[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Oil and gasoline isn't going to get any cheaper...that's the bottom line. And it won't. To be fair, we in the US do whine about the high cost of gasoline, when they've been playing twice what we are paying now in Europe for a number of years now. We are just finally catching up to everyone else, so to a certain extent my fellow Americans need to sit down and shut up.
There is really no way to bring the prices down. Giving us a gas tax holiday won't work. Drilling offshore won't work. Opening more refineries won't work. We are simply running out of oil for our demand; the supply of oil isn't infinite.
There are a few ways to make Americans happy by decreasing the amount of money we spend on gas:
1) Spend some cash now to build up, improve and expand our public transit system (which currently ranges from totally sucks to non-existent). That will help the environment, save people from buying cars, and be generally cheaper.
2) Require higher miles per gallon on ALL vehicles purchased in the US. Of course this will piss all of my fellow Michiganders off, but tough shit. They should have seen this coming in the 70's during the last fuel crisis. Europe manages to have cars that get 40+ MPG.
3) Americans could also get up off their butts and walk/bike to places. That would also require more money to get decent and safe walking/biking paths in a lot of areas. But that would help with the amount people spend for gas AND decrease the size of Americans ever-expanding waist lines.
4) Finally admit that oil is a LIMITED resource, and it doesn't matter who controls it. We are NEVER going to see cheap gasoline again. We figured that out with ethanol; gas price goes down, but food price goes up since all the corn goes into the gas tank.
[/QUOTE]
Where was that place that had gasoline selling for like $1.00 or less a gallon? Wasn't that somewhere in Europe? I don't remember.
Thread
Posts in chronological order
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
2) Require higher miles per gallon on ALL vehicles purchased in the US.
[/QUOTE]
We have cars like that around and you know it. But there's a majority of people who drive pickup trucks and bigger trucks in the USA for their work which cannot be done with a car. Snowplowing, construction, etc. I know my truck, gets probably 8 mpg or less. Trucks are meant for hard working, not driving around on a highway. It takes a lot more power to run a truck, and they do a lot more work than a car.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3) Americans could also get up off their butts and walk/bike to places. That would also require more money to get decent and safe walking/biking paths in a lot of areas. But that would help with the amount people spend for gas AND decrease the size of Americans ever-expanding waist lines.
[/QUOTE]
We could. But it depends on where in the United States. Maybe in NYC, Boston, Houston, Detroit, San Fransisco, and San Diego. But the majority of the USA is more rural.
I'm not walking 10 miles to the nearest Walmart!
As for my waist line though, it keeps going down and down. You act as if everyone in America is fat. Traitor!
We do have sidewalks though, in downtown areas because the distance is so far from one town to the next (there's a section of rural area between each town), that it'd cost so much to put in a sidewalk. Asphalt is an oil product. Prices of that have skyrocketed. Concrete is even more expensive.
2) Require higher miles per gallon on ALL vehicles purchased in the US.
[/QUOTE]
We have cars like that around and you know it. But there's a majority of people who drive pickup trucks and bigger trucks in the USA for their work which cannot be done with a car. Snowplowing, construction, etc. I know my truck, gets probably 8 mpg or less. Trucks are meant for hard working, not driving around on a highway. It takes a lot more power to run a truck, and they do a lot more work than a car.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3) Americans could also get up off their butts and walk/bike to places. That would also require more money to get decent and safe walking/biking paths in a lot of areas. But that would help with the amount people spend for gas AND decrease the size of Americans ever-expanding waist lines.
[/QUOTE]
We could. But it depends on where in the United States. Maybe in NYC, Boston, Houston, Detroit, San Fransisco, and San Diego. But the majority of the USA is more rural.
I'm not walking 10 miles to the nearest Walmart!
As for my waist line though, it keeps going down and down. You act as if everyone in America is fat. Traitor!
We do have sidewalks though, in downtown areas because the distance is so far from one town to the next (there's a section of rural area between each town), that it'd cost so much to put in a sidewalk. Asphalt is an oil product. Prices of that have skyrocketed. Concrete is even more expensive.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]YourValentine wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Gym Bitch wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Increasing the supply of a commodity tends to decrease the price of a commodity ... even liberal economists understand that ...
