NationStates Jolt Archive

Who is suffering from Gas Prices? :headbang:

Gas here in Hawaii is at an all time High of $3.39 a gallon.

What is like in your state? What do you all think about it? Is it a Oil conspiracy?

My dad likes to argue that US oil companies are hording their oil. Waiting for oil to run out in the the rest of the world so they can control the market.

Who is suffering from Gas Prices? :headbang:

Gas here in Hawaii is at an all time High of $3.39 a gallon.

What is like in your state? What do you all think about it? Is it a Oil conspiracy?

My dad likes to argue that US oil companies are hording their oil. Waiting for oil to run out in the the rest of the world so they can control the market.
It's twice as much as that in the rest of the world.

Besides, where on earth are you planning to drive to in Hawaii? Isn't several thousand miles of Pacific Ocean a bit of a handicap to long distance driving?

It's about a quid a litre here. That's... £4.50 a gallon (I think), which is about $8.50 a gallon I suppose.

That said, petrol (or gas, whatever) here is always more expensive, as we've got road tax factored into our petrol prices.

It's twice as much as that in the rest of the world.

Besides, where on earth are you planning to drive to in Hawaii? Isn't several thousand miles of Pacific Ocean a bit of a handicap to long distance driving?

Well, he could always roll up the windows. :D

$2.89 here in Cincinnati. Kind of like it often is actually. I hear that nationwide it will go over 3 bucks for everybody come summer and that is certainly something to look forward to. :(

I certianly do think that it is something illegal that the oil companies are doing to keep prices so high. Just hope that Bush doesn't invade Iran. I shudder to think of what gas prices would do then!

*shudders*

That's what price controls do...they drive up the price of gasoline and make the supply situation worse for consumers. Add that to an already tight supply situation and record crude prices in other places and you've got the case for the high price of gasoline.

However, Hawaii will be a great site for cellulosic ethanol and biodiesel production. High prices might drive the technology and ultimately remove Hawaii's dependence on imported gasoline.

What's happening is that the gasoline supply is falling while refineries are shut down (while simultaneously retooling to summer gasoline) and peak summer demand is coming up; that's driving up the price of gasoline which is leading oil, heating oil, and all of the other derivatives higher. Once the supply situation returns to normal, prices will drift down but until then it won't happen.

You're paying $3.39 a gallon? Boo frickety hoo.

That's £1.89. £1.89 a gallon!

In England, We're paying £3.80, or £4 for diesel.

That's $6.80 to $7.15

This is something I usually just concern myself in real life, but the gas prices here are the second cheapest in Finland according to the last rumors.
I don't know the exact price, due to not driving. Thankfully, bus and ferry fares haven't gone up yet.

Who is suffering from Gas Prices? :headbang:

Gas here in Hawaii is at an all time High of $3.39 a gallon.

What is like in your state? What do you all think about it? Is it a Oil conspiracy?

My dad likes to argue that US oil companies are hording their oil. Waiting for oil to run out in the the rest of the world so they can control the market.
In NJ it's available for about $2.90 depending on which gas station you go to. Still cheap compared to Europe. Cheap compared to Hawaii too.

Now I can finally laugh at all the people in their big, gas-guzzling SUVs as I cruise past the pumps in my little 4 cylinder Nissan. It doesn't look big and mean, but it doesn't make me go broke either.

It's twice as much as that in the rest of the world.

Besides, where on earth are you planning to drive to in Hawaii? Isn't several thousand miles of Pacific Ocean a bit of a handicap to long distance driving?


Ouch, yes I admit the price of gas isn't as high as some other Nations. And yes, we Americans are ungrateful.

But it is still hard for us who live in a state that has a high cost of living. And no we don't have to drive across the ocean, but we do have some of the worst traffic in our Nation. It can take 3 hours to travel 20 miles in rush hour traffic and unlike some cities and countries, our public transportation system sucks. We have only buses.

Self pitying over. My purpose was to see what others think about what is being done about energy crisis.

You're paying $3.39 a gallon? Boo frickety hoo.

That's £1.89. £1.89 a gallon!

In England, We're paying £3.80, or £4 for diesel.

That's $6.80 to $7.15

Don't you benefit from excellent public transportation?

Don't you benefit from excellent public transportation?
To be honest, no. We 'benefit' from half-decent public transportation, but the simple fact of the matter is that it's still cheaper to buy a shitty car and run that, than it is to get the bus or train everywhere.

Don't you benefit from excellent public transportation?
Hahahahahahahahaha!

Oh dear...

Hahahahahahahahaha!

Oh, mercy.

Don't you benefit from excellent public transportation?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Good one, good one.

Wait, you were serious? :O

The word "Fucking" "way" and "no" come to mind. Rearrange them to get the answer.

I think there doing all they can its just that all they can do remains to be seen considering how a giant oil engine makes the world turn round

To be honest, no. We 'benefit' from half-decent public transportation, but the simple fact of the matter is that it's still cheaper to buy a shitty car and run that, than it is to get the bus or train everywhere.

Well if you pay so much in gasoline then you must really use the half-decent public transportation or everyone somehow manages to take the hit. I mean 6, 7 dollars a gallon?

*flees*

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Good one, good one.

Wait, you were serious? :O

The word "Fucking" "way" and "no" come to mind. Rearrange them to get the answer.

Heh. Learn something new everyday. Here I would thank that with gas so expensive that people would naturally turn to public transportation instead of paying through the nose at the pump. Unless all your cars are super efficient? :eek: :p

hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

I assume you've never traveled on modern british transport

our trains are slower then in most of the developing world, our fares make it cheaper to drive even with the current petrol crisis and the network is shoddy.

As an example to get from Aberystwyth (home to the national libery a university and parts of the assembly) it takes 3 hours to get here by road to get to the capital cardiff, by train it takes 6+ hours (6 being an optemistic minimum) and costs a lot more (say 50-100% more as a minimum) also we have to go via england for fucks sake as there isn't a direct link, all for a 130 mile journey

Heh. Learn something new everyday. Here I would thank that with gas so expensive that people would naturally turn to public transportation instead of paying through the nose at the pump. Unless all your cars are super efficient? :eek: :p
Nope, it's just that even our massively expensive car costs are cheaper than travelling by public transport. To go between my university and home used to cost about £40 by train and take five hours. In the car, it was two hours, and about half as much.

In fairness, you can do things here by public transport; it's just still so much easier to drive.

Gas here in Hawaii is at an all time High of $3.39 a gallon.

What is like in your state? What do you all think about it? Is it a Oil conspiracy?

My dad likes to argue that US oil companies are hording their oil. Waiting for oil to run out in the the rest of the world so they can control the market.
How far do you have to drive in Hawaii? The UK is an island. $7 here. Are we somehow more rich?

It's not a conspiracy. It is a denial of global production constraints.

Oil. Gross.

Politicians? Are you suggesting that they should use more fuel efficient engines in the motorcades etc. It might help a little.

What will help is if everyone uses just a little less oil. Set the AC at home to be a couple of degrees warmer, or the heating to be a couple of degrees cooler. Cook more instead of eating take out or ordering etc. Reduce your own personal fuel bill.

It is not up to the politicians!

Did you know in the US the government recieves about 50 cents in takes for every gallon of gas sold. The oil companies only gat, at highest, 10 cents. Who is price gouging? Also, it is the US gov that is holding up drilling in alaska and the coasts so we have a supply later.

Nope, it's just that even our massively expensive car costs are cheaper than travelling by public transport. To go between my university and home used to cost about £40 by train and take five hours. In the car, it was two hours, and about half as much.

In fairness, you can do things here by public transport; it's just still so much easier to drive.

I don't know how far away you live from your university but I am 10 miles away and just take the bus down, costs me $1.75 one way. I would think that a bus would be much cheaper then train if you have efficient bus routes anyway.

It's up around $1.22 a litre here in Newfoundland, or it was when I walked by a gas station.. I'll leave it to you to do the conversions to USD or British Pounds. :p

Let us also remember that Americans are not exactly the best paid people in the world either.... most of us at least.

