Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 94 of 94
  1. #81  
    Interesting article here saying the gas bubble may be about to pop.

    http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...mod=ba_mp_view

    What is interesting however is when they say pop they are talking about a drop to $100, which is still very very high. I really believe the time to move on to alternate sources of cheap energy is now.

    Surur
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    Interesting article here saying the gas bubble may be about to pop.

    http://online.barrons.com/article/SB...mod=ba_mp_view

    What is interesting however is when they say pop they are talking about a drop to $100, which is still very very high. I really believe the time to move on to alternate sources of cheap energy is now.

    Surur
    Nice post from a reputable source....

    It's tough to know how much of the surge in crude-oil prices -- up 40% just this year -- reflects fundamental supply and demand, and how much is due to other factors, including the dollar, commodity speculation and interest from institutional investors. Like some others, we suspect the run-up was fueled by more than economics.
    I think a few people made money on the oil increase... although, it may end up being a good thing, if Americans decide to do something this time instead of doing nothing like we did after the 70s oil issues.

    I get a feeling if oil drops back to $1.50, Americans will celebrate by purchasing the largest Hummer they can find.

    I'd hope we would continue pushing new technologies at a faster rate than before.... I agree, we need other way to produce energy.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  3.    #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I really believe the time to move on to alternate sources of cheap energy is now.
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    I think a few people made money on the oil increase... I agree, we need other way to produce energy.
    Here is a good thread about alternative fuel sources:

    http://discussion.wmexperts.com/showthread.php?t=161633

    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    I have to say, that it still amazes me that with the potential of the world's wealth as a prize, that we do not have more advancement in alternative fuel sources for cars and other modes of transportation. I enjoy reading about the advancements of electronic cars, fuel cells, to nuclear powered batteries, etc... It seems that with all the technology we have now and all the new technologies we are developing and discovering all the time that there isn't a solution yet. It seems that no matter what alternative source you look at, it is "almost there"....but that for one challenge or another they are not able to mass market it, just cannot get that extra umph of power to make it have that mass appeal, just have to make it last a little longer to make it meet every day needs, etc...

    It reminds of what someone just posted today or yesterday....remember the movie Money Pit where the contractor keeps on telling Tom Hanks for months he will be finished in two weeks.

    -----------

    I see this needing to be addressed in two...possibly three stages...these are just off the top of my head:

    IMMEDIATE NEEDS/GOALS (1-9 years)
    • Need to decrease foreign support for oil. this means domestic drilling to help curve this dependence. I have heard of reports lately that say that there is enough oil in North America to rival the middle east. A North American oil alliance between Mexico, USA, and Canada could take the VAST majority of our oil needs.....if we tap into it.
    • I would support a tax on the oil companies AND at the pump that will go directly to funding alternative fuel research and implementation. With public awareness of where the money is going with public progression updates at least every 6 months.
    • I am generally not a gov regulation type of guy, but I have heard talk of gov regulations for oil companies that so much research must be geared toward alternative fuel sources. I would think that this would be a logical step. The day is coming when oil companies are going to be memory of the past for the most part, I would think they want to be involved in the next step.
    • Offer federal assistance to American auto makers to develop and implement current options (like more electrical power vs fossil fuel).
    • Increased Tax savings to individuals who buy these cars.


    LONG TERM NEEDS/GOALS (10-50 years)
    • Develop a car that does not run on fossil fuel at all. This would be such a HUGE financial incentive that the private sector should be easy to involve.
    • Add tax breaks for companies actively pursuing this goal with reviews of progress to continue these breaks.
    • Federal funding for University research into alternatives.
    • Implement a distribution system to support the new alternative fuel if needed that will need to replace gas stations.
    • The loss of world political clout that the Middle East will experience from such a transition will be HUGE and must be addressed in how to prepare for these concerns now. It is possible that this loss of wealth and power could turn violent if face with no longer having the world dependent on them for fuel consumption.
    • Have a $100 million X prize for the first person or org to present a mass market solution for non fossil fuel car.


    Again, these are just rambling thoughts that I am sure many are not thought out very far. Please add your perspective of what we need to do now for immediate goals and long term goals to move away from fossil fuel consumption all together.


    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Here are some ideas that I have why there is a massive lack of funding and research towards finding a viable alternative energy solution that can be implemented into a massive infrastructure to support it at an economical price for the consumer "at the pump" level:

    One: Gov Support. In spite of all the talk from Pres Bush I really have not seen any real push or incentives or aid offered to advance research. I am generally against the gov stepping in as a general principle and becoming the source of motivation for a movement & development that could be or should be handled in the private sector.

    But since the solution will have to involve a major overhaul in our national gas distribution infrastructure, have direct effects on our economy, potentially spark very harsh actions from those in the middle east that would loose the number one oil consumer as a customer for all transportation fuel, etc... This time they do need to step up and offer financial assistance for research, tax breaks, an X prize, etc... to spur this on. Research needs to be in a larger part than it is now funded by the gov to take a little of the financial risk factor out of the private sector as new ideas are tried and scrapped in R&D. Devil is in the details, but I would vote for a gas tax that went to this with published results every 6 months.

    Two: Money / Greed. Right now as I mentioned above there is too much money to be earned and taken advantage of right now with the both the oil companies on one side with the motivation to keep oil as the number source for transportation and Carbon Credit Sales on the other side with the same motivation. These two avenues need to leveraged with an invested interest in developing and deploying an alternative fuel source. They could be given a 5-10% tax break (which is massive concerning their revenues) if 100% of that money went to 3rd party organizations / companies / academic institutions developing alternative fuel source and infrastructure research. Again with progress reports every 6 months.

