Location: Back in Ohiya, for now ... Gender: Zodiac: Chinese Yr:
Posted:
Apr 20, 2012 - 5:28am
oldslabsides wrote:
No, that's not what is implied. What is implied is exactly what I said: people should get a clue and rearrange their lives to fit the realities of a world wherein there are too many of them demanding too much of a finite set of resources. Sadly, I doubt that's gonna happen.
Life is being rearranged as we speak. Has been going on in earnest for the past 5 or so years, since oil spiked the last time. Began about 10 years earlier after 9-11. Not because of 9-11, but about that time when the following recession hit. People lost jobs due to offshoring, automation, technology improvements, whatever.
Rearranging 300 million people takes some time to do, especially when we don't even know what the jobs of the future are going to be and where they will be. Alternative fuel and power source development are well underway but realistically it will take several decades to get away from petroleum as the primary source. And I do believe it will happen, but only when the alternatives are practical and affordable. The market place will determine that. We already have real alternatives as miamizsun has tried to point out with the Thorium reactors, others will follow, it is happening.
But planes will not fly on batteries, trucks will not roll on batteries, and neither will busses. We have an oil glut and it will continue. The US has 25% of the world's oil reserves according to a recent study. The trucking industry is in the process of switching to natural gas. That will cause problems for refiners with a falling demand for diesel. You cannot make gasoline without making diesel. That is the reason that gas is less expensive in the winter, diesel production goes up to meet home heating needs, resulting in an oversupply of gasoline. And vice versa in the summer with summer car travel. Eventually the US will become an exporter of diesel fuel due to oversupply.
I have seen electric charging stations in California as well as here in Ohio. In Cal, they are being used, but here in Ohio, they are not, because electric cars are impractical in areas that experience hard winters and long commutes in the cold. The heaters in these electric cars still run on gasoline, just as the auxiliary heaters in VW's did some 40 years ago. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
But I have faith. When the range of an electric car hits 100 miles on a charge, then there will be a demand for them, but 40 miles, just ain't doin it and won't. But my point and the point of many others is that we need cheap oil to survive the transition. The transition has begun and will not stop, even if oil gets cheap. The goal of reducing pollution is the driving force. The cost of pollution is very high, as in spent nuclear fuel rods, coal ash and sulfur from refining crude. And CFL's are the Windows ME of lighting, speaking about pollution. I am already well into LED's for my lighting needs, paying a higher price for a better and greener product. Think how long it took to switch over from bias ply tires to radials. Took decades, but it happened.
Politics and the rest of the world not withstanding ...
No, that's not what is implied. What is implied is exactly what I said: people should get a clue and rearrange their lives to fit the realities of a world wherein there are too many of them demanding too much of a finite set of resources. Sadly, I doubt that's gonna happen.
You have it all wrong, it is Obama's fault as soon as we throw him out gas prices will go down, our lawns will turn greener and we will all live happily ever after.
In it I asked if that implied that the government should tell us where to live. That was oversimplistic. But no less oversimplistic than stating that more than a 30 mile commute is irresponsible.
There are so many reasons why it cannot happen except in urban centers in the Northeastern US. America is not built vertically with 1,000 people living in apartment buildings except in a few places. Home ownership cements people into locations that may have been close to employment at one time, but changing jobs changes commutes for example. Your solution would not work in SoCal for example. People would kill for a 30 mile commute, yet the reality of finding afforable housing takes people far away from their jobs requiring long commutes. Public transportation is a joke in SoCal. It exists, but it does not go places people go.
Housing lotteries were common in the 80's there due to a shortage of housing. Your vision requires everyone to move into cities and give up rural life altogether. I abhor city living. The noise, crime, pollution, high costs of food and the hassle of traffic and getting around just plain sucks and is not worth it, for me. I haven't owned a vehicle that gets less than 30 mpg for over 20 years. I've done my due diligence. I made it out to a rural setting and will not give it up. If and when I get a vehicle that gets 40 mpg, I want to move farther out, not closer.
