These Gas Prices Are Killing Me

[Nimue1995 1]

I have a question since this is becoming a discussion of economics. Is it really economical in the long run to continue to depend on OPEC oil and give them a stranglehold on our economic health? We've forced their prices down due to reduced demand at the moment. But what happens to an economic recovery when that demand goes up and the prices for oil rise with it? Does that not dampen down an economic recovery? So isn't driving the gas guzzlers putting our economic freedom at risk? Regardless of global warming, do you all really think this is a good idea?P.S. I'm as guilty as anyone by the way. I have an Isuzu Trooper which isn't known for fuel economy. But we only drive it when it's the only vehicle for the job such as now with lots of snow and ice on the roads.

[hblask 1]

I have a question since this is becoming a discussion of economics. Is it really economical in the long run to continue to depend on OPEC oil and give them a stranglehold on our economic health? We've forced their prices down due to reduced demand at the moment. But what happens to an economic recovery when that demand goes up and the prices for oil rise with it? Does that not dampen down an economic recovery? So isn't driving the gas guzzlers putting our economic freedom at risk? Regardless of global warming, do you all really think this is a good idea?P.S. I'm as guilty as anyone by the way. I have an Isuzu Trooper which isn't known for fuel economy. But we only drive it when it's the only vehicle for the job such as now with lots of snow and ice on the roads.

OPEC is not 100% of the oil supply, so it's not like they have a complete stranglehold. Also, they are not just going to cut off their noses to spite their face. It's in their best interest to compete in the world markets.The recent volatility in prices has little to do with OPEC and their decisions. The best analysis I've seen gives a very simple explanation: abundant, easy to produce products have low volatility; scarce products with long lead time on production = volatile prices. Think about it, when was the last time shoes has 200% price swings in two years?Anyway, a bit of rambling there. Basically, I don't buy that OPEC has a stranglehold on our economy at any price. If they jack up the price (to the extent that they can do that anymore, which is not much), we just shift consumption patterns. That doesn't necessarily harm the economy, it just shifts which parts of the economy grow faster. There may be adjustment periods, but that is a continuous process, and one we can absorb easily.

[akoff 0]

I have a question since this is becoming a discussion of economics. Is it really economical in the long run to continue to depend on OPEC oil and give them a stranglehold on our economic health? We've forced their prices down due to reduced demand at the moment. But what happens to an economic recovery when that demand goes up and the prices for oil rise with it? Does that not dampen down an economic recovery? So isn't driving the gas guzzlers putting our economic freedom at risk? Regardless of global warming, do you all really think this is a good idea?P.S. I'm as guilty as anyone by the way. I have an Isuzu Trooper which isn't known for fuel economy. But we only drive it when it's the only vehicle for the job such as now with lots of snow and ice on the roads.

I am totally for it as an economic issue. If someone creates a product that works well, feeds the need, is cost effective and is clean....where i do i buy the stock!! That company will be printing money, maybe not as much as the fed but it will make ungodly amounts. I am in for that. This does assume we stay out of the way and let free markets work...i wonder if our Dem. friends will be looking for a excessive profits tax on that company...just wondering.

[Jeepster80125 0]

i have no idea why you think i care about these CC reports or whatever the hell. the point is that gas pollutes, it will run out eventually, it comes from countries that shouldnt be getting billions of our dollars, but most importantly, it is out of date, inefficient technology. would you be ok if we still used medical equipment from the 1880s? the medical techiques back then saved some people so why change them right? why try to improve?thats what we are doing with gas powered cars. you talk about global warming scientists being brought up on charges. what about the oil companies who bribe our politicians so they can continue making billions of dollars each month. what about them destroying the chances of electric or solar powered cars? the whole point you are trying to argue is meaningless.alternative fuel options can give us more efficient, safer, cleaner, and in the long run much much much cheaper fuel than gas. please dont respond with more rambling about some groups report because i am not interested.

prices and current economics are not the issue. this is bigger than all of that nonsense.

Holy cow, you're much more of an idiot than I've given you credit for.HBlask and Guap addressed your dumbest points, so I don't need to get into it.You're a hit and run artist these days though, I don't think you're willing to stick around and talk with the big kids. I'm sure it's intimidating. We're here if you ever decide to articulate or defend a point okay?

[timwakefield 68]

Does anyone have any estimates of where the "new oceanfront property" will be so I can buy in advance?

Ohio.

[Sal Paradise 57]

Ohio.

no thanks, I'll just drown.

[Don Giovanni 0]

This shoots your entire retarded argument completely out of the water.It's out of date? Why because the internal combustion engine is 150 years old?It's inefficient? As compared to what?Wind? Nope, that still sucks and is proven not viable.Water? It works in some areas that have water flow to turn the turbine and efficiently transfer the energy.Solar?Nope that is still way too expensive and inefficient to use as a regular source.Also coal is still the cheapest most efficient way of producing energy. So until this is no longer the case, then keep digging for coal and drilling for oil.

its inefficient compared to everything else that should be in development. the point is that as long as people like you are happy consuming everything in your sight with no thought of what that is doing we have no reason to start moving forward. you are happy with the current system because it makes things cheap and easy for you. its time for you to grasp the bigger picture. electric cars could be here now. so there goes your whole retarded argument. natural gas could be here now. yea, they dont work if no one invests in them and there is no initiative to switch to them, and no help from the government to implement them. with the oil companies lobbying congress of course this isnt going to happen. going by whats cheapest sounds like a great plan... im sure thats a big part of your life, but as a world we need to advance, and waiting until our cheap resources are used up is not a good plan.

[El Guapo 8]

its inefficient compared to everything else that should be in development. the point is that as long as people like you are happy consuming everything in your sight with no thought of what that is doing we have no reason to start moving forward. you are happy with the current system because it makes things cheap and easy for you. its time for you to grasp the bigger picture. electric cars could be here now. so there goes your whole retarded argument. natural gas could be here now. yea, they dont work if no one invests in them and there is no initiative to switch to them, and no help from the government to implement them. with the oil companies lobbying congress of course this isnt going to happen. going by whats cheapest sounds like a great plan... im sure thats a big part of your life, but as a world we need to advance, and waiting until our cheap resources are used up is not a good plan.

Electric cars are not more efficient. They cost more to produce and use more natural resources. (It's more expensive and uses more resource to create the electricity than just using gas)Your arguing on feelings of change, but with no rational behind it.I personally could care less what powers our transportation. As long as it is reliable, easily attainable and cost effective.

[Don Giovanni 0]

I personally could care less what powers our transportation. As long as it is reliable, easily attainable and cost effective.

you could care less? so... you do care some? im not sure whether you care or not based on this statement but you dont need to tell me that you are only interested in how gas effects you individually, ive known that and said as much already.my rational is that renewable energy is an improvement to gas in more ways than you all seem to grasp. and the faster we get started with it the better. this wont happen until people lose this attitude that you have. your stats on the economy and prices of alternate fuels are completely irrelevant. i dont know how else to say this. as a civilization, as a form of life, we need to get past oil as quickly as possible to survive in the long run, and im not just talking about global warming, though that seems to be an ever increasing part of it.

[SCYUKON 0]

you could care less? so... you do care some? im not sure whether you care or not based on this statement but you dont need to tell me that you are only interested in how gas effects you individually, ive known that and said as much already.my rational is that renewable energy is an improvement to gas in more ways than you all seem to grasp. and the faster we get started with it the better. this wont happen until people lose this attitude that you have. your stats on the economy and prices of alternate fuels are completely irrelevant. i dont know how else to say this. as a civilization, as a form of life, we need to get past oil as quickly as possible to survive in the long run, and im not just talking about global warming, though that seems to be an ever increasing part of it.

Debating with you is worthless - you keep rambling on about higher level thinking, such as not going after the cheapest alternative.Well then I hope you buy all locally grown food, and only products made in the USA, in your state, and your town (good luck finding them). With what little money you have left (if you have any), you can ride to the famers market. I will be on the road behind you in 1 of my 2 SUVs, and I will try to swing wide enough not to run you over when I go by. After all, we need to preserve the higher level thinkers such as yourself. We don't want the co-ops to be empty - that would be inefficient and wasteful. You do live in a co-op, don't you? If you don't, why not? Is not a single family house a wasteful entity. Hope you are walking the walk sir.