I dunno what the situation is over in the UK or the European Union as a whole, but here in American the gap between the very well off and poor is widening and we're on the verge of completely losing the middle class.

When you hear "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer", think America.

I live the most impoverished city in the US for its size. Over on the east coast, if you bag groceries you get like, 8 bucks an hour and health insurance. Here, we only would get minimum wage.

Considering a lot of people make $5.15 an hour, remember that for every gallon of gas needed to get to work (since public transportation is only buses, no public trains run through the city, only commercial) he/she loses 3/5 of his/her wages per hour.

This is brutal in a city where they're raising property taxes. On top of that we're already getting charged more rent 'cause we fixed the property up... so now that it is better looking its worth more so we PAY more. To add to that, power plants in California are being shut down for long term maintenance, meaning we have to get power from others... in turn... massively higher electric bill (some analysts predict we're looking at 300 bucks a month, 200 more than average.)

So you assholes out there that bitch at us for having "low gas prices"... keep in mind most of us can't afford it. And most of us are NOT driving SUVs... though those bastards at the higher end of the financial spectrum are fucking us over too. Consider it a double whammy for most of us Americans.

I hate to burst everyones tidy little bubble but the supply of oil is never going to "return to normal" we are going to continue to run out and we may have already reached the point of diminishing returns. Either way sometime soon we'll hit a slide and eventually bottom out when it costs more to get oil out than the oil is worth.

God help us then. The politicians certainly aren't now.

I don't know how far away you live from your university but I am 10 miles away and just take the bus down, costs me $1.75 one way. I would think that a bus would be much cheaper then train if you have efficient bus routes anyway.
I'm not at university any more, but it was about 120 miles as the crow flies. The trains here are quite expensive but at least pretty reliable and comfortable, but the buses are awful. A journey from my home into the centre of town (2 miles?) is nearly £5 return, on a cramped, old and uncomfortable bus.

I'm not at university any more, but it was about 120 miles as the crow flies. The trains here are quite expensive but at least pretty reliable and comfortable, but the buses are awful. A journey from my home into the centre of town (2 miles?) is nearly £5 return, on a cramped, old and uncomfortable bus.

Hey you don't exactly ride in style here either. You often wonder if the floor is going to fall out from under you the way the bus often shakes when it goes over the crappy roads that my city is cursed with.

Living that far away though must be pretty bad to begin with. I hope you didn't have classes everyday that would be horrid.

Nope buses are damn expensive in britain too... costs me about £5 ($8) to travel about 5miles down the road... Britain is sh** hole when it comes to public transport.. You Americans are shadowed from how bad public transport can get, and dont reolise how shit it really can be!

It's up around $1.22 a litre here in Newfoundland, or it was when I walked by a gas station.. I'll leave it to you to do the conversions to USD or British Pounds. :p

About $3.00 a gallon little over actually

Hey you don't exactly ride in style here either. You often wonder if the floor is going to fall out from under you the way the bus often shakes when it goes over the crappy roads that my city is cursed with.

Living that far away though must be pretty bad to begin with. I hope you didn't have classes everyday that would be horrid.
Heh, I didn't commute every day... :p

I lived at university - the journey times and costs were for travelling home during holidays.

Who is suffering from Gas Prices? :headbang:

Gas here in Hawaii is at an all time High of $3.39 a gallon.

What is like in your state? What do you all think about it? Is it a Oil conspiracy?

My dad likes to argue that US oil companies are hording their oil. Waiting for oil to run out in the the rest of the world so they can control the market.

Oh dear.Does one drive an SUV? If one does, one has a decidedly rickety soapbox, if not, nigh on the remainder of the USA does.

How on earth can you justify deploring an augmentationin oil prices that still leaves them in acute deficit to those of the rest of the world, whilst remaining ignorant of the depletion in petroleum resources, or blind as to the necessities of business.

Gas here in southwest Michigan is a little over $3.00 now. I don't have too much of a problem with the price; I am fortunate to have a very fuel-efficient car and don't need to buy gas very often.

I am fortunate to have a very fuel-efficient car and don't need to buy gas very often.

Intelligence should not be attributed to luck.

Intelligence should not be attributed to luck.
But cars so fuel-efficient are harder to come by, and they cost a lot more, so s/he is fortunate to be able to have one.

I'm not at university any more, but it was about 120 miles as the crow flies. The trains here are quite expensive but at least pretty reliable and comfortable, but the buses are awful. A journey from my home into the centre of town (2 miles?) is nearly £5 return, on a cramped, old and uncomfortable bus.
Glad I live in Holland then. Every college/university student gets a pass for free public transport.

Intelligence should not be attributed to luck.
As if that was relevant to the post you quoted, or are you just sharing wisdom?

It's $2.80 here.

Typo in the poll :(

I think gas is $3 a gal here.

I think the state of the UK public transport system is overstated. I live in Newport, Wales, and the bus service here is as a rule on time and generally decent. The trains aren't as good but as long as you allow for a maximum of 20-30 mins delay and it's generally fine.

It's up around $1.22 a litre here in Newfoundland, or it was when I walked by a gas station.. I'll leave it to you to do the conversions to USD or British Pounds.

About $3.00 a gallon little over actually

1 gallon = 3.8 liters.

$1 CAD = .884161 USD

So Lylybium would be paying USD $4.09.9 per gallon for gas, if he chose to give up being a pedestrian.

Bush's recent actions are already causing the cost of gas and oil to drop.

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/energy_policy

Text of Bush speech announcing federal investigation into possible price gouging:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060425/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_text_1

What has Congress done? Nothing. Only Bush is doing something.

It's twice as much as that in the rest of the world.

Besides, where on earth are you planning to drive to in Hawaii? Isn't several thousand miles of Pacific Ocean a bit of a handicap to long distance driving?
Actually the People of Hawaii would be excellent candidates for the President's electric car proposal. Assuming they don't drive more than 40 miles at any given time.

Bush's recent actions are already causing the cost of gas and oil to drop. http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/energy_policy

Relaxing environmental regulations will do that; however, there is the possibility that crude prices will fall along with gasoline prices further dragging down the refined products. However, there's also the environmental impact of lifting the rules; I just can't understand people who want strict emissions laws but complain about expensive gas...it's one or the other, not both.

Reformulated gasoline requires more work to produce than conventional gasoline, so no matter what the supply of reformulated will be less and prices higher. Even so, gasoline is driving up the price of crude rather than vice versa, so a drop in gasoline will also drag down crude albeit less due to the ongoing supply concerns.

1 gallon = 3.8 liters.

$1 CAD = .884161 USD

So Lylybium would be paying USD $4.09.9 per gallon for gas, if he chose to give up being a pedestrian.
Actually, it was I who was/am the pedestrian in question, and by my calculation, it's about $4.08 per gallon USD, but conversion factors get rounded off differently in different sources. ^^

$1.10 (cdn) here in Toronto /litre.

Yeah, far too busy right now to do the conversions, but I wanted to contribute something. :)

$1.10 (cdn) here in Toronto /litre.

$3.77 US per gallon. :cool:

Did you know in the US the government recieves about 50 cents in takes for every gallon of gas sold. The oil companies only gat, at highest, 10 cents. Who is price gouging? Also, it is the US gov that is holding up drilling in alaska and the coasts so we have a supply later.
They're already talking about suspending the federal gas tax.

Thanks Vetalia. ^^

$4.09 US per gallon. :cool:
Uh, no, not when $1.22 per litre CND is $4.08 US per gallon.

At the current/latest exchange rate, it's $3.68 US per gallon, give or take 2 cents for the litres/gallons conversion and which digit it's rounded off at.

Relaxing environmental regulations will do that; however, there is the possibility that crude prices will fall along with gasoline prices further dragging down the refined products. However, there's also the environmental impact of lifting the rules; I just can't understand people who want strict emissions laws but complain about expensive gas...it's one or the other, not both.

