NationStates Jolt Archive

I heard some talking head on the radio today berating President Bush for doing some sword dance with the King of Saudi Arabia. He posited that President Bush should have ended the dance by telling the king to exert his influence over OPEC to bring the price of oil down to around $50-60/barrel or the US would pull its defence network around Saudi Arabia.

What do people think? How can the US move away from its dependence on OPEC?

Quite easy, in fact
1) Rely more on US oil from Alaska and the likes
2) Increase the amount of ethanol in gasoline
3) Develop better public transportation
4) Invest more in alternate fuel sources
5) Invest HEAVILY in the development of hydrogen fuel (hydrogen fuel is the future)
6) Start enacting tariffs, taxes, and conservation programs aimed at reducing influence of oil

It's a real shame that Washington isn't willing to do ANYTHING

What do people think? How can the US move away from its dependence on OPEC?

Drill in Alaska and off the shore of California and Florida while building nuclear power plants and other alternative sources of energy. :rolleyes:

Interesting, Mr Talking Head, since Bush was actually taking part in a sword dancing ritual, in Bahrain.

Oh well never mind, all those Arab countries are pretty much the same anyway eh? ;)

Interesting, Mr Talking Head, since Bush was actually taking part in a sword dancing ritual, in Bahrain.

Oh well never mind, all those Arab countries are pretty much the same anyway eh? ;)
If it is outside the US, the differences are only pedantic; they all speak funny and worship heathen gods. Well, except maybe Canada: they seem alright most of the time.

If it is outside the US, the differences are only pedantic; they all speak funny and worship heathen gods. Well, except maybe Canada: they seem alright most of the time.

There's a world outside the US?

the talking head was an asshole and the sword dance has nothing to do with anything.

the US just sold the saudis an assload of smart bombs. if we dont get something for THAT, george bush will have proven himself incompetent in yet another area.

2) Increase the amount of ethanol in gasoline
That isn't going to work until they tell the corn lobby to fuck off. Corn is good for exactly two things: popcorn and making more corn. For sweetening, sugar cane is better. For ethanol, anything is better.

True dat. Apparently, Brazil's already made the move to all-sugar cane ethanol fuel. If only we could do the same...

I understand corn is not the best way however what your suggesting would not jive with the climate where the majority of US crops are grown.

That isn't going to work until they tell the corn lobby to fuck off. Corn is good for exactly two things: popcorn and making more corn. For sweetening, sugar cane is better. For ethanol, anything is better.

True dat. Apparently, Brazil's already made the move to all-sugar cane ethanol fuel. If only we could do the same...

True dat. Apparently, Brazil's already made the move to all-sugar cane ethanol fuel. If only we could do the same...

Indeed. Brazil's sugar ethanol is far more efficient than corn ethanol. I read that the amount of corn required to make the ethanol to fill the tank of an SUV could feed a family for a year. So inefficient.

The problem with drilling on American soil is that all that oil is protected by numerous environmental laws. Get rid of those, we reduce American foriegn oil dependency. But that won't happen, it'll get protested by environmentalists.

Nuclear power plants would be great, except they have almost no impact on foriegn oil dependency, and none of them will get built because of protests.

Public transportation would greatly reduce our foriegn oil dependency, but no one uses it. People in America are happy and content to drive everywhere. Plus, with as spacious as the United States is (including the cities), public transportation is less efficent and more expensive.

In short, a huge number of American cultural and social norms need to change, along with the political culture, in order to reduce our dependency on foriegn oil.

Drill in Alaska and off the shore of California and Florida while building nuclear power plants and other alternative sources of energy. :rolleyes: Open ANWR! It's just a tundra wasteland, nothing to be saved except a few shrubs.

Quite easy, in fact
1) Rely more on US oil from Alaska and the likes
First off, it'll take at least 10 years just to start getting oil. Second, at least a third of it won't even be sold to the US, probably even more than a third.
2) Increase the amount of ethanol in gasoline
3) Develop better public transportation
4) Invest more in alternate fuel sources
Ok
5) Invest HEAVILY in the development of hydrogen fuel (hydrogen fuel is the future)
No, it's not. It's a joke like corn ethanol. Stop living in fantasyland.
6) Start enacting tariffs, taxes, and conservation programs aimed at reducing influence of oil
Ok

It's a real shame that Washington isn't willing to do ANYTHING
And we call our government stable... Stable doesn't get anywhere. This is why we need proportional representation.

Anytime anyone proposes drilling in ANWR, the environmentalists go nuts.... Even though it would take about ten years for it to have any impact at all in the US, America should start drilling there YESTERDAY. The environmentalists also have fits when nuclear energy is discussed.

No one in Washington is really willing to take on the environmental lobby -most Democrats are in bed with them and the Republicans don't have the guts to stand up to them.

