skyhighmac Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 I think that gas companies are throllting production just to drive up profits and the CEO's are making big money at the cost of the consumer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dtflick Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Refineries cannot keep up with demand. There are simply not enough refineries to produce the amount of gas that we use. There is no point in building a multi-million dollar refinery that will take 6 years to complete, 10 years to recoup the costs, when our country is eargerly seraching for and exploring ways to cut back oil consumption. Truth is, it will only get worse. Gas demand will only increase while supply and production will continue to decrease. Hybrid vehicle are no answer. Running cars on food (ethanol comes from corn) is a bad idea all around. We need a completely new fuel source NOW. The only way to bring down gas prices is to use less gas, which will put pressure on the big oil companies, cause a buildup of supply, and drive the prices down. However, the American people are not willing to curb thier driving habits, regardless of how high gas prices get. Who is going to stop taking vacations, car pool, ride the bus, and basically just sit at home? Not many. People enjoy the freedom and independence that comes with driving a car. Few want to be tied down to a bus schedule (it takes me 15-20 minutes to drive to school, would take me 2.5 HOURS if I rode the bus), most can't get along with the people they work with long enough to car pool, and everyone needs a break. Only one way to get to sunny florida, and that is to burn gas. Unless we all go out and buy electric scooters, expect gas prices to rise even higher. Sorry for the bad news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
errandwolfe Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 Why? Simple answer...we as a nation seem to carry much more about homosexuals being allowed to marry then forcing our law makers to actually come up with a decent energy policy; Either that or we are so apathetic as a nation that we have allowed this slide to occur where we have rule by the radicals. Maybe if we achieved more then a 50% voter turnout (and thats for a Presidential election!) then we could put politicians in office who would actually do what the people wanted. Come on, the oil companies are raking in record profits while we pay record prices! At what point does a government ruled by the radicals on both sides care what the average person is going through? Simple, they don't! These people in office know who put them there, the radical extremes of both the left and the right. They have no desire to help the average American, their whole goal is to pander to their respective bases. In other words, they all know where there bread is buttered. If you ask me, it's time to make some toast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted May 22, 2007 Share Posted May 22, 2007 The radicals of either party don't control the agenda... either one. If the far left had it's way, we'd all be using solar cars. If the far right had it's way we'd have a spanish-style inquisition... It's the apathetic wishy-washy middle that drives our society ;-p Cut taxes but increase spending... for instance. Far right says "Cut taxes and cut spending" Far left says "Raise spending and raise taxes" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 I don't know how plausible this is (I'm sure it would probably be in wide-spread use if it was), but I was thinking the other day about alternatives. What you had an electric car that was charge by a battery station charged by a solar panels. You could have one of these panels at home so that your car could be charge while you sleep at night. It would be nice if you could have a "gas" station with larger batteries charged by solar panels that you could pull up to and refill, but I have a feeling that the charge would take too long. So I was thinking it might be better if the recharge stations were located in parking lots, so that your car would recharge while you were in work, school, or shopping. I also read a suggestion that we put floating solar panels all over the ocean (since it covers about 75% of the Earth's surface), and use that energy for the electrolysis of water that could be used to power cars. I thought this idea was pretty cool. Regardless, our choice of fuel needs to change to something renewable because 1) fossil fuels are going to run out eventually 2) they would cut down on the level of pollution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Solar panels to power the average home are extraordinarily expensive and take up much roof space. A car would require a lot of energy to drive any sort of distance. As to putting solar panels over the ocean... Well... it would significantly alter the earth's albedo (as opposed to putting them on roofs and desert areas). It is unclear what part albedo plays in global warming. It might be better to err on the side of caution and stick to areas already developed. (not to mention the overwhelming cost and instability of solar panels over water). Nuclear power is still the safest, non-poluting and ultimately cheapest form of energy. Solar power still requires massive amounts of chemicals in silica production, so it is a poluting technology. Though wind is fairly emission neutral, just not practical on a wide-spread basis. (This is debated, but it's my belief). An orbital soletta might be the best approach to both generating energy and negating global warming. A mirror in space focusing some of the sun's energy away from the earth into energy collectors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OryHara Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 The radicals of either party don't control the agenda... either one. If the far left had it's way, we'd all be using solar cars. If the far right had it's way we'd have a spanish-style inquisition... It's the apathetic wishy-washy middle that drives our society ;-p Cut taxes but increase spending... for instance. Far right says "Cut taxes and cut spending" Far left says "Raise spending and raise taxes" I have to agree with that. Most of you were too young to remember but maybe killbot. But back during the Clinton administration, he used the DOJ to go after Mickey$oft, and pretty much got a judgement, but it wasn't harsh enough for M$. Microsoft was judged in violation of Anti-Trust laws, and a criminal investigation proceeded. Because of individual state payoffs M$ won, and it just so happened to be the end of Clinton's term. If the oil companies were pressured to compete, (Which by LAW they can't. Its stupid I know) then it would force the gas prices down in free market, and eventually we would see gas fall to almost nothing per gallon. The government has their filthy hands in big oil, dems, and repubs alike. I call them Republicrats when it comes to issues like this. Its not a free market, its subsidized in the mask of "the war on terror". Iraq is just a