Ready for $7/gallon Gas? (death, solutions, compare, parties)

[jetgraphics]

Originally Posted by Wapasha

Sure, I'm all for ending subsidies for oil, if they only allowed companies to go and get the oil and refine it. But the current government is hostile towards fossil fuel exploration, drilling, and processing, even though there is no alternative fuel source yet available.

Based on the known reserves, we only have about 3 years supply at current consumption rates. Of course, since we import 70% of our current consumption those reserves might last ten years.

And based on the unproven reserves (guesstimates), we may have another 11 - 12 additional years worth of oil.

Oil reserves in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Proven oil reserves in the United States are 21 billion barrels (3.3×10^9 m3), excluding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The U.S. Department of the Interior estimates the total volume of undiscovered, technically recoverable prospective resources in all areas of the United States, including the Federal Outer Continental Shelf, the 1002 area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska, and the Bakken Formation, total 134 billion barrels (21.3×10^9 m3) of crude oil. This excludes oil shale reserves, as there is no significant commercial production of oil from oil shale in the United States.


GET AMERICA BACK ON TRACK...Go RAIL!

[HighPlainsDrifter73]

Originally Posted by Prytania

First off there won't be a sudden jump in gas to $7 gal.
Secondly the gasoline tax SHOULD be increased to the difference between the market rate and $3.50 and that money should be set aside to develop a national rail network/light rail & streetcars.

Cars won't be taken away and gas will still be readily available but we need serious alternatives so that we aren't as oil/gas dependent for our transportation needs into the next 50 years.

(And what liberal wants to put people into characterless buildings? Look into New Urbanism which is walking and transit dependent living, and into small town and urban environments like we had before World War II)
ie. an example

Wow, you couldn't pay me enough to live in a place that dense where your neighbor flushes the toilet and you hear it. We need to recognize that type of living arrangement won't cut it for everyone. I like having some open space around me. I live in the exurbs and it is quite nice, but I prefer the very rural and will be moving in the next year to 2 years.

I wouldn't want that forced on me. I wonder if there's even a back yard in those kind of places.

$7 per gallon for gas is insane and any politician who votes for it should be voted out in the next election. Our standard of living is slowly eroding and this will be one more thing to keep the downward slide going.

[hnsq]

Originally Posted by allydriver

I could give .02 ****s about what kind of car you own or like, but really the arrogance of you epecting me to pick up the tab at the gas pump for your choices is a little much to bear.

I hope people are more environmentally aware than they are today. That isn't arrogance, that is my beliefs. If that makes you mad, then that is your problem, not mine.

Originally Posted by Greatwoods

OK, but high gas prices won't fix that. People move to the suburbs because most walkable cities with good public transportation are so expensive. Find a way to control gentrification and you might see some middle class families move back to the city.

True, but it is at least a step towards a solution. You are right though...

Originally Posted by swagger

This type of comment always makes me chuckle. I hope it doesn't hurt, but I gotta give you a smack with a clue bat.

First of all, the number of cars one owns is pretty irrelevant. At one point a few years ago, I owned three cars and a motorcycle. Want to know a secret? I could only operate one at a time.

Second, people have varying requirements of their vehicles. Sometimes people need to haul "stuff," load more than 4 people into a car or tow something. If everyone stuck to your zero-or-one-car ideal, the one car that many people would own would have to be something that gets really horrible mileage. Is that what you want?

Right now, between my girlfriend and I, we have three cars. Hers is a VW "new" Beetle (I prefer the "real" ones, but hey, it's her car), and I have a minivan and a lifted Jeep. The Jeep rarely gets driven (20k miles in 7 years) - I have it for running trails, not as a daily driver. The van gets used when we need the space or towing capacity. Our daily driver is the Beetle - the car that gets the best mileage. If we had to get rid of one car, it'd be the Beetle. The Jeep fits less cargo than the VW, and neither the VW nor the Jeep can carry the number of people or amount of "stuff" that we sometimes need to carry.

We also run our business from home, so neither of us have a commute. Our business is almost completely paperless, too. We're about as "green" as a household or business can get. But we have three cars, so we're bad, bad people.

lol...I know you can only drive one at once, but you DO realize the 3 cars and the motorcycle you own have to be made, don't you? If the demand exists for 3+cars per household, plants will churn out that many cars. Do you realize that has an impact?

And you do realize if you only drive a car once a month or so it is cheaper to rent than buy? Why on earth would you spend money on a jeep that gets that few miles when you could just rent one when you need that kind of vehicle?

You know what I do when I need to haul something big? I either rent a big vehicle or get delivery. Over the lifespan of a typical car I will save thousands of dollars over owning and it is better for the environment as well.

Does that make sense, or should I take more time to spell it out for you?

