No gas for me tomorrow

[HoustonEagle]

If everyone cared enough to drive fuel-efficient cars, we would have an oversupply. But, the American people have made it clear they don't care, even if it means our brave, young men dying in far-out places.  He may have had his flaws, but Jimmy Carter tried in 1977 to set fuel efficiency and alternative energy guidelines that would have made us nearly self-sufficient by 2000 and he was hooted down.

You get what you ask for.

←

oooooooooooooooooh you extolled the virtues of Jimmy Carter on this board!!! You sir are a mad man. I can hear keyboards banging away now. Prepare to be bashed.

For what it is worth you are right. Oh dear God I opened myself up too! I am a dead man.

Edited September 1, 2005 by HoustonEagle

[MeanGreenNation]

THe only way a gas-out will work is if it i done over a long period of time. Likely weeks. Think about it. Not everybody fills up at the same time. So if everybody fills up at once sales will be offset for the next several days. OPEC made their money all on that one single day. Those several days will have no effect. My solution to the problem was buying a moped last night. Sucker gets 75-100mpg.

[pollock]

saw on CNN yesterday that gas in Venezuela is up to about .05 per gallon.

Perhaps it is time to switch our focus from mid east to So. Am.

←

That's what Pat Robertson thinks.

[Cowtown]

Carter lifted the restrictions on home brewing that had been in place since prohibition...I guess he really was the smartest president.

in reference to an earlier post: Venezuela only sells through Citgo in the US, not sure what Canada does...

[FirefightnRick]

Just know that I don't drive a large vehicle simply because I don't care. I drive a large vehicle so that I have a better shot at survival when some OTHER fireman comes along to dig me out after some drunk or a know-it-all-teenager or some other asshole driving too damn fast loses control and crosses over into my side of the freeway. Hell, the way people are driving right now you wouldn't think there is a crisis at all?

Rick

Edited September 1, 2005 by FirefightnRick

[SilverEagle]

When I was a child living in Longview Texas in the 50's, I remember that Longview had a bus system. My family had ONE car, and when my dad had the car and was out of town with it, the rest of us rode the bus. It worked quite well. We also walked to many of the placed that we wanted to go. If it was too far to walk, then I did something radical....I got on my bicycle.

I know it was a different time, but the point is that our love affair with the automobile is always going to get in the way of us being independent regarding energy.

Mass transit, we are the only industrialized country that seems to resist it.

Edited September 1, 2005 by SilverEagle

[Coffee and TV]

The scary part about this is that we currently have the technology to produce fuel through I think what they called Hydrogen cells and the byproduct is of course water instead of exhaust.  In fact, there are mass transit systems currently using these systems.

I think hydrogen fuel cell technology should be put on hold temporarily while other alternative means are found. In order to have a hydrogen fuel cell work hydrogen has to be found in its natural form, and that's almost impossible to find. Even if you did find it it would be too expensive to "harvest" (I guess that's the right word). And splitting water to make hydrogen cells is useless because it takes more energy to do that than the amount of energy a hydrogen cell can produce.

[posiesnivy]

Being neither a scientist or chemist ( barely passed these courses in HS), I may be calling the technology I referred to by the wrong name. The information came from an article I read and if I remember correctly, the hydrogen passed between two screens or plates and it was that process of what happened between the plates that caused the energy. Maybe I am totally confused on how it took place and maybe it was not hydrogen, but they did say it was very fuel efficient and that it was being used in the northwest. The only problem was the water which was a by product.

Maybe those in the know can explain all this in a much better fashion than I. Personally, I'm all for pursuing the idea of producing fuel from cut grass. I sure cut enough of it on our acreage. It would be nice to have your own still to produce fuel from your lawn!

[Coffee and TV]

Being neither a scientist or chemist ( barely passed these courses in HS), I may be calling the technology I referred to by the wrong name.  The information came from an article I read and if I remember correctly, the hydrogen passed between two screens or plates and it was that process of what happened between the plates that caused the energy. 