[/QUOTE]
But that is not true for oil,unfortunately. There is no market in the old sense, the oil price is not regulated by supply and demand. In Rotterdam the tanks are overflowing but the price is at an all-time high. In the 1970s the price went up when the OPEC limited the supply but now the price is high due to monopolistic structures and global speculation. If the US dollar were not at an all-time low the world-wide crisis would be even worse.
Oil will be needed by the chemical industry for a long time, it's the raw material for many products and cannot be replaced that easily. However, it can be replaced as the main source of energy and it's totally irresponsible to waste away the oil reserves for fuelling cars and heating houses. That's not a matter of ethics, it's a matter of economic reason. Investing into alternative energy is necessary to maintain our standard of living, it's also a growing market.
To give the oil companies nore rights to drill when they already do not use the licenses they already have is only serving the oil companies and not serving the people or the consumers. Why would the oil companies sell their products any cheaper when thy have even more power and more resources?[/QUOTE]
How do you heat your house? Electric heat?
[/QUOTE]
But that is not true for oil,unfortunately. There is no market in the old sense, the oil price is not regulated by supply and demand. In Rotterdam the tanks are overflowing but the price is at an all-time high. In the 1970s the price went up when the OPEC limited the supply but now the price is high due to monopolistic structures and global speculation. If the US dollar were not at an all-time low the world-wide crisis would be even worse.
Oil will be needed by the chemical industry for a long time, it's the raw material for many products and cannot be replaced that easily. However, it can be replaced as the main source of energy and it's totally irresponsible to waste away the oil reserves for fuelling cars and heating houses. That's not a matter of ethics, it's a matter of economic reason. Investing into alternative energy is necessary to maintain our standard of living, it's also a growing market.
To give the oil companies nore rights to drill when they already do not use the licenses they already have is only serving the oil companies and not serving the people or the consumers. Why would the oil companies sell their products any cheaper when thy have even more power and more resources?[/QUOTE]
How do you heat your house? Electric heat?
We heat with natural gas. The combustion efficiency of our heating system must meet the legal requirements or we must buy a new one. The CO2 emission must not exceed the values set by law. From next year new houses must meet new heat insulation requirements, if you do not insulate your house properly, you don't get a building permission.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Jacob Britt wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE]
I know my truck, gets probably 8 mpg or less.
I drive a Citroen C3 diesel - around town I average 55mpg and on a long run around 72-75mpg!
I know my truck, gets probably 8 mpg or less.
I drive a Citroen C3 diesel - around town I average 55mpg and on a long run around 72-75mpg!
I get about 32 miles to the gallon. My parent's RV gets 7 miles per gallon. Yuck. My house is heated with electric heat but I wish it were gas, gas is cheaper. Here where you live depends on if you get gas heat or electric heat. It's predetermined.
well, as fer oil drilling, imho it's how the Industrial Revolution morphed into the military-industrial complex. All the easy oil has been found; you once got plaques for drilling two miles deep, these days, five is impressive. There are so many competing theories about 'peak oil' they could float Kashoggi's Ship on hot air alone! every great civilization that ever rose to greatness was crushed by the weight of its material excess, and so while oil is a topic now, water will be the topic as it is already in so many places. When Hero developed the steam engine in Roman times, it wasn't exploited properly for several centuries thereafter.
Mary & I use gas heat, electric AC & light, & are in the process of redoing the gutters to capture more rainwater for a set of barrels on the side of the house. My garden pond uses oatmeal disks to prevent a breeding spot for mosquitos, because I won't use electric for a pump, and we use a pushmower to eliminate that type of gas & noise, altho a lawnmower-type tone on electric guitar is nice. This year the garden has half a dozen tomato plants, peas, beans, squash, and my sunflowers. We compost everything. Thin film solar panels are an interesting topic, and we would drive electric or hydrogen the moment a real opporuntity occurs. Paging Dr Tesla...It's pretty therapetic to visit the Mini-Cooper website and customize one for s's & g's, considering they get about 33 mpg. My father drives a Honda Insight, anywhere from 55 to 70 mpg. We do have wind farms nearby, but there's a real serious eminent domain push for a major new electrical line thru Appalachia. it seems there should be a tipping point, and with all the fires and floods, it's amazing how slowly we in the US change.
