Gas Prices

[Mike M.]

Re: What about hydrogen?

i believe the generator is on the distal end of tc's own alimentary canal.

[Duke W.]

Re: What about hydrogen?

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for a reasonable amount of research and use of alternative fuels where it is economically viable, but what bugs me is that these programs are not viable for the 200+ million vehicles owned by Americnas, yet the policians and luddites present them as truly viable mass market alternatives. Of course, millions, if not billions in federal funding to support these programs can make "facts" jibe with whatever it takes to get the money!

Regarding methane, either using it directly in transportation IC engines or using it to produce hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles is not viable on a mass scale - even ignoring the econmics - because there is not enough natural gas, and even massive exploration programs will probably not produce enough nothwithstanding all the "environmental issues" associated with gas exploration, which are similar to crude oil exploration.

That leaves electrolosis, but the massive amounts of electric power required to disassociate water by this method to support fuel cell vehicles on a mass scale would require the building of hundreds of nuclear power plants at a cost of trillions, and I don't see that happening in my lifetime.

We've backed ourselves into a corner with national policies that encourage cheap gasoline in the short run, which allows us to drive huge, fuel guzzling vehicles and live 50 miles from our jobs, yet we won't look for oil in "our backyard" or even build a damned refinery on US soil.

If we continue to go on our merry way - with politicians placating their consituents with "cheap gas" so they can win their next election and boundary conditions that don't allow any viable alternatives, much less expansion of the current system, the sure long term result will be econominc armageddon.

The only question is: WHEN?

Duke

[Dick W.]

Re: What about hydrogen?

According to recently published reports, cows are the largest source of airborn polution in central California. Their production of methane gas is a by-product a ruminant animal.

[Wayne K.]

And beans are cheap and in good supply. *NM*

[Joe L.]

Re: Gas Prices

Michael-----

The country is Kuwait. However, I believe that they are donating 500 million dollars plus some amount of oil (1 million barrels, I think). It couldn't be 500 million barrels at today's price would represent a donation of about 33.5 BILLION DOLLARS. I don't think that they're going that far. Nevertheless, I think that their donation is just about the largest single donation to date from foreign countries.

[Gerard F.]

What about cows?

Yep, they are cracking down, and also in Southern, California. I wonder what the emission controls are going to look like on the "Happy" California cheese cows. They probably will not be too happy, and maybe move to Wisconsin.

Remember the regulation circle formula: More Money=More Regulators=More Regulations=More Money.

Jerry Fuccillo
#42179

[Tracy C.]

All true and beans are tasty = Pleasure x 2 = *NM*

[Dick W.]

Re: What about cows?

They have moved from Wisconsin to California. Ya'll are the #1 dairy state now. It is going to be interesting to see what the regulators come up with.

[mike mccagh]

Re: What about cows?

i can just see it now: all calif holsteins/gernseys/jerseys with catalytic converters projecting from their posteriors and manditory smog test annually.Who cut the cheese? mike

[Tom R.]

Re: MS/LA fuel supplies

Not to highjack the thread but to lend some insight into the situation in MS/LA. Our salvation army unit ran out of gas in MS and another group ran out of fuel on the way down to MS from South Carolina.

Our mission was temporarily scrubbed due to the instability in southern MS...fuel and lawlessness. We've got a medical mission waiting on assignment but our people won't send us in until situation stablizes. Those going in typically are self-sufficient. Saw three guard unit heading down I95 each with two tanker cars.

Much of southeastern supplies are being redirected to the devastated area.

[Verle R.]

Re: Gas Prices

Terry,
In addition to all the above comments I'll ask you a question. What would you suggest as an alternative to the oil companies? The government?

Consider the economics of oil exploration. Most new reservoir discoveries around the USA are offshore. Close inshore is proscribed by environmentalists, farther offshore is well developed and far offshore is very deep water. Ten years ago, in water 200 to 500 ft depth, it cost in excess of $100 million in exploration, test drilling and construction costs before the first barrel was produced. Today that cost is more like $250 million. In deep water (greater than 1000 ft) the costs are closer to $750 million to find and develop the first well. It is getting more expensive, not cheaper to find oil.

Exploration is a very risky business. Do you expect the government (consider any group of politicians you desire) to allocate the amount of money necessary, with the associated risk, to explore for oil?

What is your suggestion about their profits? Impose an "excess profits tax" like the government did in the 1970's oil embargo? And what would you suggest happen to that "new tax revenue"? Politicians would pour it down some rat hole like they did then, not use it for energy research. If the 1970's excess profits tax was used in whole for research and development of energy we probably would not be in the fix we are now in.

Someone said we receive much of our oil from the Middle East. Actually, most of our imported oil comes from Central and South American and Canada. Some does come from the Middle East. A more immediate danger to our oil supply is Caesar Chavez, President of Venezuela, who plans to quit supplying oil to the USA and start sell to China. Venezuela owns Citgo Petroleum.

Duke mentioned the tar sands. The USA and Canada have reserves of heavy crude, including tar sands, sufficient for about 300 years at present usage. The two problems with producing it are economics and environmentalists. Oil companies have spent a lot of money over the years researching production and refining technology for heavy crude. They can do it but it is not economical even if they were allowed to build the refineries.

The USA lacks sufficient refining capacity to produce gasoline and other refined products to meet demand. We are paying a premium to import refined products.

The major oil companies are all "multi-national" corporations. A great deal of their profits are made overseas. Before you condem them for the amount of their profits, separate the USA percentage from the internationl percentage.

What is the solution to our energy problems? Politicians with the guts to go against the environmental lobby and allow construction of refineries, nuclear power plants and drilling and production of known reservoirs in the USA.

Verle

[Steven C.]

Re: Gas Prices

Joe, they owe us at least that after what we did for them.

[Joe L.]

Re: Gas Prices

Steve-----

Keep in mind, there was a LOT of "doing for us" in what we "did for them". There have been many other cases, even in recent times, in which countries invaded and/or occupied other countries or areas. In virtually all of those cases, we have "looked the other way". However, when Saddam Hussein tried it in Kuwait, we didn't like it, at all, and drove him out. However, enough for what has become a political discussion. Politics and religion are VERY sensitive subjects and best left for other venues.

[Wayne K.]

Mike, I think you were meaning to say anally. *NM*

[Barbara S.]

Michael: can you say "rip off"? *NM*