[BigL2U]

The great thing about these types of dialogs is that it gets people thinking, which is the first step to creating. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/wink.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> I've been working from home one or two days a week and when I'm not in 968 I drive like an old man.



US oil currently produces about 5 million barrels of oil a day. At peak production the US can generate around 10 million barrels a day. Some believe that if we drilled every where we think there's oil in the US we could do close to 16 million. Another little tid-bit is that in the Middle East they pump six barrels of water for every barrel of oil (advantages of being in the desert). In the US oil fields we pump close to 1000 barrels of water for every barrel of oil. This is still considered a good ratio but it takes more time and effort to get a return. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/huh.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

The fact that the US government has had 36 years since the first "energy crisis" in 1972, to put together a comprehensive energy policy seems to go unnoticed..... We just need an comprehensive energy policy and support......both from our US Government.

Earossi your point is well taken and I agree we do need strong leadership on this issue. But the DOE has been studying the "energy crisis" and alternatives. They have some very good, comprehensive recommendations for an energy policy that includes Wind, Solar, Natural Gas, Oil, Coal, and Nuclear options. But the lobbyist control the pockets and interest of our representative <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/dry.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> and until now they haven't been very interested. OPEC's oil was fast and cheap so nobody cared.

i would happily pay more taxes if it would fix the problem

Flash, you have to be careful because Politicians will say what you want to hear until they get your tax dollars and then they forget about the promises they made and move to the next big crisis (with your money still pouring out of your pay check). Private industry is starting to pick up some of the research but Government regulation hinders their ability to act on some things so they are trying to partner with the US Gov. The Energy and Homeland Security commission is bi-partisan and seemingly very willing to take a more assertive stance on an Energy Policy.



We'll see..

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

absolutely - remember, i did say "if it would fix the problem" - big if, but i'd be first in line to pay



by the way, even though i own a guzzler and all that, commuting is done via train, so we do put our money where our mouth is - just wish there were more options around here - at least they are finally putting the train in between the ocean and downtown



and why don't we have E85 here in california?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

[quote name='flash' post='56873' date='Jul 29 2008, 03:48 PM']and why don't we have E85 here in california?[/quote]

Because ethanol is a scam. The only reason it's even in the energy discussion is because of the very powerful farm lobby (and with the Iowa caucuses the first stop on the presidential primary schedule, is it any wonder every presidential candidate is solidly behind it, at least early in the primary season? Sickening.). It wouldn't even be a footnote without the massive subsidies we taxpayers have dumped into this rat hole. Thank God it seems to finally be fading out of the discussion, which may be why you still can't buy it too far away from the farm belt.



A few problems with ethanol. First, it takes more energy (131 BTUs per gallon of ethanol) to produce than it contains. Second, it requires massive amounts of water - ethanol from irrigated corn requires about 880 gallons of water for every gallon of ethanol. Third, it puts crops for fuel in competition with crops that could be used for food. Fourth, it's so hydroscopic, that it can't be transported in pipes - it has to be trucked everywhere. Fifth, it would require about 9.4 acres to produce the corn for the ethanol to run an average car 10,000 miles. This means that if all cars in the US were fueled by E85, it would require a total of about 82% of the total land area of the United States to grow all the corn.



Yes, this could change if cellulosic ethanol became a reality, but there's no sign that's going to happen anytime soon, if ever. Bottom line, ethanol is thermodynamically, economically, and morally bankrupt. Although, I think it would be fantastic to use as an octane booster in a modern direct injection application, which, from what I've read, would allow the use of compression ratios on the order of 14:1, along with boost levels of about 18 psi. This would allow the displacement of a typical engine to be cut in half to achieve comparable power levels, resulting in about a 30% reduction in fuel consumption. Now that's what I call a smart use of ethanol!



I totally agree with your comments about public transportation, and the need to conserve. I can even grudgingly accept that for certain very specific applications, electric cars may make some sense (and I applaud GM for aggressively moving to bring the Chevy Volt to the market by 2010). But this ethanol thing is a joke. Except it's anything but funny.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[earossi]

Flash, I'm afraid that I have to agree with Cloud on his comments on ethanol. Here, in the corn belt (Chicago), the ethanol lobby has begun running radio spots to debunk the "myth" that ehtanol production has finally trickled down to impact the pricing of food. As farcical as it may sound, one of their advertised arguments is that ehtanol does NOT use the same type of corn that would be used for the food chain. Though this may be true (not being a farmer, I can't substantiate that claim), they somehow forget to mention that though Midwest farmers may be growing a different type of corm for ethanol, they are also rotating acreage out of food/feed corn into ethanol corn. Wouldn't you, if you could get $5 a bushel for ehtnaol corn versus $1.75 for feed corn? As a result , ALL corn is now being sold around $5 per bushel. We are just beginning to see the impact on food costs as that almost tripling of corn prices begins to work its way into the food chain.