Mary & I use gas heat, electric AC & light, & are in the process of redoing the gutters to capture more rainwater for a set of barrels on the side of the house. My garden pond uses oatmeal disks to prevent a breeding spot for mosquitos, because I won't use electric for a pump, and we use a pushmower to eliminate that type of gas & noise, altho a lawnmower-type tone on electric guitar is nice. This year the garden has half a dozen tomato plants, peas, beans, squash, and my sunflowers. We compost everything. Thin film solar panels are an interesting topic, and we would drive electric or hydrogen the moment a real opporuntity occurs. Paging Dr Tesla...It's pretty therapetic to visit the Mini-Cooper website and customize one for s's & g's, considering they get about 33 mpg. My father drives a Honda Insight, anywhere from 55 to 70 mpg. We do have wind farms nearby, but there's a real serious eminent domain push for a major new electrical line thru Appalachia. it seems there should be a tipping point, and with all the fires and floods, it's amazing how slowly we in the US change.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I think, from what I've seen, Americans just don't care enough yet. It is widely known (I think) that if you slow down, you can increase your fuel efficiency. Yet everyone around where I live is still driving 10 mph over the speed limit. And, they are driving mostly SUV's it seems. I don't have an SUV, but they make up a pretty high percentage on our roads.[/QUOTE]
Slowing down will not increase your fuel efficiency, which is rather a factor of acceleration. That's why you get better gas mileage on the highway, rather than in the city. Fuel economy is more correlated to the tachometer than the speedometer. If you want to conserve gas, shift gears as soon as possible - try to keep that RPM gauge low. Otherwise, accelerate slowly, try to remain in motion, and keep your speed steady.
Oh, and not owning an SUV surely helps. I can definitely see the utility of owning an SUV - although I am sure that many SUV owners don't capitalize on it. However, a Honda Civic isn't exactly the best people (or cargo) carrier, you know?
Anyway, gas prices are not too high. If they were, the market would develop an alternative to gas. It's really that simple (no joke) - we don't need government subsidies or conscientious consumers. All we need is a free market.
I think, from what I've seen, Americans just don't care enough yet. It is widely known (I think) that if you slow down, you can increase your fuel efficiency. Yet everyone around where I live is still driving 10 mph over the speed limit. And, they are driving mostly SUV's it seems. I don't have an SUV, but they make up a pretty high percentage on our roads.[/QUOTE]
Slowing down will not increase your fuel efficiency, which is rather a factor of acceleration. That's why you get better gas mileage on the highway, rather than in the city. Fuel economy is more correlated to the tachometer than the speedometer. If you want to conserve gas, shift gears as soon as possible - try to keep that RPM gauge low. Otherwise, accelerate slowly, try to remain in motion, and keep your speed steady.
Oh, and not owning an SUV surely helps. I can definitely see the utility of owning an SUV - although I am sure that many SUV owners don't capitalize on it. However, a Honda Civic isn't exactly the best people (or cargo) carrier, you know?
Anyway, gas prices are not too high. If they were, the market would develop an alternative to gas. It's really that simple (no joke) - we don't need government subsidies or conscientious consumers. All we need is a free market.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Music Man wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
I think, from what I've seen, Americans just don't care enough yet. It is widely known (I think) that if you slow down, you can increase your fuel efficiency. Yet everyone around where I live is still driving 10 mph over the speed limit. And, they are driving mostly SUV's it seems. I don't have an SUV, but they make up a pretty high percentage on our roads.[/QUOTE]
Slowing down will not increase your fuel efficiency, which is rather a factor of acceleration. That's why you get better gas mileage on the highway, rather than in the city. Fuel economy is more correlated to the tachometer than the speedometer. If you want to conserve gas, shift gears as soon as possible - try to keep that RPM gauge low. Otherwise, accelerate slowly, try to remain in motion, and keep your speed steady.
Oh, and not owning an SUV surely helps. I can definitely see the utility of owning an SUV - although I am sure that many SUV owners don't capitalize on it. However, a Honda Civic isn't exactly the best people (or cargo) carrier, you know?
Anyway, gas prices are not too high. If they were, the market would develop an alternative to gas. It's really that simple (no joke) - we don't need government subsidies or conscientious consumers. All we need is a free market.[/QUOTE]
I don't know much about the mechanics of cars, but I've always been a steady driver and I drive mostly in the right lane, most of the time. There are rare occasions when I speed, but it is for a good reason - not an everyday occurrence. Maybe my father taught me these sorts of things - about accelerating smoothly to conserve fuel. Probably.
