R
RadioPatrol
Guest
He does not know or care, Kerad has been sucked in my Alternative and Change ....
no one has defined it yet but Kerad is on the
ready to go .... 
McCain and Bush: Wrong again.
- Thread starter Kerad
- Start date
He does not know or care, Kerad has been sucked in my Alternative and Change ....
no one has defined it yet but Kerad is on the
ready to go .... 
wintersprings
New Member
"The way I see it, if speculators are responsible for artificially inflating the price of oil, something should be done about them."
yea, those evil folks in the Pension system of California (Liberals??) all invested Billions, and made like a 1/2 Billion on oil futures, for their retired folks.
Go get them old folks, slap them in jail.
yea, those evil folks in the Pension system of California (Liberals??) all invested Billions, and made like a 1/2 Billion on oil futures, for their retired folks.
Go get them old folks, slap them in jail.
Kerad
New Member
How am I a hypocrite? I'm driving a Mazda 6, which still has a year and a half of payments. When I buy my next car, it will be a hybrid or electric or whatever is best at that time. Where did I say people should go out and by a hybrid today? Nowhere. I said more and more people are replacing their old cars with hybrids. Just as more and more people and industries will look to future energy technologies when it's time to upgrade/replace their current ones.I asked what your were driving mister hypocrite .....
have you run out and gotten your hybrid yet, like a good little socialist ....
Like your Messiah AL BORE told you to .......
Hybrids are still not worth the premium tacked on by dealers ... hell you can get a mini that gets 40 mpg ....
my 14 yr old Saturn gets 30 ... and my commute is 30 min / 20 miles, part local roads, part Beltway ... it would not pay for me to get a Prius ... I have no car note .... why would I want one ... and having to run the motor to keep the AC Going in the summer ... is saving what exactly ...
You Righites are always trying to change the debate...or spin something I said into something I didn't. Trying to claim I said we won't need any oil in 10 years. Trying to say that I'm predicting everyone will have cars with solar panels strapped to the roof (still better than a dog on the roof, btw) in 5 years.
You all should just log off your computers and throw 'em out. I mean...really, computers will never work. Go back to your phonograph records and black and white tv's with the rabbit ears. Oh wait...at one time those were considered impossible, too.
Huh.
Back to the caves with you.
You just maintain that status quo...only reaching for what you already have. The rest of us will progress along without you.
cwo_ghwebb
No Use for Donk Twits
I have to admit you're tenacious, Kerad. But I feel you're on the wrong side of this argument. Something has to be done now regarding the energy situation. The populace has waited while leaders of both parties have screwed up. They don't suffer the crunch, the rich don't suffer the crunch, the poor can't get any poorer so just who is suffering from their inaction? The middle class.
Alternative energy, just where can a company build a nuclear power plant in a reasonable amount of time?
Alternative energy, huge wind farms everywhere, but NIMBY. It's fine off the coast of Delaware, but not off the coast where the Kennedy estates are located. And they haven't seemed to be feasible as they stop birds from migrating or some other excuse.
Better batteries - actually they are getting much better. In 1996 I headed up a division that tried to analyze the impact new technologies would have on the preparedness of the military from the viewpoint someone else had the technology and we didn't. Batteries were at the top of the list. That was twelve years ago, and the technology hasn't advanced to the point to make a difference.
I think nobody is against alternative energy sources; and if we can get something that economically satisfies the country's needs, that's great. But to pin hope on an alternative energy, TBD, without addressing the current needs of the country, seems short-sighted.
We've experienced the short-sightedness of Carter's administration. I personally don't want to retrogress back to the past. That's change I don't want. History has shown socialism doesn't work economically. That's change I don't want. I don't want to live in a cave, when our leaders and messiahs of all persuasions jet around and live the good life that's off-limits to me by their ignorant policies. It's time to get practical not philosophical and address the issue logically.
MMDad
Lem Putt
Here you go. The technology is here now. You can be part of the solution. Why wait for technology that may never get here?
Attachments
chernmax
NOT Politically Correct!!
Unfortunately with this being an election year neither the Democrats or Republicans will do anything about coming to a bipartisan agreement on drilling and alternative energy. Most will continue to fix the blame verse the problem because if either party succeeds at coming up with a comprehensive energy plan that will lower oil prices and relieve the strain being put on the backs of working America, it could positively influence the other candidate and neither party wants that to happen. So grab your socks America, oil just went up to $142 dollars a barrel and the House and Senate let out for a nice long 4th of July vacation!!! UFB...