You're correct, that's how it takes place. Hydrogen and Oxygen are seperated by a plate, the energy they produce comes from the process of the elements trying to combine. More plates = more energy = more horsepower. (and I only know this through PBS and National Geographic, I suck at chemistry too).

The problem with this though is trying to find hydrogen in its natural state.

Edited September 1, 2005 by Coffee and TV

[BeanCounterGrad'03]

The auto industry won't do it for the same reason they won't offer small trucks with diesels in the US...... because people in America won't buy them. Continue to want bigger and bigger SUVs and that is what they will make... the increase in oil prices should change that in a sane world... but thats not where we live.

What I wouldn't give for a 4x4 Ranger with a 4cyl turbo diesel that will run biodiesel.

The fossil fuel  industry is another story all together....

Shane

←

I completely agree with you Shane...any modern diesel engine (built within last ten years) should run on biodiesel without any extra conversion. I'd definitely be in the market for a 4cyl diesel (make mine a Jeep Wrangler). Diesel engines get much better milage also.

[3XNTGRAD]

I saw a report not that long ago that Brazil is converting almost completely to biofuels. I believe that they already do not import almost any oil, and produce the biofuels domestically. It can be done, but I don't know what the relative cost is.

[posiesnivy]

Thanks Coffee and TV. It's looks like I did remember most of that article correctly. It goods to know since I've reached the mid century mark, I'm not losing my memory yet!

Back to the original topic of this thread, I have been by an intersection near our home which has gas stations on 3 of the 4 corners and have yet to see anyone getting gas. I've been by at least 5 times this morning and no one is at the pumps. I don't know if they all got the message or are shell shocked by the fact that yesterday we were paying $2.44 and this morning it was $2.97.

[Arkstfan]

Ethanol has held promise for 30 years and the advocates have always said "soon as gas goes up this is viable". Well it wasn't viable when gas went to 75 cents, $1, $1.50, or $2.00 and doubt it will be at $3.00.

There two technologies available that can be ramped up to truly effective levels in a relatively short time.

Hybrids. The gas motor makes electricity just like a locomotive. Some folks have shown that by adding some additional batteries to a hybrid and plugging them in at night that they can run around 40 miles before the gas engine kicks in. That covers the commute of most Americans.

Bio-diesel. Only hitch right now is production. In the US we are using soybeans but the yield isn't great (an acre produces around 40 gallons). At that rate we could not totally covert to bio-diesel and meet all are needs nor produce any grain crops. Much greater potential from rapeseed, mustard, jatropha (not sure it grows in the US, they are using it some India), palm oil with the greatest theoretical yield coming from algae. Get the production ramped up and we can do great things either running it straight or blended. There is a problem for current vehicles. Bio-diesel is more of a solvent that regular diesel. So it will knock loose any gunk that is in the tank or fuel lines and send it straight into the engine. Not a wonderful property for an injection based fuel feed system and older vehicles burning conventional diesel will have a lot of deposits. It also gels more easily than conventional diesel and so is less suited to winter usage in the northern part of the country.

[DoubleEagle]

We receive most of our oil from Canada and Venezuela...At least that's what I was told once.  Feel free to correct if it's wrong.

←

Imports ranked by Country from the DOE website...

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/i...portexport.html

1 CANADA

2 MEXICO

3 SAUDI ARABIA

4 VENEZUELA

5 NIGERIA

6 IRAQ

7 ANGOLA

8 ALGERIA

9 ECUADOR

10 UNITED KINGDOM

[Coffee and TV]

If every driver in America had a car that got 20mpg then we could simply turn away any Saudi oil that is imported. (I.E. 1.3 million barrels a day)

[MeanGreenTeeth]

And Trickle Down Economics really DID work... this thread is gonna close.

I think given the circumstances an open dialogue is a good thing. Even though this no doubt will cause disagreement among us, I hope the moderators will allow this thread to continue for a few more days at least. It is an important topic, even though it is a football board.

But before it does.... saying that we should relax enviromental policy is asinine. It is similar to saying that that you would sacrifice your childs seatbelt in the back seat to buy a cheaper car.

Umm... no it is nothing like sacrificing a seatbelt to make a cheaper car. Please detail how drilling in ANWAR and letting new refineries be built is comparable to kids flying through windshields.

