U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Long Island
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-16-2008, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Huntington, NY
889 posts, read 2,247,181 times
Reputation: 207

Advertisements

Senators Warn Bill Could Spike Gas $1.50 to $5 a Gallon
Inhofe, Sessions blast massive costs of global warming legislation.

By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
5/15/2008 5:44:34 PM



Worried about gas prices hitting $4 a gallon and beyond? Imagine if they were $6, $7 or even $8 a gallon. those levels are a certain possibility should Congress pass cap-and-trade legislation, which could face a vote in early June.

Oil is trading at record levels, in excess of $120 a barrel. Leading Republican Sens. James Inhofe (Okla.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.) both told the Business & Media Institute (BMI) energy prices would drastically increase if the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 2191) is signed into law.

“The studies show it would be directly affected, would be a $1.50 a gallon, in addition to what it is today,” Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said to (BMI).

continued: Senators Warn Bill Could Spike Gas $1.50 to $5 a Gallon (http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080515172437.aspx - broken link)
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-16-2008, 10:37 AM
 
1,027 posts, read 2,293,864 times
Reputation: 627
I'm going to just have to start riding around in my son's Peg Perego jeep. I can fit in it, and it goes 5MPH! I'll be all the gossip among the mothers on play date days. Sorry to make light, but I'd get too depressed to function if I thought about this any longer.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 11:07 AM
 
1,303 posts, read 3,076,994 times
Reputation: 346
Default Not to get political

Quote:
Originally Posted by GigiBowman View Post
Senators Warn Bill Could Spike Gas $1.50 to $5 a Gallon
Inhofe, Sessions blast massive costs of global warming legislation.

By Jeff Poor
Business & Media Institute
5/15/2008 5:44:34 PM



Worried about gas prices hitting $4 a gallon and beyond? Imagine if they were $6, $7 or even $8 a gallon. those levels are a certain possibility should Congress pass cap-and-trade legislation, which could face a vote in early June.

Oil is trading at record levels, in excess of $120 a barrel. Leading Republican Sens. James Inhofe (Okla.) and Jeff Sessions (Ala.) both told the Business & Media Institute (BMI) energy prices would drastically increase if the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act (S. 2191) is signed into law.

“The studies show it would be directly affected, would be a $1.50 a gallon, in addition to what it is today,” Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said to (BMI).

continued: Senators Warn Bill Could Spike Gas $1.50 to $5 a Gallon (http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080515172437.aspx - broken link)
Not to get political but isn't this a nice out for the two senators to squash any environmental legislation?? I am always cynical about the real underpinnings of their motivation, and oftentimes a list of campaign donors helps get at the real root of their motivations. You could just as easily argue that the potential environmental benefits will provide savings elsewhere in terms of health claims, etc. Or that such a potential for price increases will further prompt alternative fuels efforts and we'll see gas prices drop longer term.

I have no dog in this fight, just a cynical view of politicians and their ties to special interests, democrat or republican.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 11:08 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,632 posts, read 17,383,011 times
Reputation: 2816
Quote:
Inhofe spoke at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. on May 15 to introduce the “We Get It!” campaign – a program founded by evangelical Christians that question the merits of global warming alarmism. According to Inhofe, the bill will make it to the floor of the Senate on June 2.
I agree w/ previous poster - this looks like a special interest campaign. I support reducing Greenhouse gas emissions. I think it is selfish to ruin the environment for future generations just to get cheaper prices now for this generation. We have to look towards the future and find alternate ways to reduce consumption. Super fuel-efficient cars are a big start. Does everyone really need the SUV that gets 12mpg?

Example, here is an article slanting the bill in a totally opposite direction:
eNewsUSA: EPA Releases Analysis Of Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act

-Under the Climate Security Act, increases in average US electricity prices materialize slowly and gradually. Even forty years after enactment, those prices reach a level only 18% higher than the 2005 level. Over that period, the bill directs more than $1 trillion to lowering and offsetting US consumers' actual energy costs. According to the release, the analysis also includes, at the request of critics of climate legislation, other modeled scenarios that make highly pessimistic assumptions about constraints on technology deployment, the formation of natural gas cartels, and the like. In responding to the same request last October, the Energy Information Administration concluded that an analysis would be realistic without these pessimistic assumptions.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 11:25 AM
 
1,303 posts, read 3,076,994 times
Reputation: 346
Default Well since are getting political

Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
I agree w/ previous poster - this looks like a special interest campaign. I support reducing Greenhouse gas emissions. I think it is selfish to ruin the environment for future generations just to get cheaper prices now for this generation. We have to look towards the future and find alternate ways to reduce consumption. Super fuel-efficient cars are a big start. Does everyone really need the SUV that gets 12mpg?

Example, here is an article slanting the bill in a totally opposite direction:
eNewsUSA: EPA Releases Analysis Of Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act

-Under the Climate Security Act, increases in average US electricity prices materialize slowly and gradually. Even forty years after enactment, those prices reach a level only 18% higher than the 2005 level. Over that period, the bill directs more than $1 trillion to lowering and offsetting US consumers' actual energy costs. According to the release, the analysis also includes, at the request of critics of climate legislation, other modeled scenarios that make highly pessimistic assumptions about constraints on technology deployment, the formation of natural gas cartels, and the like. In responding to the same request last October, the Energy Information Administration concluded that an analysis would be realistic without these pessimistic assumptions.
So I lied, I guess I will get briefly political... These two are in the hip pocket of the oil and gas special interests. A quick online search at any of those free campaign donor sites lists their top contributors over their career and their current campaign...shockingly, it is oil/gas/energy folks, not even counting the PACs or lawyers that represent them and contribute. Again, not pro or con Republicans, just dismissive of these two senators. Most politicians in my opinion fall into this same camp, regardless of party affiliation. Depressing really...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 11:49 AM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,632 posts, read 17,383,011 times
Reputation: 2816
Oh man, I googled Inhofe:

Only Texas senator John Cornyn received more campaign donations from the oil and gas industry in the 2002 election cycle.[21] The contributions Inhofe has received from the energy and natural resource sector since taking office have exceeded one million dollars.[22]
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Huntington, NY
889 posts, read 2,247,181 times
Reputation: 207
All the politicians are disgusting....and we're paying for it. I don't know about you guys but I don't think I can handle more than $4.09 a gallon for gas!
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 12:02 PM
 
Location: NJ/NY
10,632 posts, read 17,383,011 times
Reputation: 2816
It's going to keep going up as the years go on no matter what. Everyone can scream and yell and come up with bills, but when it comes down to it, oil is a non renewable resource, it's not unlimited. The less we have, the more expensive gas will get, which is why people need to focus more on conservation, gas efficient cars, etc.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 12:13 PM
 
432 posts, read 1,481,337 times
Reputation: 141
I now pick up my employees and bring them to work; four of them.
If the gas situation does not right itself 6-14 months from now we are going to be in ALOT of trouble.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2008, 12:27 PM
 
76 posts, read 172,663 times
Reputation: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
oil is a non renewable resource, it's not unlimited. The less we have, the more expensive gas will get
They also said.. "Oil is only 20$ a barrel, its not cost effective to goto those remote oil deposits.." Now that oil is 120$ a barrel they say China & India are booming.. they are killing the supply...

blah blah blah blah..

We need an viable alternative to Oil, and it's not corn based Ethanol..

Quote:
Originally Posted by GigiBowman View Post
All the politicians are disgusting....and we're paying for it. I don't know about you guys but I don't think I can handle more than $4.09 a gallon for gas!
Pray those electric Cars (Chevy Volt?) come to the market sooner rather than later!.. Because I dont think we'll see under 3$ gas again..

It's my own fault cause I drive an SUV, but then how else can you parade around 3 kids in carseats, a wife and a mother in law..= (
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > Long Island
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top