Reformulated gasoline requires more work to produce than conventional gasoline, so no matter what the supply of reformulated will be less and prices higher. Even so, gasoline is driving up the price of crude rather than vice versa, so a drop in gasoline will also drag down crude albeit less due to the ongoing supply concerns.
Did you know that each state mandates its own local blend of gas? I didn't know that until I read about Bush's speech. Having over a hundred different mandatory blends would contribute, quite a bit, to making the price of gas high. If the states were to take up Bush's call to adopt a common standard, that would help reduce prices too.

Uh, no, not when $1.22 per litre CND is $4.08 US per gallon.
At the current/latest exchange rate, it's $3.68 US per gallon, give or take 2 cents for the litres/gallons conversion and which digit it's rounded off at.

Yeah, I just realized that; I put in $4.6225 rather than $4.2625 when I converted from Canadian dollars to US dollars.

Using the correct number, I got $3.77...got to pay more attention to the way I put the numbers in.

Did you know that each state mandates its own local blend of gas? I didn't know that until I read about Bush's speech. Having over a hundred different mandatory blends would contribute, quite a bit, to making the price of gas high. If the states were to take up Bush's call to adopt a common standard, that would help reduce prices too.

You could just set the environmental rules higher, but make it standard nationwide; the amount of savings in terms of production efficiency that would come from national gas standards would be more than enough to implement a higher, nationwide standard and still increase overall refinery output.

It would pretty much appeal to everyone; environmentalists get a clean and stricter fuel implemented nationwide, refiners are saved time and money by producing the same blend year round to the same standard nationwide, and consumers win by getting lower prices due to lower distribution/refining costs, easier distribution, and more gasoline production.

Yeah, I just realized that; I put in $4.6225 rather than $4.2625 when I converted from Canadian dollars to US dollars.

Using the correct number, I got $3.77...got to pay more attention to the way I put the numbers in.
With $4.2625 CND per gallon, I still get $3.56 US. What's the conversion rate you're using? I'm using $.883626 US per $1 CND, which is the latest one on x-rates.com, so I'm assuming it's the latest official one, since it has today's date on it.

Theft of thread, but with better poll options.

Granted my original died....

With $4.2625 CND per gallon, I still get $3.56 US. What's the conversion rate you're using? I'm using $.883626 US per $1 CND, which is the latest one on x-rates.com, so I'm assuming it's the latest official one, since it has today's date on it.

I'm using the same one; I'm still getting $3.77.

3.56/4.2625=.83519

I think you might be putting in .83 rather than .88, which would explain your answer.

You could just set the environmental rules higher, but make it standard nationwide; the amount of savings in terms of production efficiency that would come from national gas standards would be more than enough to implement a higher, nationwide standard and still increase overall refinery output.

It would pretty much appeal to everyone; environmentalists get a clean and stricter fuel implemented nationwide, refiners are saved time and money by producing the same blend year round to the same standard nationwide, and consumers win by getting lower prices due to lower distribution/refining costs, easier distribution, and more gasoline production.You could, but I guarantee you that instead of adopting the strictest rules (like in California), the energy industry would fight for the laxest rules, and we'd be back to smog filled cities everywhere.

What the feds are doing:

Congress: so far nothing

Bush:

1. The Federal Trade Commission is investigating whether the price of gasoline has been unfairly manipulated in any way.

BUSH: I'm also directing the Department of Justice to work with the FTC and the Energy Department to conduct inquiries into illegal manipulation or cheating related to the current gasoline prices.

The FTC and the attorney general are contacting 50 state attorneys general to offer technical assistance to urge them to investigate possible illegal price manipulation within their jurisdictions. In other words, this administration is not going to tolerate manipulation.

2. Record oil prices and large cash flows also mean that Congress has got to understand that these energy companies don't need unnecessary tax breaks like the write-offs of certain geological and geophysical expenditures or the use of taxpayers' monies to subsidize energy companies' research into deep water drilling.

I'm looking forward to Congress to take about $2 billion of these tax breaks out of the budget over a 10-year period of time.

Cash flows are up. Taxpayers don't need to be paying for certain of these expenses on behalf of the energy companies.

3. The second part of a good plan to confront high gasoline prices is to promote greater fuel efficiency. And the easiest way to promote fuel efficiency is to encourage drivers to purchase highly efficient hybrid or clean diesel vehicles, which, by the way, can run on alternative energy sources.

Hybrid vehicles run on a combination of a traditional engine and electric battery. The twin sources of power allow hybrid cars and trucks to travel about twice as far on a gallon of fuel as gasoline-only vehicles. When people are driving hybrids, they're conserving energy.

Clean diesel vehicles take advantage of the advantage in diesel technology to run on 30 percent less fuel than gasoline vehicles do.

And more than 200,000 hybrid and clean diesel vehicles were sold in the United States last year. It's the highest sales in history.

Congress wisely, in the energy bill, expanded the tax credit for purchases of hybrid and clean diesel vehicles up to as much as up to $3,400 per purchase. That made sense. If we're trying to conserve energy, if we want to become less dependent on oil, let's provide incentives for consumers to use less energy.

The problem is that these tax credits apply to only a limited number of hybrid and clean diesel vehicles for each manufacturer. If the automakers sell more than their limit, new purchasers are not eligible for the full tax credit.

And so here's an idea that can get more of these vehicles on the road, and that is to have Congress make all hybrid and clean diesel vehicles sold this year eligible for federal tax credits


4. The third part of the plan to confront high gas prices is to boost our supplies of crude oil and gasoline.

It makes sense. We're in a supply-and-demand world. If prices are high, it means demand is greater than supply. One way to ease price is to increase supply.

One immediate way we can signal to people we're serious about increasing supply is to stop making purchases or deposits to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for a short period of time. I directed the Department of Energy to defer filling the reserve this summer.

Our strategic reserve is sufficiently large enough to guard against any major supply disruption over the next few months. So by deferring deposits until the fall, we'll leave a little more oil on the market. Every little bit helps.

5. We also need to ensure that there are not needless restrictions on our ability to get gasoline to the pump.

Under federal air quality laws, some areas of the country are required to use a fuel blend called reformulated gasoline. Now, as you well know, this year we're undergoing a rapid transition in the primary ingredient in reformulated gas from MTBE to ethanol.
Yet state and local officials in some parts of our country worry about supply disruption for the short term. They worry about the sudden change from MTBE to ethanol — that the ethanol producers won't be able to meet the demand. And that's causing the price of gasoline to go up some amount in their jurisdictions.

And some have contacted us to determine whether or not they can ask the EPA to waive local fuel requirements on a temporary basis. And I think it makes sense that they should be allowed to, so I'm directing EPA Administrator Johnson to use all of his available authority to grant waivers that would relief critical fuel supply shortages. And I do that for the sake of our consumers.

If Johnson finds that he needs more authority to relieve the problem, we're going to work with Congress to obtain the authority he needs


6. Secondly, we also need to confront the larger problem of too many localized fuel blends, which are called boutique fuels.

The number of boutique fuels has expanded rapidly over the years, and America now has an uncoordinated and overly complex set of fuel rules. And when you have an uncoordinated, overly complex set of fuel rules, it tends to cause the price to go up.

And so I'm directing Administrator Johnson to bring the governors together to form a task force on boutique fuels. And the mission of this task force will be to find ways to reduce the number of boutique fuels and to increase cooperation between states on gasoline supply decisions. I want to simplify the process for the sake of our consumers.

And then I'm asking them to get these recommendations to my desk. And I look forward to working with the United States Congress to simplify the process.

7. Listen, we need to expand our refining capacity. One of the problems we face is that we've got tight supplies because we haven't expanded refining capacity. There hasn't been a new refinery built in 30 years.

If you're worried about the price of gasoline at the pump, it makes sense to try to get more supply to the market. That will be beneficial for American consumers to get more supply to the market.

Further reason why we haven't expanded or built new refineries to the extent we need to is because the permitting process in this country is extremely complicated. Companies that want to upgrade their equipment or expand their existing refineries or build new ones often have to wade through long bureaucratic delays and/or lawsuits.

To make this gasoline supply more affordable and more secure, Congress needs to allow refiners to make modifications on their refineries without having to wait for years to get their idea approved. I mean, if we want more supply, let's reduce the paperwork and the regulations.