People in this country will pay whatever it takes in gasoline costs to drive the biggest SUV on the block so they can say they are the coolest.... but they gripe about the cost of cleaning up our air to prevent asthma in their children?? Wow.... killing me.

Yeah, I don't think anyone is making that argument here. Could you please detail for me your evidence that drilling in ANWAR and letting new refineries be built will cause asthma?

And you are right about the endsource being fossil fuels in many cases... but there is the ability to do it differently. Read about the Denton dump. Trash trucks pick up trash, take it to the dump, that produces landfill gas, the gas is used to power a biodiesel refining plant, the BD is used to fire the engines that drive the trucks that pick up the trash...... AND the plant produces a surplus of BD which is being sold at a profit to the city. This project is something for all of us to be proud of..... it got huge nation press.

Yes, I applaud such efforts, but it isn't really going to be enough, even if done on a large scale to curb our energy issues is it?

There is a great cover piece in National Geo last month about America lagging behind Europe in the development of alternative fuels both on the end user and source sides. Its very interesting. Also a lot of info about our dependence on fossil fuels and their subsequent effect on the world we live in.

That's nice and I hope that the research goes well, but Hydrogen (which is the media darling it seems) can only be easlily extracted from, you guessed it, fossil fuels. There really is no escaping it. Personally, I like the idea of increasing our nuclear power. It is actual pretty ideal if managed in a very non-russian type way. But a lot of the greenie's would rather see us go back to the depression rather than open another nuclear plant. Some people won't be happy until everyone is poor and miserable (but by God our air will be very palatable)

[shaneb]

Sorry.  My "damn liberals" comment was said in fun.

←

As is clearly evidenced by the links in your signature..... I got it.

Shane

[shaneb]

I completely agree with you Shane...any modern diesel engine (built within last ten years) should run on biodiesel without any extra conversion.  I'd definitely be in the market for a 4cyl diesel (make mine a Jeep Wrangler).  Diesel engines get much better milage also.

←

You can now buy the Jeep Liberty in a BD capable turbo diesel... I have thought about it but just like having a small pickup much better... suits my needs better than an SUV does.

And you are right, most will operate on some form of BD. But its the petro/bio mixture that changes engine to engine. However I think that Willie claims that his B100 (100% BD) will run in any engine produced after about 1994. And most truckers are reporting increases of about 2 mpg with the bio compared to petro.

Not to mention the FAR REACHING economic and social benefits of taking profits from huge oil companies and putting them in the hands of family farmers.

Shane

[UNT_92_Fan]

My solution to the problem was buying a moped last night. Sucker gets 75-100mpg.

←

He is telling the truth...I saw you caleb on your green and white moped at the intersection of colorado and mckinney....looks like the 'ped has some pick up too!

[shaneb]

I think given the circumstances an open dialogue is a good thing. Even though this no doubt will cause disagreement among us, I hope the moderators will allow this thread to continue for a few more days at least.  It is an important topic, even though it is a football board.

Umm... no it is nothing like sacrificing a seatbelt to make a cheaper car.    Please detail how drilling in ANWAR and letting new refineries be built is comparable to kids flying through windshields.

Yeah, I don't think anyone is making that argument here.  Could you please detail for me your evidence that drilling in ANWAR and letting new refineries be built will cause asthma?

Yes, I applaud such efforts, but it isn't really going to be enough, even if done on a large scale to curb our energy issues is it?

That's nice and I hope that the research goes well, but Hydrogen (which is the media darling it seems) can only be easlily extracted from, you guessed it, fossil fuels.  There really is no escaping it.  Personally, I like the idea of increasing our nuclear power.  It is actual pretty ideal if managed in a very non-russian type way.  But a lot of the greenie's would rather see us go back to the depression rather than open another nuclear plant.  Some people won't be happy until everyone is poor and miserable (but by God our air will be very palatable)

←

The only power plant I have personally been hard core against is the refinery that Entergy tried to build in East Texas.... you know.... the natural gas fired steam plant that was slated to consume 5.5 million gallons of water per day out of Caddo Lake? Caddo (for those unaware) is Texas' only natural lake, we have no ability to artificially control its level, it is at the mercy of the ACOE who run the dam at Lake O The Pines and is home to more wildlife and eco-tourism than you can shake a stick at.

But natural gas fired steam plants are very clean burning..... much cleaner than lignite (dirt burners) like the one just south of Marshall.... they also don't require that nasty little habit called.... what is it..... hmmm.... oh yeah STRIP MINING!

I (as would most conservationists) would LOVE to replace every lignite plant with a natural gas steam plant. But the problem is that the power companies dont want to replace them. They want to add to them without promise or obligation to clean up the dirt and coal burners that are already in place. The federal govt (and the state of Cali, which is what you are probably refering too) is trying to hold the companies responsible for cleaning up their own mess. The companies don't like it and cry foul... but all they have to do is clean up their act. They refuse. The same applies to the construction of new refineries. All cases I have heard have been disputes over the companies request to overuse their polution points by refusing to agree to clean up old plants. Its not a perfect solution, but at some point you have to hold their hand to the fire.

Conservatives LOVE to talk about the cost of enviromental policy. But spend a little time on the EPA Superfund site and look at what those projects have cost the taxpayers as a result of BAD or NO enviromental policy in the past. One example... the Longhorn Ammo Plant on the shores of Caddo cost taxpayers more than $60 million to clean up after Thiokol abandoned it. Most of that was centered in 2-3 areas where they openly burned TNT... a perfectly acceptable process at the time.

As for the asthma comments, it was more directed to people's blatant disregard for what effects their driving and car owning habits have on even their own children. Not to mention the economy and our country as a whole.

For example, my brother's asthma (which is becoming more and more common in children) is so bad, even at the age of 22, that on a bad Ozone Day he has to take the day off work because he has a hard time getting enough oxygen into his blood to have any energy at all. He is NOT a rare case.

Asthma kills kids.... more and more every day. Asthma (partially) and asthma attacks (even more so) are caused by the pollution in our air. If someone told you that getting your child to wear a safety belt would cost you more or mean that you have to sacrifice being the coolest kid on the block would you do it??? Of course. But if someone told you that if you and others drove a vehicle that used less fuel and burned cleaner but cost more/wasn't as cool would help your child's asthma..... would you do it???? Not if you lived in North Dallas.... ask my mom... who lives and drives alone everyday and drives an SUV built to carry 5-6 people.

As for your comments on the National Geo article.... you should read it before you comment. There are huge sections that talk about exactly your concerns including an article about the need to produce hydrogen from a clean energy source (IE wind, solar or nuclear).

As for the impact that alternative power can have on our dependence.... Denmark now produces 20% of its electricity from wind...... totally... clean... wind... How do you think that a 20% reduction in the burning of lignite or coal would impact the world around us????

Its no longer a pipe dream my Rush-loving friend. Its been done.... just not in the U.S.

As for your comments on ANWAR... I won't even start on our supposed Sportsman President's outlook. I will instead leave you with the words of the Great Edward Abbey:

"I come more and more to the conclusion that wilderness, in America or anywhere else, is the only thing left that is worth saving."

"We can have wilderness without freedom; we can have wilderness without human life at all, but we cannot have freedom without wilderness, we cannot have freedom without leagues of open space beyond the cities, where boys and girls, men and women, can live at least part of their lives under no control but their own desires and abilities, free from any and all direct administration by their fellow men."

"A man could be a lover and defender of wilderness without ever in his lifetime leaving the boundaries of asphalt, powerlines, and right-angled surfaces. We need wilderness whether or not we ever set foot in it. We need a refuge even though we may never need to go there. I may never get there. We need the possibility of escape as surely as we need hope: without it the life of the cities would drive all men into crime or drugs or psychoanalysis."

And my personal all-time favorite:

"We need wilderness because we are wild animals. Every man needs a place where he can go to go crazy in peace. Every Boy Scout deserves a forest to get lost, miserable, and starving in. Even the maddest murderer of the sweetest wife should get a chance for a run to the sanctuary of the hills. If only for the sport of it. For the terror, freedom, and delirium. Because we need brutality and raw adventure, because men and women first learned to love in, under, and all around trees, because we need for every pair of feet and legs about ten leagues of naked nature, crags to leap from, mountains to measure by, deserts to finally die in when the heart fails."

[EagleChick03]

I had to fill up my tank today and yeahhhhhhh.......it was 53.20.

[Sound_Man]

be thankful iusually spend over 100 per tank on the truck

in all we spend about 5-700 per week on gas

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Truly, the only way to solve the problem is to find a substitute and become less dependant of fossil fuels.  Of course we know the auto and oil industry isn't going allow that, at least not until we have to of course. 

Rick

←

---I don't understand that one.... No one makes anyone buy a gas guzzling car/suv that gets 10-15 mph. There are a lot of options in America that gets 25-30 or more MPH, we just don't buy them.

Oil companies--- if they sold less products, they could just charge a few cents more and make as much or more money. The problem now is two big issues... the Far East, especially China (even Russia) is now consuming much more oil that they used a few years ago and there is only so much available on the world market so the price is climbing (supply and demand). Another huge problem is there HAS NOT BEEN ONE American refinery build in over in over 20 years. In fact in West Texas (where I live) there have been some small OLD refineries closed and this decreases the amount of American gasoline available..... and this has happened just as the demand for international oil is increasing. I remember a trip I took in 1997 or 98, I paid about 80 cents per gallon and oil companies were struggling in West Texas and as lot of weaker wells and unprofitable things (refineries etc.) were shut down.... Oil had dropped to $8.00 a barrel due to excessive middle-eastern oil available. Those resourses are now gone..... and we are now paying for it now.

---Look at the cars in foreign countries .... most are much smaller than what Americans use. I have been in Europe including Italy and most of those places make our cars look like Elephants, plus they use mass transportation including bikes and other means. Most of the foreign cars you see here are larger than what they sell in their own country. Most countrys (except in some oil-rich countries) have much higher oil prices than America so they buy smaller less gas guzzling cars. Europe is extremely high.

---Summary.....car companies offer small cars... Americans don't buy them... we like BIG ones.... No I don't work for an oil-company... just live in the West Texas oil-field area and understand what is happening.

Edited September 2, 2005 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[pollock]

Not to mention the FAR REACHING economic and social benefits of taking profits from huge oil companies and putting them in the hands of family farmers.

←

We definitely need an answer, but I'm still skeptical of biodiesel.

Yeah, you can make it by growing crops, but you have to look at the NET energy that is "harvestable." I made that word up because you can't PRODUCE energy. One of Newton's Laws, if I recall.... Energy cannot be created or destroyed.

If you have to burn 10 gallons of petroleum gas to make 10.1 gallons of biodiesel, it's not going to save the planet. I'm not just talking about the tractor that the farmer uses... consider the energy used in processing, transport, to treat the water used to irrigate, make the fertilizer, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

We definitely need an answer, but I'm still skeptical of biodiesel.

Yeah, you can make it by growing crops, but you have to look at the NET energy that is "harvestable."  I made that word up because you can't PRODUCE energy.  One of Newton's Laws, if I recall.... Energy cannot be created or destroyed.

If you have to burn 10 gallons of petroleum gas to make 10.1 gallons of biodiesel, it's not going to save the planet.  I'm not just talking about the tractor that the farmer uses... consider the energy used in processing, transport, to treat the water used to irrigate, make the fertilizer, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc

←

Exactly... you get it... that is called an energy matrix. Mass transportation and smaller cars is one of the answers. A lot of oil is used other ways as well.... plastic, road surfaces, synthetic materials, carpets, asphalt roofs, .... power generation.... a lot of ways that people don't think about.... and now the emerging Chinese and others are consuming them too.. This is not a simple problem... not many problems are... ask those who are trying to solve the mess in NO. There are lots of oil production and refining in that area too which is affecting gasoline distribution. Most of you in Dallas area is using oil being refined on the gulf (Houston, Beaumont, area, not West Texas)

Edited September 2, 2005 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66