| Author | Message | ||
     Corporatemonkey |
That is pure baloney and entirely illogical. Airliner maintenance for flight safety is mandated by the FAA. There is no skimping allowed. Pretending that there is skimping on airliner maintenance to save money is just fearmongering. And it is absolutely in the airlines best interest to maintain their huge investment in their primary capital assets, their fleet of aircraft. And of course it would be financial ruin if lax maintenance led to a crash. The first thing the FAA checks are the maintenace records. Actually you are incorrect Blake. The FAA does NOT check the maintenance records. They only ask if the work has been performed. A little like the fox guarding the hen house. Don't you remember earlier this year when a bunch of aircraft got grounded because of poor, or incomplete maintenance? It was found out that the work was never done. The FAA never asked if it had been done. And it became a press field day. For those of us who fly regularly, I bet everyone has notice how shabby the airplanes are starting to look. If they can't afford to keep an interior clean, just imagine what is happening in areas that are not visible by the public. And Blake I know how you love proof, here is a local article about Alaska Air http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/20 08013931_whistleblower24m.html Although this incident took place in the late 90's I can tell you it has only gotten worse. | ||
| Nevrenuf |
this was just sent to me by a guy that i used to work with. take it for what it's worth. I KNEW THIS WOULD GET TO THE PUBLIC SOONER OR LATER > > Some information to digest regarding the evil American oil companies. May > 21, 2008. Earlier today, the Senate Judiciary Committee summoned top > executives from the petroleum industry for what Chairman Pat Leahy thought > would be a politically profitable inquisition. Leahy and his comrades > showed up ready to blame American oil companies for the high price of > gasoline, but the event wasn't as satisfactory as the Democrats had hoped. > > The industry lineup was formidable: Robert Malone, Chairman and President > of BP America, Inc.; John Hofmeister, President, Shell Oil Company; Peter > Robertson, Vice Chairman of the Board, Chevron Corporation; John Lowe, > Executive Vice President, Conoco Philips Company; and Stephen Simon, > Senior Vice President, Exxon Mobil Corporation. Not surprisingly, the > petroleum executives stole the show, as they were far smarter, infinitely > better informed, and much more public-spirited than the Senate Democrats. > > One theme that emerged from the hearing was the surprisingly small role > played by American oil companies in the global petroleum market. John Lowe > pointed out: 'I cannot overemphasize the access issue. Access to > resources is severely restricted in the United States and abroad, and the > American oil industry must compete with national oil companies who are > often much larger and have the support of their governments. We can only > compete directly for 7 percent of the world's available reserves while > about 75 percent is completely controlled by national oil companies and is > not accessible.' > > Stephen Simon amplified: > 'Exxon Mobil is the largest U.S. oil and gas company, but we account for > only 2 percent of global energy production, only 3 percent of global oil > production, only 6 percent of global refining capacity, and only 1 percent > of global petroleum reserves. With respect to petroleum reserves, we rank > 14th. Government-owned national oil companies dominate the top spots. For > an American company to succeed in this competitive landscape and go head > to head with huge government-backed national oil companies, it needs > financial strength and scale to execute massive complex energy projects > requiring enormous long-term investments. To simply maintain our current > operations and make needed capital investments, Exxon Mobil spends nearly > $1 billion each day. Because foreign companies and governments control > the overwhelming majority of the world's oil, most of the price you pay at > the pump is the cost paid by the American oil com pany to acquire crude oil > from someone else: Last year, the average > price in the United States of a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline was > around $2.80. On average in 2007, approximately 58 percent of the price > reflected the amount paid for crude oil. Consumers pay for that crude oil, > and so do we. > Of the 2 million barrels per day Exxon Mobil refined in 2007 here in the > United States , 90 percent were purchased from others.' > > Another theme of the day's testimony was that, if anyone is 'gouging' > consumers through the high price of gasoline, it is federal and state > governments, not American oil companies. On the average, 15% percent of > the cost of gasoline at the pump goes for taxes, while only 4% represents > oil company profits. These figures were repeated several times, but, > strangely, not a single Democratic Senator proposed relieving consumers' > anxieties about gas prices by reducing taxes. > > The last theme that was sounded repeatedly was Congress's responsibility > for the fact that American companies have access to so little petroleum. > Shell's John Hofmeister explained, eloquently: > > 'While all oil-importing nations buy oil at global prices, some, notably > India and China , subsidize the cost of oil products to their nation's > consumers, feeding the demand for more oil despite record prices. They do > this to speed economic growth and to ensure a competitive advantage > relative to other nations. Meanwhile, in the United States, access to our > own oil and gas resources has been limited for the last 30 years, > prohibiting companies such as Shell from exploring and developing > resources for the benefit of the American people. Senator Sessions, I > agree, it is not a free market. According to the Department of the > Interior, 62 percent of all on-shore federal lands are off limits to oil > and gas developments, with restrictions applying to 92 percent of all > federal lands. We have an outer continental shelf moratorium on the > Atlantic Ocean , an outer continental shelf moratorium on the Pacific > Ocean , an outer continental shelf moratorium on the eastern Gulf of > Mexico , congress > ional bans on on-shore oil and gas activities in specific areas of the > Rockies and Alaska , and even a congressional ban on doing an analysis of > the resource potential for oil and gas in the Atlantic, Pacific and > eastern Gulf of Mexico . The Argonne National Laboratory did a report in > 2004 that identified 40 specific federal policy areas that halt, limit, > delay or restrict natural gas projects. I urge you to review it. It is a > long list. If I may, I offer it today if you would like to include it in > the record. When many of these policies were implemented, oil was selling > in the single digits, not the triple digits we see now. The cumulative > effect of these policies has been to discourage U.S. investment and send > U.S. companies outside the United States to produce new supplies. As a > result, U.S. production has declined so much that nearly 60 percent of > daily consumption comes from foreign sources. The problem of access can > be solved in this country by the same government that ha > s prohibited it. Congress could have chosen to lift some or all of the > current restrictions on exportation and production of oil and gas. > Congress could provide national policy to reverse the persistent decline > of domestically secure natural resource development. ' > > Later in the hearing, Senator Orrin Hatch walked Hofmeister through the > Democrats' latest efforts to block energy independence: > HATCH: I want to get into that. In other words, we're talking about Utah , > Colorado and Wyoming . It's fair to say that they're not considered part > of America 's $22 billion of proven reserves. > HOFMEISTER: Not at all. > HATCH: No, but experts agree that there's between 800 billion to almost 2 > trillion barrels of oil that could be recoverable there, and that's good > oil, isn't it? > HOFMEISTER: That's correct. > HATCH: It could be recovered at somewhere between $30 and $40 a barrel? > HOFMEISTER: I think those costs are probably a bit dated now, based upon > what we've seen in the inflation... > HATCH: Well, somewhere in that area. > HOFMEISTER: I don't know what the exact cost would be, but, you know, if > there is more supply, I think inflation in the oil industry would be > cracked. And we are facing severe inflation because of the limited amount > of supply against the demand. > HATCH: I guess what I'm saying, though, is that if we started to develop > the oil shale in those three states we could do it within this framework > of over $100 a barrel and make a profit. > HOFMEISTER: I believe we could. > HATCH: And we could help our country alleviate its oil pressures. > HOFMEISTER: Yes. > HATCH: But they're stopping us from doing that right here, as we sit here. > We just had a hearing last week where Democrats had stopped the ability to > do that, in at least Colorado . > HOFMEISTER: Well, as I said in my opening statement, I think the public > policy constraints on the supply side in this country are a disservice to > the American consumer. > > The committee's Democrats attempted no response. They know that they are > largely responsible for the current high price of gasoline, and they want > the price to rise even further. Consequently, they have no intention of > permitting the development of domestic oil and gas reserves that would > both increase this country's energy independence and give consumers a > break from constantly increasing energy costs. > Every once in a while, Congressional hearings turn out to be informative. | ||
| Corporatemonkey |
If they cut your pay too much, get a different job or start your own business. This ain't the Soviet Union, you are free to learn new skills and move to a different town. I know it sucks, but for every "underpaid" airline employee there are hundreds of passengers saving hundreds of dollars. I figure if the pay sucks too badly, the employees will leave, and the company will have to improve compensation. Deregulation of the airline industry has brought that industry into line with the rest of corporate America. Most corporations suffer from the woes you described, CorpMonkey. Ah yes, corporate america is getting squeezed. The problem is most of corporate american does not run an industry of national importance. People lives are at risk, whether they be on a plane, or on the ground when one falls out of the sky. And BTW as of today employee costs are only a small % of the overall airline cost. They can't squeeze anymore, nor can they cut their fuel costs. They are truly up against a wall. The airline are like a utility. We depend on them. You wouldn't want your electric company fully deregulated (ala enron). | ||
| Spatten1 |
