fossil fuel

[muckdumper]

well the storm drove the price of fuel to 70$ a barrel on early reports!!!we all are going to feel the burnt of this storm.why in hell are fuel prices staying so high where the gov't does not care that the american dollar is flowing into OPEC countries at a high rate??? SUV anyone??

[dibbs]

1 highway 0 city.

[obsidian]

Gas prices here in central IL seem to be rising anywhere from 0.25-1.00 it seems. Might be the same elsewhere.

Because we refuse to drill for oil in Alaska

[jokerthief]

It would hurt the enviroment.

[mother_brain]

Heard somebody say that the only way you'll be able to get gas for 99 cents again is off the value meal at taco bell.

[Daliman]

You know what I wonder? Why is gas near $3 a gallon now because oil prices are up, yet i can buy motor OIL for 79 cents a pint still?

[Matt Flynn]

lot of money in big oil, and Bush's money comes from big oil.

my understanding - and please correct me if i am wrong - is we do not drill oil in Alaska because so-called environmentalists don't mind drilling oil in Houston but somehow think nearly a million square miles of tundra is vulnerable to an oil leak, or that underpasses for animals cannot be built for a pipeline. i do not understand how even 50 oil wells spewing full throttle could pollute more than a couple square miles, because the oil will sludge on contact with ice. what is the point of not drilling in Alaska?

that said, i am vehemently against "licensing" those drilling rights for anything less than half the barrel price. America owns that oil and should reap the benefits.

[Il_Mostro]

The problem with all this is that there isn't very much oil up in Alaska anyway, certainly not enough to have any real effect on the price of oil. Pump all you want, might be that that extra supply will just be met by OPEC lowering their production to match.
The last time I looked at it there was expected to be enough oil in alaska to take care of USA for less than 2 years, if you could pump it at any rate you please, which of course you can't.

[Il_Mostro]

There's a lof of discussions on this over in Politics. Go read if you like.

[nmt09]

If we spent more money on research we wouldn't be so dependant on oil. Hell most of the technology exists already and just needs to be pushed into the main stream.

[Il_Mostro]

Could you give some examples of that technology?

Hint, if you are about to say hydrogen you have some studying to do.

[B Dids]

This thread is not about Greg Raymer OR a new flavor of Ben and Jerry's. Boo this thread.

[ QUOTE ]
Heard somebody say that the only way you'll be able to get gas for 99 cents again is off the value meal at taco bell.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL!!

[slavic]

[ QUOTE ]
Could you give some examples of that technology?

Hint, if you are about to say hydrogen you have some studying to do.

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen to that. The most abundant element in the universe but try creating, storing, or loading enough of it onto a car to do anything.

The best hydrogen powered fuel cells right now, use fossil fuels to creat the hydrogen. Maybe someday, but not for a while.

If you want to push ethanol, just look at what happened to Brazil over the last 25 years. Biodiesel, sorry we can't make enough soybeans to power the US fleet.

Like it or not we are married to paraffins, and though we may change the length of the carbon chain we crack them down into our economy needs them or we go for a bad ride.

Oh and for those who want to push hybrids, well I owned an 86 VW Golf that use ot get better millage. Lighter cars and smaller engines do the trick, adding a battery into the loop does not magically create more energy.

Cars however aren't the only problem, most new powerplants are NG or oil fired plants. Starting up new hydro, atomic or coal production is like announcing your going to kill someones first born, so all that oil isn't just going to cars.

We have a problem and it's going to be painfull. (Oh and yes I do own a Chevy Tahoe that I like to drive. 4wd sucking down the petro)

[Eder]

[ QUOTE ]
You know what I wonder? Why is gas near $3 a gallon now because oil prices are up, yet i can buy motor OIL for 79 cents a pint still?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only that but diesel (less refined oil) costs more in the US!!! what a rip...it's cheaper to produce and contrary to California it is no greater a pollutant than gas (even less if you drive a Rabbit diesel).
The other thing is why is the US buying oil from the mideast at these prices????Alberta has sufficient fossil fuels to supply the US at present rate of consumption for over 1000 years when we include our heavy oil ($12/barrel production cost) and shale deposits (shale extraction still in infancy @ ~$35/barrel cost about the same as our heavy oil cost before commercial production) as well as extensive conventional oil.

What is America thinking...your solution is next door and we don't run around with dynamite strapped to our bellys...the fix is in I think

[slavic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You know what I wonder? Why is gas near $3 a gallon now because oil prices are up, yet i can buy motor OIL for 79 cents a pint still?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not only that but diesel (less refined oil) costs more in the US!!! what a rip...it's cheaper to produce and contrary to California it is no greater a pollutant than gas (even less if you drive a Rabbit diesel).
The other thing is why is the US buying oil from the mideast at these prices????Alberta has sufficient fossil fuels to supply the US at present rate of consumption for over 1000 years when we include our heavy oil ($12/barrel production cost) and shale deposits (shale extraction still in infancy @ ~$35/barrel cost about the same as our heavy oil cost before commercial production) as well as extensive conventional oil.

What is America thinking...your solution is next door and we don't run around with dynamite strapped to our bellys...the fix is in I think

[/ QUOTE ]

If I remember correctly we aren't pulling most of our oil from the Middle east but from South America currently. Europe, China, and Japan are mostly pulling form the ME.

Shale oil extraction sounds good, but when will we see a productive field? It takes the better part of ten years to bring a normal field to production and that's with favorable market conditions. Could you imagine investing heavy into a $35/barrel production and then have quite a few countries drop demand and leave you with a lipsticky pig?

[Eder]

Shale extraction costs are high since only small experimental plants have been built. Same problem with our tar sands back in the 70's. If oil stays around $40 the big players are sure to sink billions into extraction technology and extraction costs would certainly drop.

[jakethebake]

http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a361/utmt40/Raymerall-in.jpg

[Easy E]

This isn't news about poker

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
Shale extraction costs are high since only small experimental plants have been built. Same problem with our tar sands back in the 70's. If oil stays around $40 the big players are sure to sink billions into extraction technology and extraction costs would certainly drop.

[/ QUOTE ]

It will, but not by much. The day we ramp this process up the environment and the air we breath will go to [censored]. That process has to be the most polluting process known to man. A necessary evil I regretfully admit, as humans have been too lazy to invest in things like ITER.