Anyway, there is aerodynamic drag to consider, which would not be much of a factor at speeds of maybe 35 or so, but if you are getting up to 65 and 70 or 75, it is going to change your gas mileage, even if you are traveling at a steady pace on a freeway. That's because air is a countering force and aerodynamic drag rises exponentially with speed. It also varies with car design and SUV's have more of a drag. I guess the best way to test it would be on a track with controlled conditions. Also, if an airplane cuts its speed down, it can conserve fuel. Same with trucks.
But I agree that wasting fuel with rapid acceleration is something a person can easily change with their behavior (unless they are just too competitive - ha).
About alternatives, I do believe the market will take care of it eventually, but it takes time for the market to catch up.
I think, from what I've seen, Americans just don't care enough yet. It is widely known (I think) that if you slow down, you can increase your fuel efficiency. Yet everyone around where I live is still driving 10 mph over the speed limit. And, they are driving mostly SUV's it seems. I don't have an SUV, but they make up a pretty high percentage on our roads.[/QUOTE]
Slowing down will not increase your fuel efficiency, which is rather a factor of acceleration. That's why you get better gas mileage on the highway, rather than in the city. Fuel economy is more correlated to the tachometer than the speedometer. If you want to conserve gas, shift gears as soon as possible - try to keep that RPM gauge low. Otherwise, accelerate slowly, try to remain in motion, and keep your speed steady.
Oh, and not owning an SUV surely helps. I can definitely see the utility of owning an SUV - although I am sure that many SUV owners don't capitalize on it. However, a Honda Civic isn't exactly the best people (or cargo) carrier, you know?
Anyway, gas prices are not too high. If they were, the market would develop an alternative to gas. It's really that simple (no joke) - we don't need government subsidies or conscientious consumers. All we need is a free market.[/QUOTE]
I don't know much about the mechanics of cars, but I've always been a steady driver and I drive mostly in the right lane, most of the time. There are rare occasions when I speed, but it is for a good reason - not an everyday occurrence. Maybe my father taught me these sorts of things - about accelerating smoothly to conserve fuel. Probably.
Anyway, there is aerodynamic drag to consider, which would not be much of a factor at speeds of maybe 35 or so, but if you are getting up to 65 and 70 or 75, it is going to change your gas mileage, even if you are traveling at a steady pace on a freeway. That's because air is a countering force and aerodynamic drag rises exponentially with speed. It also varies with car design and SUV's have more of a drag. I guess the best way to test it would be on a track with controlled conditions. Also, if an airplane cuts its speed down, it can conserve fuel. Same with trucks.
But I agree that wasting fuel with rapid acceleration is something a person can easily change with their behavior (unless they are just too competitive - ha).
About alternatives, I do believe the market will take care of it eventually, but it takes time for the market to catch up.
True, aerodynamics play a significant role in fuel consumption, but I still think the best and easiest gauge of gas economy is the tachometer, rather than the speedometer.
The market does take time, but it will find the necessary and optimal solution, with all the information available. Any governmental interference guiding what should be (i.e. through subsidies, legislation, etc.) will only be a detriment to the efficiency of market forces, and could put us significantly down the hole.
The market does take time, but it will find the necessary and optimal solution, with all the information available. Any governmental interference guiding what should be (i.e. through subsidies, legislation, etc.) will only be a detriment to the efficiency of market forces, and could put us significantly down the hole.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME] wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Donna13 wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
Anyway, gas prices are not too high. If they were, the market would develop an alternative to gas. It's really that simple (no joke) - we don't need government subsidies or conscientious consumers. All we need is a free market.[/QUOTE]
Petrol prices are too high. Unless you have shares in the oil companies, it's hard to see how you can justify your argument. People in the UK are being driven into "fuel poverty" by high petrol, gas and electricity costs. What in the world makes you think this is a good thing or somehow "natural"? Do people have a choice how much they heat their home in winter to stop them feezing to death? It's not simply a matter of people "choosing" to drive or not.
Anyway, gas prices are not too high. If they were, the market would develop an alternative to gas. It's really that simple (no joke) - we don't need government subsidies or conscientious consumers. All we need is a free market.[/QUOTE]
Petrol prices are too high. Unless you have shares in the oil companies, it's hard to see how you can justify your argument. People in the UK are being driven into "fuel poverty" by high petrol, gas and electricity costs. What in the world makes you think this is a good thing or somehow "natural"? Do people have a choice how much they heat their home in winter to stop them feezing to death? It's not simply a matter of people "choosing" to drive or not.
