PDA

View Full Version : "ANY EXCUSE WILL DO: Crisis in Egypt To Raise Gas Prices in U.S."



megimoo
02-05-2011, 11:27 AM
ORLANDO -- Experts are warning the crisis in Egypt will likely send prices at the pumps higher. Gas supplies in the US are currently up, but the uncertainty in the middle east is driving prices higher.

The national average for a gallon of regular unleaded gas now stands at $3.12.
That price is just over a two cent increase compared to last week.
Analysts said those prices could shoot up another eight cents in the next two weeks.
SNIP
http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2011/february/204602/Crisis-in-Egypt-likely-to-raise-gas-prices-in-US

Apache
02-05-2011, 01:02 PM
Just think...if Bush wasn't dicking around during his term, we coulda had some drilling in ANWR by now...:rolleyes:

Starbuck
02-05-2011, 03:10 PM
Well, OK, but it is a fact that the price of oil has gone up. World wide. I think it is a little simplistic to go around saying (or implying) that gas companies are taking advantage of Egyptian unrest by raising gas prices. Gas companies buy oil. It has gone up. Gas will go up.
A more responsible approach to reporting would show the exact relationship between the price of oil and the price of gas so that we can see for ourselves how much we are being overcharged, if at all.

As it is, the only information I have at hand is that a barrel of oil has 42 gallons and costs 90$. Out of that barrel, they get about 20 gallons of gasoline. But that means the oil refineries are paying $4.50/gallon for gasoline, if that's all they get out of it. Which it isn't.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/energyexplained/images/charts/products_from_barrel_crude_oil-small.gif
Of course they get lots of other stuff. My complaint is that I have yet to see a single reporter present an article that gives us useful information about this subject. I'm sure the information is out there and is known by lots of people, but none of them seem to be in the business of consumer reporting.

megimoo
02-05-2011, 03:24 PM
Just think...if Bush wasn't dicking around during his term, we coulda had some drilling in ANWR by now...:rolleyes:Just think... if Obama wasn't a Revolutionary Liberal/Maois we could have our America well on the road to recovering from this recession .

Apache
02-05-2011, 03:54 PM
Well, OK, but it is a fact that the price of oil has gone up. World wide. I think it is a little simplistic to go around saying (or implying) that gas companies are taking advantage of Egyptian unrest by raising gas prices. Gas companies buy oil. It has gone up. Gas will go up.
A more responsible approach to reporting would show the exact relationship between the price of oil and the price of gas so that we can see for ourselves how much we are being overcharged, if at all.

As it is, the only information I have at hand is that a barrel of oil has 42 gallons and costs 90$. Out of that barrel, they get about 20 gallons of gasoline. But that means the oil refineries are paying $4.50/gallon for gasoline, if that's all they get out of it. Which it isn't.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/energyexplained/images/charts/products_from_barrel_crude_oil-small.gif
Of course they get lots of other stuff. My complaint is that I have yet to see a single reporter present an article that gives us useful information about this subject. I'm sure the information is out there and is known by lots of people, but none of them seem to be in the business of consumer reporting.

I know all that. I was simply stating that had we gone in and started there wells back then, the Middle East turmoil wouldn't have the oil market as shaken up as it is now.

We are being held hostage by the very people who are supposed to be looking out for us. I'm tired of the political dancing to the enviro-weenies. They have proven time and again to be wrong, from the Great Apes to the Polar Bears, the oil wells set ablaze by Saddam to the Gulf oil spill, global warming to global cooling....

Wrong...

Starbuck
02-05-2011, 04:09 PM
I know all that. I was simply stating that had we gone in and started there wells back then, the Middle East turmoil wouldn't have the oil market as shaken up as it is now.

We are being held hostage by the very people who are supposed to be looking out for us. I'm tired of the political dancing to the enviro-weenies. They have proven time and again to be wrong, from the Great Apes to the Polar Bears, the oil wells set ablaze by Saddam to the Gulf oil spill, global warming to global cooling....

Wrong...

Your point is well taken, and you're right about us missing the opportunity to drill in ANWR. My beef is with the reporters who do such a poor job of giving out information.

The information that they give out - and the original article is a good example - is written for someone who is walking by the TV or new stand, and that's about all. It's written at about the 10th grade level and contains almost no information.
If this kind of reporting had been in vogue in 1775 the colonies would have never banded together and we'd all be singing something besides "The Star Spangled Banner". Americans in 1775 read newspapers and pamphlets and engaged in debate. Then that all went away, albeit slowly.
Today, the equivalent of the 1775 pamphlet has arisen in the form of Twitter and Facebook. It remains to be seen whether this new medium will result in improvements, but I actually think it will in many cases.

Apache
02-05-2011, 05:52 PM
Your point is well taken, and you're right about us missing the opportunity to drill in ANWR. My beef is with the reporters who do such a poor job of giving out information.

The information that they give out - and the original article is a good example - is written for someone who is walking by the TV or new stand, and that's about all. It's written at about the 10th grade level and contains almost no information.
If this kind of reporting had been in vogue in 1775 the colonies would have never banded together and we'd all be singing something besides "The Star Spangled Banner". Americans in 1775 read newspapers and pamphlets and engaged in debate. Then that all went away, albeit slowly.
Today, the equivalent of the 1775 pamphlet has arisen in the form of Twitter and Facebook. It remains to be seen whether this new medium will result in improvements, but I actually think it will in many cases.

Its a knee jerk reaction. What passes for "journalism" today is a joke. We've got a bunch of lap-dog monkeys banging out what they are told to... There's no actual interest in going beyond the here and now. People are the same way anymore...


Like it or not, drilling our own supply is a national security priority. If we don't tackle this soon, everyone will wonder, what the hell, when it's too late...

noonwitch
02-07-2011, 11:35 AM
It's still cheaper than it was during most of the Bush administration. It's been right around $3 a gallon for most of the past year, and I remember it being over $4 a gallon for a good part of Ws second term.

fettpett
02-07-2011, 11:41 AM
It's still cheaper than it was during most of the Bush administration. It's been right around $3 a gallon for most of the past year, and I remember it being over $4 a gallon for a good part of Ws second term.

not really until the last year or so, it got bad but then started going down...not as cheap as it was at the start of his Admin though :(

Apache
02-07-2011, 11:46 AM
It's still cheaper than it was during most of the Bush administration. It's been right around $3 a gallon for most of the past year, and I remember it being over $4 a gallon for a good part of Ws second term.

Correction. It was cheaper during MOST of the Bush term, things didn't rise to 3 or 4 dollars a gallon until the second year of his second term. Even then they didn't stay that way...

Tecate
02-07-2011, 09:13 PM
To be completely honest, I'm surprised that it hasn't moved higher than this already. If you look at commodities as a whole, oil is actually lagging compared to everything else... And don't forget to factor in a weak US dollar to the equation. When oil peaked @~$145 / barrel during the Summer of 2008, the USDX was all the way down to ~72. It staged a huge rally off that low and went all the way back up to the high 80's again. Right now it's sitting @~78.

This isn't necessarily the last word on oil prices, but it must be considered.

Tecate
02-07-2011, 09:28 PM
http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i228/Loveways/15_4.jpg

Madisonian
02-08-2011, 07:46 AM
It's still cheaper than it was during most of the Bush administration. It's been right around $3 a gallon for most of the past year, and I remember it being over $4 a gallon for a good part of Ws second term.
Gas was about $1.50 a gallon when Bush was inaugurated and only went above $2.00 for 2 weeks during his first term.
It did not hit $3.00 until May of 2007 (after the Pelosi / Reid takeover) and hit its highs of low $4 during the summer of 2008 (for about 8 - 10 weeks) after which it it retreated to under $2 until 3 months into the Obama regime where it has steadily progressed to where it is today.(source:http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html)
California and the left coast were always about 10% higher than the rest of the country, but that has more to do with thier taxes and such.

In summary, no it is not cheaper than it was during most of the Bush administration and 10 weeks was not a good part of Bushes 2nd term. In fact in 208 weeks (4 years), it was at or over $4 for roughly 5%

Nice try though..

Odysseus
02-08-2011, 10:46 AM
Just think...if Bush wasn't dicking around during his term, we coulda had some drilling in ANWR by now...:rolleyes:
As stated previously by others, Bush wasn't the problem. Congressional Democrats did everything in their power to prevent it, using the vilest demagoguery and outright lies to ensure that we would be unable to tap domestic resources.

I know all that. I was simply stating that had we gone in and started there wells back then, the Middle East turmoil wouldn't have the oil market as shaken up as it is now.

We are being held hostage by the very people who are supposed to be looking out for us. I'm tired of the political dancing to the enviro-weenies. They have proven time and again to be wrong, from the Great Apes to the Polar Bears, the oil wells set ablaze by Saddam to the Gulf oil spill, global warming to global cooling....

Wrong...
Drilling in ANWR would have helped, until Obama came up with an excuse to shut it down, as he did in the Gulf.

We absolutely must drill domestically, but we also have to develop other proven technologies. Domestic natural gas reserves can supply us with much cleaner electrical generation than even the cleanest coal plants, and we should be building new plants as fast as we can. We also need more nuclear plants (there hasn't been a new one built since the 70s). We are limited in how much gasoline we can produce, and may never be completely self-sufficient, but there is no reason that our electrical power generation cannot be met entirely by domestic sources. It just takes will, the removal of impediments to private investment, and the muzzling of our shrill green hysterics.


Gas was about $1.50 a gallon when Bush was inaugurated and only went above $2.00 for 2 weeks during his first term.
It did not hit $3.00 until May of 2007 (after the Pelosi / Reid takeover) and hit its highs of low $4 during the summer of 2008 (for about 8 - 10 weeks) after which it it retreated to under $2 until 3 months into the Obama regime where it has steadily progressed to where it is today.(source:http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html)
California and the left coast were always about 10% higher than the rest of the country, but that has more to do with thier taxes and such.

In summary, no it is not cheaper than it was during most of the Bush administration and 10 weeks was not a good part of Bushes 2nd term. In fact in 208 weeks (4 years), it was at or over $4 for roughly 5%

Nice try though..

Target! Cease fire. :D

Here's where this gets truly miserable for the US. Europe gets its oil from three sources: The North Sea, Russia and the Middle East. The Saudi, Kuwaiti and Iraqi oil comes up through the Suez Canal, which is now threatened by Egypt's instability. Iranian oil also comes up through the Canal, but Iran is allied with the Muslim Brotherhood. This means that they can exclude US-allied OPEC trade from transiting the Meditterranean, which will not only drive up the price, but ensure market dominance to our enemies. That's not to say that the oil will go unused, it will be diverted to Asia, where China will appreciate getting a critical resource on the cheap. Russia will also experience a windfall, and use the added clout from more market control to bully the former Warsaw Pact nations that have tried to distance themselves from Moscow and ally with is. Western Europe will find itself under Russian and Iranian leverage, and good luck ever getting them to agree to anything that we need in the realm of security.

This is the worst possible strategic situation that we could have been in. When Obama took office, the US was the sole remaining superpower, but when he leaves, we will be lucky to be one of them. He has done to America what Clement Atlee did to the British Empire.

lacarnut
02-08-2011, 12:10 PM
As stated previously by others, Bush wasn't the problem. Congressional Democrats did everything in their power to prevent it, using the vilest demagoguery and outright lies to ensure that we would be unable to tap domestic resources.

Drilling in ANWR would have helped, until Obama came up with an excuse to shut it down, as he did in the Gulf. .

Bush did not fight hard enough and use his bully pulpit to advance more drilling. I fault Bush for his laissez faire attitude. He fought hard for the war and troops but not for domestic and social issues.

Democrats, the news media and the courts will side with the environmental nuts who want to stop all drilling onshore and offshore. Many of them are anti-American zealots. As I see it, there is only one person that has the experience, knowledge and the fortitude to battle them. That is the former governor of AK. Even if she becomes President and has a filibuster Senate, the die in the wool Democrats and the other obstructionist mentioned above will declare war on the administration and their energy policies. Democrats play down and dirty. The Repubs need to take lessons. Additionally, any Repub candidate that announces a sound energy policy will automatically become a polarizing figure. With the right Repub President, we can create millions of good paying jobs in the energy field, decrease our balance of payments and improve our national security.

Apache
02-08-2011, 12:15 PM
As stated previously by others, Bush wasn't the problem. Congressional Democrats did everything in their power to prevent it, using the vilest demagoguery and outright lies to ensure that we would be unable to tap domestic resources.

Drilling in ANWR would have helped, until Obama came up with an excuse to shut it down, as he did in the Gulf.

That's one thing that pissed me off about W, he was more interested in compromise than getting things done. There was a majroity in Congress and Bush should have taken the initiative to lead the charge for domestic energy production...

Novaheart
02-08-2011, 12:27 PM
Ultimately, money has no value but oil does.

While "Peak Oil" hysteria is largely BS at this point (according to Oil And Gas Journal ) and the price of oil is ridiculously high and manipulated (according to Oil And Gas Journal) as time marches on, oil will cost more.

So, while stuffing subsidized oil companies' pockets full of cash, and floating Arabs on golden barges wouldn't seem like the best use of our money, holding our domestic oil in reserve is probably the best long term strategy.

The only scenario under which it doesn't make sense to burn everyone else's oil first is if you believe that the relief technology will arrive before we need to use our domestic oil. In that case, we will have wasted brazillions of dollars on foreign oil to save something which will only be used for specialty applications in the future.

lacarnut
02-08-2011, 12:59 PM
Ultimately, money has no value but oil does.

While "Peak Oil" hysteria is largely BS at this point (according to Oil And Gas Journal ) and the price of oil is ridiculously high and manipulated (according to Oil And Gas Journal) as time marches on, oil will cost more.

So, while stuffing subsidized oil companies' pockets full of cash, and floating Arabs on golden barges wouldn't seem like the best use of our money, holding our domestic oil in reserve is probably the best long term strategy.

The only scenario under which it doesn't make sense to burn everyone else's oil first is if you believe that the relief technology will arrive before we need to use our domestic oil. In that case, we will have wasted brazillions of dollars on foreign oil to save something which will only be used for specialty applications in the future.

No moron. We need to find alternative energy to supplement oil usage like natural gas which we have gazillions of. The government along with private enterprise needs to invest in the infrastructure of natural gas pipelines to fuel our cars. Nuke plants would be a good idea also. Scrap subsidies for dumb shit like solar, wind and Ethanol which has proven to be a bust. The damn windmills in TX don't work in freezing temperatures. Ethanol uses almost as much energy as it creates. People are starving because of this idiot practice. Even Al Gore states that Ethanol was a bad idea. Three solar companies have went bust recently even though they got boatloads of cash in subsidizes. The biggest problem with this change in direction is we have f....ing stupid ass liberals like you that do not want an energy policy that uses fossil fuels. Idiots like Obama telling us that in the year 2035, we will only be importing 20%. You have got to be really stupid to believe that crap cause solar, wind, Ethanol, electric cars and other alternative fuels is not going to get us there.

Obama wants to nationalize the oil industry. Those greedy oil companies and other large business's are making too much money and need to share the wealth to workers per his Chamber of Commerce speech. Taking over the oil companies, taking their profits and raising the Federal gas tax will be for the good for all of us. Not. That is the plan because this socialistic POS in the WH thinks he is King and wants prices to rise to those of the EU.

Odysseus
02-08-2011, 02:34 PM
No moron. We need to find alternative energy to supplement oil usage like natural gas which we have gazillions of. The government along with private enterprise needs to invest in the infrastructure of natural gas pipelines to fuel our cars. Nuke plants would be a good idea also. Scrap subsidies for dumb shit like solar, wind and Ethanol which has proven to be a bust. The damn windmills in TX don't work in freezing temperatures. Ethanol uses almost as much energy as it creates. People are starving because of this idiot practice. Even Al Gore states that Ethanol was a bad idea. Three solar companies have went bust recently even though they got boatloads of cash in subsidizes. The biggest problem with this change in direction is we have f....ing stupid ass liberals like you that do not want an energy policy that uses fossil fuels. Idiots like Obama telling us that in the year 2035, we will only be importing 20%. You have got to be really stupid to believe that crap cause solar, wind, Ethanol, electric cars and other alternative fuels is not going to get us there.

Obama wants to nationalize the oil industry. Those greedy oil companies and other large business's are making too much money and need to share the wealth to workers per his Chamber of Commerce speech. Taking over the oil companies, taking their profits and raising the Federal gas tax will be for the good for all of us. Not. That is the plan because this socialistic POS in the WH thinks he is King and wants prices to rise to those of the EU.

Here's the part that I love: Obama wants to penalyze power generation via clean coal and oil, but expects electric cars to recharge somewhere. Can we tell him where the plug ought to go?

Apache
02-08-2011, 02:41 PM
Here's the part that I love: Obama wants to penalyze power generation via clean coal and oil, but expects electric cars to recharge somewhere. Can we tell him where the plug ought to go?

If he bows to another foreign leader I'll show him where that cord will go...:p

Rockntractor
02-08-2011, 03:28 PM
Ultimately, money has no value but oil does.

While "Peak Oil" hysteria is largely BS at this point (according to Oil And Gas Journal ) and the price of oil is ridiculously high and manipulated (according to Oil And Gas Journal) as time marches on, oil will cost more.

So, while stuffing subsidized oil companies' pockets full of cash, and floating Arabs on golden barges wouldn't seem like the best use of our money, holding our domestic oil in reserve is probably the best long term strategy.

The only scenario under which it doesn't make sense to burn everyone else's oil first is if you believe that the relief technology will arrive before we need to use our domestic oil. In that case, we will have wasted brazillions of dollars on foreign oil to save something which will only be used for specialty applications in the future.

The problem is while we wait and supposedly sit on it , China and many other countries are in the gulf pumping it away from underneath us.

lacarnut
02-08-2011, 04:28 PM
Here's the part that I love: Obama wants to penalyze power generation via clean coal and oil, but expects electric cars to recharge somewhere. Can we tell him where the plug ought to go?

I predict in 3 three years that the Volt (GM's $41k electric car) will go by the wayside like the Caddy diesel in the late 70's. It was a bomb and the Volt will be also. This POS will only go 40 miles on a full charge. Then, it runs on (gasp) gasoline. Nissan and Toyota makes these greenie cars for 7 to 8 thousand dollars less. If I was interested in an electric car, I would buy the butt ugly Prius cause at least it has been in production for a few years and most of the bugs have been worked out. Gonna laugh my ass off when GM has to start re-calling these lemons in for repairs.

The dunces in DC lent Tesla Motors 500 millions to produce an electric Roadster at 120 grand and a sedan at 50 grand. Banks would not lend money to the millionaire owner so he hit up Uncle Sam. We will never see that money repaid either.

lacarnut
02-08-2011, 04:39 PM
The problem is while we wait and supposedly sit on it , China and many other countries are in the gulf pumping it away from underneath us.

Ever notice how Wee Wee & Nova post articles about energy but are too ignorant to engage in a discussion. Probably funneling these left wing pieces to Obama and his band of clowns.

Rockntractor
02-08-2011, 04:42 PM
Ever notice how Wee Wee & Nova post articles about energy but are too ignorant to engage in a discussion. Probably funneling these left wing pieces to Obama and his band of clowns.

Wei is part of an organized effort, they give him material, Nova is just out trolling for a boyfriend.

Apache
02-08-2011, 04:53 PM
Ever notice how Wee Wee & Nova post articles about energy but are too ignorant to engage in a discussion. Probably funneling these left wing pieces to Obama and his band of clowns.

We blow holes in Wheezer's arguments all the way down the line... Nova has no idea what he's talking about and tries to sound good doing it.

Odysseus
02-08-2011, 06:00 PM
I predict in 3 three years that the Volt (GM's $41k electric car) will go by the wayside like the Caddy diesel in the late 70's. It was a bomb and the Volt will be also. This POS will only go 40 miles on a full charge. Then, it runs on (gasp) gasoline. Nissan and Toyota makes these greenie cars for 7 to 8 thousand dollars less. If I was interested in an electric car, I would buy the butt ugly Prius cause at least it has been in production for a few years and most of the bugs have been worked out. Gonna laugh my ass off when GM has to start re-calling these lemons in for repairs.

The dunces in DC lent Tesla Motors 500 millions to produce an electric Roadster at 120 grand and a sedan at 50 grand. Banks would not lend money to the millionaire owner so he hit up Uncle Sam. We will never see that money repaid either.
Yeah, but at least the Tesla Roadster gets some performance and looks good. Clearly, America is having a midlife crisis if we spent that much money on a sports car.
http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/all/themes/tesla/images/roadster/hero_roadster_fusion-red.jpg

Wei is part of an organized effort, they give him material, Nova is just out trolling for a boyfriend.

I think that this is the first time that anyone equated Wei's posts with any kind of organizational effort. The man's synapses are set to random fire.

Novaheart
02-09-2011, 01:07 PM
No moron. We need to find alternative energy to supplement oil usage like natural gas which we have gazillions of.

Well, fuckwad, I didn't say that we didn't.



No moron. .... The government along with private enterprise needs to invest in the infrastructure of natural gas pipelines to fuel our cars.

Where, asswipe, did I say that they shouldn't?



No moron. ....... The biggest problem with this change in direction is we have f....ing stupid ass liberals like you that do not want an energy policy that uses fossil fuels. I


And this is why, you drooling baboon, that I said your inability to read what is written is tiresome. You can't find a single post on this or any other board which supports your belief that I oppose fossil fuels.

fettpett
02-09-2011, 01:10 PM
Well, fuckwad, I didn't say that we didn't.




Where, asswipe, did I say that they shouldn't?




And this is why, you drooling baboon, that I said your inability to read what is written is tiresome. You can't find a single post on this or any other board which supports your belief that I oppose fossil fuels.

LOL...someone got their panties in a bunch this morning/afternoon

fettpett
02-09-2011, 01:18 PM
The dunces in DC lent Tesla Motors 500 millions to produce an electric Roadster at 120 grand and a sedan at 50 grand. Banks would not lend money to the millionaire owner so he hit up Uncle Sam. We will never see that money repaid either.

The thing is, Tesla Motors wasn't designing cars for the everyday person, the were specifically targeting people with money and this is why they are as expensive as they are.

They sell their power train to Toyota and Diamler, and looks like they are expanding into the cheaper markets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors

personally If they can get set they'll grow pretty quick and help push the other companies to develop GOOD electric cars not those POS's that GM sells


Of course we need the infrastructure to accommodate them, which all the fucktard NIMBY's keep blocking and our fucktard Pres is squashing with his Carbon Credit bullshit

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 01:20 PM
LOL...someone got their panties in a bunch this morning/afternoon

Yep. He must have had a spat with his boyfriend.

fettpett
02-09-2011, 01:20 PM
also the Money didn't come from the stimulus or anything, came from a Bush era program


In June 2009 Tesla was approved to receive US$465 million in interest-bearing loans from the United States Department of Energy. The funding, part of an US$8 billion program for advanced vehicle technologies (Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan Program), supports engineering and production of the Model S sedan, as well as the development of powertrain technology that Tesla plans to sell to other automakers.[46] The low-interest loans are not related to the "bailout" funds that GM and Chrysler have received, nor are they related to the 2009 economic stimulus package. The Department of Energy loan program was created in 2007 during the George Bush administration in order to get more fuel-efficient vehicle options to U.S. consumers and to decrease the country's dependence on foreign oil.[47]

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 01:39 PM
The thing is, Tesla Motors wasn't designing cars for the everyday person, the were specifically targeting people with money and this is why they are as expensive as they are.

They sell their power train to Toyota and Diamler, and looks like they are expanding into the cheaper markets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Motors

personally If they can get set they'll grow pretty quick and help push the other companies to develop GOOD electric cars not those POS's that GM sells


Of course we need the infrastructure to accommodate them, which all the fucktard NIMBY's keep blocking and our fucktard Pres is squashing with his Carbon Credit bullshit

The purpose of the electric car is to be environmentally friendly, save energy and should be cost effective. It fails at all three in my opinion. The manufacture and disposal of batteries is a big problem. You have to get the electricity to run these things from somewhere. Buying an electric car that cost 7 to 10 thousands more than a gasoline car is not economical in the long run. Plus, the resale value on a 5 year old electric car will be in the toilet.

I don't want my tax money supporting boondoggles like electric car, windmills, solar and Ethanol. Most of these green energy companies would fall flat on their face if they were not heavily subsidized. The US can not afford to subsidize this stupidity. Debt is getting ready to consume us.

Yukon
02-09-2011, 01:42 PM
ORLANDO -- Experts are warning the crisis in Egypt will likely send prices at the pumps higher. Gas supplies in the US are currently up, but the uncertainty in the middle east is driving prices higher.

The national average for a gallon of regular unleaded gas now stands at $3.12.
That price is just over a two cent increase compared to last week.
Analysts said those prices could shoot up another eight cents in the next two weeks.
SNIP
http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news/2011/february/204602/Crisis-in-Egypt-likely-to-raise-gas-prices-in-US

The US price works out to $ .83 per litre, we in the Great White North pay $ 1.09 per litre ( in my town). You are still getting batgain. Stop your whinning !

Novaheart
02-09-2011, 01:49 PM
I don't want my tax money supporting boondoggles like electric car, windmills, solar and Ethanol. .

Your tax money was spent on something else. I think you paid for the "bridge freezes before roadway" sign on 301 at 156. It's a nice sign.

Yukon
02-09-2011, 01:52 PM
I don't want my tax money supporting boondoggles like electric car, windmills, solar and Ethanol.



If you had said you didnt want your money spent on wars and military waste I would have had more respect for your opinion.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 01:54 PM
If you had said you didnt want your money speny on wars and military waste I would have had more respect for your opinion.

Are you driving an electric car? Is your electricity produced by a windmill? I know you are drinking ethanol right now!

Zathras
02-09-2011, 01:56 PM
If you had said you didnt want your money speny on wars and military waste I would have had more respect for your opinion.

As if respect from a fucktard like you means anything Pukeon.

Yukon
02-09-2011, 01:58 PM
Are you driving an electric car? Is your electricity produced by a windmill? I know you are drinking ethanol right now!

I intend on purchasing the new Chevy Volt in the spring.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 01:59 PM
I intend on purchasing the new Chevy Volt in the spring.

Will you charge it with a windmill or will your power come from coal?

Zathras
02-09-2011, 02:01 PM
I intend on wasting my money buying the new Chevy Volt in the spring.

So you're the one.

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 02:14 PM
If you had said you didnt want your money spent on wars and military waste I would have had more respect for your opinion.

If you do not have any skin (US taxes) in the game, your opinion is worthless. However, you do have a point with waste and over spending in not only defense but all branches of our government. Conservatives are for slashing the budget. Liberals want to nibble around the edges.

BTW, if Russian or China attacked/invaded your worthless ass, the USA would protect you. Did that ever dawn on you??????????

Odysseus
02-09-2011, 02:38 PM
If you do not have any skin (US taxes) in the game, your opinion is worthless. However, you do have a point with waste and over spending in not only defense but all branches of our government. Conservatives are for slashing the budget. Liberals want to nibble around the edges.

BTW, if Russian or China attacked/invaded your worthless ass, the USA would protect you. Did that ever dawn on you??????????

Why would China or Russia attack Canada? They're already quasi-socialist states that don't care much for the US. An invasion would be redundant.

fettpett
02-09-2011, 02:42 PM
The purpose of the electric car is to be environmentally friendly, save energy and should be cost effective. It fails at all three in my opinion. The manufacture and disposal of batteries is a big problem. You have to get the electricity to run these things from somewhere. Buying an electric car that cost 7 to 10 thousands more than a gasoline car is not economical in the long run. Plus, the resale value on a 5 year old electric car will be in the toilet.

I don't want my tax money supporting boondoggles like electric car, windmills, solar and Ethanol. Most of these green energy companies would fall flat on their face if they were not heavily subsidized. The US can not afford to subsidize this stupidity. Debt is getting ready to consume us.

I agree, but the R&D has to come from somewhere (I do prefer that the money came from the private sector) and it's not going to be overly efficient for a while.

I would like to see more diesel and diesel hybrids than the direction we're going, since a diesel engine will run on vegetable oil and we can use petroleum for other uses.

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 03:04 PM
Why would China or Russia attack Canada? They're already quasi-socialist states that don't care much for the US. An invasion would be redundant.

They could steal their oil, gold, silver, etc. Nothing else would be worth the effort.:)

Yukon
02-09-2011, 03:10 PM
Conservatives are for slashing the budget. Liberals want to nibble around the edges.

?

Are you serious, do you live in the real world? You have the gall to make this claim when it was conservatives like Reagan and Bush, Junior who ran up the largest deficits in the history of monetary budgeting? Surely you jest my friend or are you just plain simple?

fettpett
02-09-2011, 03:12 PM
Are you serious, do you live in the real world? You have the gall to make this claim when it was conservatives like Reagan and Bush, Junior who ran up the largest deficits in the history of monetary budgeting? Surely you jest my friend or are you just plain simple?

HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHA

DUMBASS

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 03:34 PM
Are you serious, do you live in the real world? You have the gall to make this claim when it was conservatives like Reagan and Bush, Junior who ran up the largest deficits in the history of monetary budgeting? Surely you jest my friend or are you just plain simple?

I am speaking of the newly elected Tea Party conservatives. Obama has rung up more debt in 2 year than Bush did in 8. Looks like you are the simpleton.

BTW..why do you care??? I don't care what kind of monetary budgeting or shitty government health care or giving drugs to addicts or high tax rates, etc. etc. you Canadians have. You sound like the EU trash that likes to meddle in American affairs. Could it be that we live large, and liberal busy bodies like you are jealous???

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 03:34 PM
Are you serious, do you live in the real world? You have the gall to make this claim when it was conservatives like Reagan and Bush, Junior who ran up the largest deficits in the history of monetary budgeting? Surely you jest my friend or are you just plain simple?


I intend on purchasing the new Chevy Volt in the spring.

Will you charge it with a windmill or will your power come from coal?

Yukon
02-09-2011, 03:41 PM
Will you charge it with a windmill or will your power come from coal?

Actually it will just be charged using my exterior home electric outlet. Our hydro is very inexpensive compared to what Americans pay - so is our gas for home heating.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 03:44 PM
Actually it will just be charged using my exterior home electric outlet. Our hydro is very inexpensive compared to what Americans pay - so is our gas for home heating.

Does your Hydro provide all of Canada's electricity? Our environmentalists block us from further hydroelectric projects.

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 03:45 PM
Will you charge it with a windmill or will your power come from coal?

Don't tell him that the Volt loses 30% of it's electric power when the temp. falls below freezing. The 40 mile range drops to 28 miles, and then the gasoline engine kicks in using (gasp) gasoline. You would have to be an idiot to buy this POS living in a cold climate where this much performance is zapped. However, it sound like the right car for a dumb ass Canadian.

fettpett
02-09-2011, 03:46 PM
hydro is great, but it fucks with the environment and fish....i though you libtards were all about not fucking with the environment

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 03:51 PM
Actually it will just be charged using my exterior home electric outlet. Our hydro is very inexpensive compared to what Americans pay - so is our gas for home heating.


In 2007, the leading type of power generation by utilities in Canada is hydroelectricity, with a share of 58.7%. Coal (16.6%), nuclear (15.5%), natural gas (6.6%) , fuel oil (1.2%), wind (0.5%) and wood (0.3%) follow. Other sources, such as petroleum coke make up the remaining 0.7%.

However, these figures do not account for the variety of provincial generation mixes. Historic producers of coal, like Alberta (73.6%), Saskatchewan (61%) and Nova Scotia (56.8%), have come to rely mainly on coal-fired generating stations. In hydro-rich provinces, such as Quebec (94%), British Columbia (94.8%), Newfoundland and Labrador (96.8%) Manitoba (97.7%), Yukon (93.2%) and the Northwest Territories (75.1%), hydroelectric power accounts for the bulk of all electric generation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada
Looks to me like there will be a lot of hydrocarbon fuels used to power your car, not counting the gasoline in the tank because after all it is a hybrid.

Novaheart
02-09-2011, 05:33 PM
Doesn't the gasoline engine kick in on all these hybrid cars when you turn the AC on?

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 05:54 PM
Doesn't the gasoline engine kick in on all these hybrid cars when you turn the AC on?

I would think so, but in Canada that part wouldn't be used much.

Yukon
02-09-2011, 06:04 PM
Jealous are we ?

Odysseus
02-09-2011, 06:05 PM
Doesn't the gasoline engine kick in on all these hybrid cars when you turn the AC on?

It depends on the hybrid.

In parallel hybrids, both motors are connected to the transmission and transmit power to drive the wheels, In series hybrids, only the electric motor drives the drivetrain, and gas motor works as a generates power for the electric motor recharges the batteries.

In both cases, the gas motor runs throughout operation.