Kerad
New Member
That will only work until the speculators screw it all up by pushing the price of dog food through the roof.
"Today the price of dog food set another record high of $140 per bag, the third increase in less than a week. Speculators blame the sharp rise on reports that a panda bear may have farted."
Larry Gude
Strung Out
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
My favorite sound on this forum - the sound of Kerad crying "uncle".
Look, you're against drilling and oil exploration? At least have the intelligence to offer an alternative solution. You're asking people to NOT drill for energy sources they know are there - on the premise that it won't be deliverable in enough time - but asking them to place their hopes and futures ---
On something that doesn't even EXIST yet. You know, this spectrum of new technology that's going to save us all.
That oil won't be available in ten years? How soon will your undeveloped, unknown technology even see the light of day?
At least if drilling is approved, there's structure in place to get started tomorrow, even if it takes years.
The reason why I both like and dislike Democrats is they live in dreams and not reality. So far, no one on your side is making palpable, pragmatic solutions - just setting up roadblocks and trying to blame people.
When people with oil furnaces start to freeze next winter, are you gonna tell them that in 20 years, some new form of technology might save them - maybe? Because we have to stop using oil?
cwo_ghwebb
No Use for Donk Twits
At least we can eat our dogs and pandas. Until I use my dog to pull my sled to work, he's always available for dinner.
That will only work until the speculators screw it all up by pushing the price of dog food through the roof.
"Today the price of dog food set another record high of $140 per bag, the third increase in less than a week. Speculators blame the sharp rise on reports that a panda bear may have farted."
chernmax
NOT Politically Correct!!
Last edited:
Larry Gude
Strung Out
That's...
...the underlying issue; there must be an economic incentive to replace oil. Oil isn't going to be set aside by a government mandated 'space' program or Manhattan project. To liken the development of the atomic bomb or going to the moon to the WILLBE energy source is to say that we must have a better potato chip and we could have it if we only put our minds to it; there is no reason for a better potato chip at the moment.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
There was never any economic incentive to go to space or build atom bombs, either. That was a government concern, and the most important one - survival. You're actually talking apples and oranges. I don't think people are looking towards oil companies taking the lead in competing for our energy dollars in developing alternatives.
At least with space and with the Manhattan project, the goal was actually a definable one - build a fission bomb - go to the moon. It wasn't "let's see what kind of weapons we can make" or "let's kind of go into space or something". "Energy independence" is too vague - but commercially viable nuclear fusion is not.
There is at least one economic incentive - whoever finds the most commercially successful alternative to how people use energy will make money.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I'm...
No one is going to find a commercially successful alternative until oil starts running out. Imagine investing a billion dollars into a thing or process that can run a car for about $3 a gallon. Oil will be $2.99 or lower just as soon as the $3 WILLBE energy is ready for market; supply and demand. Oil producers are not going to just sit there and not sell oil.
This is another gaping whole in the WILLBE energy argument; an abject lack of understanding of economics. Either we ban oil or it runs out; those are the only ways to make WILLBE viable unless WILLBE hits the market cheaper, a good deal cheaper, than oil. And if we ban oil or even use significant amounts less, it WILL crash in price. So, again, it's just fantasy.
So, again, BURN IT UP.
...not the one who is throwing around the moon and the bomb as examples. I was trying to make the point you're making; apples and oranges.
No one is going to find a commercially successful alternative until oil starts running out. Imagine investing a billion dollars into a thing or process that can run a car for about $3 a gallon. Oil will be $2.99 or lower just as soon as the $3 WILLBE energy is ready for market; supply and demand. Oil producers are not going to just sit there and not sell oil.
This is another gaping whole in the WILLBE energy argument; an abject lack of understanding of economics. Either we ban oil or it runs out; those are the only ways to make WILLBE viable unless WILLBE hits the market cheaper, a good deal cheaper, than oil. And if we ban oil or even use significant amounts less, it WILL crash in price. So, again, it's just fantasy.
So, again, BURN IT UP.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
Ok, now THAT statement doesn't make sense in lieu of other remarks you've made. If I came up with a substantially cheaper source of fuel tomorrow, people would buy it. You're not going to change an oil-based economy all that swiftly, but it will change if even a small number of people find it economical.
