we wait for alternatives is to reduce global energy consumption.

Chas

Collapse -

Something else to think about

by Tearat In reply to Increased Production

Oil pumped from under the land is easy
The pumps work ok with a minimum of attention and maintenance

Oil pumped from under the sea is different
You need a platform
Workers to run the platform
You have to ship the oil
On land you can pipe it

That is old and I am sure things have changed

But I doubt it is the same cost for land and sea wells

It is not an excuse but an observation

The other thing to think about is the risk to human life

I don?t think anyone wants cheep oil that puts people at risk
Sorry I know that is an easy answer and a cheap shot
Treat the safety part as a separate post
It is not meant to be a personal attack

Everyone has different needs
Some risk their lives all the time

It is only my opinion
Damn it I should just delete it

Collapse -

So...

by rkuhn In reply to Increased Production

So, just because something would have little impact, we shouldn't do it?

Obama's position so far on US drilling is that it will take 10 years to get to market.

Ok, if we start now we'll have it in 10 years. But, the longer we wait, the longer it is until we get it.

It's kind of like someone who weighs 400 lbs saying that it will take too long to lose enough weight to have any meaningful impact.

Well, you have to start somewhere, someday.

Collapse -

10 -12 years for the first drop

by Oz_Media In reply to So...

You can get all the numbers here:http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/index.html

Over the last 8 years there have been differing reports on the project, with each report providing seemingly less and less oil each time.

In essence, IF they get the go ahead today, they won't see a single drop for at least 10-12 years, and that is for teh initial/largest know reserve. There are quite a few smaller reserves, but each time an exploration project is allowed, it will take another 10 years before oil is produced.

Regardless if you get to drill or not, the global oil price will remain the same. Even if you pull it out at $3 a barrel, it will still be on the world market at $140 barrel.

If your theory is correct, in Canada we should be payign less for our gasoline that you do in the. 60% of your imported gas comes from Canada. With refineries just down teh street and a pipeline that runs from Alberta through to IOCO (about 15 mins from my house), we STILL pay a higher price for gas than the Americans we sell it to, and we mainly drill out own.

Collapse -

What is better for a country

by jdclyde In reply to 10 -12 years for the firs ...

use their own products or purchase their products from over seas?

Which puts money back into the economy and which sucks money out of the economy?

With Canada as dependent on the US economy as it is, it is also in Canadas interest that we are not getting our oil from over seas.

Collapse -

Volume

by Oz_Media In reply to What is better for a coun ...

Right now you drill your own oil, but you import the bulk of it. Again, most comes from Canada but another 40% comes from many other sources.

Canada also buys and sells oil, most of our sales are to the USA, and nobody is arguing the importance of our trade with the USA, don't start getting defensive.

No matter how much oil you get overseas, you will always get a greater benefit buying it from Canada and yes Canada benefits from selling oil, to whomever it is.

Canada also has options for oil sales to Europe though, which the US does not at this time, nor can you provide a supply as your own supply falls short of your own demand. the difference is, we are not dependent on your oil, incomes yes but that can be replaced with trade within the commonwealth and other allied nations.

What you and many others fail to recognize is that drilling ANWR is not going to reduce the cost for gas at the pumps.

Even if drilling started in ANWR, there is still going to be the same, ever increasing level of demand for at least 10 - 12 years until you can start producing your own there.

While it has been suggested that just the knowledge of your drilling would bring down prices, this is very hard to believe as nobody is going to be scared out of gouging by something that WILL be in the future. It will take a good 8-10 years later that other competitors start to see any increase in supply.

With the number of new vehicles put on the road each month, to think that a small increase in your own supply would have any effect on gas at the pump is a bit far fetched. By th etime you actually start seeing any oil out of teh ground, your demand will be so high that it will probbaly be worse than today.

The resolutions are to reduce the demand, reduce the need for oil and STOP FIGHTING THE DAMN WAR. War has been responsible for almost every unrealistic hike in history.

With the Taliban sabotaging the Afghan pipeline all the time, and a thinning force there to protect against sabotage, there is no way you'll see a price drop for a long time.
I know you are thinking that if you drill ANWR you would reduce/eliminate your demand in Saudi Arabia, but that's absurd; with the amount of oil you import compared to the amount you'll get from ANWR, when you need even more than you do today, they are simply not going to balance each other out.