Congress also needs to simplify and speed up the permitting process for refinery construction and expansion. And so I'm going to work with Congress. It's important for Congress to cut through the red tape and guarantee refinery construction permits will be processed within a single year.

8. We've got tight crude oil supplies and it seems like it makes sense for us to use our new technologies to find more crude, particularly crude here at home.

One of the issues, you know, that has been confronting Congress is ANWR. And I fully recognize that the passage of ANWR will not increase the oil supply immediately. But it's also important to understand that if ANWR had been law a decade ago, America would be producing about a million additional barrels of oil a day and that would increase our current level of domestic supply by 20 percent.

We've got to be wise about energy policy here in America. We've got to make sure that we protect the environment, but we also got to make sure that we find additional supplies of crude oil in order to take the pressure off the price of crude, which takes the pressure off the price of gasoline at the pump.

9. All I've outlined here today are interim strategies. Short-term and interim strategy. The truth of the matter is the long-term strategy is to power our automobiles with something other than oil. Something other than gasoline which is derived from oil.

And we're making progress. In the State of the Union address, I talked about the Advanced Energy Initiative. And this is an aggressive plan. A wise way of using taxpayer's money to get us off our addiction to oil.

I set a goal to replace oil from around the world. The best way and the fastest way to do so is to expand the use of ethanol.

Advanced Energy Initiative is focused on three promising ways to reduce gasoline consumption. One is increasing the use of ethanol. Another is improving hybrid vehicles. And finally, one is developing hydrogen technology.

All three go hand in hand. All three are an important part of the strategy to help us diversify away from hydrocarbons.

Ethanol has got the largest potential for immediate growth. Most people may not know this, but today most of ethanol produced in America today is from corn. Most vehicles can use 10 percent ethanol in their automobiles.

What's interesting that Americans don't realize, with a little bit of expenditure, we can convert a standard automobile to what's called a flex-fuel automobile. And that flex-fuel vehicle can use fuel that is 85 percent ethanol.

Amazing, isn't it? Without much cost, your automobile can be converted to be able to burn fuel with 85 percent ethanol or a product made from corn grown right here in America.

Ethanol is a versatile fuel. And the benefits are easy to recognize when you think about it.

One, the use of ethanol in automobiles is good for the agricultural sector. I'm one of these people who believes when the agricultural sector is strong, America is strong.

The way I like to put it would be — it's a good thing when a president can sit there and say, gosh, we've got a lot of corn. And that means we're less dependent on foreign sources of oil.

You don't have to choose between good environment and good economics. You can have both by the use of technology. And ethanol is an example of what I'm talking about. And ethanol's good for drivers. Ethanol is homegrown. Ethanol will replace gasoline consumption

But what's really interesting, there are new plants springing up in unexpected areas, like the Central Valley of California, or Arizona, or, of course, in the sugar fields of Hawaii. After all, sugar can be used for ethanol. As a matter of fact, it's a very efficient feedstock for ethanol.

Ethanol required our support. In other words, to get this new industry going it required a little nudge from the federal government.

Since I took office we've extended the tax credit of 51 cents per gallon for suppliers. We've created a new 10-cent-per-gallon tax credit to provide extra help to small ethanol producers and farmers. We've provided $85 million of loans and grants for the ethanol business ventures.

In other words, this is a collaborative effort. The federal government has got a role to play to encourage new industries that'll help this nation diversify away from oil.

I proposed, and I'm working with these members of the Renewable Caucus, $150 million in next year's budget for research in advanced forms of ethanol. And that's a significant increase over previous levels. I think it makes sense. And surely the prices at the gas pumps should say to the taxpayer, it makes sense for this government to spend money on development to find alternative sources of energy.

10. also support biodiesel fuel, which can ... which can substitute for regular diesel in cars, trucks, buses and farm equipment.

Last year I went out to see a biodiesel refinery in Virginia that's making clean-burning fuel from soybean oil. And it was a really interesting process to watch. I don't know if you know this or not, but they are able to use waste products like recycled cooking grease to manufacture biodiesel.

In other words, research and development has led to new alternative source of energy like biodiesel. And so that's one of the reasons why I signed into law the first-ever federal tax credit for biodiesel producers.

In other words, we're interested in addressing our energy security need on a variety of fronts. It makes sense for the United States to have a comprehensive strategy to help us diversify away from oil.

11. And so we also got to understand that we've got to research not only to invest in ethanol and biodiesel, but part of a comprehensive strategy is to spend money on researching new battery technologies.

And one of the really interesting opportunities available for the American consumer will be the ability to buy a plug-in hybrid vehicle that will be able to drive up to 40 miles on electricity.

It seems to make sense to me. If we're trying to get us all gasoline with crude oil as the main feedstock, then why wouldn't we explore ways to be able to have vehicles that use less gasoline? And one way to do so is to use electricity to power vehicles.

And we're pretty close to a breakthrough. We believe we're close to a technology that will make it possible to drive up to 40 miles on electricity alone, and then if you have to drive more than 40, then your gasoline kicks in. But you can imagine what that'll mean for drivers in big cities who on a daily basis they don't drive over 40 miles. And so therefore, a lot of drivers are going back to forth from work in big cities won't be using gasoline, and that's going to help. We have $31 million in our budget to speed up research and development and to advance battery technologies.

12. And finally, one other opportunity that is more long run than ethanol or biodiesel or plug-in hybrid vehicles or encouraging people to buy the hybrids that are on the market today is hydrogen.

We're spending about $1.2 billion over five years to research the use of hydrogen to power vehicles.

And it makes a lot of sense when you think about it because hydrogen produces zero emissions. The only emission it produces is water.

And when I was out there in California, I visited the California Fuel Cell Partnership and saw buses and cars and SUVs that are driving on the highways out there powered by hydrogen.

And the research and development money that we have spent has lowered the cost of hydrogen fuel cells. It's helped to make them lighter.

In other words, there's an industry coming and it's an industry that will enable the consumers to drive to work, just like we're doing today, but not rely on foreign sources of oil.


Conclusion:

What I'm describing to you today is a strategy that recognizes the realities of the world in which we live. Our dependency on oil has created economic security issues for us and national security issues for us. And therefore this country must use our brain power and entrepreneurial spirit to diversify away from the hydrocarbon economy.

You know, there's no doubt in my mind that one of these days, instead of people driving up to a gas station they're going to be going up to a fueling station. And they'll be able to have choices to choose from. You've got a hydrogen-powered car, you'll be able to have that choice. If you want 85 percent, maybe someday 100 percent, ethanol, that'll be an option available, too.

We owe it to the American people to be aggressive on price gouging now. We owe it to the American people to be promoting alternative ways to drive their cars so as to make us less dependent on foreign sources of oil. We owe it to the American people to be aggressive in the use of technology so we can diversify away from the hydrocarbon society. And that's precisely what we're doing.

I'm using the same one; I'm still getting $3.77.

3.56/4.2625=.83519

I think you might be putting in .83 rather than .88, which would explain your answer.
No, $1.1 CND * 0.883626 conversion = $0.9719886 US per litre * 3.785 liters per gallon = $3.678

Copied and pasted all relevant conversions into Calculator, and went directly from one to the next. Yay for being able to use the result of the last calculation in the next one.

You could, but I guarantee you that instead of adopting the strictest rules (like in California), the energy industry would fight for the laxest rules, and we'd be back to smog filled cities everywhere.

Yeah, that's my concern. The government can't craft an energy bill without handouts to oil and gas companies, let alone pass a comprehensive law that would affect the entire industry.

I'd love to get rid of this burdensome web of laws but not at the expense of going back to the pollution of the 1960's...any national standards have to be stricter and more uniform than the ones they replaced, not laxer. After all, it's supposed to be a step forward, not back. We're still paying for the pollution caused by the petroleum industry during the past century.

You could just set the environmental rules higher, but make it standard nationwide; the amount of savings in terms of production efficiency that would come from national gas standards would be more than enough to implement a higher, nationwide standard and still increase overall refinery output.