I mean, how many ways are there to heat your home? Electric? Coal? Oil? Propane? Wood? Kerosene? Natural gas? Which do you use? People choose the option that suits them best. You've covered some of this before when we were discussing flex fuel. You stabilize prices by having viable alternatives. You don't have to REPLACE oil, just have a good alternative. You don't have to MANDATE "green-ness". It just has to be an affordable alternative.
That's somewhat true. But there's only so low they can go, because as the cheap oil reserves run out, the harder to get oil isn't going to be so cheap to sell. Maybe ol' Jeb can strike oil by shootin' at some food, but eventually the oil is going to be harder to get.
Right now the selling point for PHEV's is that dollar for dollar, they can cost as much as a third less to "fuel" in the use most consumers will use them for - commuting to work. They don't sell me on the premise that I don't want to have TWO vehicles - one for commuting and one for "real" driving.
You don't have to exhaust it first. And no ones says it has to be mandated. Believe it or not, they still make LP's and cassettes. It's just a lot harder to find them nowadays. They still make floppies, and even more amazing, they still sell computers that have them. But they're rare because over time people found the new media more economical and useful.
Honestly? If WILLBE is even a little bit cheaper - I might be persuaded, only because I've seen gas prices climb all my life. I've seen gas prices fluctuate at the SAME GAS STATION in just one day. I'm not crazy about gasoline for the simple reason that it may be 4 bucks a gallon today but that I have no idea what it will cost next year or even tomorrow.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I agree...
If there was a GREAT option at $3.50 a gallon no one would buy it because oil would be $3.49 or less the same day.
Are you entering into WILLBE think on me???
...but the fact of the matter is there is not a viable option. There just isn't. Not even close. Infrastructure, vehicles, licensing, etc and so on and so forth.
If there was a GREAT option at $3.50 a gallon no one would buy it because oil would be $3.49 or less the same day.
Are you entering into WILLBE think on me???
Larry Gude
Strung Out
No...
Yes, technology costs money to get at tougher to reach oil, but it also cost money to set up rigs in Saudi 60 years ago. Those costs disappear into irrelevance when you start spreading those costs over years and millions of barrels a day.
We're talking nearly 90 million barrels a day. Do the math. Say it costs another $10 a barrel for new methods. That's over $300 billion, per year, to go towards new equipment and methods.
That means WILLBE is a long, long way from getting out of the crib.
...it's totally true. It costs Saudi something like $6 a barrel to pump oil. And it's gonna be that way for a long, long time. So what if it goes up by a factor of 10? Hell, it only costs $40 to pump it in Texas.
Yes, technology costs money to get at tougher to reach oil, but it also cost money to set up rigs in Saudi 60 years ago. Those costs disappear into irrelevance when you start spreading those costs over years and millions of barrels a day.
We're talking nearly 90 million barrels a day. Do the math. Say it costs another $10 a barrel for new methods. That's over $300 billion, per year, to go towards new equipment and methods.
That means WILLBE is a long, long way from getting out of the crib.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
That's...
...on an individual basis. Same thing for burning someones used grease. There are all sorts of things that make sense, for an individual, to be economical on their own tiny scale. That is not the basis for state or regional or national or global policy.
Toxick
Splat
While I agree with this, there are two problems.
1) Putting all your eggs in one basket. Not smart. If we currently have a single viable source for fuel, it makes no sense to expend ALL our effort and capital into alternatives. SOME? Yes. LOTS? Yes. But summarily writing off something that works for now is just... stupid.
2) Offers no short term relief.
When we develop another cheap efficient viable fuel source that's not oil, there will be nobody happier than I am, as we watch oil companies collapse under their own weight, and today's executives end up eating out of of KFC garbage bins. I will gleefully cheer as we watch the middle east return to its previous status as the sandy, itchy crotch of the world.
But drilling will provide near term relief, and keep things running while we can develop alternatives.
I don't know if I'm as optimisitic about solar power (until we further our dyson-sphere technology) or wind power as you are, but I'm sure we can figure something out. Meantime, we should use what we got.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Solar...
Once energy storage is solved, batteries, there y'ah go.
Also, don't hold you breath waiting for oil companies to collapse nor the middle east oil kingdoms. They know what they've got. They'll divest when the time comes. Most likely, you'll come up with the battery and they'll buy you out.
...is king. It's the best, easiest and cheapest; it's free, there for the taking.
Once energy storage is solved, batteries, there y'ah go.
Also, don't hold you breath waiting for oil companies to collapse nor the middle east oil kingdoms. They know what they've got. They'll divest when the time comes. Most likely, you'll come up with the battery and they'll buy you out.