The airline are like a utility. Actually, they are not, in economic terms. Utilities (those with the assets) must invest in huge generation and distribution networks, which have to be spread among millions of customers to be economically feasible. Huge fixed costs. I'm not making this up, Econ 101 textbooks all illustrate the semi-regulated nature of the utility model, explaining the unique nature of the industry. Airlines can operate with 10 planes or thousands of planes. Airlines can sell some planes and eliminate routes. Just like a bus company. There are also substitute products for airlines. You can drive or take a train. Utilities do not have the same practical flexiblilty. They would not make the huge investments if the government could not guarantee some sort of semi-captive customer base. The government would have to nationalize the utilities because no one would risk the capital investment. We don't want that, ask anyone that lives in a socialist country how reliable government run power and telephone is. Not good. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
Why do you think your Big Mac doesn't look like the commercials??? Cause the kid that cooks it gets paid shit and doesn't really care if he does a shity job. I dont agree it has to do with money but it has everything to do with attitude. Those same kids would be spitting on your food for $20/hour. You wouldn't want your electric company fully deregulated (ala enron) Ours is deregulated in the state of Maryland and our electric went up 70% this year which has everyone pointing fingers. All this doom and gloom is a self-fulfilling prophecy. | ||
| Damnut |
Airlines can operate with 10 planes or thousands of planes. Airlines can sell some planes and eliminate routes. Just like a bus company. There are also substitute products for airlines. You can drive or take a train. Sorry but I can not drive or take a train to where I am right now from where I live. I live outside of Boston and I'm working in Northern Ireland at the moment. Sorry but I'm not taking a ferry to N.I. | ||
| Spatten1 |
Sorry but I can not drive or take a train to where I am right now from where I live. I live outside of Boston and I'm working in Northern Ireland at the moment. Sorry but I'm not taking a ferry to N.I. Well, it is bike to work day today..... | ||
| Nevrenuf |
damn damn, how lucky can one guy get. almost had an opportunity to work over in spain but it feel through. i'll bet you wish you had your bike over there. | ||
| Swordsman |
Er, nobody has to fly. Flying is a convenience. Take a little extra time and drive/ride in, or phone in, or video conference. If someone has to physically be on site, get someone locally. I can't see flying as a business necessity for anything, really. That was an interesting article about the Congressional hearing. Wonder how Obama's campaign would do if that info was promoted by McCain? ~SM | ||
| Damnut |
Er, nobody has to fly. Flying is a convenience. Take a little extra time and drive/ride in, or phone in, or video conference. If someone has to physically be on site, get someone locally. I can't see flying as a business necessity for anything, really. Really, do you really think that?? Sorry but one of the products that my company sells is a magnetic research tool that is used in most Universities in the US and we have quite a few around the world. They are also used in many Data Storage Companies' R&D labs. (Seagate, Fujitsu & Western Digital to name a few) We are a small company, ~40 people. How long do you think we would be in business if we were to have Reps/local engineers in ALL of the places that we have systems in?? Sorry but being a Field Service Engineer means that I have to travel, which means I HAVE to fly to fix/install my customer's machines. | ||
| Oldog |
Interesting post Neil, I have heard that oil and refineries are an issue with the tree huggers. relieving the economic pressure would improve things here. time to take the 8.00$ ride home.. | ||
| Nevrenuf |
enjoy every ounce of it oldog. and damnut, you are quite correct about not being able to get someone else to go and do your job at a work site miles away. when your doing a job, you have to have direct access to that job so you can actually see what is going on. you don't want to depend on someone else to be your eyes and ears. one buddy just lost his job because he was working with the info someone else gave him. there might be other factors involved too but that is the primary one. | ||
| Imonabuss |
There has never been a time when government controlled anything was cheaper. Not much could be more terrifying than the thought of politicians in control of the fundamental basis of the economy. | ||
| Brumbear |
It all bullshit every bit of it we have the answer we have had it for 100 years and we will never use it ELECTRIC No If And OR BUTTS!!!!!!!!!!! for naysayers I say flush out your head gear look around free your mind your ASS will soon follow electric forklifts .trains and motorcyles all work better than the IC counterparts | ||
| Iamike |
Yeah, but the eviornmentalists don't want us to use coal or nukes to make the electricity. Solar and wind is very limited in its capability for making stable electricity. Energy is not a free lunch. | ||
| Oldog |
you have to have direct access to that job so you can actually see what is going on. you don't want to depend on someone else to be your eyes and ears. Soooo True! Brumbear Could the HV feed be coupled to the vehicle by induction efficently so that we dont have the 3rd rail / overhead deal? } | ||
| Brumbear |
dc conv to ac electric its common now and quite effecient the sane set up as a blue rhino except with batt packs would solve refuling and recharge is far and away cheapr than fossil fuel BTW hydro electric is free | ||
| Spatten1 |
Yeah, but the eviornmentalists don't want us to use coal or nukes to make the electricity. Solar and wind is very limited in its capability for making stable electricity. Now there are also protests about the wind farms killing birds. Any solution will not be good enough for them, they just want to tear down those that want solutions. It is very easy to say everything sucks, but not be realistic about finding the best solution. Nothing is perfect, so you have to find the best compromises. Non-analytical knee-jerk liberals to tear down any and all solutions. They just point at ambigious ideas that can't really be implemented. Intelligent liberals tend to want nuclear or the best coal and NG technologies that are at least much cleaner than what we used in the past. They are just less vocal than the loony left. I'm not saying knee-jerk conservatives that don't give a shit what we do to the environment are any better. However, I beleive that moderate conservatives tend to be more pragmatic on energy issues than moderate liberals. This includes loads of outdoorsmen that spend way more time enjoying and conserving nature than the jerks in San Francisco carrying the protest sign. | ||
| Gtmg |
Do you really think oil companies want to change the current balance of production to demand? You are kidding me right. Their profits are at all time levels. Lots of smoke around supply and demand issues. There is no lack of supply. Do you see gas stations in any part of the world shutting down because of supply issues? The reality is there is there is very limited competition in the oil industry almost creating a monopoly type situation. Look up the word oligopoly. This is the current state. It would take 10+years to get oil out of Alaska and off the coast and much much longer to set up shale converting operations in Wyoming etc. Meanwhile we have capped wells in Pennsylvania and Texas that could be producing but are not. Why not? The oil companies have zero incentive to change production levels. They are delivering excellent return to the stockholders. GM has already announced their fully electric car will be out by 2010. Oil is a short term investment. You all know that GM is not leading the way. The law of supply and demand will change dramatically for oil but the cat is out the bag with electric transportation. It is just too close. Many of us are in the 40 yo+ ranks that make good money and are white males. This is typically a conservative group that will see the effects of things like oil increases affect them last. Hence it is not an issue, we need to drill more etc... We will see a massive change in our time from oil driven to electric driven vehicles. We should be leading the way. We have the smartest and most creative engineers in the world. We have the most productive work force. It is time to claim some independence from the camel jockies and other countries that do things like manipulate the currency exchange rate and let them go back to being the poor desert countries they have always been. | ||
| Aesquire |
A few thoughts to ponder. Electric cars don't work, in a lot's of people use them way, because the electrical generation capacity is not big enough to recharge them. Period. Better batteries ( polymer ion? ) may give enough range for most applications, and you might get your company to install recharge stations in the parking lot, but without the capacity to charge them, electric cars are a rich man's ego trip. I'm all for the increase in capacity. Solar, Nuclear, methane from garbage, etc. Without MORE power, we are screwed. More people, more power. Period. Hydro is free? Ok....  Build a dam. Buy the turbines. handle the environmental paperwork. now ask yourself, where is the location for a new dam ( that is not yet built ) that is not an environmental issue? China? The East River in NY? The leftist/enviro-mental activist type, would really prefer we give up cars, live in cities so we can walk to work, and it would be nice if the population was low enough that cities could be really nice villages with a town square, with a gazebo & the town band playing welcome to Willoughby....... ( without those pesky poor & mentally inferior types, everyone who is not as "aware" as the enlightened, rednecks, etc. goes unspoken, but it's in there. ) These people have influenced the govt. to raise the price of energy & restrict supply, for your own good, of course. They are not a motorcyclist's buddy. If the oil companies make a 8% profit, and the typical government agency turns 1$ of input into 48 cents of service, then the price of any commodity the government provides will cost more, and be subsidized out of your pocket. ( and the rich a-holes in Texas & Arabia will still be rich ) How much does a penny cost to make? Since the same people who said 10 years ago that we can't drill in ( name your spot ) because it would take ten years to develop are still saying that......they have been wrong for a decade. | ||
| Blake |
I wonder if the electric car recharging were to happen at off-peak hours (wee hours of the night) if the grid could handle it? | ||
| Blake |
Cmonkey, I said that the FAA mandates the maintenance. After a crash, the FAA checks the maintenance records. You no read good and I stand by my statements. I have a brother-in-law who works for Southwest; he does maintenance work on their commercial airliners. He says nothing has changed in their maintenance schedule, or work. I believe him. | ||
| Blake |