[timwakefield 68]

(ahem, cough)

[checkymcfold 0]

Electric cars are not more efficient. They cost more to produce and use more natural resources. (It's more expensive and uses more resource to create the electricity than just using gas)

this isn't true. most electric engines that are powerful enough to run a car operate at 95-99% thermal efficiency. this, along with the fact that gasoline needs to be refined and transported to the pumps, renders even current NiCd or lead-acid batteries (including their production and transport to production factories--assuming they're produced domestically, anyway) significantly more efficient than internal combustion engines, which have efficiency ratings that top out at under 50%, transport not included. power plants vary greatly from type to type, but only the most inefficient coal plants can dip below the 50% threshold for thermal efficiency.moreover, almost all types of rechargeable batteries can have their important material recycled.that said, i don't think that anyone should really give a fuck WHY other people think that we should move to sustainable, domestically-produced energy production. there are economic, environmental, social, and employment-related reasons for doing so, and different people are going to prioritize those reasons differently. it's altogether unfortunate that people are fighting for the sake of fighting when they could be working together on laying out the groundwork for a move that pretty much everyone with half a brain understands that we're going to have to make eventually.

[hblask 1]

it's altogether unfortunate that people are fighting for the sake of fighting when they could be working together on laying out the groundwork for a move that pretty much everyone with half a brain understands that we're going to have to make eventually.

That's like saying that in 1950 we should've started stockpiling vast warehouses alphabetic-and-function keys in anticipation of the internet revolution. Even if we could've been correct about such a thing doesn't mean it makes economic sense to do it 50 years before we are ready.

[El Guapo 8]

this isn't true. most electric engines that are powerful enough to run a car operate at 95-99% thermal efficiency. this, along with the fact that gasoline needs to be refined and transported to the pumps, renders even current NiCd or lead-acid batteries (including their production and transport to production factories--assuming they're produced domestically, anyway) significantly more efficient than internal combustion engines, which have efficiency ratings that top out at under 50%, transport not included. power plants vary greatly from type to type, but only the most inefficient coal plants can dip below the 50% threshold for thermal efficiency.moreover, almost all types of rechargeable batteries can have their important material recycled.that said, i don't think that anyone should really give a fuck WHY other people think that we should move to sustainable, domestically-produced energy production. there are economic, environmental, social, and employment-related reasons for doing so, and different people are going to prioritize those reasons differently. it's altogether unfortunate that people are fighting for the sake of fighting when they could be working together on laying out the groundwork for a move that pretty much everyone with half a brain understands that we're going to have to make eventually.

Your misunderstanding what I was saying. Electricity comes from somewhere, it does not just magically appear in the batteries. For the most part it is created by burning coal. So until we get electricity generated more economically, then electric cars won't be economical, especially factoring in the batteries and the cost and energy to produce/maintain and replace.

[hblask 1]

Interesting article, I don't know who created this or the accuracy of it, but does anyone have any other full-life-cycle footprint data?http://bexhuff.com/hybrid-or-hummer

[hblask 1]

With a few more clicks:http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/20/1858204http://www.truedelta.com/blog/?p=48So basically, nobody knows how to compare the lifespan of various car models against each other, especially the Prius, because it is too new to have a valid data set.But the point is, there is still a fair amount of doubt as to the actual relative ecological footprints of hybrids vs gas cars, so the people who are jumping ship early may actually be harming our long term ecological interests. See, one of the signals prices give us is the cost of the resources involved in a product. So if something is more expensive, there's a good chance it's because it is using more resources. Over time, technology changes bring that price down, but do we really want to force people to cause MORE harm now on the theory that it could accelerate the technology curve a little? What if it doesn't? Is there any evidence that forcing premature adoption speeds the rate of advance in technology, or is that just a feel-good belief?We have a data set that has, historically, been exceptionally reliable: prices. Prices have always been able to tell us what people value and where it makes sense to put our resources. Therefore, if you wish to override that mechanism, you need to provide firm data. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. So far, the evidence is lacking on all fronts, and the argument keeps coming back to things like "it's the only earth we have", and "we need to do it for our grandchildren", which of course are sweet and stuff, but have nothing to do with the reality of economic or ecologic tradeoffs.And all of the above is separate from the argument I advanced earlier, that is is wrong for you to impose your priorities on people who can't afford to make the change. If the choice is to stick with a cheaper gas car, create a small amount of pollution, and get a new and safer car seat for their kid, or be forced to buy more expensive technology and live with the old cracked car seat, thereby risking the life of their kid right now, which choice should a parent make? Are you ready to force a different choice on them?