No one in Washington is really willing to take on the environmental lobby -most Democrats are in bed with them and the Republicans don't have the guts to stand up to them.
To be fair, most Republicans are in bed with them too.. Literally:p.

As cars get more and more efficent, soon you'll need a volt of electricity to take a trip across the country, stopping at landmarks along the way. As for now, you can repeal gas taxes, and drive hybrids! Simple, isn't it?

To be fair, most Republicans are in bed with them too.. Literally:p.

As cars get more and more efficent, soon you'll need a volt of electricity to take a trip across the country, stopping at landmarks along the way. As for now, you can repeal gas taxes, and drive hybrids! Simple, isn't it?

On average, hybrids can cost anywhere from $3500-$6000 more than a "normal" car - most families probably can't afford that up-front cost. If the government REALLY wanted people to drive them, they'd give breaks/incentives to both the car companies for designing/making them and to people for buying them in order to make them affordable.

It's like going to the supermarket - the Seventh Generation line of recycled paper goods is a great idea ... except all of the products cost more than "regular" paper towels, toilet paper, etc. Most people aren't willing to swallow that cost just to be nice to the environment.

On average, hybrids can cost anywhere from $3500-$6000 more than a "normal" car - most families probably can't afford that up-front cost. If the government REALLY wanted people to drive them, they'd give breaks/incentives to both the car companies for designing/making them and to people for buying them in order to make them affordable.

It's like going to the supermarket - the Seventh Generation line of recycled paper goods is a great idea ... except all of the products cost more than "regular" paper towels, toilet paper, etc. Most people aren't willing to swallow that cost just to be nice to the environment.
Yeah, and SUVs don't cost more then hybrids? I've seen quite a few that were pretty expensive. And also, you have to think of how much you would save on gas, depending on the car you were planning to get, it might be worth it.

Yeah, and SUVs don't cost more then hybrids? I've seen quite a few that were pretty expensive. And also, you have to think of how much you would save on gas, depending on the car you were planning to get, it might be worth it.

Touche on the SUV remark. I can't believe how many people drive those Hummers...

Regarding the gas savings, however, I am reading this cost-analysis for a Honda Civic LX vs. a Honda Civic Hybrid. The analyst used city-mileage b/c he argued that's the way most people drive. Anyway, he argued that after five years, you'd save $1250, after ten years, you'd save $2500, and after fifteen years, you'd save $3750.

Here's the link in case anyone is interested. I don't feel like figuring it all out myself, so you can see this guy's stats/figures if you care to:

http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/auto/car-guide/hybrid.asp

No, it's not. It's a joke like corn ethanol. Stop living in fantasyland.


No, it is the future, though it's pretty far down the road.

Touche on the SUV remark. I can't believe how many people drive those Hummers...

Regarding the gas savings, however, I am reading this cost-analysis for a Honda Civic LX vs. a Honda Civic Hybrid. The analyst used city-mileage b/c he argued that's the way most people drive. Anyway, he argued that after five years, you'd save $1250, after ten years, you'd save $2500, and after fifteen years, you'd save $3750.

Here's the link in case anyone is interested. I don't feel like figuring it all out myself, so you can see this guy's stats/figures if you care to:


We'll use city mileage figures for both cars because that's the mileage estimate most drivers are likely to achieve. Let's say gas is $1.75 per gallon and you drive 15,000 miles every year. ..After five years, you'd save $1,250 at the pump. After 10 years, you'd save $2,500. After 15 years you'd save $3,750, finally just over your $3,500 goal.




He says $1.75! Gas is $3.15(At least where I'm at) which would make your savings... Let's see... I think it's $5135 per 5 years for the hybrid and $7382 for the normal one. 2247$. So after 10 years you'd save $4494 in gas, more than the differance in price.

Open ANWR! It's just a tundra wasteland, nothing to be saved except a few shrubs.
A lot of people are under the impression that we would really be that better off with ANWR being full blown open.
Oh yeah, btw, a lot of the problem is the lack of refineries. Anyone happen to notice that?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/
antiquated, but working on it.

the Republicans don't have the guts to stand up to them.
What?
When have "guts" had anything to do with their decisions?

Also ... do you know who was involved in making the original purchases for most of the land on the slope in the first place, and for what reason?
http://newsminer.com/2007/12/28/10594/
for one

He says $1.75! Gas is $3.15(At least where I'm at) which would make your savings... Let's see... I think it's $5135 per 5 years for the hybrid and $7382 for the normal one. 2247$. So after 10 years you'd save $4494 in gas, more than the differance in price.

You're right, his price model is outdated, but the idea remains the same - are Americans willing to wait FIVE years to "save" on their hybrid purchase? I would bet that most would not...