You can rest assured of two things.  First, we will never run out of a source of energy as long as there is a need (demand).  Second, the adequate incentive to develope this new source will not be there until the end of cheap oil (supply) is in plain view.  

Quoted: call congress and tell them to rescind their stupid ethanol mandate (call GWB too) lobby for drilling in anwr and offshore, and the building of more refineries of course, it would pretty much be a waste of time since our government seems to be for sale to the hightest bidder. You can't compete with ADM.

+1

The problem is the supply chain.

I have a foolproof plan for lowing gas prices:

bring the ol' SAC B-52's out of mothballs,  put them in the air over all the OPEC countries.  Every time the price of gas goes above $45.00, bombs start to fall.  Once the price comes down to $45.00 they stop.

Simple, easy, foolproof.


Heck, OPEC has been artificially inflating the price of oil for years. No reason we can't decrease it artificially.






Ok,  here's another, less entertaining plan:

Send all the liberal %@#$Q#$Q#'s to mexico.  Build a plethora of new, clean nuclear reactors including the very small "utility closet" sized ones that can't melt down.  Power everything possible with electric.  Move to a nuclear base society and tell OPEC (and islam too by extension) to go piss up the proverbial rope.  Watch them degenerate into a fourth world low-level constant riot as they burn themselves out.

Buy Saudi shiek stuff on ebay for cheap for years as they try to keep themselves solvent.


Man, I really should be running the country.

Quoted: One thing that would be a start is keeping only one standard for reformulated gasoline (typically large metropolitan areas are required by the EPA the use a reformulated gasoline to cut emissions - in generic terms this would be 'city' gas verus 'country' gas).. As an example VA has the same formulation of gas for the NOVA and Richmond areas.. BUT Chicago has something like a dozen different reformulated gasolines.. This difference increases productions and transportation costs drastically.. IMHO - The idea of cutting taxes would not do any good.. Here in VA we have $0.175/gal state tax.. NC is closer to $0.24/gal - BUT from my experience the retail price in VA is not $0.07 cheaper.. it seems to me that the majors (exxon etc) keep the pricing where they want it - which does not take tax rates into account.. ALSO the tax money goes to rebuilding/maintaining the roads.. just my thoughts. brian

Tax reduction would help in states that have it as a percentage of the price.  That is regressive.

What we need is a complete overhaul of the EPA.  This bloated abortion of a government bureau has NO feedback control and zero grasp on technology.  Case in point is the MTBE issue that has done more harm than good.  Back in the 1970s, a researcher discovered adding oxygen-containing components to gasoline reduced emissions in carburated, non-catalytic equipped engines.  So in 1990 when over 70% of the vehicles on the road used fuel injected, closed-loop controlled, catalytic converter equipped engines, they mandated a solution that would only help the TRANSIENT EMISSIONS of 30% of the vehicles on the road!

Flash forward to 2006 when 97% of the cars on the road see NO emission benefit from such reformulated gasolines and the refiners are being SUED because the one oxygen containing companent has been polluting groundwater.  So the refniners have voluntarly STOPPED using MTBE because of the problems...but other regulations make the manufacture of low vapor gasoline much more difficult.

What we have is a multi-layer problem.  Its a problem of the EPA with too many out-dated controls on gasoline and its inability to incorporate technology advancements in the fleet on the road.  And one of the refiner's inabilty to market a product in a market of ever-increasing regulations.

Quoted: IBPO In Before Peak Oil. One of the best ways to lower gas prices is to recind the taxes on every gallon.  That would lower it about 30 some cents per gallon.   The next best way would be to put in an express method of permitting the building of new refineries in this country.  Do you realize that there is about 10 years of paperwork to do before you can turn over a shovelful of dirt?  Oh, and then there is the NIMBY of a new refinery to deal with also.

Yeah, then think of us not only offeding the 'world community' but leveling IRAN and Iraq, and exploiting the MF'rs till the well runs dry in a decde or more likey 2. This is the GOP, imagine the Dems after 9/11. "well we have 22 meeetings and counsels' and arbitrations to look into first before retalation. Klinton left the armed services saying....I never wanted to go to war , Im here for the college money! And that class of people.Period.

Lower the cost of drilling wells for one.  That is a huge contributing factor; the more expensive it is to get the oil the more it is going to be sold for to get the same profits.  

I thought the liberals were saying we invaded Iraq for the oil?  

Quoted: The Ft. worth star telegram had a article yesterday (sat) about the CEO of Texxaco (I think, maybe mobil, heck it does not matter) that makes a avg. of 144K per DAY. I think I speak for all when I say "thats bullshit" If he is making that much then why the hell are we still paying 3 bucks a gallon?

How much would the price of a gallon of gas be if he made $1 a day? And BTW You don't speak for me when so say "that's bullshit", I'm not a socialist. Your whole post is simplistic bullshit.

Construct light rail systems to haul goods from manufacturer to retailer and retire trucks from the road.  Run the rail system on clean nuclear energy.  That would save a good bit of diesel.  Construct light rail systems in the cities to move commuters from home to work and back again.  That frees up quite a bit of gasoline to use in rural areas where it would be cost-prohibitive to use rail.

Everybody wins.

Light rail is a farce.  What is "light" about it and how does running on rails reduce the parasitic losses of rolling resistance?  Hint, tire engineering has gone a long way since vulcanization of rubber.  Hysteric losses in tires is but a fraction of the losses from that incurred by light rails horrible aerodynamic disadvantage in short to medium haul.

The most efficient long haul transportation system to date is the pipeline.  Then the supertanker.  Then train.  Then truck.  

Light rail is a PAC funded transportation pipe dream.  Only bedwetters and thumbsucking window kissers embrace it.

Quoted: Light rail is a farce.  What is "light" about it and how does running on rails reduce the parasitic losses of rolling resistance?  Hint, tire engineering has gone a long way since vulcanization of rubber.  Hysteric losses in tires is but a fraction of the losses from that incurred by light rails horrible aerodynamic disadvantage in short to medium haul. The most efficient long haul transportation system to date is the pipeline.  Then the supertanker.  Then train.  Then truck.   Light rail is a PAC funded transportation pipe dream.  Only bedwetters and thumbsucking window kissers embrace it.

Hey, don't hold back there, buddy.

Light and heavy rail:  Passenger Rail: Includes short- and long-distance passenger rail, commuter rail, and light and heavy rail. Heavy rail is electric transit vehicle with capacity for heavy "volume" traffic. It is more generically referred to as subway. Light rail is a type of electric transit railway with a light-volume capacity, with generic names like "streetcars," "trolley cars," and "tramways."

link

It's debatable whether rail or automobiles are more energy efficient... but you can't power an automobile with nuclear power today and you certainly can power light rail that way, freeing up more diesel and gasoline for cars.  Thus dropping demand, and dropping prices.  Which is what this thread was about.

You weren't planning on having your groceries delivered to your house through a pipeline, were you?

If the refineries are ever built, which I doubt they will be, until we as a country nut up and build them, drill Alaska.  Drill it hard.  Drill it deep.  I dont care that Alaska is "a natural beauty", or whatever they call it.  So was/is Texas, and we've been drilled for the last 100 or so years.  Its your turn now, Mr. "We're Bigger than Texas" Alaska.  Show us that you're bigger than Texas, and step up to the challenge.

Quoted: Build 5 refineries in Mexico. And if Fox says, "accept 20million more invader labor or we stop sending gas," then what?  I thought we were trying to reduce price and dependence on foreign energy. (edit to replace oil with a refined product)

Foreign dependance on fuel is just a feel good statement.  It holds no water, or in this case, oil.  We will always be dependent upon foreign sources for oil as long as we bow to pressure by eviromentalists, and their wacky, and distorted views on the global health.  

Alaska has a massive reserve of oil, more than enough to allow us to build mass quantities Ethanol fueled vehicles that will bring them down to a reasonable cost.  E85 doesnt do anyone any good if the vehicles are 1 to 10,000 ratio of ethanol to gasoline/diesel.  It doesnt help if the vehicle costs more than a gas powered vehicle.  It also doesnt help if you cant go down to your local gas station and get some.

Drill Alaska, and along with whats still yanked out of the ground in Texas, and other states, and stop exporting oil(yes we actually export oil, thanks to Clinton).  Refine all US produced oil in the US, and that will limit what we intake.  Allow Mexico to refine all of the oil we need, and let them sell the rest.

Building, maintaining, staffing, and guarding refineries, railroad trackage, and pipelines, will give plenty of good paying jobs to Mezcans, and it keeps them in their contry.  Not only will they be able to refine their own oil, but a significant amount of foreign oil.  Mexico can then sell their surplus of their gas and oil, and that of other countries, purchased by them.  It will make Mexico a better place to live.  Look at what is happening at the Intermodal ports on Mexico's Pacific coast.  The quality of life has been boosted significantly.

Quoted: One thing that would be a start is keeping only one standard for reformulated gasoline (typically large metropolitan areas are required by the EPA the use a reformulated gasoline to cut emissions - in generic terms this would be 'city' gas verus 'country' gas).. As an example VA has the same formulation of gas for the NOVA and Richmond areas.. BUT Chicago has something like a dozen different reformulated gasolines.. This difference increases productions and transportation costs drastically.. IMHO - The idea of cutting taxes would not do any good.. Here in VA we have $0.175/gal state tax.. NC is closer to $0.24/gal - BUT from my experience the retail price in VA is not $0.07 cheaper.. it seems to me that the majors (exxon etc) keep the pricing where they want it - which does not take tax rates into account.. ALSO the tax money goes to rebuilding/maintaining the roads.. just my thoughts. brian

Actually, the gas tax in NC is over $0.27/gal.  About 17.5 cents of the 27 cent tax is a flat rate. There is also a variable rate that increases when the price of gas increases. It changes every six months, based on the price of gas during that period. That is why the gas tax jumped between 2 and 5 cents Jan. 1.

And now you know why I buy my gas in SC!  



Vulcan94

Quoted: Hey, don't hold back there, buddy. Light and heavy rail:  Passenger Rail: Includes short- and long-distance passenger rail, commuter rail, and light and heavy rail. Heavy rail is electric transit vehicle with capacity for heavy "volume" traffic. It is more generically referred to as subway. Light rail is a type of electric transit railway with a light-volume capacity, with generic names like "streetcars," "trolley cars," and "tramways." link It's debatable whether rail or automobiles are more energy efficient... but you can't power an automobile with nuclear power today and you certainly can power light rail that way, freeing up more diesel and gasoline for cars.  Thus dropping demand, and dropping prices.  Which is what this thread was about. You weren't planning on having your groceries delivered to your house through a pipeline, were you?

Light rail is impossible to integrate with surface traffic.  It DEMANDS dedicated lanes and protected/elevated crossings.  It does NOT reduce traffic in CBDs because of frequent stoppings etc.

The store is but 3 miles from my house.  I can take home a week's worth in my bicycle trailer.

Oh, and the most tonnage transported via heavy rail is coal which can be more efficiently transported via pipeline in a slurry for far less energy (diesel) than rail.  That alone would save millions of diesel each year.  But the rail lobby fights pipeline slurry coal transport because of the cash cow it is.