"The world's cheap reserves are basically gone"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: grampi
I agree the oil industry limits supply (and there are no real shortages), but wouldn't having more energy sources be a good thing? Why continue on with the oil industry cornering the market and being able to hold consumers hostage?

We can't even just blame the oil industry, or individual countries, or companies. There are plenty of things involved in getting oil from the ground to become gasoline at the pumps, and a lot of things can disrupt supply and, therefore, price. More energy sources would be a fantastic thing.


The oil industry (and speculators) play the fact that supply disruptions CAN happen to the hilt, though they almost never happen...we'd probably all be sick if we were to find out how many $billions the industry has made just by playing "there could be supply disruptions" card....
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: Garak

There are always alternatives if one is stubborn enough. I admit that a gasoline powered automobile is the path of least resistance.


Gas is the "standard" because it is cheap, plentiful, and reliable. If other fuels bested its utility for the same price, they would quickly become the "standard" that "alternatives" are measured by.

There are plenty of alternatives out there to replace gasoline, they are simply more expensive. Why should people be forced to use fuels that are more expensive? That is a great waste of resources.


So why are alternatives not further developed so they're less expensive? There are a lot of technologies that are too expensive to use at first, but they're almost always further developed to bring down costs....just seems strange to me this isn't happening with alternative energy sources...
 
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
^If you want capitalism then immorality comes with it. I'm not saying that similar bad behavior doesn't accompany other economic systems. You can fight it by doing everything in your power to reduce, or eliminate, demand. If you ask your government to regulate private industry to prevent the perceived immorality then you no longer want capitalism.

Plus, I do not believe what you say is going on is the case. But, I could entertain specific examples. Hearsay, rumors, and TV news reports don't count.


So you don't believe the U.S. is exporting refined products, and if so, please explain why you don't think this serves to keep our prices as high as absolutely possible....
 
Originally Posted By: grampi
The oil industry (and speculators) play the fact that supply disruptions CAN happen to the hilt, though they almost never happen...we'd probably all be sick if we were to find out how many $billions the industry has made just by playing "there could be supply disruptions" card....

Of course they do. But there are legitimate disruptions, too, and I believe you and I both agree that hedging one's bets isn't a bad thing.

Originally Posted By: grampi
So why are alternatives not further developed so they're less expensive? There are a lot of technologies that are too expensive to use at first, but they're almost always further developed to bring down costs....just seems strange to me this isn't happening with alternative energy sources...

The market can do strange things. LPG used to be very big up here. Of course, emissions technology updates in vehicles were mostly focused upon gasoline. So, putting propane in a vehicle became more challenging. Additionally, before that point came, the price rose to the point that it wasn't as attractive.

Lots of technologies do go down in price, but take a look at them. Some stuff just advances rapidly, and greatly outstrip older technology. Gasoline is pretty darned good and very hard to beat. I don't think the bureaucratic environment in North America makes it easier, either.
 
Originally Posted By: grampi

So why are alternatives not further developed so they're less expensive? There are a lot of technologies that are too expensive to use at first, but they're almost always further developed to bring down costs....just seems strange to me this isn't happening with alternative energy sources...


The Federal Leviathan and the various States have been subsidizing "alternative energy" for decades, and there still are no viable alternatives. Even with this, billions upon billions of tax payer dollars continue to be poured down the drain on "development".
 
Originally Posted By: grampi

The oil industry (and speculators) play the fact that supply disruptions CAN happen to the hilt, though they almost never happen...we'd probably all be sick if we were to find out how many $billions the industry has made just by playing "there could be supply disruptions" card....


So are orange juice producers ripping off the public, too?

http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/orange-juice.aspx
 
Making fuel from seawater could be $3 to $6 per gallon in 10 years. The electricity can be supplied by nuclear, solar, etc.
 
Originally Posted By: grampi

So why are alternatives not further developed so they're less expensive? There are a lot of technologies that are too expensive to use at first, but they're almost always further developed to bring down costs....just seems strange to me this isn't happening with alternative energy sources...

It may surprise you to learn that gasoline (and cars) are still extremely cheap in the USA. That is the direct result of economies of scale, competition and low fuel taxes.
It is essential to urgently develop alternatives to avoid burning fossil fuels before our climate gets even worst than it is going to get. With cheap gas this paradigm change is not going to occur naturally fast enough and so it becomes the job of our collective governments to accelerate the economics appropriately.

However, both your government and ours are made up of lawyers and businessmen, with no science education whom are more interested in their own wealth and popularity, and are not going to upset the voting public by any suggestion of taking away their "toys." Your cheap gas will remain and I would suggest that if you live in an area affected by the polar vortex last winter your best bet is that you might want to consider moving.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
So are orange juice producers ripping off the public, too?

The U.S. executive should approve the north/south pipeline as long as an OJ pipeline gets laid at the same time. I'll be happy.
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: grampi

The oil industry (and speculators) play the fact that supply disruptions CAN happen to the hilt, though they almost never happen...we'd probably all be sick if we were to find out how many $billions the industry has made just by playing "there could be supply disruptions" card....


So are orange juice producers ripping off the public, too?

http://www.nasdaq.com/markets/orange-juice.aspx


Consumers don't have to buy orange juice....
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: grampi

So why are alternatives not further developed so they're less expensive? There are a lot of technologies that are too expensive to use at first, but they're almost always further developed to bring down costs....just seems strange to me this isn't happening with alternative energy sources...


The Federal Leviathan and the various States have been subsidizing "alternative energy" for decades, and there still are no viable alternatives. Even with this, billions upon billions of tax payer dollars continue to be poured down the drain on "development".


I would have to question anything the gov subsidizes...it's quite possible none of that money is actually spent on alternatives development...
 
Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
Originally Posted By: grampi

So why are alternatives not further developed so they're less expensive? There are a lot of technologies that are too expensive to use at first, but they're almost always further developed to bring down costs....just seems strange to me this isn't happening with alternative energy sources...

It may surprise you to learn that gasoline (and cars) are still extremely cheap in the USA. That is the direct result of economies of scale, competition and low fuel taxes.
It is essential to urgently develop alternatives to avoid burning fossil fuels before our climate gets even worst than it is going to get. With cheap gas this paradigm change is not going to occur naturally fast enough and so it becomes the job of our collective governments to accelerate the economics appropriately.

However, both your government and ours are made up of lawyers and businessmen, with no science education whom are more interested in their own wealth and popularity, and are not going to upset the voting public by any suggestion of taking away their "toys." Your cheap gas will remain and I would suggest that if you live in an area affected by the polar vortex last winter your best bet is that you might want to consider moving.


$4 gas is not cheap...and before you say anything about what Europeans pay for gas, it's not comparable....their prices are mostly taxes that go to pay for many services we pay for here out of our own pockets...I do agree we need to accelerate our development of alternatives...
 
Originally Posted By: grampi
$4 gas is not cheap...and before you say anything about what Europeans pay for gas, it's not comparable....their prices are mostly taxes that go to pay for many services we pay for here out of our own pockets...

I would say it's entirely comparable. What "services" provided are going to make your car move?

I pay $8.50 (per US gal) and the included tax pays only for roads otherwise the voters would raise a stink. Much of the extra cost is due to our remote location. I used get annoyed at paying $30 a tank in California when I lived there about a decade ago but now it's $100 every tank, about 270 miles, more than 3 hours take-home pay. No big deal, it's still no more expensive than taking the bus and more-importantly the price encourages me to not waste the stuff.
 
Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
Originally Posted By: grampi
$4 gas is not cheap...and before you say anything about what Europeans pay for gas, it's not comparable....their prices are mostly taxes that go to pay for many services we pay for here out of our own pockets...

I would say it's entirely comparable. What "services" provided are going to make your car move?

I pay $8.50 (per US gal) and the included tax pays only for roads otherwise the voters would raise a stink. Much of the extra cost is due to our remote location. I used get annoyed at paying $30 a tank in California when I lived there about a decade ago but now it's $100 every tank, about 270 miles, more than 3 hours take-home pay. No big deal, it's still no more expensive than taking the bus and more-importantly the price encourages me to not waste the stuff.


You have some expensive roads! Does you asphalt have gold in it?
 
Originally Posted By: grampi
Originally Posted By: Kiwi_ME
Originally Posted By: grampi
$4 gas is not cheap...and before you say anything about what Europeans pay for gas, it's not comparable....their prices are mostly taxes that go to pay for many services we pay for here out of our own pockets...

I would say it's entirely comparable. What "services" provided are going to make your car move?

I pay $8.50 (per US gal) and the included tax pays only for roads otherwise the voters would raise a stink. Much of the extra cost is due to our remote location. I used get annoyed at paying $30 a tank in California when I lived there about a decade ago but now it's $100 every tank, about 270 miles, more than 3 hours take-home pay. No big deal, it's still no more expensive than taking the bus and more-importantly the price encourages me to not waste the stuff.


You have some expensive roads! Does your asphalt have gold in it?
 
Quote:
It is essential to urgently develop alternatives to avoid burning fossil fuels before our climate gets even worst than it is going to get. With cheap gas this paradigm change is not going to occur naturally fast enough and so it becomes the job of our collective governments to accelerate the economics appropriately.

So it's the job of politicians to make cheap energy more expensive, and put confiscated resources into arbitrary and unproven "research" projects, all based on computer models that cannot be verified?
 
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Tempest
So are orange juice producers ripping off the public, too?

The U.S. executive should approve the north/south pipeline as long as an OJ pipeline gets laid at the same time. I'll be happy.
wink.gif



Hey, how about some barter?

Send that pipeline to Florida and we'll send you TWO gallons of OJ for every gallon of oil!

Deal?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
It is essential to urgently develop alternatives to avoid burning fossil fuels before our climate gets even worst than it is going to get. With cheap gas this paradigm change is not going to occur naturally fast enough and so it becomes the job of our collective governments to accelerate the economics appropriately.

So it's the job of politicians to make cheap energy more expensive, and put confiscated resources into arbitrary and unproven "research" projects, all based on computer models that cannot be verified?


So let me see if I'm reading you correctly...we should basically do nothing more than what we've been doing for the last 100 years? That sounds like a sound energy policy to me...
crazy.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

OVERKILL
Nothing is cheaper than mine to mouth coal
Replies
17
Views
642
OVERKILL
billt460
Dieseling A Air Rifle, (Pellet Gun)
Replies
14
Views
4K
barryh
burbguy82
The problems with GDI
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
3K
Patman
S
  • Locked
Record Breaking Profits
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Astro14
T
Amazon Basics
Replies
16
Views
1K
cptbarkey
Back
Top