It would pretty much appeal to everyone; environmentalists get a clean and stricter fuel implemented nationwide, refiners are saved time and money by producing the same blend year round to the same standard nationwide, and consumers win by getting lower prices due to lower distribution/refining costs, easier distribution, and more gasoline production.
I agree. The Pres addressed it by calling on the states to hold a meeting to adopt one standard. I would prefer California's because it is the best in the nation to date.

You could, but I guarantee you that instead of adopting the strictest rules (like in California), the energy industry would fight for the laxest rules, and we'd be back to smog filled cities everywhere.
They could fight it, but let's just say they don't exactly have much clout at the moment. ;)

Yeah, that's my concern. The government can't craft an energy bill without handouts to oil and gas companies, let alone pass a comprehensive law that would affect the entire industry.

I'd love to get rid of this burdensome web of laws but not at the expense of going back to the pollution of the 1960's...any national standards have to be stricter and more uniform than the ones they replaced, not laxer. After all, it's supposed to be a step forward, not back. We're still paying for the pollution caused by the petroleum industry during the past century.
If everyone adopted California's standards, said by some to be the one of the strictest in the world, I think that would solve that problem.

They could fight it, but let's just say they don't exactly have much clout at the moment. ;)
Shit. They've got record profits right now--that's all the clout they need.

And just to reply to your long-ass Bush speech post, Whittier--the Democrats called for that investigation two months ago and Bush sat on his ass. The Dems don't have the power in Congress to start their own investigation--yet. Possibly next January when the new Congress is seated. Just wanted to make that plain since you said Congress hadn't done anything--you're right, but it's the Republicans' faults for that.

If everyone adopted California's standards, said by some to be the one of the strictest in the world, I think that would solve that problem.

I think they should; I honestly don't think it's the higher standards that drive up prices, it's that there are so many of them. Even if they wern't, a web of differing requirements would drive up prices no matter how strict they are because it puts strain on the distribution system.

In NJ it's available for about $2.90 depending on which gas station you go to. Still cheap compared to Europe. Cheap compared to Hawaii too.

Now I can finally laugh at all the people in their big, gas-guzzling SUVs as I cruise past the pumps in my little 4 cylinder Nissan. It doesn't look big and mean, but it doesn't make me go broke either.


Don't you like how in Full-serve country, the gas is cheaper than most? The argument that "Full-serve increases gas prices" is once again proved bogus. I work in a full serve Chevron in BC, gas price at my station is about the same as the self-serves in the other local municipalities...114.0 per litre, which works out to about:

3.60 USD

Not too bad.

Shit. They've got record profits right now--that's all the clout they need.

And just to reply to your long-ass Bush speech post, Whittier--the Democrats called for that investigation two months ago and Bush sat on his ass. The Dems don't have the power in Congress to start their own investigation--yet. Possibly next January when the new Congress is seated. Just wanted to make that plain since you said Congress hadn't done anything--you're right, but it's the Republicans' faults for that.
Actually several Republicans issued their own call at about the same time.
The problem is that because this is an election year and Bush is unpopular, Congress at this time is doing nothing but finger pointing. They're blaming Iran, Bush, Venezuela, oil companies. Heck I was just reading the other day about some dumb ass saying that Europe was responsible. That's a new one, though I don't know what it is that Europe was supposed to have done.

I agree but keep in mind that the Democrats share equal blame. I don't think any of the people in Congress are really interested in solving the issue. The reason being, that they want to keep it as a campaign issue. It's a perfect issue depending on who you ask.

So at the moment, only Bush is doing anything at the federal level which kind of makes sense. This is his last term since he can't run again and his popularity is the lowest its ever been, so he has nothing to lose by putting his neck out against the oil companies. Where as it could be argued that members of Congress have a lot to lose because they are beholden to oil companies and other interests for their reelection. And that applies to the dems just as much as to Reps.

The question is, will Congress agree to Bush's plan of action? So far, he is the only one who has put one forward. Or are they going to keep prices high so they can have an issue to milk?

Don't you think it kind of wrong for politicians to keep the price of gas and oil high just so they can get reelected?


Edit: And that first part of your comment is why Bush wants to take back the tax cuts that Congress gave the oil companies last year. That particular bill could not have been passed without Democrats voting for it. But it was a republican provision introduced by Mr. Delay.

To be honest, no. We 'benefit' from half-decent public transportation, but the simple fact of the matter is that it's still cheaper to buy a shitty car and run that, than it is to get the bus or train everywhere.

The English Public Transportation system is excellent, in London. Yes it is. Becuase in England our idea of excellent public transportation is one that is always late, always expensive and always based upon one city.

Britain has an extremely high cost of living. We're taxed the most, work the most in Europe, and consume the most alchole per-head in the world. Gas prices are just another rainy day for the average British worker.

I heard that gas in California was up to $3.50 a gallon.

I voted other, I meant to pick the Just no option.

If Congress and the states don't heed the Pres. call for action, then the only thing Bush has, other than his investigation into price gouging, is a speech with promises that the rest of the federal government is blocking from implementation.

I heard that gas in California was up to $3.50 a gallon.
Premium in south Florida is around $3.30, and I didn't see a single station with Regular under $3.00.

Nope, the government isn't doing a damn thing to help us. Just pussyfooting around the issue and giving us a bunch of lip service. We need action against oil companies not all this meaningless BS they're trying to push down our throats.

i hear by summer its ognna be over 4 bucks even 5 some places(good luck hawaii)

imagine next year do i hear 7 bucks?

2008...
10-12??

2009...
20.00 mabey

these problems arent gonna be solved by ethanol or solar cars because they dont go as fast as gas cars...and plus by 2009 these just arent gonna be that maney solar cars...plus there more exspenisive...i dunno wut were gonna do by 2009 it'll be 50 a gallon in europe!

I think they should; I honestly don't think it's the higher standards that drive up prices, it's that there are so many of them. Even if they wern't, a web of differing requirements would drive up prices no matter how strict they are because it puts strain on the distribution system.

If it were the sheer number or stringency of regulations, prices would be down from ten or so years ago, not up. Yet ten years ago, people were horrified that prices had climbed above a dollar a gallon. . .a level we would pray for today.

What's clogging up the market isn't regulation; it's anti-competitive behavior on the part of the oil companies. We've been hearing about how "refineries shutting down" have been causing inopportune price spikes since 2001 (remember Enron, anyone?), yet you would think that in a perfect marketplace, someone, somewhere would have built better refineries so that they could undercut their competitors. This hasn't happened. Instead, all the companies bitch and moan about their refinery problems all the way to the bank, because it is profitable for them not to fight each other and instead collectively sodomize us.

We need more regulation, not less: we need to break up the vertically and horizontally-integrated trusts that the oil companies have again become, and look for what seems to be some pretty clear-cut evidence of price fixing and gouging.

I voted other, I meant to pick the Just no option.

If Congress and the states don't heed the Pres. call for action, then the only thing Bush has, other than his investigation into price gouging, is a speech with promises that the rest of the federal government is blocking from implementation.And with the success rate of his other investigations, I predict that after ten years and $230 million, we'll discover that it was the Martians who did it.

Bush intends to hold an investigation to look for price gouging. Of course, this doesn't mean the oil companies can't do whatever the fuck they want, it just means the gas stations can't turn a profit without getting fucked over.

If it were the sheer number or stringency of regulations, prices would be down from ten or so years ago, not up. Yet ten years ago, people were horrified that prices had climbed above a dollar a gallon. . .a level we would pray for today.

What's clogging up the market isn't regulation; it's anti-competitive behavior on the part of the oil companies. We've been hearing about how "refineries shutting down" have been causing inopportune price spikes since 2001 (remember Enron, anyone?), yet you would think that in a perfect marketplace, someone, somewhere would have built better refineries so that they could undercut their competitors. This hasn't happened. Instead, all the companies bitch and moan about their refinery problems all the way to the bank, because it is profitable for them not to fight each other and instead collectively sodomize us.

