Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 10/8/2005 5:37:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 5:37:54 AM EDT by jquillen1985]
Oil and energy are always hot topics here, and from what I gather, most of the ARFCOM community wants more refineries built, saying we have plenty of oil but just can't refine it fast enough.  With new refineries, we'd go back to cheap, plentiful gasoline.  The only thing in our way is environmental restrictions, and that is why no refineries have been built since the mid-70s.  

New ligislation passed just recently:

WASHINGTON - The House narrowly approved a Republican-crafted energy bill Friday aimed at encouraging construction of new refineries, although opponents said it would do nothing to ease energy prices while handing unneeded benefits to a profit-rich oil industry.

Supporters of the measure said that hurricanes Katrina and Rita made clear that the country needs more refineries, including new ones outside of the Gulf region. Critics argued it would allow the oil industry to avoid environmental regulations that would lead to dirtier air.

The bill passed 212-210. Its prospects in the Senate were uncertain.
Story continues below ↓ advertisement

The vote, which was supposed to be taken in five minutes, lasted more than 40 minutes as GOP leaders searched for the last two votes they needed to get the bill approved. They buttonholed lawmakers for last-minute lobbying as Democrats complained loudly that the vote should be closed. Finally two GOP lawmakers switched from “no” to “yes,” giving the bill’s supporters the margin of victory.



Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, said the bill streamlines the maze of permitting requirements for expanding or building refineries and directs the president to single out federal land where a refinery may be built. The changes could lead to construction of a new U.S. refinery within a year, he predicted.

But opponents said the legislation fails to address the rising cost of natural gas — which will cause heating costs to soar this winter — or deal with high prices motorists are paying at the pump. Instead, they argued, it will allow the oil industry to avoid environmental rules and force states and communities to accept refineries they don’t want.

“Using Hurricane Katrina as their excuses the Republicans are again pushing their special interest agenda,” said Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California, including “all the special favors to the industry that were too extreme” for Congress last summer when it passed energy legislation.

But Barton said the need for more refineries was made obvious by hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The hurricanes shut down a dozen refineries and disrupted a fifth of the country’s gasoline supplies.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now no American, especially an American with a truck that get 13 miles to the gallon, is going to argue against cheaper gas, but it only encourages our purchasing oil from asshole countries, a la Saudi Arabia.  Bush has done nothing to try and get us away from petroleum dependence.  How can people not understand that the sooner we don't use oil(at least oil from Arab nation), the sooner we can let them rot into the stone age?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:49:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Now no American, especially an American with a truck that get 13 miles to the gallon, is going to argue against cheaper gas, but it only encourages our purchasing oil from asshole countries, a la Saudi Arabia.  Bush has done nothing to try and get us away from petroleum dependence.  How can people not understand that the sooner we don't use oil(at least oil from Arab nation), the sooner we can let them rot into the stone age?



Well, what the heck.  It's a slow morning.

Okay, jquillen, why don't you explain what we could use in the place of petroleum?

Remember, it must be plentiful, cheap, and technologically possible.

Okay, the clock is running.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:51:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Now no American, especially an American with a truck that get 13 miles to the gallon, is going to argue against cheaper gas, but it only encourages our purchasing oil from asshole countries, a la Saudi Arabia.  Bush has done nothing to try and get us away from petroleum dependence.  How can people not understand that the sooner we don't use oil(at least oil from Arab nation), the sooner we can let them rot into the stone age?



Well, what the heck.  It's a slow morning.

Okay, jquillen, why don't you explain what we could use in the place of petroleum?

Remember, it must be plentiful, cheap, and technologically possible.

Okay, the clock is running.




We're approaching the point at which ethanol is looking better and better as a way to take the demand off of oil....



Having said that, I'm all for building a new refinery.....


<----likes cheap gas, hates foreign oil, doubts ANWR is worth the trouble, not sure what else to do......
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:53:37 AM EDT
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 5:57:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



I'd like to see your math there.


(Show your work, for partial credit...)

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:02:10 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



And what do you imagine that they make that there diesel out of?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:03:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



I'd like to see your math there.


(Show your work, for partial credit...)