There's also a "siphoning" effect when something like the price of corn suddenly mushrooms......the food companies get on board for the ride up the price ladder.....by tacking on a few cents since the "market will bear it". Point of proof is that Kraft just released quarterly earnings that show no increase in product production, but higher pricing in ADDITION to the impacts of more costly feedstocks.



Regarding government regulation of Big Oil......be very careful what you wish for! One of the reasons that oil has remained so low all these many years has been the impact of free trade. Once you place a cap on pricing, you will open Pandora's box. It has been proven many times over that free trade and an open market are the best buys for the consumer. Currently, we have seen a run up in oil due to a near perfect storm, much of it created by the Federal governmnent. But, that is a topic for another thread.



Since I lived in California for over 5 years, I can make the observation that the attitudes and beliefs of the importance of Federal control of free trade espoused by many Californians is not shared by the rest of this country.



Nice job Cloud. You seem to have the right facts on this one.



Ernie

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

let me be clear - i don't think that ethanol is THE answer - i think it is a stop gap, and as i said, trading one set of problems for another - it would wean us off of oil though, and that is a good thing



the thing you guys are missing is that we still aren't doing the farm thing right - we are still paying farmers to grow nothing - we are still shipping our crops overseas for nothing in return - we need to stop that and use the land for ourselves - that means FREE corn for a while



the other thing being missed is that we don't have to use corn - corn just grows easily - anything that contains starch will produce ethanol - we need to use our waste products - we don't have to grow anything - we already have the infrastructure to collect it - they come by every week



as for fading out, hardly - the number of stations serving it is expanding - i just googled and found it at a number of stations in california - i didn't think it was here yet - not a lot, but starting



free trade has done nothing for the economy but create inflation and degrade service - look what happened to the phone company when they broke that up - ugh - yes, it has brought about a faster rate of technological advancement, but i see no other advantage, beyond making the rich richer and the poor poorer - oil prices need to be controlled - oil futures need to be taken off the market, and the entire industry needs to be treated exactly like every other energy industry



i have no issue with the price of oil - in fact, i have always said gas was too cheap here - what i have issue with is the ability of the industry to hold the country ransom - some filter mechanism needs to be in place - the market is too volatile, and far too many wars are fought over oil - the economy right now is where it is for this very reason



before you all go off and label me some nutty left wing liberal, realize that i am also a gun toting, welfare despising, union breaking, elitist snob that feels that if you don't think you are making enough money, you need to work harder or change jobs - i am neither democrat nor republican, liberal nor conservative - i have views on both sides of most arguments - it might surprise you to know that i am NOT an obama fan - that guy scares the bejeezuz out of me



i also don't think the people can govern themselves, or want to, but i also don't think the government should control everything - as i said, we brought this upon ourselves - it is a wolf and sheep situation to be sure - left to their own devices the public will never figure it out or make change - it's not in their nature - (the other thing winston said was that the best argument against democracy was a 5 minute conversation with a voter) - it has to be forced upon them - the solution will be neither cheap nor pleasant to many - so be it - what is the alternative? more of the same?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

Back to $ 5 gallon ! Ok, I exaggerate, it's actually $ 4.99 ..and I only saw this price at just one gas station near the airport ( those always seem to charge 20 to 30 cents / gal. more than the norm ) , but everything else around these parts seems to hover around the $ 4.70 for 91 oct.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

Ouch! It just dropped a few cents here, to around $3.69 for premium. Weird how there's such a huge discrepancy from region to region. I know a lot of people think high gas prices are a good thing (to encourage conservation and the like), but there is no more cruel hit to the pocketbooks of poor saps who don't have any alternative means of getting to work.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[craigawoodman]

If the US stopped its QE program of printing money, the USD would appreciate against other currencies and fuel would become cheaper. There is large shale oil deposits and gas deposits that can be utilized.



Or, buy a more fuel efficient car. This does not have to mean less fun, just more bang for your bucks. My Q7 uses half as much fuel as the Toyota Prado I had before it and puts out nearly double the power (but is diesel). Wife's new car is also a diesel, makes twice as much torque and about nearly double the power, but uses less fuel. The combined cycle for the car is 5.9 litres per 100km. This is a full sized sedan. My truck got 6.1Litres per 100km driving down the freeway to the Gold Coast (plus a little bit of city driving). This is nearly Prius economy in a 2.5 tonne truck.



