U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-10-2010, 06:07 PM
 
1,842 posts, read 1,572,969 times
Reputation: 169

Advertisements

If you look at the price of oil from 1869 until now, you will see it started high and was unstable and falling until the stock market crash in 1929 (the start of the great depression). From there until the start of the second world war the price was stable and gradually declining. After WWII it jumped a bit and then was stable and falling until 1973. From 1973 until the present the prices have been unstable and climbing. What happened in 1973? The member states of OPEC got really mad at the US and had an oil embargo. World demand has also risen as well. The member states of OPEC are still really mad at the US now as well.

Until OPEC is no longer mad at the US the world oil prices are going to be unstable. Every time OPEC has cut the oil supply we've had a recession. Big cuts in oil supply big recession small cuts small recession. So if we don't want to have a recession when they cut the oil supply next time then we had better stop buying their product. This means switching from oil to something else for the energy source for personal transportation.

How to do this?
If you put a $1 surcharge on the pump sale of fuel for transportation then you can use this money to give a consumer subsidy for the sale of a PV and electric vehicle system. The system as I envision it would have two batteries one hooked up the the PV aria and the in the car. With lead acid batteries they would need to be switched with Li batteries one could be used to recharge the other.

There would be a $30K co-pay and the rest would be based on % domestic content. 100% made in the USA = $30,000 purchase price. 100% made in china = full price.

A $1/gl surcharge would provide $100bil a year for the production of EV and PV. I have a friend that has converted a car to work on electricity. When he designed his car he found that it was going to be cheaper to run on electricity than gasoline. The cost of lead acid batteries and Li batteries was about the same over the life of the Li batteries. Over 20 years the cost of a PV aria to run a car would be cheaper than or about same as the cost of gasoline for a car for the same amount of time. As volume production builds then the price of PV would drop.

Obama has a plan to make alternatives to electricity generated by fossil fuel burning cheaper than burning fossil fuels. He is proposing to do this by making the electricity more expensive.

If it ain't broke then don't fix it. The price of electricity isn't broken. The price of gasoline is broken. The plan that I am proposing could make PV cheaper than electricity generated by burning fossil fuel.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-10-2010, 07:23 PM
 
29,986 posts, read 39,283,350 times
Reputation: 12792
Are you able to rewrite your proposal of how going green is less expensive without taxing others andwithout providing subsidies to "green" companies?

Oh, most electricity in this country is generated via coal. A very cheap and plentiful fuel in the USA.

Where are most PV cells produced? CHINA. How green is Chinese industry? Significantly less so than highly regulated US industry. Are you aware of the polution that is taking place in China in their production of PV cells?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2010, 07:28 PM
 
1,842 posts, read 1,572,969 times
Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Are you able to rewrite your proposal of how going green is less expensive without taxing others andwithout providing subsidies to "green" companies?

Oh, most electricity in this country is generated via coal. A very cheap and plentiful fuel in the USA.
This is not about replacing coal with Photo voltaic. This about replacing imported oil for personal transportation with with domestically produced PV. The price of electricity in this country is not broken so don't try and fix it. The cost of imported oil is broken that needs fixing.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2010, 07:33 PM
 
29,986 posts, read 39,283,350 times
Reputation: 12792
Again, are you able to rewrite your propasal without taxing and providing subsidies to prop up these so called "green" industries?

Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2010, 07:42 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,416 posts, read 18,004,096 times
Reputation: 8942
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Are you able to rewrite your proposal of how going green is less expensive without taxing others andwithout providing subsidies to "green" companies?

Oh, most electricity in this country is generated via coal. A very cheap and plentiful fuel in the USA.

Where are most PV cells produced? CHINA. How green is Chinese industry? Significantly less so than highly regulated US industry. Are you aware of the polution that is taking place in China in their production of PV cells?
And overlooked by the left, always, is that oil is plentiful, right here; but they don't want us to develope our own resources. It was reported over a year ago (maybe two) that the US has more oil than all of the Middle East combined. Yet we are not allowed to tap into it. Why? Radical environmentalism.

These people want us to be slaves to others. Further, they have no clue what they are talking about when it comes to oil; i.e., we will never not need oil, and lots of it. Oil and it's derivitives are used in virtually everything, from plastics to cosmetics. To quit using oil would mean returning to the "dark ages". It is utter stupidity to think oil can be replaced.

Coal is, as you say, plentiful and clean as well. Much techology has assured that coal will not polute.

Further, experts in the field now believe that the earth is constantly producing oil.

Most of these people who tout the "alternative" and "renewable source" lies have no clue what they are talking about. They've never worked in the energy industry, don't know a kilowatt from a kilogram, and probably couldn't replace a light bulb without help.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2010, 08:07 PM
 
1,842 posts, read 1,572,969 times
Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Again, are you able to rewrite your propasal without taxing and providing subsidies to prop up these so called "green" industries?

The short answer is no. And I'm not looking at this from a Green perspective I'm looking at it from a what makes long term economic sense perspective. And buying stuff from people that want to kill us really makes little long term sense. Particularly when they have a long history of cutting supply and causing economic hardship on us. Cutting our dependance on oil for transportation really makes strategic sense. (We are at war if you haven't noticed)


Over the life of a PV array it will at current prices (for the total system apples to apples) cost is about ½ of what the gas and car would to run a gas car for the same amount of time and miles. It is currently cheaper to use PV for personal transportation than to use gasoline. People will not make the kind of investment that is needed with out a proven market. The subsidy will provide the proven market. If you want people to do something the you have to pay them to do it.