ANWR is NOT the answer, it is a temporary solution, and even then it doesn't work because it is not an immediate temporary solution. It is just a stupid idea.

Drilling ANWR may be neccessary one day, it may produce some valuable oil for you, but it sure as **** isn't a solution for the current problem. That's just silly

Collapse -

40%

by jdclyde In reply to Volume

if nothing else, is what I am concerned about.

Another note, just being silly here, but if it DOES take the alleged 10 years, at what point should we START?

I was not getting defensive about trade, or putting Canada down. We both benefit or we both get hurt.

If that 40% is taking our money and putting it into over sea markets, that is less money that stays in our system, and weakens us financially. When we are hurt, Canada is hurt.

We need to drill, just like Canada needs to drill.

No, it won't lower the price now, but it does work for the future.

It would be nice if SOMEONE would come up with an alternative for transportation, leaving that oil for industry instead by the time it comes on-line.

Collapse -

Thay had a good try anyway

by Oz_Media In reply to 40%

"It would be nice if SOMEONE would come up with an alternative for transportation, leaving that oil for industry instead by the time it comes on-line."

Not quite but getting closer:
Brazil is using 25% less gasoline in most vehicles (as mandated) with a great portion of them becoming entirely Ethanol based. This makes Brazil the world's first oil independent country.

ANWR is NOT going to provide 40% of your oil consumption. At todays standards it would provide less than 10%, based on predicted number of barrels per day. By the time 12 years runs by, for EACH of the DOZENS of smaller exploration projects, not just from the word 'GO', how many more cars will you have on the streets and how much MORE oil will you need and how LITTLE of that would be produced by ANWR? We are talking a very insignificant number, especially after the billions spent to get there, and even then the amount of ANWR oil has changed a great deal over the last 8 years, so the projected numbers are way off base. You produce 85 million barrels a day in America, with an additional million per day, will you get that 40% you are looking for? Nope, not a chance in ****!

In short, NO, you will NOT see 40% of your consumption taken care of 12 years down the road. You will be in the same mess you are today, except 12 years behind in doing something about it.

As far as Canada is concerned:

"Canada's energy minister said Sunday he pushed at an emergency meeting of oil producing and consuming countries for more transparency in global markets to allow supply and demand to be the biggest influences on oil prices."

"Although Canada accounts for less than three per cent of the world's oil production, it sits on 15 per cent of the world's reserves -- second only to Saudi Arabia -- mostly concentrated in northeast Alberta."

"Despite its relatively small share of the world oil market, Lunn noted that Canada is one of the few countries in the world that is capable of significantly increasing production.

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers said last week that Canada's oil output will nearly double to 4.5 million barrels per day by 2020. More than $100 billion worth of investments is on the books to triple oil sands production, which now supplies slightly more than one million barrels per day."

Right now, production costs for drilling in the Abertan oil sands are the worlds highest, yet you feel that by building new refineries or expanding existing ones which are already at capacity, and shipping oil from ANWR to the US, you will see lower prices from a little pittance of available oil?

I'd say that it is just a bunch of oil hungry Americans opposing change, not exactly a realistic or viable argument when it has been proven to help in other parts of the world. Most nations outside of North America have been recycling and using better resource management practices for decades, and they are much better off for it too.

Collapse -

How much does cutting back save?

by jdclyde In reply to So...

Will it be "enough"?

If everyone trades in for a hybrid TODAY, how much oil will be saved? Will it be enough to make sure we don't use it all up or that the price will never go up, or make a REAL difference in emissions?

Funny, how people don't realize how stupid their argument of "it won't be enough" or "it will take to long" really is, because it is not a valid reason for NOT doing anything.

That is EXACTLY how we got into this situation, people not willing to think long term or look at a bigger picture.

I still wonder why, with prices the way they have been in the UK, why no one over there ever invented anything using an "alternative fuel". Why hasn't Canada come up with this solution? Both are more liberal leaning countries, and both have bought into the whole man made global warming thing, so why are THEY not leading the way?

A bunch of small things add up to a lot. Ricks 400lbs example of a woman didn't get that big overnight. It was one twinkee at a time, over years.

Back to Hardware Forum
385 total posts (Page 5 of 39)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums