Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You already pay that price for fuel in the US, although it is actually more like $14/gal due to subsidies and military support.
About 75% of the oil in the US comes from the US, Canada and South American countries. The rest is from the ME, Africa and elsewhere. The Persian gulf is about 10% and dropping.
Arguments about whether military involvement in the ME in the past is a subsidy to oil is debatable, it's becoming a baseless argument as US production continues to increase. The US can and will be independent of foreign oil imports very shortly, especially with Trump's very aggressive domestic energy policy.
As far as the "subsidies" go these are tax breaks, no one is writing them a check. The value of these tax breaks relative to the market is quite small, if they were removed and those costs were passed onto the consumer there will be a fractional increase of one penny at the pump. Just to put the amount of these tax breaks into perspective the revenue of Exxon by itself exceeds the tax breaks in a few days.
This is their fuel and it still requires energy expense to produce that fuel. I'm sure there is studies out there on this and the amount of agricultural that would be required to feed these horses would be enormous. They also some with their own health issues.... How much manure would accumulate in one day if the 8,5 million residents of NYC used horses for transportation? This is one the major things that forced horses out.
Do we not get to include subsidies for the natural gas and coal that charges EVs or is that getting too complicated?
The federal tax subsidies for natural gas is lumped together with oil. It's an inconsequential amount relative to the market. The same thing for coal, the primary tax break for coal is on pollution controls. If those costs were passed onto the consumer the average electric bill might increase 20 cents per month.
Think it could happen? I think it misses the fact that many people don't have off street parking, that many of us need (even if its just occasional) range beyond what Electrics can provide today.
Well, I don't subscribe to that site so I can't see the news article, but according to your title, it seems to be a ban on fuel driven cars, not necessary non-autonomous vehicles. Personally, to out right ban something like that is way big brotherish and something I would never support. I want to be given the choice to gravitate to the new technology. Once over 80% of the population goes for battery powered automobiles, then the automakers can simply start phasing out the gas/diesel sector.
So every US conflict from the Revolutionary War to bombing ISIS is only about oil? Who knew!
So when everybody is using EV's, are you assuming lithium and cobalt are only going to come from our allies?
I'd like to know where you think the asphalt on roads actually comes from.
Do we not get to include subsidies for the natural gas and coal that charges EVs or is that getting too complicated?
Do you honestly believe we would care one iota about the middle east if they didn't have oil? Anyways, I wasn't advocating for a type of car but discussing the true cost of a gallon of fuel in the US. Strangely enough, the rest of the world gets all the oil they want at the same prices we pay without needing giant militaries. So either we are stupid, the military industrial complex runs the show, or we as American taxpayers are also paying to subsidize the oil use of other countries. Either way, it doesn't change the true cost of a gallon of fuel.
Location: San Ramon, Seattle, Anchorage, Reykjavik
2,254 posts, read 2,738,154 times
Reputation: 3203
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman
This is their fuel and it still requires energy expense to produce that fuel. I'm sure there is studies out there on this and the amount of agricultural that would be required to feed these horses would be enormous. They also some with their own health issues.... How much manure would accumulate in one day if the 8,5 million residents of NYC used horses for transportation? This is one the major things that forced horses out.
I guess my message was taken out of context. Not describing using horses TODAY (I mean really, where did I say that?). What I described was the transition 100 years ago from horse and buggy to the automobile.
Regarding the horse waste, NYC had a fairly efficient method of cleaning it up but the biggest problem was that they left the roads unpaved. The mud was often ankle deep or the dust was out of control. With cars (and to some extent bicycles) came paving. Can you imagine NYC with dirt streets?
Do you honestly believe we would care one iota about the middle east if they didn't have oil? Anyways, I wasn't advocating for a type of car but discussing the true cost of a gallon of fuel in the US. Strangely enough, the rest of the world gets all the oil they want at the same prices we pay without needing giant militaries. So either we are stupid, the military industrial complex runs the show, or we as American taxpayers are also paying to subsidize the oil use of other countries. Either way, it doesn't change the true cost of a gallon of fuel.
You just answered your own question. Oil cost the same regardess if it's produced at home or by evil theocratic oligarchies who hate us. We have a huge military because we have a huge country and the largest economy dependant on global trade. If you're hoping for Sweden to help us defend our borders, then good luck. Switch to EVs then by your rationale we'd need a large a military to secure cobalt and lithium imports.
Oil cost the same regardess if it's produced at home or by evil theocratic oligarchies who hate us.
If the history of prices in the coal industry where you have a steady domestic supply are any indication that may not be the case in the near future. Both the natural gas oil markets in the US have not adjusted to the new supply. Once they do I expect the prices will settle to slow and steady rate, at least here in the US. Stable energy prices also help provide stability to other markets.
Location: San Ramon, Seattle, Anchorage, Reykjavik
2,254 posts, read 2,738,154 times
Reputation: 3203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy100
You just answered your own question. Oil cost the same regardess if it's produced at home or by evil theocratic oligarchies who hate us. We have a huge military because we have a huge country and the largest economy dependant on global trade. If you're hoping for Sweden to help us defend our borders, then good luck. Switch to EVs then by your rationale we'd need a large a military to secure cobalt and lithium imports.
Why do we need a large military to secure cobalt and lithium when these and all commodities are available on the free market? Or are we to become as Rome and steal the commodities we need?
Global trade works great whether you have a large military or not. It's not like we need to invade countries to set up trading agreements with them. Somehow every single other country (Russia, China, and India included) in the world seems to get it done without annually bankrupting themselves.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