We need more regulation, not less: we need to break up the vertically and horizontally-integrated trusts that the oil companies have again become, and look for what seems to be some pretty clear-cut evidence of price fixing and gouging.
Do you think the FTC is going to find anything?

Bush intends to hold an investigation to look for price gouging. Of course, this doesn't mean the oil companies can't do whatever the fuck they want, it just means the gas stations can't turn a profit without getting fucked over.
don't the oil companies own just about all the gas stations in the US?

Shit. They've got record profits right now--that's all the clout they need.

Someone else that slept through the part about profit margin vs profit. Nazz, quit demogoguing the issue and get your facts straight. These may be record profits, but the profit margins aren't anywhere near record levels. The company is still getting approximately the same return on their investment as before these 'record' profits. Look at a few XOM 10-Qs.

Someone else that slept through the part about profit margin vs profit. Nazz, quit demagoguing the issue and get your facts straight. These may be record profits, but the profit margins aren't anywhere near record levels. The company is still getting approximately the same return on their investment as before these 'record' profits. Look at a few XOM 10-Qs.
Bush seems to think they're making record profits.

Do you think the FTC is going to find anything?

Given that the FTC is the finest institution that Big Business can buy, no. But that doesn't mean that what they ought to be looking for isn't there.

It's about 2.39 here. >_>

I heard that gas in California was up to $3.50 a gallon.

Doesn't surprise me, Cally has some of the highest taxes and the worst gas in the U.S.

Someone else that slept through the part about profit margin vs profit. Nazz, quit demagoguing the issue and get your facts straight. These may be record profits, but the profit margins aren't anywhere near record levels. The company is still getting approximately the same return on their investment as before these 'record' profits. Look at a few XOM 10-Qs.You're damn right I'm demogoguing the issue, because that's the only way anything is going to change. We need radical change in transportation in the US--we need more fuel efficient cars, we need better public transportation, we need more R&D in alternative fuels, we need to get off fossil fuels that cause pollution and we're not going to get there without making someone a bad guy. The oil companies are already douchebags of the highest order, so I don't feel badly in the slightest about fanning those flames a bit.

They are making record amounts of cash, but not as much record amounts of cash. Poor, poor oil companies.

What's clogging up the market isn't regulation; it's anti-competitive behavior on the part of the oil companies. We've been hearing about how "refineries shutting down" have been causing inopportune price spikes since 2001 (remember Enron, anyone?), yet you would think that in a perfect marketplace, someone, somewhere would have built better refineries so that they could undercut their competitors. This hasn't happened. Instead, all the companies bitch and moan about their refinery problems all the way to the bank, because it is profitable for them not to fight each other and instead collectively sodomize us.

Low gas prices were directly responsible for the closures of the refineries; many of the refiners were unable to remain profitable and either went under or sold off their refineries and had them shut down to control costs. Most refineries were running in the red throughout the 90's, and oil companies remained profitable only due to giant mergers.

The cheap gas of the 1990's did more to consolidate the oil industry than any other period in history; the high gas prices today have their roots in the variety of factors that kept gas artificially cheap during that period.

You're damn right I'm demogoguing the issue, because that's the only way anything is going to change. We need radical change in transportation in the US--we need more fuel efficient cars, we need better public transportation, we need more R&D in alternative fuels, we need to get off fossil fuels that cause pollution and we're not going to get there without making someone a bad guy. The oil companies are already douchebags of the highest order, so I don't feel badly in the slightest about fanning those flames a bit.
Well buddy, you are honest about your position. I'd like to see all that come to pass, too, but I don't believe that another big lie is the way to do it. I am convinced that higher gas prices, higher oil prices, and more expensive electricity is going to make alternatives to fossil fuels more acceptable in a commercial sense. That's the only way that they will ever be accepted by the public. And you know what? The energy companies are going to be the ones that make all that happen.

Well buddy, you are honest about your position. I'd like to see all that come to pass, too, but I don't believe that another big lie is the way to do it. I am convinced that higher gas prices, higher oil prices, and more expensive electricity is going to make alternatives to fossil fuels more acceptable in a commercial sense. That's the only way that they will ever be accepted by the public. And you know what? The energy companies are going to be the ones that make all that happen.

And if they don't, they go out of business. That's what's great about technology; if they don't keep up with it, they will lose market share and eventually go under...that's why the oil companies will not be able to stonewall or otherwise stop the implementation of alternative energies forever. The ones who are smart and who will remain in business are getting ready for the new technology, not trying to keep them under wraps.

Well buddy, you are honest about your position. I'd like to see all that come to pass, too, but I don't believe that another big lie is the way to do it. I am convinced that higher gas prices, higher oil prices, and more expensive electricity is going to make alternatives to fossil fuels more acceptable in a commercial sense. That's the only way that they will ever be accepted by the public. And you know what? The energy companies are going to be the ones that make all that happen.
They'll only make that happen if they're dragged to it kicking and screaming--that's always been the case in the past and I see no reason why they'll change now--and the best way to drag them, in my eyes, is to get a lot of pissed off people to help.

You're paying $3.39 a gallon? Boo frickety hoo.

That's £1.89. £1.89 a gallon!

In England, We're paying £3.80, or £4 for diesel.

That's $6.80 to $7.15
I agree. (Even though most of the price of your petrol is Tax)

I see a lot of bad comparisons of "Bottled X" to petrol, but think of it this way...

95% Pure, fuel-grade Ethanol (Everclear Brand Grain Alcohol) runs $90/gal (+/- $18per 750ml).

Drive less, walk more, get fuel efficient vehicles. Save the Petrol for the lorries or you might find yourself without a bog roll.

(I also remember the 1973/74 Oil Embargo... at least you CAN buy petrol today...)

They are making record amounts of cash, but not as much record amounts of cash. Poor, poor oil companies.
Of which the vast amount of US stock is held by Pension & Mutual Funds... i.e. Widows, Orphans, Old People and small Investors - not Rockafeller/Gottrock/Bush/Heinz-Kerry types.

Are there obscenely paid people in those companies? Yes, But the real "Profits" go to the shareholders. Destroy the Profits, and feed dogfood to grandma.

(Note - this only applies to commonly-held US companies, not Government Held companies like CITGO...)

I am thinking that ethanol might not be the best investment in the long run. Because you have to grow it. And it takes a couple of months to grow corn. I don't know how long it takes to grow sugar cane. But it seems to me that that would drive up the price ethanol itself.

Petrol in Australia costs...ets see around AUD$1.20/L so...if my calculations are correct...AUD$4.40/Gallon...US$3.30/Gallon! Ha ah haa! It pays to be America's bitch! Take that Europe, maybe if you bent over and let the US have their rough unlubricated way with you than you might have petrol prices like these :D

I am thinking that ethanol might not be the best investment in the long run. Because you have to grow it. And it takes a couple of months to grow corn. I don't know how long it takes to grow sugar cane. But it seems to me that that would drive up the price ethanol itself.Seems to work for Brazil...

But yeah, dump the stupid formulations. At worst we need only 3, (six if you count the 3 octane grades)

Arctic, Temperate and Texas grades. Distribute according to transept.

I'm not sure how much corn it takes to make ethanol or biodiesel or whatever vegetable based fuels you people think we need, but the US has the most efficient agricultural industry in the world. (Last I checked.) We can produce enough corn to supply most of the world (food wise) and not even blink. We often overlook the fact that other countries are afraid of our agriculture industry. There are countries that won't go into a free trade agreement with us because they think we will wipe their agricultural industry out of existence. That makes me think that we can easily produce enough corn to ease our fuel problem. Mind you, right now we are actually paying farmers for not producing as much as they possibly can (federal subsidies). As it is, a lot of the produce from farms goes to waste. I think some form of biofuel is the way to go, at least for the US.

I don't remember the exact numbers, but mass/agracultural space wise, corn or cellulose based alcohol is more costly to manufacture both in BTUs and diminished foodstock than is practical.

Sugar Cane (as Brazil uses) or (maybe) Sugar Beets OTOH...