    Three: No sense of public urgency. There needs to be an active, massive, and on going public education program to gain public support and then hopefully public demand for this. To avoid the Right Wingers and the Left Wingers distracting from the this message bickering about what the motivations for this movement is, we need to focus on the solutions and the benefits of implementing a solution be it environmentally friendly, increasing our national security, solidify the basis of our economy, etc... To fund this we could use a tax break for the oil companies to help fund research above and since the Carbon Credits are suppose to be all about improving the environment and our awareness of our personal effects on it, their tax breaks would assist to fund this with their tens of billions industry.

    This is just as important as research as public complacency is a great environment to stall and squander money if these programs do not have a very public eye watching it's progress and demanding results.

    I fear though that it is going to take $6.85 a gallon price hike that will kill our economy to bring about this sense of urgency to look for alternative fuels. But then there will not be the money to research as we would have now.

    Four: Action Now. Every Day People Can Take Action. There is a lot that we can do now to add to this cause. It sounds cliché, but it can never be underestimated the use of local newspapers, contacting gov officials, talk radio, etc... in sharing any of these ideas and the urgency to move now.
  4. #84  
    I think people need to stop looking for the 200 mile range car and settle for a "good enough" solution that can be improved with time. If the range people were looking for were more around 50 miles a huge number of solutions already available would suffice (even compressed air and flywheels).

    Surur
  5. #85  
    OPEC has no intention of decreasing the cost of oil on their own. If it does go down, it will be due to the US drilling within its boundaries - when that happens, things might change. OPEC is greedy and frankly, this country has done nothing to be ashamed of.

    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    Nice post from a reputable source....



    I think a few people made money on the oil increase... although, it may end up being a good thing, if Americans decide to do something this time instead of doing nothing like we did after the 70s oil issues.

    I get a feeling if oil drops back to $1.50, Americans will celebrate by purchasing the largest Hummer they can find.

    I'd hope we would continue pushing new technologies at a faster rate than before.... I agree, we need other way to produce energy.
  6. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    OPEC has no intention of decreasing the cost of oil on their own. If it does go down, it will be due to the US drilling within its boundaries - when that happens, things might change. OPEC is greedy and frankly, this country has done nothing to be ashamed of.
    lol.... nice way to push your republican agenda.

    Even if the US starts drilling within its boundaries there is not a guarantee that oil prices will drop much.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  7. #87  
    Theog, how is this a way to push the republican agenda? When demand goes down, does that mean your life style will be changed? Why should your life style change? What is wrong with being self-sufficient now and in the future? Oil is now, alternative sources is the future. What is wrong with that? The environment? One needs to get off of the environmental extremist band wagon and get down to real life. When China has oil, the ability to expand its base and the US does not, where does that put the US?

    There is nothing republican here. We need to be self sufficient and that will not happen with the democrat presentation. Hope, increased taxes, doing nothing about now - that leads to zero.
  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Theog, how is this a way to push the republican agenda? When demand goes down, does that mean your life style will be changed? Why should your life style change? What is wrong with being self-sufficient now and in the future? Oil is now, alternative sources is the future. What is wrong with that? The environment? One needs to get off of the environmental extremist band wagon and get down to real life. When China has oil, the ability to expand its base and the US does not, where does that put the US?

    There is nothing republican here. We need to be self sufficient and that will not happen with the democrat presentation. Hope, increased taxes, doing nothing about now - that leads to zero.
    Surely it makes sense to use up the rest of the world's oil before you use up your own?

    Surur
  9. #89  
    No. Why should the US depend on countrys that are hostile to it? Why should we give billions and billions of dollars to countrys that are hostile to us? OPEC states it will not lower the price and what reason would any country have to lower its standard of living when there is frankly no reason to. The ability of the US to meet its needs when the restraints are removed are tremendous. In the 40's we rebuilt our Navy and became capable of handling 2 fronts at the same time. We did the impossible then and frankly there is no reason we cannot become self-sufficient well under the time Obama says it will take.
  10. #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    No. Why should the US depend on countrys that are hostile to it? Why should we give billions and billions of dollars to countrys that are hostile to us? OPEC states it will not lower the price and what reason would any country have to lower its standard of living when there is frankly no reason to. The ability of the US to meet its needs when the restraints are removed are tremendous. In the 40's we rebuilt our Navy and became capable of handling 2 fronts at the same time. We did the impossible then and frankly there is no reason we cannot become self-sufficient well under the time Obama says it will take.
    Unless the amount pumped is a large enough fraction of the world supply, it would not bring down the price of oil, and unless you force the oil companies to only sell US oil in USA (and therefore create trade barriers), buying from USA companies is the same as buying from say Columbia. Because oil is a commodity it doesnt matter who you buy from, its all sucking from the same pool, and the oil you dont buy will be bought by some-one else, like the EU or China.

    One would think the wise thing for a limited commodity is to hoard your own until everyone else starts running dry, them start pumping your own and then slam up the trade bariers.

    Surur
  11. #91  
    Something is better than nothing. On a related front, global warming, has anyone seen this site - http://ultimateglobalwarmingchallenge.com/.

    and of course Al Gore has yet to have a real debate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo..._of_Brenchley).

    Back to our regular programming.
  12. #92  
    This just in -

    The good news - companies are scrambling to lease public land to put up solar power plants, to the tune of 1 million acres. (130 proposals, enough power to run 20% of American households

    The bad news - This caused the Bureau of Land Management to put a 2 year moratorium on the approval of any application.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/us...C/XeacGbXhab+A

    Imagine the impact of reducing the heating oil requirement and other household energy requirements by 20% on the price of oil.

    Surur
    Last edited by surur; 06/28/2008 at 04:55 AM.
  13. #93  
    And because we put our power plants in the middle of nowhere, consider the amount of power lost during transfer.
  14. #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    consider the amount of power lost during transfer.
    How much do we lose on average now?
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Posting Permissions