Okay, I'm about to open a whole other can of worms with this, and make a wacky segue into the Iraq War.  If Americans made a sacrifice to smaller cars, instead of half of all sales being trucks, and we started going towards diesel, we could eliminate the need of Arab oil completely.  This war has asked for no sacrifice from the American people, and it's the first war it's been like this (The Gulf War doesn't count because it laster 6 months).

How about people start making some sacrifices instead of fueling the fire?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:04:44 AM EDT
My American truck gets 17 mpg.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:04:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

We're approaching the point at which ethanol is looking better and better as a way to take the demand off of oil....




Nice try, old buddy.

And, just how do we make ethanol?  By planting crops?  Harvesting them?  Then "refining" them into ethonal?

How much energy does that take?  Some studies have shown that it actually takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethonal than it can supply.

That ain't the solution.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:15:33 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:16:18 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mojo:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



I'd like to see your math there.


(Show your work, for partial credit...)




Okay, I'm about to open a whole other can of worms with this, and make a wacky segue into the Iraq War.  If Americans made a sacrifice to smaller cars, instead of half of all sales being trucks, and we started going towards diesel, we could eliminate the need of Arab oil completely.  This war has asked for no sacrifice from the American people, and it's the first war it's been like this (The Gulf War doesn't count because it laster 6 months).

How about people start making some sacrifices instead of fueling the fire?



 A lot of members here do, and I'm sure there are a lot of Americans do too.  Recent report on last Labor Day weekend:  People decided to stay home instead of travelling, therefore 10% or 12% decrease in gas demand compared to the year before...

 So when are you going to use bicycle to go to work?



I do actually.  And I drive a car that gets 55 MPG.  What do you do?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:21:00 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Now no American, especially an American with a truck that get 13 miles to the gallon, is going to argue against cheaper gas, but it only encourages our purchasing oil from asshole countries, a la Saudi Arabia.  Bush has done nothing to try and get us away from petroleum dependence.  How can people not understand that the sooner we don't use oil(at least oil from Arab nation), the sooner we can let them rot into the stone age?



Well, what the heck.  It's a slow morning.

Okay, jquillen, why don't you explain what we could use in the place of petroleum?

Remember, it must be plentiful, cheap, and technologically possible.

Okay, the clock is running.



There is no one solution. Thats the problem.
We need to switch to alternative energy for homes. Nuclear, solar, wind, water and thermal for The Grid.
We need to switch to a combination of biofuels and coal gasification for our automobiles and manufacturing plants.
We need to give good incentives for people who *gasp* conserve!
We need to go to more efficient, organic methods of farming.
The list goes on. Its not easy, theres no simple solution.

But jesus, look how people bitch when we even discuss giving up their massive inefficient vehicle they dont need and probably dont even know how to fully use for something more practical. You think we could make all the other changes necesary?
Hell no.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:22:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

We're approaching the point at which ethanol is looking better and better as a way to take the demand off of oil....




Nice try, old buddy.

And, just how do we make ethanol?  By planting crops?  Harvesting them?  Then "refining" them into ethonal?

How much energy does that take?  Some studies have shown that it actually takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethonal than it can supply.

That ain't the solution.




There are two conflicting stories about ethanol production.

You present one theory.

I present the other - namely, the theory that, as fuel prices increase, there comes a point (I've heard $3/gallon) at which it becomes economically feasible to make ethanol, and use it as a fuel.

No, it will never replace gasoline, but it DOES have a potential use as a supplement to shave the peak off of our oil demand.

The technology is almost mature, and oil prices are almost to the point that in the next 5 years, I firmly believe that we will see more widespread use of ethanol as an additive to gasoline.

I could be wrong - but I firmly beolieve that ethanol is an untapped source of reducing our demand for oil.


But then again, I come from a farm area - and you come from an oil area. It's no surprise that we see this differently.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:23:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 6:23:32 AM EDT by jquillen1985]

Originally Posted By Specop_007:

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Now no American, especially an American with a truck that get 13 miles to the gallon, is going to argue against cheaper gas, but it only encourages our purchasing oil from asshole countries, a la Saudi Arabia.  Bush has done nothing to try and get us away from petroleum dependence.  How can people not understand that the sooner we don't use oil(at least oil from Arab nation), the sooner we can let them rot into the stone age?