Originally Posted by Nite Ryder

I do disagree with you, as will most people who read your post. But, I'm not going to flame one little bit. I'm just going to remind you there is a place where you can live with these kind of thoughts and other people nearby will give you a big smile and shake your hand. Jack Nicholson found this place in the movie "One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest", sounds like you are about ready to join him.

Does that mean I should say screw it and go buy a hummer? Idealism is what drives change, even if the ideal is unrealistic.

[uggabugga]

Originally Posted by FinkieMcGee

So they're not including any costs to the court system, or military costs involved in ensuring safe shipping channels? Damn.

thanks for your frank admission that you came nowhere close to even reading the article. here it is, one more time:

To reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector 14 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, the cost of driving would simply have to increase..

no, they did not discuss any of the costs you mention, since their only aim was to push the idea that cost of gasoline needs to be forcibly driven skyward to achieve the CO2 emissions levels that bammers promised.

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by uggabugga

this will be wonderful for the sputtering economy..

Despite causing it, the libs will be the first to ***** about it. It translates into higher prices for EVERYTHING, as all products need to be delivered to market.

It is like the libs who wanted all the dams torn down to save guppies, yet were shocked when thier electric utility bills skyrocketed.

The libs are like infants. They cry from a stimulus, whether it is cold or hunger, but do not have the knowledge or means to satisfy thier needs in a rational sense. As long as they get a bottle NOW, everything is okay for them, until, of course, the next crisis arises.

[FinkieMcGee]

Originally Posted by uggabugga

thanks for your frank admission that you came nowhere close to even reading the article. here it is, one more time:



no, they did not discuss any of the costs you mention, since their only aim was to push the idea that cost of gasoline needs to be forcibly driven skyward to achieve the CO2 emissions levels that bammers promised.

So as I mentioned in my post, those costs aren't included.

Thanks!

[swagger]

Originally Posted by hnsq

lol...I know you can only drive one at once, but you DO realize the 3 cars and the motorcycle you own have to be made, don't you? If the demand exists for 3+cars per household, plants will churn out that many cars. Do you realize that has an impact?

The impact is negligible when amortized across the number of miles driven and/or years of service.

Do you have any idea how many thousands of gallons of diesel fuel are burned just to deliver the components of a single windmill to the location it'll be constructed? Are you against wind power? Based on your logic in the above quote, you should be.

Originally Posted by hnsq

And you do realize if you only drive a car once a month or so it is cheaper to rent than buy? Why on earth would you spend money on a jeep that gets that few miles when you could just rent one when you need that kind of vehicle?

My Jeep can't be rented. Even if it could be, it'd be dangerous for someone inexperienced with a particular vehicle to try to use that vehicle on the trail.

Originally Posted by hnsq

You know what I do when I need to haul something big? I either rent a big vehicle or get delivery.

That's nice.

Are you renting a truck a couple times a month to haul four people and a couple of large telescopes around? Are you renting something every week to go somewhere with six people in the car? Are you renting something to tow your Jeep to the trail every month or so? I'm doing all that with my minivan, which was selected and purchased because it can do all those things. Your argument is that it'd be cheaper for me to rent something every time I need to do any of those things? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Originally Posted by hnsq

Over the lifespan of a typical car I will save thousands of dollars over owning and it is better for the environment as well.

Maybe you will, but I wouldn't.

Hey - how about that! Not everyone is YOU!

Originally Posted by hnsq

Does that make sense, or should I take more time to spell it out for you?

Right back at ya.

[hnsq]

Originally Posted by swagger

The impact is negligible when amortized across the number of miles driven and/or years of service.

Are you sure about that? Or are you just guessing?

Do you have any idea how many thousands of gallons of diesel fuel are burned just to deliver the components of a single windmill to the location it'll be constructed? Are you against wind power? Based on your logic in the above quote, you should be.

You are absolutely right, wind power in its current form is inefficient. The technology isn't there yet. I am glad we agree on something.

My Jeep can't be rented. Even if it could be, it'd be dangerous for someone inexperienced with a particular vehicle to try to use that vehicle on the trail.

The fact that you have a hobby that is so bad on the environment as that is more than a little depressing.

Try buying a bike. You might lose some weight and have fun without contributing to environmental decay/greenhouse gasses/corporate consumerism.

That's nice.

Are you renting a truck a couple times a month to haul four people and a couple of large telescopes around? Are you renting something every week to go somewhere with six people in the car? Are you renting something to tow your Jeep to the trail every month or so? I'm doing all that with my minivan, which was selected and purchased because it can do all those things. Your argument is that it'd be cheaper for me to rent something every time I need to do any of those things? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Have you heard of zipcars? Again, it is nice that you think you are right, but do me a favor, run the numbers and post here again, ok buddy?

Maybe you will, but I wouldn't.

Hey - how about that! Not everyone is YOU!

Right back at ya.

Try doing some math. You might surprise yourself. The only thing you have proven to me is that you are great at assuming a lot without ever actually pricing anything out. Do you want some books on the financial benefit of using vehicles less? I have read up on the subject and would be more than happy to recommend some to you. Or do you not want to actually learn anything new? It IS easier to keep your same lifestyle than try to learn/grow. Right?

Attitudes of gluttonous consumerism like yours are disgusting.

Do you know what social/environmental responsibility is? Or do you not care as long as you can have a little more fun with all of your toys?

[swagger]

Originally Posted by hnsq

Are you sure about that? Or are you just guessing?

Since you're the one saying that the manufacturing of one car is so harmful, why don't you prove it? Then prove that amortized across 13 years (the current age of my Jeep - it has many years left) or 160,000 miles (the mileage of the last car I sold [bought brand new a decade earlier, btw]), the environmental "damage" of that car being manufactured isn't negligible.

You're the one making the absurd claim here, not me. The burden of proof is on you to prove it.

Originally Posted by hnsq

You are absolutely right, wind power in its current form is inefficient. The technology isn't there yet. I am glad we agree on something.

I didn't even touch nuclear...

My example was a pretty simple one, and the process of building a windmill has very little impact compared to building the infrastructure required for most other forms of energy generation or conversion.

If you had your way, we'd all be living in caves. But we wouldn't be allowed to have fires to warm ourselves - it'd be too environmentally unfriendly.

Originally Posted by hnsq

The fact that you have a hobby that is so bad on the environment as that is more than a little depressing.

You are "more than a little depressed" because of my hobby? Seriously? You need help.

By the way, you are obviously clueless when it comes to the off-road community. I'd wager that I do more to help the environment in three months than you do in a year. Off-road organizations are among the most active in conservation and actually getting out there and getting stuff done. When was the last time you ran a trail and picked up enough trash left by inconsiderate hikers to fill several trash bags?

Originally Posted by hnsq

Try buying a bike.

What do I need two of them for?

Originally Posted by hnsq

You might lose some weight and have fun without contributing to environmental decay/greenhouse gasses/corporate consumerism.

LOL! I think that if you really tried, you could have fit two or three more liberal sheep buzzwords into that sentence!

Originally Posted by hnsq

Have you heard of zipcars?

Originally Posted by hnsq

Again, it is nice that you think you are right, but do me a favor, run the numbers and post here again, ok buddy?

You're the one making the outrageous claims. How about YOU "run the numbers" and prove YOU'RE right?

Originally Posted by hnsq

Try doing some math. You might surprise yourself. The only thing you have proven to me is that you are great at assuming a lot without ever actually pricing anything out.

Here we go with the elitist "I'm smarter than you and it's been proven because you disagree with me, despite me not knowing anything about you or your interests or what demands life has placed on you, none of which matters anyway because you're supposed to be just like me and like it!" garbage.

Save it. You're wasting precious energy spouting that nonsense.

Originally Posted by hnsq

Do you want some books on the financial benefit of using vehicles less?

Sure. Mail them to me. I can always using more kindling for my campfires.

Originally Posted by hnsq

Or do you not want to actually learn anything new?

You (obviously) don't know who I am or what I know. You just read that I have a Jeep that I like to drive off-road occasionally, and I'm countering you in this thread. As far as you're concerned, that's all you need to know.

It wouldn't matter that to get to my last "regular" job, I determined the break-even point between taking the bus or driving my (then 32mpg) car to work, and would spend two extra hours in transit every day taking the bus, just to save 50 cents on gas. No, that wouldn't matter to you, because I have more than one car.

It doesn't matter to you that I explained specifically why we have multiple cars, and that we drive the most fuel efficient one (for that reason) unless we need to drive the van or we're heading out to a trail. No, that doesn't matter to you, because I still own a Jeep.

It wouldn't matter to you that we run an almost completely paperless office - despite our business being centered around paperwork - use natural lighting (during daylight hours) in our office and run our business at home, giving us a 10 foot, zero emission commute. No, that wouldn't matter, because I like to go rock crawling sometimes on the weekends.

Originally Posted by hnsq

It IS easier to keep your same lifestyle than try to learn/grow. Right?

It IS easier to keep assuming things about people, rather than try to learn from/understand them. Right?

Originally Posted by hnsq

Attitudes of gluttonous consumerism like yours are disgusting.

Well, since I don't have that attitude... What can I say - you're just wrong.

Originally Posted by hnsq

Do you know what social/environmental responsibility is? Or do you not care as long as you can have a little more fun with all of your toys?

I love you, man. Ignorant rants like yours just make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

[AnUnidentifiedMale]

Am I a bad person for owning a Hummer? It's the smaller model, so I consider it to be the "green version" of the Hummer.