distraction for many different things. Mostly the control freaks in DC that want to use it as an excuse to change things the way they want it, and to drive the population into Orwellian mind slaves. Its true with %28 of the population I would have to say, since thats about what Bush's approval rating is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 I'm older than both you or Killbott. I remember the 20th century quite well. Gas prices aren't artificially inflated through a lack of competition... Gas prices are artificially deflated due to enormous government subsidies. Gas really ought to cost about $5 a gallon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antic Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 I think that gas companies are throllting production just to drive up profits and the CEO's are making big money at the cost of the consumer. You want to think yourself lucky. In the UK its costs around £0.94 per litre. That works out at around $7 a gallon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavespeech Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Yep too right, quit whining. $7.37 a gallon here in the UK when I filled up this morning. That equates to approx 26 cents per mile in my 2.2litre bog standard car. And our road tax and insurance costs seem to rise each year without fail. I guess the English government want to force us all off the roads to counter the, I'm sure it's just made up' greenhouse effect created by our US friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 You want to think yourself lucky. In the UK its costs around £0.94 per litre. That works out at around $7 a gallon Yep too right, quit whining. $7.37 a gallon here in the UK when I filled up this morning. That equates to approx 26 cents per mile in my 2.2litre bog standard car. And our road tax and insurance costs seem to rise each year without fail. I guess the English government want to force us all off the roads to counter the, I'm sure it's just made up' greenhouse effect created by our US friends. here here, will someone please tell me what the hell you Americans are complaining about? "oh well we drive more!" - heres an idea, buy a more fuel efficient car and get with the times Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superhai Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 USA is using 20% of worlds oil and gas output... why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreakyMac Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 Isn't there Biodiesel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollcage Posted May 23, 2007 Share Posted May 23, 2007 USA is using 20% of worlds oil and gas output... why? Well, the efficiency standards in the US aren't anywhere near what the rest of the world requires. The US is one of the worst countries when it comes to this (I'm not sure if there are any that are worse). That figure might change a bit if the government had required manufacturers to make more efficient cars. Isn't there Biodiesel? Yeah, but it requires the use of plants and animals, which could put a strain on our food supply. And I'm not sure, but like ethanol, I think it might pollute more than regular fossil fuels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cringemaster Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Reading the last few Motor Trends, its seems like diesel has a promising future as an "alternative", and biodiesel holds that same promise. From what I understand, many new diesels in the US qualify for SULEV, so emissions should be improved, and with biodiesel made from corn oils and other by-products, oil dedpendency will decrease, as long as people can adapt to diesel engines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Someone give me 1 good reason why the average person needs an automobile (vs any other transportation method). Needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ictinike Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I hate society for this reason. :-P $3 is ridiculus. Just stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OryHara Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 Someone give me 1 good reason why the average person needs an automobile (vs any other transportation method). Needs. Because when you carry a truckload of tools, and a ladder, you need one. '97 Ford Ranger. 4 cyldr Yep too right, quit whining. $7.37 a gallon here in the UK when I filled up this morning. That equates to approx 26 cents per mile in my 2.2litre bog standard car. And our road tax and insurance costs seem to rise each year without fail. I guess the English government want to force us all off the roads to counter the, I'm sure it's just made up' greenhouse effect created by our US friends. Thats what Blair & Bush have done. It is that bad everywhere. I'm older than both you or Killbott. I remember the 20th century quite well. Gas prices aren't artificially inflated through a lack of competition... Gas prices are artificially deflated due to enormous government subsidies. Gas really ought to cost about $5 a gallon. The government regulates oil industries where they can't compete. Just Google it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adowoMAC Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 We have to pay $6.2 bucks in germany.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I hate society for this reason. :-P $3 is ridiculus. Just stupid. It's not even remotely ridiculus, you've just had it too good for too long, get with the times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted May 24, 2007 Share Posted May 24, 2007 I hate society for this reason. :-P $3 is ridiculus. Just stupid. It's not even remotely ridiculus, you've just had it too good for too long, get with the times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OryHara Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 It's not even remotely ridiculus, you've just had it too good for too long, get with the times! Then who is responsible? Who holds accountability? And can he / she / it be removed from office / authority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Embio Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I'm confused, is that meant to be ironic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ictinike Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 It's not even remotely ridiculus, you've just had it too good for too long, get with the times! I'm 17, I am with the times. I don't have a car because I like to be able to buy food though. Yes, it is ridiculus, gas is almost as much as bottled water now. Oh well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwprod12 Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 haha. I like how when asked why the average person needs a car, the response is that the average person needs to haul tools. The average person uses their vehicle to get themselves to and from work. Which can probably be replaced with some other method of transportation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts