| Author |
Message |
    
Hootowl
| | Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 05:28 pm: | 
|
Divide their salaries by the number of gallons of gasoline sold in the US annually, and you'll see that even if they gave their bonuses back to the consumers, it wouldn't amount to a hill of beans. Bitching about outrageous (and it is outrageous)executive compensation isn't going to solve this.
(Message edited by hootowl on July 17, 2008) |
Cowboy
| | Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 05:31 pm: |
|
I told you to watch T Boone, I just read where he is covering 400,000 acres with wind mills. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 07:42 pm: |
|
400,000? They will stop him. The enviro-nuts will sue.
Like I said, I completely get the class envy function. Those super rich ( fill in blank ) buying jets & yachts, showing off their wealth. Bah, Humbug. Of course it is the easy way to get the peasants upset. That's why evil people use it to manipulate you. Look at history. The guys that use class envy to stir up power always screw the peasants. Will it be Yankee baseball players next year we are supposed to be mad at?
It would be nice to have that Oil company president retirement plan though. 1 year would set me for life.
(Message edited by aesquire on July 17, 2008) |
Hedcase
| | Posted on Thursday, July 17, 2008 - 09:09 pm: |
|
Is the gov't currently investigating oil speculation practices/etc? Over the last couple of days oil prices have fallen quite a bit - coincidence? From 147 to just under 130 per barrel in three days is rather interesting. Or, is the US through with the 'summer vacation driving' so demand is going to go down? I'm not complaining, mind, but just wondering why all of the sudden there's this (welcome) change in the price of oil. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Friday, July 18, 2008 - 07:45 am: |
|
Mostly it's the talk of drilling that's lowering the price. ( did I predict that?  )
That's the speculators. If supply is going to go up, the price comes down. That's how you'd bet right? That's how they are betting. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Saturday, July 19, 2008 - 06:46 pm: |
|
I had a vision.......
The opening ceremony at the 400,000 acre wind farm....speeches, dedication to a dead local politician, huge electric lights turning on one by one to show how much power is benefiting mankind, then....
They release the Doves!!!!
"Oh the humanity....." |
Frankfast
| | Posted on Sunday, July 20, 2008 - 07:36 pm: |
|
"Mostly it's the talk of drilling that's lowering the price. ( did I predict that? )
That's the speculators. If supply is going to go up, the price comes down. That's how you'd bet right? That's how they are betting."
BS - There's as much oil in the ground as there is water. Greed, plain and simple. Now that people are looking for electric and hydrogen cars, the price of oil will come down and they'll be back driving their F-150s in no time. And all development on electric cars will stop. It's all fixed. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Sunday, July 20, 2008 - 09:42 pm: |
|
How come we don't get discounted oil from Iraq? |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Sunday, July 20, 2008 - 11:26 pm: |
|
Garryb, I don't know. I thought we were supposed to steal it. I even remember idiot talk show hosts call for us to pay for the war with the oil. 
Frank,
the cushion of extra available oil is smaller now. The speculators were betting that Congress would keep making supply expensive on purpose to cause social change. Congress wants to tax technical change into being, which is not happening. You can't legislate reality like that.
Do you think that we will get a repeat of Carters folly where we spent billions on Coal to Gas tech & it got undercut when OPEC opened the taps, lowering the price? I don't think they can anymore.
Check this out. I don't agree with it all, but it's interesting.
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/july-august-m agazine-contents/our-electric-future |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Sunday, July 20, 2008 - 11:34 pm: |
|
Here's a letter & reply about power.
From http://www.jerrypournelle.com/mail/2008/Q3/mail527 .html
nuclear, alcohol, and venezuela
Hi. Jerry - of course, I'm with you 100% on nuclear power plants. There are two, perhaps three, objections to nuclear. First, nuclear power plants don't provide a source of fuel for transportation. Second, nuclear fuel is a finite resource, and will eventually deplete just as certainly as oil has. Third, depleted nuclear fuel needs to be stored, carefully, for very long periods of time.
None of these is a reason not to build nuclear power plants.
We need electrical power to run our homes and buildings, and nuclear can provide that. Nuclear fuel will run out; but not for a long time, and will allow us to switch over to a sustainable fuel at a much more leisurely pace. Finally, all fuels pollute; the difference with nuclear fuel is that the pollution is all nicely contained in one point, rather than spread throughout the atmosphere (Chernobyl notwithstanding). And as Robert Heinlein once pointed out, we might find something very useful to do with depleted nuclear fuel in 50 or 100 years.
It is, however, important to recognize that nuclear will NEVER solve the transportation fuel problem. We need a portable, stable, high energy density fuel that we can make cheaply, and in abundance, right here in the USA. Alcohol / Ethanol / Methanol are the best candidates going.
It is also possible that once we devise a mechanism for the rapid and cost effective production of Alcohol, it might actually be cheaper to run a thermoelectric plant from alcohol rather than uranium. I would make such a decision based on TCO rather than hysteria, and I will confess that I haven't examined the numbers; but an alcohol burning plant must be orders of magnitude cheaper to build, maintain and decommission, than a uranium burning one. An alcohol burner would probably release less total pollution as well, if you consider the depleted fuel as pollution. I'm not sure it is; but whether or not it is pollution, its safe and guarded storage is certainly expensive. That ongoing cost must also be considered.
But, I haven't examined the numbers; this is just speculation. However, whether or not we replace uranium with Alcohol, we still need cubic miles of cheap alcohol right away, to fuel our vehicles. So it makes sense to focus on that technology immediately.
Re Venezuela: they have a population of about 26 million, in an area roughly twice the size of California. According to the US Census bureau, California has a population of roughly 36 million people; so, very roughly, Venezuela has about 1/3rd the population density of California.
Of those 26 million, it's important to note that only about 12 million work. (CIA World Factbook.) Roughly 38% of the population is below the poverty line; and the country is experiencing a CPI annual inflation rate in excess of 18%.
I wasn't able to determine how many Venezuelans actually drive vehicles. But given these numbers, I suspect that car ownership is no where near as prevalent in Venezuela as it is in California. It's also worth noting that Venezuela has MUCH more solar energy to exploit, than we enjoy in North America. This means that the average Venezuelan probably doesn't have a space heating bill, and has much more opportunity to make use of solar water heating. It's also true that agrifuel crops will grow much more abundantly than would be the case in many areas of North America. Even low technology approaches to agrifuel production will yield bountiful results, if you pour enough solar energy into the mix. In the USA, we will have to be considerably more scientific, and employ a lot more high technology. Fortunately, we have the ability to do that.
I am loosely aligned with David Blume from a philosophical standpoint; but I fear that he approaches alcohol fuel more as a lawyer, than a scientist. That is, he enters the room with a pre-existing point of view, and then works persuasively to make his case. I suspect the situation in Venezuela is not as rosy as he would have us believe.
Be well, my friend - Charlie
Several points to make here.
First, nuclear waste is a non-problem. The simplest method of dealing with them is to encase the stuff in glass (actually make a glass with the waste as ingredients) then take it to the Mindanao Trench and drop it overboard. It will eventually be carried into the depths of the earth where it came from in the first place. End of problem.
What most people do not seem to know is that while "nuclear waste" is in fact radioactive for thousands of years, after about 600 years the only radioactivity remaining is from the actinides, and those are what caused it to be fuel in the first place; after about 600 years the residuals are less active than the original ores mined in the first place.
And if we don't like dumping the stuff in the Deep (where we can't retrieve it if we suddenly wish we had it) then again make glass of it, and stack it in the Mojave desert. A square mile of the Fort Irwin maneuver area would do for many years to come. If you really doubt the stability of glass (which is pretty near eternal) build a superdome over it. Put a triple chain link fence topped with razor wire around the site with a notice that anyone crossing the line is fair game for the Army, but you'll probably die before we can kill you. Have a nice day.
As to renewability of nuclear power, we haven't tried very hard to find new nuclear resources; and how much you find has always in the past depended on how hard you look. I don't think that has changed much. Moreover, we have half a dozen breeder techniques for expanding the amount of nuclear fuel, and they are neither as environmentally hazardous nor as expensive (saving legal costs) as petroleum technologies for stuff like oil shale.
Now: I give you a general principle: given enough energy we can do anything. Electricity is useful. We haven't worked very hard at finding ways to use it for transportation; we haven't even looked at how countries with lots of hydro-electric power have done it. Some transport is fairly easy to convert over a 30 year period: railroads, much of long-haul trucking. It requires messenger wires and trolley receptors, but that's a known technology. Some transport is pretty simple: we already know how to make pretty good electric cars with a range of 100 miles, and most people drive far fewer than 100 miles a day. Those are known technologies; requiring new distribution systems; conversion will take some years, but if you don't start on something you will never finish it.
T Boone Pickens is absolutely right: we can't go on transferring a trillion a year to the middle east. On the other hand, we used to be the creditor nation of the world, as well as the manufacturing nation. We gave that up voluntarily for regulations and a regulatory state. Whether his conclusion, that we ought to convert to wind power, is correct is another matter. It doesn't look as useful as nuclear, but there are fewer envir0nmental fanatics opposed to wind. I suspect that energy economics is more determined by law suits than by engineering.
As to your observations about Brazil, I am sure you are correct. The last time I was in Brazil they were just coming out of an enormous inflationary spiral. I used to have a ten million cruziero note that would about have paid for breakfast. They have recovered from some of that, but I doubt they have completely recovered, and I don't think of Brazil as an example for us to follow.
Like you I am impressed with Blume's enthusiasm, but I don't have the means to check his factual assertions. What I do know is that there are many ways out of our energy crisis (when I wrote about this in the 70's I said our looming energy crisis, but it's no longer looming; it's here). We still have a population willing to work and some of the best technology available. What's needed is to free the American people of entangling regulations. Let a thousand flower bloom. We are, after all, capitalists, or so we assert. Perhaps we ought to try capitalism again.
Now of course some regulation is needed; but it needs to be set up with the Iron Law in mind. We need to understand that we can't afford what we are doing now. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 07:53 am: |
|
I still don't get it,
We have spent Trillions rebuilding/ freeing Iraq and we don't get a discount on Oil? |
Cowboy
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 08:11 am: |
|
The best you can hope for is that thier daily production will be enough to influnce the market value crude. |
Oldog
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 10:52 am: |
|
If the batteries and other items were easier to recycle electric / gas "convertable" would be sooo cool.
Electric around town, Gas for long trips
truth is that even big SUV type trucks could be made more thrifty |
Road_thing
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 03:04 pm: |
|
There's as much oil in the ground as there is water.
It's just a little harder to find than water...
rt |
Chellem
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 03:08 pm: |
|
There's as much oil in the ground as there is water.
Even if that's true, water gets reused and reused. We wash our car, or water a plant, the water returns to the earth, or evaporates and rains down again. Cycle of life, blah blah blah.
Once ya burn oil, what have you got? Um, just exhaust fumes I think.
->ChelleM |
Ducxl
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 04:22 pm: |
|
We have spent Trillions rebuilding/ freeing Iraq and we don't get a discount on Oil?
Silly us.That's because we liberated them.Instead,we should've conquered them and TAKEN the oil.Now WE American taxpayers get to finance the rebuilding .
I've been reading about T.Boone Pickens.I think he's on to something.So is Al Gore.
But alas,we'll surely become complacent again(was it 1977 the last time this happened?). |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 06:19 pm: |
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_energy_crisis
I suspect T.Boone is going to get richer.
AlGore already is cashing in on his scam.
Though it would be great to get alternative energy to replace fossil fuels ( & i have more than half a clue how ) what's going on now is scam, con & screw job.
Some people want gas to cost you more. Barack is only unhappy it happened so fast while he is trying to get your vote. Some of these people have good intentions. Others do not. |
Garryb
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 08:19 pm: |
|
Your right, maybe they don't appeciate our help.
Maybe we should focus more on conservation and migration to alternate sources. How about tax incentives? |
Ducxl
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 09:04 pm: |
|
what's going on now is scam, con & screw job.
How so? Do we need an energy Czar?
Al Gore was mentioned the other day to fill this cabinet position.
Nationalization of America's energy interests?
To prevent us from complacency should energy prices drop again? As in the 1979 crisis? |
Brumbear
| | Posted on Monday, July 21, 2008 - 09:05 pm: |
|
I started to put together stuff for the E car but it turns out we got one in the repo yard a MILES its called I may just go and improve on that we will see |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 12:08 am: |
|
"We have spent Trillions rebuilding/ freeing Iraq"
and wiping countless al qaeda and their cohorts from the face of the Earth.
Sounds like a bargain to me, even if it is an exaggeration. |
Frankfast
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 07:48 am: |
|
"I suspect T.Boone is going to get richer.
AlGore already is cashing in on his scam."
Don't knock the profit motive. It's the American Way. |
Frankfast
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 07:50 am: |
|
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25787722/
Where big oil has gone wrong. |
Cowboy
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 08:21 am: |
|
I dont think Big oil has gone wrong they are making a profit, the vast majority of teck. and equipment comes from the U.S.A. the democrat congress , the greenies, the Al Gores are the culpit and dont forget the news media and the American public that knows next to nothing about the oil industry. Just for a point of ref. I would like to know the percent of my Buell brothers have and do make thier living in the oil industry. and thier posions held. (managent-supervisor-labor-ect,)I am beting it is less than 5%. |
Bigdaddy
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 08:51 am: |
|
The Olberman network,,,,,,there's a bastion of truth. |
Road_thing
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 10:17 am: |
|
Cowboy, I'm one. Not sure if I'm labor or management--I'm the geological/geophysical part of a three-man company. The other two are a land/contracts guy and a fund-raiser.
But I've been an exploration manager/VP of two different NYSE oil & gas companies so I guess I can identify with the "management" side of things.
From Frank's link: The companies say they are doing what they can to find more fossil fuels around the world, but the easy oil is gone.
I believe this to be true. The competition for leases on- and offshore in the US, and for exploration concessions in foreign countries, is intense. If you can't control the acreage, you can't drill the wells. If you can't drill the wells, you can't spend the money on exploration. If you can't spend the money on exploration, where's the best place to put it to benefit the owners (shareholders)? Sometimes stock buy-backs represent the best use of the available cash. And not just in the oil business, as the article correctly points out.
rt |
Cowboy
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 10:33 am: |
|
RT You are correct I am just bitching because permits are so slow in coming.You know as well as I that if we were doing what we should we could not find enough personal to fill the jobs we could crate.They may be a little harder than buger king but the pay is a damn sight better. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 10:55 am: |
|
"Don't knock the profit motive. It's the American Way."
I sure don't consider fraudulently (at worst) or ignorantly (at best) drumming up hysteria about the end of the world in order to make a buck the American way. I consider it fraud. I guess some folks do view that as the American way, the types of folks who hold a dim view of America and wish that we could be more like Cuba or Venezuela, Michael Moore and his ilk. |
Chellem
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 22, 2008 - 11:22 am: |
|
If you can't control the acreage, you can't drill the wells.
I thought we solved this already? Just hire the Burns Slant-Drilling Oil Company.
->ChelleM |
|