The bottom line is that any airline would have to be a complete fool to purposefully neglect safety of flight type maintenance. It is unjustified fearmongering to assert otherwise. The risks are way to high and the payback nill. The case you site concerning American Airlines was much different than an airline neglecting periodic maintenance as you asserted. | ||
| Benm2 |
That statement is about as bad as the hydroelectric is free comment. At least with the hydroelectric, you can easily look back at past costs & debunk the "free" thing. As far as tearing down the electric car, there is no PROOF that recharging would "tear down the grid". I doubt that there would be any massive switch to electric cars, and the drain on a per-car basis would be low in comparison to the loads imposed by your average 4000 square-foot two-ton air conditioner. The incremental gains in electrical power required (whether they be coal fired, nuclear, solar, wind, hydroelectric or Mr Fusion) would likely be able to keep up with demand. Also, in the case of coal, gas, or oil fired powerplants, the energy conversion is considerably higher than the average IC car engine. Also: electric cars don't always need to be connected to grid to charge. If I remember right, solar power is about 400 W per sq ft on a good day. If a solar cell is 30% efficient, that's 120W per square foot. With 16 sqare feet of solar cell on the roof and hood: 1.9kW. On a good solid sunny workday, 17.1kW-hrs (9 hours). That 17kW-hr should be about enough to cover the average commute. Sure, this can be countered with cloudy days, costs, I don't want solar cells on my cars, and other tripe but it is a possibility. There are more. | ||
| Cowboy |
If the a$$ H000000 would just take the allowable off it would help. To hold a well to 100 bbls per day that is capable of makeing 800 bbl is pure bull sXXt.It is impossable to list all the things they have done wrong. | ||
| Jb2 |
Blake, Interesting point you brought up about electric cars. Hybrids are a different breed but have added many new dimensions to the collision repair industry. They even pose many problems for rescue workers who might have to work on these vehicles at the "scene of an accident". Besides the danger involved while working on these vehicles there is the cost of the vehicle over the lifespan of it's existence that most tree-huggers NEVER consider. The initial cost to build the car is higher. While they get better gas mileage in the time they're on the road the batteries have a limited life. The cost of replacing the batteries are extremely high. The cost of proper disposal on the same batteries present a whole other problem. Several research groups are taking these factors into account and are trying to create a realistic cost and environmental impact for a hybrid vehicle from cradle to grave. All indicators are that hybrid vehicles cost more and have a bigger impact on the environment than a gas guzzling SUV. Go figure. JB2 | ||
| Strokizator |
"with a gazebo & the town band playing Welcome to Willoughby" Somebody besides me has been watching too many Twilight Zone reruns. Obama's reason for not wanting to open up any new drilling is that it will take 10 years to reach production and by then we won't need it anymore. This guy's a genius! | ||
| Gtmg |
The cost of batteries for cars etc is relatively high right now. As production ramps up and there are gains in volume that allow R and D and tooling costs to be spread the price of batteries will go down. Electric cars are coming and coming fast. They will run a hiway speeds for 300 miles. Think about it the car companies need large cars to make a profit. They can no longer do it with gas powered cars so they need to do something else. It is a matter of survival for them. We will see electric cars very soon and lots of them. The push though late is now on. As far as the grid handling not an issue. Most people would plug in at night when the grid is underutilized in most areas. Alot of areas except the west have excess electrical capacity. My guess is 2010 we see an explosion of these cars from all car companies that are affordable considering the price of cars today. My guess is the $30,000 range to start with. | ||
| Road_thing |
Cowboy: If I understand it right, the current allowable in Texas is 100%. The only reasons to choke a well back are either to minimize water production or formation damage, or for reservoir pressure maintenance. For anyone who believes that the major US oil companies somehow "control" the price of crude oil(and therefore, by extension, the price of gasoline) I ask you to take a look at this historical price curve (from the US Energy Information Administration website):  Now, if Exxonmobil, Shell, et al have the market so firmly in their grasp. what in hell were they doing in the late '80's, when the first big "oil bust" hit and a half million or so oil industry types lost their jobs? And what about the late '90's? That bust was short, but not real sweet for those of us in the business. Supply and demand, folks, supply and demand. I have to be skeptical of politicians who say we shouldn't drill in certain areas because "it won't make any difference for 5 to 10 years." Do they think we're not still going to be short of oil in 5 to 10 years? What I hear is "I don't care what happens in 5 to 10 years because I won't be in office then." Conserve and explore. It's the only answer to the shortage of petroleum. I'm all for alternative energy, too. Let's get on with it. rt | ||
| Nevrenuf |
they just showed on the news this morning how the chinese is finally stopping the subsidizing of gas. they did it to begin with so they could stimulate economic growth in the country. whether that will have an impact or not, only time will tell. |