Well, what the heck.  It's a slow morning.

Okay, jquillen, why don't you explain what we could use in the place of petroleum?

Remember, it must be plentiful, cheap, and technologically possible.

Okay, the clock is running.



There is no one solution. Thats the problem.
We need to switch to alternative energy for homes. Nuclear, solar, wind, water and thermal for The Grid.
We need to switch to a combination of biofuels and coal gasification for our automobiles and manufacturing plants.
We need to give good incentives for people who *gasp* conserve!
We need to go to more efficient, organic methods of farming.
The list goes on. Its not easy, theres no simple solution.

But jesus, look how people bitch when we even discuss giving up their massive inefficient vehicle they dont need and probably dont even know how to fully use for something more practical. You think we could make all the other changes necesary?
Hell no.



You're my new best friend on these boards.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:23:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:

Originally Posted By mojo:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



I'd like to see your math there.


(Show your work, for partial credit...)




Okay, I'm about to open a whole other can of worms with this, and make a wacky segue into the Iraq War.  If Americans made a sacrifice to smaller cars, instead of half of all sales being trucks, and we started going towards diesel, we could eliminate the need of Arab oil completely.  This war has asked for no sacrifice from the American people, and it's the first war it's been like this (The Gulf War doesn't count because it laster 6 months).

How about people start making some sacrifices instead of fueling the fire?



 A lot of members here do, and I'm sure there are a lot of Americans do too.  Recent report on last Labor Day weekend:  People decided to stay home instead of travelling, therefore 10% or 12% decrease in gas demand compared to the year before...

 So when are you going to use bicycle to go to work?



I do actually.  And I drive a car that gets 55 MPG.  What do you do?



Same here


And I must say, I do enjoy my car. Although I'm closer to 40 then 55 but nonetheless it gives me a full mag of ammo against virtually anyone who pulls the "What have you done" card out.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:28:56 AM EDT
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:33:58 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



 They will when market forces make them.  Your little voice doesn't quite qualify, sorry.

 On a serious note, there aren't a lot of diesel engines available to put in vehicles. Why? Because most Americans have shunned them en mass. (That's right Gomer, you the American consumer. The driving force in change).

How can you expect companies to pour vast amounts of capital into the infrastructure, R&D, ect to build a decent diesel if they can't get any return on that investment?

So, they have usually adapted an off the shelf diesel (like Cummins) to use. That's fine for larger trucks, but won't do shit for smaller cars.


What you should do, Gomer, is grab your business plan, put on your suit and head off to Wall Street to beat on all the venture capitalists doors.  Once you get your $$ you can go ahead, gather a design team, buy a big plot of land, erect a huge facility, a casting plant, a machining center, ect and build your engine.

Don't forget, it will have to be a cross platform engine (unless you plan on investing in designing many more). BTW,  It can't cost any more than the gas engine than you plan on replacing either (not if you want to sell that many) .

You, Gomer, could be the next Bill Gates!

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:47:25 AM EDT
One thing no one has brought up yet is the economics of building a refinery.  The oil companies run on profits, just like any other company.  Why would they invest billions into a refinery just to watch the prices drop because on an increase in supply?  Look at a graph of oil costs over the last 15 years.  The prices go up and down all the time.  
The regulatory compliance part of building a refinery, I have heard, will take up to 5 years to complete.  This is before the first shovel full of dirt is moved.  Then the headache of the envirowhackos, and their endless lawsuits about the delicate environment.  After all this, would you really want to go through the headache of building a refinery?  They have a  good thing now,   a product with unlimited demand.  Go ahead and get pissed off at them.  What are you going to do, use something else?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:47:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
Now no American, especially an American with a truck that get 13 miles to the gallon, is going to argue against cheaper gas, but it only encourages our purchasing oil from asshole countries, a la Saudi Arabia.  Bush has done nothing to try and get us away from petroleum dependence.  How can people not understand that the sooner we don't use oil(at least oil from Arab nation), the sooner we can let them rot into the stone age?



Well, what the heck.  It's a slow morning.

Okay, jquillen, why don't you explain what we could use in the place of petroleum?