The problems with hybrids are:
While they don't emit as much carbon monoxide, the batteries are much larger and more toxic than conventional auto batteries, which means that both manufacturing and disposal are more hazardous, and the pollution from the batteries is a far more serious problem than fantasies like Global Warming.
The cost per vehicle is far greater than for internal combustion driven cars
The range on battery, even when augmented with ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) doesn't match conventional cars, and in some cases, is laughably low.
Some hybrids require recharging off of the power grid, which negates the advantage of not using as much fossil fuels, since most power in the US is generated by oil, coal, natural gas or the like.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 06:07 PM
Jealous are we ?

My first 16 years of life were in Minnesota, jealous, no.

Odysseus
02-09-2011, 06:07 PM
Jealous are we ?

Hardly. The lack of AC use is more than offset by increased engine and drive train wear from trying to get out of snow drifts, corrosive weather effects on the auto body and chassis and smug idiocy from hybrid owners who think that their lifestyle has an impact on the planet.

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 06:26 PM
Jealous are we ?

Yes, yes and yes. I could give a flying fuck how the internal wheels of Canadian politics turn. Conversely, a liberal dummy like you is hell bent on giving us advise. Everyone here thinks you are a meddling fool.

We have a President who does not know his ass from the hole in the ground about energy. So, we will have to deal with it for almost 2 years before he is shown the door.

FYI, I have my best interests of my country at heart. If I did not, I would not give a shit about the price going up or gaining energy independence cause I receive (2) oil royalties checks from Denbury and Hess each month. Got news for you. Green energy will never ever get us close to there.

Go buy that hunk of shit Volt. It will be a lemon just like the Caddy diesel in the late 70's.

Zathras
02-09-2011, 06:45 PM
Jealous are we ?

Of you and your POS Volt? Not in the least Pukeon. In fact we're laughing our asses off at your stupidity in buying one....and pretty much everything else you believe in as well.

Yukon
02-09-2011, 06:49 PM
lac,

I think you have a great President.

djones520
02-09-2011, 06:53 PM
lac,

I think you have a great President.

Good for you. We don't.

Zathras
02-09-2011, 06:56 PM
lac,

I think you have a great President.

Of course you do...you're a braindead, liberal waste of skin....much like Obumbles.

Madisonian
02-09-2011, 06:57 PM
lac,

I think you have a great President.
We might think that Canadians have a great PM as well if anyone in the US gave a shit who it is.

lacarnut
02-09-2011, 07:13 PM
lac,

I think you have a great President.

And I think you are a retard. On the other hand, who gives a shit what you think.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 07:19 PM
We might think that Canadians have a great PM as well if anyone in the US gave a shit who it is.

And if we did give a shit it probably wouldn't matter much because he answers to the queen doesn't he.
Canada isn't grown up yet, they have foster parents!

djones520
02-09-2011, 07:23 PM
And if we did give a shit it probably wouldn't matter much because he answers to the queen doesn't he.
Canada isn't grown up yet, they have foster parents!

Huh... that is true. I wasn't aware that Canada was still a Constitutional Monarchy under Britain. I thought they had split all political ties like that.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 07:29 PM
Huh... that is true. I wasn't aware that Canada was still a Constitutional Monarchy under Britain. I thought they had split all political ties like that.

I thought the queen still had a say, I might be wrong on this but I thought i heard this mentioned recently in some sort of issue.

djones520
02-09-2011, 07:30 PM
I thought the queen still had a say, I might be wrong on this but I thought i heard this mentioned recently in some sort of issue.

It would seem she has the same power in Canada as she has in Britain. I have no clue what that power is, but she has it.

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 07:34 PM
It would seem she has the same power in Canada as she has in Britain. I have no clue what that power is, but she has it.

You're right, from what I can tell from Wiki it is ceremonial, they severed legislative ties in 1982.

Madisonian
02-09-2011, 07:42 PM
And if we did give a shit it probably wouldn't matter much because he answers to the queen doesn't he.
Canada isn't grown up yet, they have foster parents!
The Canadian PM answers to Perez Hilton?

Rockntractor
02-09-2011, 07:46 PM
You're right, from what I can tell from Wiki it is ceremonial, they severed legislative ties in 1982.

It actually gets a little confusing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Canada

She may actually be the only Brit to have power there but may not choose to exercise it.:confused:

Apache
02-10-2011, 11:15 AM
Are you serious, do you live in the real world? You have the gall to make this claim when it was conservatives like Reagan and Bush, Junior who ran up the largest deficits in the history of monetary budgeting? Surely you jest my friend or are you just plain simple?

I see Mister Ignorant is back...:rolleyes:

Rockntractor
02-10-2011, 11:21 AM
I see Mister Ignorant is back...:rolleyes:

Were you gone yesterday? He was here all day!

Apache
02-10-2011, 11:48 AM
Were you gone yesterday? He was here all day!

Yes I was... ice is not making things easy out here :rolleyes: