U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Halloween!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
 
Old 03-06-2011, 05:36 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in Kentucky
3,790 posts, read 8,087,862 times
Reputation: 2429

Advertisements

...a decent rail system in this country? We would be able to take some trucks off the road and move many more things via rail, saving oil.

BTW, Obama considering tapping the oil reserve...waste of time. Hell, use all the oil in the reserve. It would last us 36 days and then what?
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-06-2011, 05:45 PM
 
25,058 posts, read 24,589,291 times
Reputation: 11714
I agree with you. It's another reason why I don't agree with drill, baby, drill. We use tens of millions of gallons of oil per day, how is tapping our small oil reserves (relative to our consumption rates) making any sense is beyond me. All our reserves are going to last what? 10 years tops? And that is probably a huge overestimate
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 05:49 PM
 
4,172 posts, read 6,178,403 times
Reputation: 1204
I agree with both sides. We need to increase oil supply (drill) and reduce our demand (conserve) - economics 101. Plus, develop new alternatives.

Also, opening up stored oil is more of a psychological signal to stabilize / reduce oil prices. But, if the mid east trumoil lasts longer, we would have used up our backup for times we may really need it.

Last edited by calmdude; 03-06-2011 at 05:59 PM..
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:02 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in Kentucky
3,790 posts, read 8,087,862 times
Reputation: 2429
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed View Post
I agree with you. It's another reason why I don't agree with drill, baby, drill. We use tens of millions of gallons of oil per day, how is tapping our small oil reserves (relative to our consumption rates) making any sense is beyond me. All our reserves are going to last what? 10 years tops? And that is probably a huge overestimate
Our reserves would last 36 DAYS. We use around 20 million bbl/day. We have 727 million in reserves.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:03 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 20,057,712 times
Reputation: 2507
How about using coal and nuclear power for electricity generation?

I think a more expansive rail system would be great,however the tracks have long been pulled up in most places.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:10 PM
 
4,172 posts, read 6,178,403 times
Reputation: 1204
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
How about using coal and nuclear power for electricity generation?

I think a more expansive rail system would be great,however the tracks have long been pulled up in most places.
If you are talking short term, it is difficult to suddenly increase the capacity of a plant. It is also expensive to maintian extra capacity that is not used. If you are talking long term, sure, increase alternatives. Saudi is the only country that has expensive-to-construct spare capacity to very quickly increase oil supply - they may do it if US wants it to. Notice despite the west's chest thumping, Libya continues to export oil - alternatives are not that easy to come by.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:13 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,556 posts, read 20,057,712 times
Reputation: 2507
Expanding rail would be very difficult too wouldn't it??
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:15 PM
 
4,172 posts, read 6,178,403 times
Reputation: 1204
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post
Expanding rail would be very difficult too wouldn't it??
....probably expensive and time-consuming too. ETA: that is why, many think railroad stocks are a good buy in the near future. Plus, there is the politics - lobbies of different modes have their tentacles into the system - just like the tire lobby gutted the railroad proposed in Los Angeles (in 1950?)......
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:15 PM
 
12,744 posts, read 16,282,575 times
Reputation: 8754
Deregulation of railroads enabled the abandonment of many lines and the ability to invest in high traffic routes. Railroads were actually able to carry the same amount of freight on fewer miles of track. Now if you are talking about passenger or high speed rail, which many see as a menace to the American way of life, that is substandard or worse.
Rate this post positively Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-06-2011, 06:16 PM
 
Location: Sango, TN
24,874 posts, read 22,078,732 times
Reputation: 8652
Quote:
Originally Posted by kentuckydad95 View Post
...a decent rail system in this country? We would be able to take some trucks off the road and move many more things via rail, saving oil.

BTW, Obama considering tapping the oil reserve...waste of time. Hell, use all the oil in the reserve. It would last us 36 days and then what?
It would depend greatly on how the rail was set up, how much there was, and what the trains ran on.

Most trains today are diesel, and therefore use petroleum. Now if they were electric, or used bio-diesel, that would make a difference. Again, it would also depend greatly on where the rail went, and if its mostly for freight or passenger as well.

Personally I'd like to see electric high speed rail to most major urban areas. On those trains you would have passenger cars, and flat track cars for electric cars. That way the limited distance wouldn't be that big of an issue. The train would take you most of the way, with limited stops.

For instance, if I wanted to go from Mobile to Chicago. I'd drive my all electric car to Mobile, 150 miles away, well within the limits of an all electric car. Go to a train station, my car gets loaded onto a freight car designed for multiple cars. I would then get into the passenger car. The train would make probably 20 or 30 stops along the way. When I get to Chicago, my car is charged from the trains electrical system, I'd get out and get into my car, and drive to my hotel. Spend my weekend in Chicago, then do the opposite thing going back.
Rate this post positively 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.


 
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:
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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, 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