By the way, we pay about $1.65 a liter for premium and $1.56 a liter for diesel.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

Cloud, I realize that as a conservative you disdain many of those around you, but should you be calling half of our population poor saps? As a lifelong liberal, I not only enjoy eating cake but also agree with those confiscatory taxes that pay for all of these brazen green environmental projects. Bikes and buses for all! Lol

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

[quote name='Rap' timestamp='1369045435' post='142912']Cloud, I realize that as a conservative you disdain many of those around you, but should you be calling half of our population poor saps? As a lifelong liberal, I not only enjoy eating cake but also agree with those confiscatory taxes that pay for all of these brazen green environmental projects. Bikes and buses for all! Lol[/quote]



Everyone knows that 47% of the US population pay no taxes and always rely on sucking at the teet that is government support ..so those must be the poor saps, right ? Or is that the half that CAN afford high gas prices because without the tax burden, and all the government subsidies they should have plenty of disposable cash.. Oh Romney, where are you when we need to get all the true details behind these facts ?! <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/rolleyes.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/laugh.png" class="smilie" alt="" /> On a non-sarcastic note, the was a recent discovery of masive oil deposits in North Dakota, which is estimated to be able of generating a staggering 10 X the current US production and entirely eliminate the country's dependency on ANY foreign oil. Anyway, speculation soon startered about exploration of those reserves and what it would mean for gas prices, the economy, etc..but have not heard anything further after the initial report ..odd, you'd think something like that would gain enough traction to stay in the news for quite a while..



http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next...2.13s.html

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

if the oil companies can sell gas at $5/gallon, they will. why would they spend a ton of money to extract new oil, if it meant they had to sell it cheaper?



i'm not sure why gas is so much cheaper down here. i just paid $4.29 for premium yesterday at one of the most expensive stations around here.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

[quote name='flash' timestamp='1369055654' post='142915']if the oil companies can sell gas at $5/gallon, they will. why would they spend a ton of money to extract new oil, if it meant they had to sell it cheaper?

i'm not sure why gas is so much cheaper down here. i just paid $4.29 for premium yesterday at one of the most expensive stations around here.[/quote]



Good point.

Not sure, but it's been that way for as long as I remember . Even stations in Beverly Hills or Newport Beach are a bit cheaper than any given station around these parts.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

By "poor saps", I was simply referring to the average Joes and Janes out working to support themselves and their families - I definitely didn't mean it as a derogatory statement in any way. Not get get too political, but conservatives (and I'm far from a lock-step conservative - I agree with liberals on some issues, and with conservatives on others) are often accused of being "for the rich", presumably at the expense of everybody else, but it's the liberals who seem to be quick to call for things like higher taxes on fuel to pay for "green energy" alternatives, and there's nothing that hurts average folk more than having to dig ever deeper into their pockets to pay for a basic necessity like fuel for their cars.



Oh-oh, look what I've just started... <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/ph34r.png" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

I paid $4.21 yesterday. Usually, the Bay Area has some of the most expensive gas prices, in spite of the fact that much of it is refined around here, so there should be substantially less transportation costs. On the other hand, we tend to have a high median income, so the oil companies takes what they can gets!

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[DaveN]

I don't use a calendar to check for the arrival of long weekend, I just drive by the pumps;when the price goes up 20% for no reason I know next week is a 3 dayer :-$ it's going to take something bigger than the government to rein in these gluttonous profiteers. Why didn't Gene Rodenberry deal with the future here in the 70's, he and his writers were better than Nostradamus at everything else :-P

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

[quote name='lbpesq' timestamp='1369066363' post='142919']

I paid $4.21 yesterday. Usually, the Bay Area has some of the most expensive gas prices, in spite of the fact that much of it is refined around here, so there should be substantially less transportation costs. On the other hand, we tend to have a high median income, so the oil companies takes what they can gets!

[/quote]



that's the other thing that bugs me , you guys in the east bay get better prices than in the city or the peninsula ( and it's not just at Chevron, because you have a refinery there..). that's it , from now on I'm driving 50 mles to gas up there <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/laugh.png" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

or ya could move to jersey where they pump it for ya!

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

or to Oregon, where I heard you have no choice.. no self-servce ! ( anyone here from Oregon thatcan verity if that's fact or fiction ? ) <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/huh.png" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[craigawoodman]

Gouging the end users and achieving a higher price - isn't this just what OPEC was set up for?



The true cost of fuel is low, but the additional taxes, etc added is what drives it through the roof in terms of price. For those of you who think electric cars will save us, the Government over here is already talking about charging massive registration fees for electric vehicles, as there is no tax take on electric vehicles, so revenue for roads and everything else that this funds disappears.



So, if we all converted to electric cars tomorrow, two issues, not enough power generated and infrastructure could not cope, plus massive government tax hikes to claw back lost revenue. Net result - no change or worse off.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Kim]

$5.41/US gal in $US here.



FWIW, in 1984, the first year that I started keeping track of gas, it was about $0 50/litre. It is now 29 years later. At 4% inflation the cost should be $1.56/litre. The actual cost is $1.39/litre. So it hasn't been all that bad. Try the same calculation on a loaf of bread or bottle of Coke.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.