No, that's not what is implied. What is implied is exactly what I said: people should get a clue and rearrange their lives to fit the realities of a world wherein there are too many of them demanding too much of a finite set of resources. Sadly, I doubt that's gonna happen.
Location: Back in Ohiya, for now ... Gender: Zodiac: Chinese Yr:
Posted:
Apr 19, 2012 - 5:43pm
oldslabsides wrote:
We need to use even less. I'm hoping that at some point it occurs to a significant portion of suburbia that a thirty-mile commute is ridiculous and they start relocating closer to their places of employment.
Somehow my reply this morning disappeared.
In it I asked if that implied that the government should tell us where to live. That was oversimplistic. But no less oversimplistic than stating that more than a 30 mile commute is irresponsible.
There are so many reasons why it cannot happen except in urban centers in the Northeastern US. America is not built vertically with 1,000 people living in apartment buildings except in a few places. Home ownership cements people into locations that may have been close to employment at one time, but changing jobs changes commutes for example. Your solution would not work in SoCal for example. People would kill for a 30 mile commute, yet the reality of finding afforable housing takes people far away from their jobs requiring long commutes. Public transportation is a joke in SoCal. It exists, but it does not go places people go.
Housing lotteries were common in the 80's there due to a shortage of housing. Your vision requires everyone to move into cities and give up rural life altogether. I abhor city living. The noise, crime, pollution, high costs of food and the hassle of traffic and getting around just plain sucks and is not worth it, for me. I haven't owned a vehicle that gets less than 30 mpg for over 20 years. I've done my due diligence. I made it out to a rural setting and will not give it up. If and when I get a vehicle that gets 40 mpg, I want to move farther out, not closer.
Proclivities
There are always a few such people who demand the utmost of life and yet cannot come to terms with its stupidity and crudeness.
Location: Paris of the Piedmont Gender: Zodiac: Chinese Yr:
Posted:
Apr 19, 2012 - 7:23am
kurtster wrote:
Pardon my hyperbole. Domestic oil consumption has peaked, bottom line.
I figured you were being hyperbolic. Yes, consumption is lower than a few years ago, but I don't know if that means it won't increase again; at these prices, it doesn't seem likely though.
We are already using less than ever here in the states. Demand peaked several years ago.
We need to use even less. I'm hoping that at some point it occurs to a significant portion of suburbia that a thirty-mile commute is ridiculous and they start relocating closer to their places of employment.
As gas prices continue to soar around the country, Joe Kennedy III, the Democratic candidate for Rep. Barney Frank’s seat, wrote an online letter to supporters calling for an end to “cheap oil.”
I like high gas prices in the sense that eventually people will start figuring out how to use less of the stuff.
So Congress extended the payroll tax cut.... great. What they're not talking about is how that money is being rerouted directly to the oil companies. Never mind tensions in Iran and that Libya isn't back up to full production; many U.S. refineries are simultaneously offline and U.S. oil producers are getting a better price for refined products in Asia... at OUR expense!
Barack doesn't understand that the current high prices at the pump cannot be tolerated for long. Drop him a line and wake him up.
As gas prices continue to soar around the country, Joe Kennedy III, the Democratic candidate for Rep. Barney Frank’s seat, wrote an online letter to supporters calling for an end to “cheap oil.”
hippiechick
Did you ever grow anything in the garden of your mind?
Location: topsy turvy land Gender: Zodiac: Chinese Yr:
So Congress extended the payroll tax cut.... great. What they're not talking about is how that money is being rerouted directly to the oil companies. Never mind tensions in Iran and that Libya isn't back up to full production; many U.S. refineries are simultaneously offline and U.S. oil producers are getting a better price for refined products in Asia... at OUR expense!
Barack doesn't understand that the current high prices at the pump cannot be tolerated for long. Drop him a line and wake him up.
bump