One thing I didn't mention was that if you line the free way right of ways with PV then you can have twin overhead catenary wires then you can drive a cross the US with out use diesel fuel. (For long distance trucking) Once in place this would really cut the cost of doing business. Free enterprise doesn't always pick the best solution. It does pick a workable one though.

We need a better solution a cheaper solution. And long term this will be cheaper. And it may end up cheaper for PV for electrisity than coal and that would be with out a subsidy.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2010, 08:16 PM
Status: "'wokeness' is a cancer" (set 3 days ago)
 
33,485 posts, read 22,334,875 times
Reputation: 17967
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming View Post
The cost of imported oil is broken that needs fixing.
oil costs are probably right about where they should be. adjusted for inflation, gasoline costs about the same as it did 50 years ago.

Inflation Adjusted Gasoline Prices

Year Price
1958 $2.24
1968 $2.11
1978 $2.16
1988 $1.75
1998 $1.35
2008 $3.23
2009 $2.28
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2010, 09:00 PM
 
29,986 posts, read 39,283,350 times
Reputation: 12792
Quote:
Originally Posted by newonecoming View Post
The short answer is no. And I'm not looking at this from a Green perspective I'm looking at it from a what makes long term economic sense perspective. And buying stuff from people that want to kill us really makes little long term sense. Particularly when they have a long history of cutting supply and causing economic hardship on us. Cutting our dependance on oil for transportation really makes strategic sense. (We are at war if you haven't noticed)


Over the life of a PV array it will at current prices (for the total system apples to apples) cost is about ½ of what the gas and car would to run a gas car for the same amount of time and miles. It is currently cheaper to use PV for personal transportation than to use gasoline. People will not make the kind of investment that is needed with out a proven market. The subsidy will provide the proven market. If you want people to do something the you have to pay them to do it.


One thing I didn't mention was that if you line the free way right of ways with PV then you can have twin overhead catenary wires then you can drive a cross the US with out use diesel fuel. (For long distance trucking) Once in place this would really cut the cost of doing business. Free enterprise doesn't always pick the best solution. It does pick a workable one though.

We need a better solution a cheaper solution. And long term this will be cheaper. And it may end up cheaper for PV for electrisity than coal and that would be with out a subsidy.
I believe we need to become an energy independant nation sooner rather than later. However, the PV technology efficiency is just no there yet and neither is battery storage capability. You are not going to convince me that you can rig my 8,000lb SUV, manufactured in 2002, with 200K miles on it, to run cheaper on your PV than on gasoline tomorrow, short of proving it. Since you are big on subsidies I'll let you subsidize that conversion for me. Deal?

I also do not agree with government taxation to subsidize certain industries (or groups of people). Robbing Peter to pay Paul will always earn the governement the loyalty of Paul.

Last edited by lifelongMOgal; 03-10-2010 at 09:21 PM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2010, 10:34 AM
 
1,842 posts, read 1,572,969 times
Reputation: 169
quote=lifelongMOgal;13243945]I believe we need to become an energy independant nation sooner rather than later.[/quote]Yip we agree on this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
However, the PV technology efficiency is just no there yet and neither is battery storage capability.
The PV would go on the roof of your house and there would be a battery that holds the electricity. If you go with lead acid cheap heavy low range then you would need to switch batteries. If you go with Li the best batteries have 10X the power density as lead acid. With lead acid you can get a reasonable 50 mile range car. With Li you can get a reasonable 500 mile range car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
You are not going to convince me that you can rig my 8,000lb SUV, manufactured in 2002, with 200K miles on it, to run cheaper on your PV than on gasoline tomorrow, short of proving it. Since you are big on subsidies I'll let you subsidize that conversion for me. Deal?
http://backyardmetalcasting.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3412&start=0
This person is an engineering student he thinks that it is cheaper to convert your own than to pay for gas. He is smart and does good math. He thinks he can. Not everyone is able to do the engineering on a conversion like this but....
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
I also do not agree with government taxation to subsidize certain industries (or groups of people). Robbing Peter to pay Paul will always earn the governement the loyalty of Paul.
Well I'm robing Paul to pay Paul. Taking the money out of the consumer's pocket at the pump and putting it back into the pocket of the consumer at the car dealership.


http://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=28&t=13731




A bit smaller but it shows a good Li battery pack conversion.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-11-2010, 10:42 AM
 
1,842 posts, read 1,572,969 times
Reputation: 169
http://www.priceofcrude.com/images/oilprice1869big.gif
http://www.priceofcrude .com/images/oilprice1869big.gif Take the space out just before the “ “.com


Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga View Post
oil costs are probably right about where they should be. adjusted for inflation, gasoline costs about the same as it did 50 years ago.

Inflation Adjusted Gasoline Prices

Year Price
1958 $2.24
1968 $2.11
1978 $2.16
1988 $1.75
1998 $1.35
2008 $3.23
2009 $2.28
The above link shows the oil price history for the world Take out the effects of OPEC getting mad at us and GAS would be a lot cheaper. Look at the price from just after WWII until 1972. Stable and falling.
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:


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

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