Remember, it must be plentiful, cheap, and technologically possible.

Okay, the clock is running.




We're approaching the point at which ethanol is looking better and better as a way to take the demand off of oil....



Having said that, I'm all for building a new refinery.....


<----likes cheap gas, hates foreign oil, doubts ANWR is worth the trouble, not sure what else to do......



1) Ethanol (and bio-fuel in general) is an overall energy looser - it takes more energy to produce it than the final product delivers (a/o refining gasoline, where this is not an issue)

2) It will utterly destroy many existing vehicles where the engine is not designed to handle alchohol fuel. Many cars still on the road have a 10% maximum tolerance.

3) If you actually look at it, Ethanol is a pretty worthless fuel, which is 'pushed' as a way to throw more subsidies to the non-corporate corn farmers who are a major voting bloc in some states...
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:50:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



I'd like to see your math there.


(Show your work, for partial credit...)




Okay, I'm about to open a whole other can of worms with this, and make a wacky segue into the Iraq War.  If Americans made a sacrifice to smaller cars, instead of half of all sales being trucks, and we started going towards diesel, we could eliminate the need of Arab oil completely.  This war has asked for no sacrifice from the American people, and it's the first war it's been like this (The Gulf War doesn't count because it laster 6 months).

How about people start making some sacrifices instead of fueling the fire?



Diesel still requires the same amount of oil import...

Bio fuel is impractical once you get beyond the guy filling up from his restauraunt buddy's deep-fryer... It is not workable as a commercial fuel, as the amount of input product needed to replace oil is more than the farm capacity of the entire nation, and the expense is tremendous when operating on that scale... Not everybody has a buddy in the food biz...
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:55:15 AM EDT
A couple of comments- the bill passed the House- barely.  The Senate?  Even the Florida republican Martinez is against drilling off Florida.  Bet the whole thing dies there or gets gutted.

Manufacturers will not put a good diesel car in the US as long as they are not allowed to be sold in our most populated states.  I think Cali and NY? do not allow sales.

We are our own worst energy enemy.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 7:11:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DougR:
A couple of comments- the bill passed the House- barely.  The Senate?  Even the Florida republican Martinez is against drilling off Florida.  Bet the whole thing dies there or gets gutted.

Manufacturers will not put a good diesel car in the US as long as they are not allowed to be sold in our most populated states.  I think Cali and NY? do not allow sales.

We are our own worst energy enemy.



New low suphur diesel says otherwise.  The emmissions of gasoline with twice the mileage.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 7:26:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
1) Ethanol (and bio-fuel in general) is an overall energy looser - it takes more energy to produce it than the final product delivers (a/o refining gasoline, where this is not an issue)

2) It will utterly destroy many existing vehicles where the engine is not designed to handle alchohol fuel. Many cars still on the road have a 10% maximum tolerance.

3) If you actually look at it, Ethanol is a pretty worthless fuel, which is 'pushed' as a way to throw more subsidies to the non-corporate corn farmers who are a major voting bloc in some states...





1) I guess that depends on which research you cite.......and it's been my experience that which research you cite also depends on who funded the research.

(And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why arowneragain left his career path towards being a scientist...)

2) Rumor has it that cars wear out.

3) I won't for a minute deny that there are politics behind ethanol - it sort of reminds me of another politically fueled (pun intended) industry called 'petroleum'.

I recognize the shortcomings of ethanol. But I still believe that it has the potential to help us meet our energy demands. Can it do it alone? No way! But it is a piece of the puzzle, a piece that oil-producing states want to overlook.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:29:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:

New low suphur diesel says otherwise.  The emmissions of gasoline with twice the mileage.



No, it isn't
 
Not "twice the mileage".

Besides, where does the "low sulfur diesel" come from?

Petroleum.

And to make it "low sulfur" requires additional refining, therefore more cost.

And, just for the record, I used to work on a de-sulfurizing unit in a refinery, so I'm not just making this stuff up.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:32:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By arowneragain:
3) I won't for a minute deny that there are politics behind ethanol - it sort of reminds me of another politically fueled (pun intended) industry called 'petroleum'.

I recognize the shortcomings of ethanol. But I still believe that it has the potential to help us meet our energy demands. Can it do it alone? No way! But it is a piece of the puzzle, a piece that oil-producing states want to overlook.