Don't you benefit from excellent public transportation?

if you mean london, then yes otherwise no. Also note that public transport is still expensive enough to make cars the cheaper choice. :mad:

There is no reason for us to be enslaved to OPEC and Exxon other than the fact that our elected representatives have financial interests in big oil.
Diesel technology is here and readily available. Agriculture is being subsidized to leave fields untouched.
It would be nice if the government would give a little incentive to make the switch but my next car will be a small diesel with an extra tank so I can burn vegetable oil.
Brazil is almost, if not already, independent of reliance on foreign oil. I guess they're just smarter than the rest of us.
This crap of taking away the enviromental regs on gas production is just another way for the republicans to do away with anything that gets in the way of their making profits. Taking gas away from our national reserves is at best a band-aid to appease the masses and at worse another major blow to our national defense.

Sugar cane is an efficient source of ethanol, but it does have the effect of severely depleting the soil. Effectively if you switch land to sugar cane production it is almost impossible to economically convert it back to any other use.
There is no perfect solution to the problem.

Seems to work for Brazil...

But yeah, dump the stupid formulations. At worst we need only 3, (six if you count the 3 octane grades)

Arctic, Temperate and Texas grades. Distribute according to transept.
maybe. Just remember that to create that ethanol, Brazil is engaged in the slashing and burning of the most important rainforest in the world whereby contributing significantly to global warming.

There is no reason for us to be enslaved to OPEC and Exxon other than the fact that our elected representatives have financial interests in big oil.
Diesel technology is here and readily available. Agriculture is being subsidized to leave fields untouched.
It would be nice if the government would give a little incentive to make the switch but my next car will be a small diesel with an extra tank so I can burn vegetable oil.
Brazil is almost, if not already, independent of reliance on foreign oil. I guess they're just smarter than the rest of us.
This crap of taking away the enviromental regs on gas production is just another way for the republicans to do away with anything that gets in the way of their making profits. Taking gas away from our national reserves is at best a band-aid to appease the masses and at worse another major blow to our national defense.
Brazil also produces more than enough oil to meet its domestic demand. They could sell the small amount of excess, but if they were intelligent, they would instead create a Strategic Petroleum Reserve for their country, like we in America have.

maybe. Just remember that to create that ethanol, Brazil is engaged in the slashing and burning of the most important rainforest in the world whereby contributing significantly to global warming.

Good point. Fortunately the U.S. is not really a place conducive to growing sugar cane. We can produce corn and soybeans. No need for us to go totally the ethanol route. We can go diesel!
Would be nice if we could legalize hemp to ease the destruction of old forests and make better textiles, etc.

maybe. Just remember that to create that ethanol, Brazil is engaged in the slashing and burning of the most important rainforest in the world whereby contributing significantly to global warming.

You are, as usual, just plain wrong.

(We are slashing and burning the Amazon rainforest to produce Soya, not sugar cane. Sugar cane does not grow in that climate, it grows in more sub tropical regions.)

Good point. Fortunately the U.S. is not really a place conducive to growing sugar cane. We can produce corn and soybeans. No need for us to go totally the ethanol route. We can go diesel!
Would be nice if we could legalize hemp to ease the destruction of old forests and make better textiles, etc.
But it IS a good place to grow Sugar Beets, which (IIRC) is easier to reduce than Corn.

And I do also agree on the biodeisel & Hemp angle.

maybe. Just remember that to create that ethanol, Brazil is engaged in the slashing and burning of the most important rainforest in the world whereby contributing significantly to global warming.


How exactly does the destruction of mature forest for the growing of plants contribute to global warming?

But it IS a good place to grow Sugar Beets, which (IIRC) is easier to reduce than Corn.

And I do also agree on the biodeisel & Hemp angle.

Hey! Whatever works! This is productive dialogue. There is NO reason for us to be in this dependent state to big oil corporations and OPEC. If our legistators truly were working for the good of the nation instead of their own monetary self-interests this problem would well be on the way towards being solved.
It's in the western world's best interest to solve this and get the hell out of the mid-east.

It's in the western world's best interest to solve this and get the hell out of the mid-east.
Hell, it's in everyone's interest.

And I do also agree on the biodeisel & Hemp angle.

Also, if more people got baked on a regular basis, there would be fewer people running around 'doing things', thereby saving resources.

How exactly does the destruction of mature forest for the growing of plants contribute to global warming?

A mature forest is a major sink of CO2. Of course it's hard to study CO2 absorption / emission in old forests, but there are those who do exactly that. So the mature forest absorbs CO2 and never releases it. The plants for ethanol absorb less and of course most of the carbon is then used to burn and thus is returned into the atmosphere.

Of course I drive a Toyota Prius, so high gas prices makes me so happy. :p

A mature forest is a major sink of CO2. Of course it's hard to study CO2 absorption / emission in old forests, but there are those who do exactly that. So the mature forest absorbs CO2 and never releases it.

Not to mention that reportedly, those rainforests also supply a huge part of the worlds oxygen supply.

You are, as usual, just plain wrong.

(We are slashing and burning the Amazon rainforest to produce Soya, not sugar cane. Sugar cane does not grow in that climate, it grows in more sub tropical regions.)

That still ignores the fact that Brazilians are cutting down the forests at a very high rate.

Also, if more people got baked on a regular basis, there would be fewer people running around 'doing things', thereby saving resources.
Try smoking industrial grade hemp. It sucks. (so I'm told).

It's easy enough to keep the THC content down, if you want to.

Interesting side-effect of large scale industrial Hemp farming is... if you are anti-pot... the cross polination royally screws the High THC content plants.

Of course I drive a Toyota Prius, so high gas prices makes me so happy. :p
Now here is somthing I just don't understand.

For the last few decades or so the EnviroLiberals have been asking for just this - high petrol prices forcing lower consumption and inquiries into alternative fuel research... but the current petrol price dynamic is Bush's fault, but the result is good, but it's Bush's fault, but the result is good... :headbang:

Interesting side-effect of large scale industrial Hemp farming is... if you are anti-pot... the cross polination royally screws the High THC content plants.

I'm now officially against your hemp policy.

I've always wondered how much sugarcane places like Hawaii or Louisiana/Florida could produce; it would be highly beneficial to the regions if they became major producers of cellulosic ethanol, not to mention large quantities of ethanol overall.

Grain based ethanol is good, but cellulosic ethanol would be perfect. There's a lot of agricultural and manufacturing waste that could be used for that with a lot of savings in energy and fuel consumption. I wonder if switchgrass will ever be used...hopefully. I've heard that stuff can grow anywhere.

I've always wondered how much sugarcane places like Hawaii or Louisiana/Florida could produce; it would be highly beneficial to the regions if they became major producers of cellulosic ethanol, not to mention large quantities of ethanol overall.

Grain based ethanol is good, but cellulosic ethanol would be perfect. There's a lot of agricultural and manufacturing waste that could be used for that with a lot of savings in energy and fuel consumption. I wonder if switchgrass will ever be used...hopefully. I've heard that stuff can grow anywhere.

Or, you know, maybe it's just time to start thinking about alternatives to internal combustion.

I understand that our industrial base is not suited to anything else, but, well, the UK eventually left the steam age.

I've always wondered how much sugarcane places like Hawaii or Louisiana/Florida could produce; it would be highly beneficial to the regions if they became major producers of cellulosic ethanol, not to mention large quantities of ethanol overall.

Grain based ethanol is good, but cellulosic ethanol would be perfect. There's a lot of agricultural and manufacturing waste that could be used for that with a lot of savings in energy and fuel consumption. I wonder if switchgrass will ever be used...hopefully. I've heard that stuff can grow anywhere.
Bush thinks it can. That's why he"s funding research to see if we can get ethanol from switchgrass and other plants besides just corn and sugarcanes.

I'm now officially against your hemp policy.
Not my policy, just simple Agricultural realities.

There's always Hydroponics... Plenty of Female plants that way... :p

Or, you know, maybe it's just time to start thinking about alternatives to internal combustion.

Ideally; it seems bizarre that for all of the advances in technology and manufacturing, we're still using the same technology virtually unchanged since the 1890's in our cars and other vehicles.

I understand that our industrial base is not suited to anything else, but, well, the UK eventually left the steam age.

I think there will be some vast changes to automobile technology; the car as a transportation concept isn't going anywhere, but the way it runs, is produced and is fueled are. The companies that can't keep up will go out of business and new ones will rise to take their place.

The petroleum age isn't going to be ended due to a lack of oil, but rather the arrival of better technologies. I think we're right on the brink of a new technologically-driven Industrial Revolution in many ways; it's very possible that by 2050, and undoubtedly by 2100 our demand for oil will be at its present levels and falling, if not sooner.

At the same time, however, GDP, living standards, and employment will also rise and pollution will be reduced considerably.

Or, you know, maybe it's just time to start thinking about alternatives to internal combustion.

I understand that our industrial base is not suited to anything else, but, well, the UK eventually left the steam age.
there's the electric battery that can currently get you 40 miles, and then there is the heavy research into hydrogen economy which makes up the biggest part of the Bush energy bill.

I think it most interesting that the oil companies couldn't get their tax breaks and taxpayer funded freebies in Bush's plan so they had DeLay put in one the appropriations bills a year ago. See, even if the person who opposes their failed policies is the US President, they still find ways to go around him.
But I think their timing was horrible on this one. Looks like they picked the wrong Pres to try and go around.

Bush thinks it can. That's why he"s funding research to see if we can get ethanol from switchgrass and other plants besides just corn and sugarcanes.

Hey, if Bush can engineer a successful energy policy that produces results in reducing our dependence on imported oil and fossil fuels in general, then he's got my support 100%. I think the public support is there, and the political climate is ripe for a major proposal...I'll be interested in what happens over the next few years.

Honestly, I'm very glad that he's talking about the issue. We need to get it out there for everyone, and as long as Bush remains committed I'm behind him on this one fully.

I like to get a bettle handle on what the problem is before I start debating how to solve it. I'd like to direct everyone to the "peak oil" problem.

"peak oil" refers to a mathematical model of resource depletion (forwarded by American geophysicist Marion King Hubbert in 1956) applied to natural oil reserves. (wikipedia is a great non-biased source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_Oil)

Most experts agree we are near the peak of oil production now, and many alarmists worry about what will happen as world oil production decreases. But what we are facing right now is not depleating oil reserves, but rather two problems.

1: A leveling off of oil production (ie, it is no longer increasing to meet the first world's normally increasing demands)

2: Rapidly increasing world demand due to developing nations, most notably China.

Simply said, we have increasing demand, and level production. Of course oil prices are going to increase. And of course oil companies are going to make more money. How could they make less on a commodity that is increasingly valuable?

*****
*****

The problem isn't just personal transportation. Oil powers the ships and trucks and trains of global, regional, national, and even state/provential trade, so increasing oil prices increases food and product prices. Yet oil (as well as gas and coal, two other depleting resources) powers many of our electric powerplants.

To replace oil with an "electric" or "hydrogen economy," we have to first replace our petrolium electric power plants AND THEN build new (non-fossil fuel) power plants to start replacing oil products in our transportation system. That is a lot of new plants. Do we have enough wind/solar/geothermal/hydrolic power to do this?

*****
*****

Fortunately, the matematical model of "peak oil" predicts a leveling off, then a gradual falling off of world oil production. Additionally, plant based ethinol/bio-desiel (which has an energy return on energy investment, EROEI, of current oil drilling) can pad some of the increase in demand and falling off of production, as can non-traditional petrol sources such as oil tars and sands (with an EROEI of about 1/15th that of normal petrol, or a fifth of bio-fuels).

However, these sources can not completely replace the oil we use. Additionally, as long as oil remains an option, we (capitalist nations) will not be able to become independant from it, no matter how much leaders like President Bush say we will.

*****
*****

As I see it, in the end, there are only a few real sources of power.

First, we are all aware of the fossil fuels, oil, NG, and coal, which will all run out (coal last).

Second, Geothermal will not "run out" but is limited in how much we can get.

Third, wind, wave, hydrolic, bio-fuels, etc all boil down to solar, and are limited by light falling on earth, the amount of our solar collectors (PVCs, dams, windmills, plants, etc), and their various efficencies (low).

Last, the nuclear option.

I think the questions are: with the first running out, are the second and third sources enough to power our current society? Our future technology, societies, and populations? Our children?

In my research, I'm inclined to believe it won't be. Not if we want to continue trade and transportation and manufacturing at it's current level. Not if we want economic growth.

Yes, they're doing everything they can, to make it more expensive.

I blame America, and Bush.

No more blaming us Canadians.

Now Congress is doing something:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060427/ap_on_go_co/oil_taxes_18

Before Bush did and said anything, Congress was not going to do a damn thing.
Now noone on capital hill (that's another term for Congress for those of you who don't know) wants to be caught with their pants down. Might be a little late for that.

Yes, they're doing everything they can, to make it more expensive.

I blame America, and Bush.

No more blaming us Canadians.
Whose blaming Canada? What do they have to do with anything?

Whose blaming Canada? What do they have to do with anything?
Southpark perhaps...


Canadia is now setting itself up to be a World power in the North West.

oil companies are firing back, saying the blame belongs to speculators:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1761582,00.html

In a way he's got a point. While we're cracking down on tax cheating and price gouging, now would be a good time to ban speculation in the oil markets. Since speculation is known to make prices artificially high in a number of areas besides just oil and gas. Take currency for example. Speculation there back in the 90's almost caused a world depression.

We need much tighter reigns on speculators.

Southpark perhaps...


Canadia is now setting itself up to be a World power in the North West.
Northwest? You mean North America? The northwest part of Canada is all dry land. In the north east, however, it's a bunch of islands.

Northwest? You mean North America? The northwest part of Canada is all dry land. In the north east, however, it's a bunch of islands.
North West Corner of the World but on the Eastern Seaboard near Greenland.
Canadia has some or has the largest stocks of Oil in the world oir so i have been informed.

Here in good ol' Australia it's around about $1.40 a litre (more if you don't live in a major city).

1 litre is equal to 0.26 gallons... which means we'd be paying a little over $5.60 a gallon (in AUD).

$5.60 AUD is US $4.19

Not terrible, but pretty bad here in Oz. :D

North West Corner of the World but on the Eastern Seaboard near Greenland.
Canadia has some or has the largest stocks of Oil in the world oir so i have been informed.
It's all shale oil though. Much more difficult and probably the most expensive to extract. But the US is importing it though.

Public transport in London isn't as bad as the rest of the UK. Hell, for £3 you get unlimited journeys on any bus in London for the day. The service is also pretty good. Quite a lot of routes run 24 hours a day. With the best routes having buses every 5 minutes at peak times and buses every 30 minutes between 1am and 5am. And there are plenty of bus lanes and contraflow lanes. The system is also quickly becoming completely cashless, making the journey times even quicker.

Bus drivers' wages are pretty good too, something like £450/wk.

As for speculators... speculators are the closest thing we have to a unified source of all the worlds problems. They have an incredible ability to make a Mountain out of not just a mole hill, but ocean trenchs as well.

*snip*

Conclusion:

What I'm describing to you today is a strategy that recognizes the realities of the world in which we live. Our dependency on oil has created economic security issues for us and national security issues for us. And therefore this country must use our brain power and entrepreneurial spirit to diversify away from the hydrocarbon economy.

You know, there's no doubt in my mind that one of these days, instead of people driving up to a gas station they're going to be going up to a fueling station. And they'll be able to have choices to choose from. You've got a hydrogen-powered car, you'll be able to have that choice. If you want 85 percent, maybe someday 100 percent, ethanol, that'll be an option available, too.

We owe it to the American people to be aggressive on price gouging now. We owe it to the American people to be promoting alternative ways to drive their cars so as to make us less dependent on foreign sources of oil. We owe it to the American people to be aggressive in the use of technology so we can diversify away from the hydrocarbon society. And that's precisely what we're doing.
denial -> negotiation ->depression ->acceptance

Next will be depression.