You are quoting me, Holly, but that is not my quote; it is Music Man's quote.
Oil prices are not excessive because consumers are still paying them. When the price increases to a level where consumers cannot or will not afford to pay for them, then the most efficient alternative will be created. The fact that this alternative has yet to be discovered and/or put into widespread use is proof that oil prices are not yet excessive.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]Jacob Britt wrote: [/QUOTENAME][QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
2) Require higher miles per gallon on ALL vehicles purchased in the US.
[/QUOTE]
We have cars like that around and you know it. But there's a majority of people who drive pickup trucks and bigger trucks in the USA for their work which cannot be done with a car. Snowplowing, construction, etc. I know my truck, gets probably 8 mpg or less. Trucks are meant for hard working, not driving around on a highway. It takes a lot more power to run a truck, and they do a lot more work than a car.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3) Americans could also get up off their butts and walk/bike to places. That would also require more money to get decent and safe walking/biking paths in a lot of areas. But that would help with the amount people spend for gas AND decrease the size of Americans ever-expanding waist lines.
[/QUOTE]
We could. But it depends on where in the United States. Maybe in NYC, Boston, Houston, Detroit, San Fransisco, and San Diego. But the majority of the USA is more rural.
I'm not walking 10 miles to the nearest Walmart!
As for my waist line though, it keeps going down and down. You act as if everyone in America is fat. Traitor!
We do have sidewalks though, in downtown areas because the distance is so far from one town to the next (there's a section of rural area between each town), that it'd cost so much to put in a sidewalk. Asphalt is an oil product. Prices of that have skyrocketed. Concrete is even more expensive.[/QUOTE]
You clearly missed my other contribution to the board where I talked about walking and biking and what not. Trust me, I now live 5 miles from town, 7 miles from the nearest supermarket. Check back earlier in the board and you'll see what I said about that.
As far as the trucks go, we could still have those and improve the fuel milage. 7 mpg? That's ridiculous. Might as well set fire to an oil field. We can't get 40+ MPG out of it, sure, but we could sure improve it to getting at least 20 MPG.
2) Require higher miles per gallon on ALL vehicles purchased in the US.
[/QUOTE]
We have cars like that around and you know it. But there's a majority of people who drive pickup trucks and bigger trucks in the USA for their work which cannot be done with a car. Snowplowing, construction, etc. I know my truck, gets probably 8 mpg or less. Trucks are meant for hard working, not driving around on a highway. It takes a lot more power to run a truck, and they do a lot more work than a car.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME]MasterHistoryGirl wrote: [/QUOTENAME]
3) Americans could also get up off their butts and walk/bike to places. That would also require more money to get decent and safe walking/biking paths in a lot of areas. But that would help with the amount people spend for gas AND decrease the size of Americans ever-expanding waist lines.
[/QUOTE]
We could. But it depends on where in the United States. Maybe in NYC, Boston, Houston, Detroit, San Fransisco, and San Diego. But the majority of the USA is more rural.
I'm not walking 10 miles to the nearest Walmart!
As for my waist line though, it keeps going down and down. You act as if everyone in America is fat. Traitor!
We do have sidewalks though, in downtown areas because the distance is so far from one town to the next (there's a section of rural area between each town), that it'd cost so much to put in a sidewalk. Asphalt is an oil product. Prices of that have skyrocketed. Concrete is even more expensive.[/QUOTE]
You clearly missed my other contribution to the board where I talked about walking and biking and what not. Trust me, I now live 5 miles from town, 7 miles from the nearest supermarket. Check back earlier in the board and you'll see what I said about that.
As far as the trucks go, we could still have those and improve the fuel milage. 7 mpg? That's ridiculous. Might as well set fire to an oil field. We can't get 40+ MPG out of it, sure, but we could sure improve it to getting at least 20 MPG.
[QUOTE][QUOTENAME] wrote: [/QUOTENAME]Oil prices are not excessive because consumers are still paying them. When the price increases to a level where consumers cannot or will not afford to pay for them, then the most efficient alternative will be created. The fact that this alternative has yet to be discovered and/or put into widespread use is proof that oil prices are not yet excessive.[/QUOTE]
Wow, you just ignored everything I said. Good job.
Wow, you just ignored everything I said. Good job.