[Don Giovanni 0]

Prices have always been able to tell us what people value and where it makes sense to put our resources.

they are not doing a good job right now. what people value is not always whats best for us. the fact that you want to wait until we have to make changes is what could keep us from surviving the next 100 years. we are in the most important and dangerous time that any civilization can face. you need to read about the three classifications of civilizations. we are about to hit the first level, but with all the problems in the world, and every glacier in the world receding, we might not make it. waiting to do something until we have to is the worst attitude we can have. if the government took one of their 700 billion free checks and put it towards upgrading our energy system we would be fine, we have everything we need to make the change so why wait.

[El Guapo 8]

Don - Billions and Billions are being dumped into "alternative energy". So I don't know where you are getting that we are not moving that direction. There has been a lot of political farce that has set things back. Ethanol for one. Its not economically or environmental effective. It triple the cost of corn futures in less than a year, and possibly millions starved in Africa and other 3 world nations because of it.

[hblask 1]

It triple the cost of corn futures in less than a year, and possibly millions starved in Africa and other 3 world nations because of it.

But that's OK, because middle or upper class white guilt is assuaged by it. What's a few million foreigners compared to a rich American feeling good about themselves?For the record, the federal govt has been investing in "alternative" fuels since the 70s. Net (positive) impact so far? Zero.

[hblask 1]

I want to feel good about myself no matter what the impact on other people. Evidence and science don't matter.

FYP

[El Guapo 8]

But that's OK, because middle or upper class white guilt is assuaged by it. What's a few million foreigners compared to a rich American feeling good about themselves?For the record, the federal govt has been investing in "alternative" fuels since the 70s. Net (positive) impact so far? Zero.

Pretty sure this is one area that you and I see eye to eye.I have no issue if we can find technology that is more efficient and effective, and if its good for the environment too, great. But to date we have not, so until that time, we need oil.The Billions dumped into wind farms is laughable at best. I have said this numerous time, but I live near a wind farm, of a couple thousand giant wind mills. The wind over the Altamant pass averages ~20 mph. Some days where the wind is 40 mph, the windmills aren't even turning. This is because there is not a good transference for the energy yet. It is stored it limited capacitors, until drained to a power plant.Those pics are from 5-10 miles from my house.

[akoff 0]

Pretty sure this is one area that you and I see eye to eye.I have no issue if we can find technology that is more efficient and effective, and if its good for the environment too, great. But to date we have not, so until that time, we need oil.The Billions dumped into wind farms is laughable at best. I have said this numerous time, but I live near a wind farm, of a couple thousand giant wind mills. The wind over the Altamant pass averages ~20 mph. Some days where the wind is 40 mph, the windmills aren't even turning. This is because there is not a good transference for the energy yet. It is stored it limited capacitors, until drained to a power plant.Those pics are from 5-10 miles from my house.

if and when that gets found invest ASAP. it will be a gold mine. the key is to make it worthwhile on the open market and not have it forced down our throats. One thing should know by now about the US is that will not get anywhere trying to force it....you have to make it look pretty and it will sell.wind farms while being cute idea don't have a big future in real power production from what i have read. At best they will be a small percentage of the power grid.

[hblask 1]

Real environmentalists are opposed to wind farms because the propellers gruesomely slaughter birds.

[El Guapo 8]

Real environmentalists are opposed to wind farms because the propellers gruesomely slaughter birds.

I was actually going to post this, but I decided against it.

[Sal Paradise 57]

Real environmentalists are opposed to wind farms because the propellers gruesomely slaughter birds.

and what about all that innocent wind you have to murder just so we can turn on a light bulb?