Just to make things clear......I am not an "oil-producing" defender.

I no longer own any oil company stock and have no vested interest in their success.

But, the fact is that there in nothing that can presently, reasonably replace petroleum.  Certainly not ethonal.

I wish there was, but there just isn't.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:44:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 8:47:41 AM EDT by Max_Mike]

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:

Originally Posted By arowneragain:
3) I won't for a minute deny that there are politics behind ethanol - it sort of reminds me of another politically fueled (pun intended) industry called 'petroleum'.

I recognize the shortcomings of ethanol. But I still believe that it has the potential to help us meet our energy demands. Can it do it alone? No way! But it is a piece of the puzzle, a piece that oil-producing states want to overlook.



Just to make things clear......I am not an "oil-producing" defender.

I no longer own any oil company stock and have no vested interest in their success.

But, the fact is that there in nothing that can presently, reasonably replace petroleum.  Certainly not ethonal.

I wish there was, but there just isn't.



Ethanol is stop gap and a long term dead end you cannot produce the needed bio mass and feed the country for it to be the major player.

We have plenty of domestic sources that can be used. Plenty of places we can drill for oil.

Then there is coal and oil shales we have enough of these to make the oil we need for 400-800 years but that will take a few years to get in to place once we decide we are going to do it.

It is not a matter of sources it is a matter of the will to do what we should… the Democrats held up drilling in Alaska for 4 years and the tried to kill that refinery bill yesterday despite the obvious and dire need for new refineries.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:47:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Old_Painless:


But, the fact is that there in nothing that can presently, reasonably replace petroleum.  Certainly not ethonal.

I wish there was, but there just isn't.



I agree completely.

Ethanol will never - without a mind-boggling change in technology that I don't foresee - be able to replace oil.

That's not what I'm saying.

What I am saying is that there is a good bit of research that shows that it may be possible to make a net gain in energy supply by refining grain into ethanol, in order to stretch our petroleum supplies.

Replace?

Never.


Supplement?

As soon as oil prices edge up a bit more.........



And I honestly believe this is a case where we'll never know the viability of ethanol until we actually give it a large-scale try.


Meantime, I wonder where all those folks are at that were joking about 'operation $0.89/gallon' when we went to Iraq?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:56:01 AM EDT
For all those who worship at the altar of diesel....isn't .gov s'posed to slap tighter regs. on emissions  for diesels in the next few years?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 11:29:19 AM EDT
Butanol
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 12:11:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 12:14:30 PM EDT by Johnny_Reno]






Plug your car in.




Link Posted: 10/8/2005 3:48:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:

Originally Posted By arowneragain:

Originally Posted By jquillen1985:
How's about getting American manufacturers off their ass and building some diesel engines worth a damn?  We could double the mileage of our entire country if we made a switch from gas to diesel.



I'd like to see your math there.


(Show your work, for partial credit...)




Okay, I'm about to open a whole other can of worms with this, and make a wacky segue into the Iraq War.  If Americans made a sacrifice to smaller cars, instead of half of all sales being trucks, and we started going towards diesel, we could eliminate the need of Arab oil completely.  This war has asked for no sacrifice from the American people, and it's the first war it's been like this (The Gulf War doesn't count because it laster 6 months).

How about people start making some sacrifices instead of fueling the fire?



No, you're not opening a can of worms, you're just making yourself look like an idiot.

Let's see how:

- No new refineries for 30 years, mostly die to environazi's
- No new oil field drilling, mostly due to environazi's
- No new dams, mostly due to EN's (got tired of spelling it out)
- No new nuclear power plants, mostly due to EN's (in case you're wondering what this has to do with gas prices, guess what most, but not all, new power plants have been powered with over the last 30 years?)

Yet, when gas prices rise due to higher demand and low supply, what is the EN's stock answer, going back to Jimmy Carter:  "Sacrifice!  Drive small cars, blah, blah, blah."

Sorry, bub, my 4x4 truck isn't the reason that gas is expensive.  It's because assholes like you won't let us drill and refine the cheapest form of energy on the planet:  Petroleum.

Merlin
Top Top