Thread: Gas $9 a gallon

Tweet

Just my thoughts, nothing to back it up.

I think in back of our mines we all knew that they could come up with something other then gasoline to run our cars. We had steam ships, trains, and motors turning machinery to produce electricity. It was just too profitable to keep us at the pumps.

Japan, as much as I have disliked them bringing their cars over here and not letting us send ours to they’re Country. They have a car that runs on water, if we could send a man too the moon why didn’t they perfect this water car before now if it doesn’t have too do with politics’

Anything that man makes, man can make it run faster, so we could have been at the drag strip taking a sip of water and put the rest in the “whatcha ma call” it do a burn out and let her rip!!

Richard

Originally Posted by ford2custom

Just my thoughts, nothing to back it up.

I think in back of our mines we all knew that they could come up with something other then gasoline to run our cars. We had steam ships, trains, and motors turning machinery to produce electricity. It was just too profitable to keep us at the pumps.

Richard

Not picking on you here Richard, it's just that you've put up the "money quote" to stimulate another facit of discussion. You've repeated something that a lot (perhaps a majority?) of people believe. The fact that a lot of people believe it doesn't make it true however. There was a time when a majority of people believed the world was flat.

The other day Dave S. invoked a paraphrase of George Santayana's adage; "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
A hundred years ago the newly emerging technology of the automobile was embroiled in stiff competition over what form of power would be used. Steam, electricity, and gasoline were on relatively equal footing. At one point the Baker electric was one of the best selling cars on the market. It's advantages were it was quiet and clean. Major disadvantage was limited service period and not easy to "refuel". Steam had the advantage of being the best known and longest serving (at the time) of motive power. It used readily available materials for fuel, and produced considerable torque and horsepower relative to it's size, and it too was relatively quiet. Disadvantages were the danger of explosion by less sophisticated operators, and the need for frequent refueling. Gasoline used in internal combustion engines was a touch and go situation. It was noisy, not well known technology, and because of that there weren't a lot of places to get the fuel readily. There was no "big oil" then, all the petroleum companies were relatively small industrial elements. Their biggest market to that point was providing fuel for illumination. Of course the growth of electriciyt distribution was occuring at the same time which was displacing petroleum from that market. Through ingenuity (and no preferential selection by government entities) and private investment it was deduced that gasoline would be a useful fuel for the internal combustion engine. Visionary people could see where it made economic sense to invest in refining and distribution networks to provide this fuel, and took a big financial risk to develope those processes. They had no guarantee of success, but in the end, gasoline provided the most stored energy (available BTU's), in the safest form, with the easiest of distribution, storage, and user friendliness that ultimately gasoline prevailed. It wasn't by hook, crook, or government mandate.......it was that the "best" technology won in the free marketplace. And it still is (despite the demagoguery)the most cost effective source of stored energy for mobile use.

Today we live in a massive smokescreen of wishful thinking and delusion. I find the BP commercials that pretend to be "man on the street" interviews most annoying. If these are real people expressing what they actually believe, then it's depressing to see such ignorance...............albeit fueled by honest wishes for something better. They spout all manner of delusions that some form of alterntive energy is just the stroke of a magical pen away...........if only we could get those evil, greedy oil companies to allow it to happen!!! Ah the fruits of propaganda!

We've had thousands of bright minds, over a CENTURY of dedicated effort, and probably bazillions of dollars (okay, maybe only hundreds of billions, but who's counting) spent trying to invent the better battery. And we've made considerable progress in that 100+ years, most of it in the past 40 or so, but we still don't have a battery system that offers a complete offset to the low cost relative energy of gasoline. If we've only come that far in a hundred or so years, what makes people think we'll have some dramatic increase in some undetermined short time?

It's a similar scenario for just about all the other "technologies" that people seem to want to hang their hat on. Biofuels? Been there, done that. Only limited success, and look what it's helped do to our food prices. Now, the flooding in Iowa will really put a crimp on the corn market on top of everything else that's distorted that group. Hang on!!

Over the past 30 or so years our government has spent over $40 BILLION dollars subsidizing alternative fuel/energy pipe dreams. Some private equity has also been invested, probably in excess of that number. Funding isn't the problem, it's the practical limits (given today's known technology) on developement. Wind? It's old technology, anyones who's lived in farm country knows that (only big city elites find it "new"). Solar? Both old and new depending on your perspective. Passive solar is as old as recorded history, active solar is relatively modern. Yet it too has developed slowly. Both these have "enjoyed" considerable funding as noted above, they have been the annointed technologies of the political and elite classes. But their progress has been slow. If any of you remember the Newman/Redford movie "The Sting", it was a good example of how con men work. They show just enough goodies to hook the mark, release a little more to keep the mark on the string, and then pump him for as much as they can get. That's the game with these subsidized "technologies". They're always promising that they're "just 7-10 more years for being viable". When that time passes, they show some little promise and tell us "give us some more funding and we'll be there for you in just 7-10 more years". In the meanwhile we ignore the most dependable, proven "technology" at hand. Crude resources on our own lands. And it won't get better this year because a segment of our governing group want the ultimate power which can't be gained until the November elections. They'll hold us all hostage at least til then.............and just over half of us will let them get away with it!

Do you really believe that these selected potential alternatives will be viable in "just 7-10 years"? That's part of the belief in the often heard comment by the obstructionists who argue against opening up ANWR or coastal regions for crude drilling. They say there's no use in drilling, it will take 7-10 years to get to market, their latest mantra is "We can't drill ourselves out of this problem!" Really? "Why not" is the question that should be thrown at them, make them back up the comment instead of giving them a free pass on such a ridiculous comment. Here's a thought suggested by author Chris Horner, who often writes debunking human caused global warming. Let's have a race. You pick whatever you think is the best alternative energy source, especially one heavily subsidized with our tax dollars, and then let's also drill in ANWR. Whichever gets to market first wins!!! Where would you put your money?

Look, someday there will be something that will realistically displace gasoline as the prime motor fuel. It's inevitable if we're allowed to pursue it in a free market, absent of government interference. It's very likely to be some technology we don't even conceive of today. It may result from nano technology (my guess), or perhaps plasma technology, I don't presume to know, only guess. In the meantime we'll have small "experiments" that will offer false hope. Ethanol might work in Iowa or S.D, but not much outside of a local area because of inherent inefficiencies (which government subsidies disguise). Biodiesel suffers from some of the same limitations, the silliest of which is the french fry oil gambit. Some of the other "ideas" will continue the con. Have you noticed that every time we have a fuel cost spike all these "miracle" devices and processes pop up; cow magnets, whirlygig devices to mount under your carb or in front of your throttle body, magic coils of unobtanium to convert fly specks to nueclear power and so on.....
Where do these ideas go when gasoline prices drop again? Why don't those fervent believers keep using those things once the price drops? Beats me!

Bob, you’re a very intelligent man, and I enjoy reading your post as they have a lot of substance. When I was in high School I wasn’t interested plain and simple. Today I enjoy learning new things and reading about the early days of our history as well as watching documentaries on public TV. In my own mine I wonder what people from the early 1900’s would think if they looked to the sky and could see what we see every day. The planes have gotten bigger, and bigger. I can remember seeing my first 747 flying over coming from O’Hara Field Airport while I was connecting steel on a building we were building in the early 70’s. I was amazed but not anymore because we see them all the time.

I’m just thinking that we would not have come this far if people didn’t have dreams and make them work. I love the small, and big block Chevy’s if gas could be at a reasonable price where we could fill up and drive cross country like I have in the past it would be great but if not then we need too try something else. Thanks for replying, and keep posting I need the knowledge. A restful mine is a wasted mine right?

Richard

This could get kewl..... The US has a ban on drilling for oil off the Florida keys til 2012... and now Cuba and China are going to develop the field while the US oil industry sits on their thumbs and watch... Thanks to our genius government!!!! Huge oil field in the Gulf, and we by our oil from the Mid East!!!! What's wrong with this picture???????

HelloEveryone on this forumn:

Got a question! Has anyone used acetone in their gas to boost miles per gallon? I have read on the internet that 2 to 3 oz per 14 gallons of gas will boost the mpg by 10 to 20%. Has anyone tried this?
Let me know
thanks
leonard

Bob , you wrote " Biofuels? Been there, done that. Only limited success, and look what it's helped do to our food prices. Now, the flooding in Iowa will really put a crimp on the corn market on top of everything else that's distorted that group. Hang on!! "
But , you didn't mention that Brazil Imports NO oil anymore . This is because they started developing bio fuel from sugarcane in the early 80s . Now 95% of cars in Brazil are hybrid ( gas/e80 ) or completely e 80 . There is a VERY CLEAN VERY EASY VERY CHEAP process for making e 80 . It is a process which a small US company holds a patent for and has proven and continues today to prove at there Arizona plant , that it's ready to go . This process uses grey water to grow super fast growing alge , and it processes into e 80 cleaner then any other bio product . Before you start in on the feasability of the alge bassed e80 you should know that 3 countries have studied the process and all have started to set up huge facilities . Those 3 countries are Germany , Italy , and Spain . Meanwhile back here in the states the company that invented the process has been fighting unsucessfully for 7 years to get any $$$ from the feds to set up commercial production . Instead the feds went with that Virgin ceo piece of phony shit and put all the bio fuel $$$ into corn , a crop they KNEW was at almost max production already !!! and one of the crops MOST at RISK from drought and plague and pests . This was 5 days after Cheney had a " PRIVATE " meeting with the 6 top US gas companies . This was ( I believe ) done in the same bu11shit manner as the $$$ blown on Hydrogen transportation systems , their way of looking like they are trying but still giving to the oil/gas bastards !!!! By the way everybody , it is VERY EASY TO ADAPT hotrods to e80 , and e80 burns much cleaner then gas and has LESS greenhouse emissions .

I’m going to {quote} part of this article from our small town paper, I could scan the whole thing but it’s getting late. {Carol Anders Staff Writer Pilot News} Monday, June 16, 2008

Tim Bope
Said we’re too smart in this country too not be doing something.
For the past three years, Bope has been building and installing hydrogen fuel supplement units in his own automobiles and those of others.

After reading several articles and investigating possibilities on the Internet, Bope began making units that split ordinary tap water to make the hydrogen useable as a fuel supplement. He then attaches a unit utilizing the hydrogen into the air intact in automobiles.

He said he read articles from NASA that indicates that hydrogen use is certainly nothing new too scientist.

Bope said his wife Kim drives a 2006 Nissan Altima that had been averaging 25 miles per gallon. After installing his hydrogen use units, she now gets 44 miles too the gallon.
He said these could be used with virtually any vehicle on the road. His next personal project will be too install a unit too his motorcycle. He said he gets 50 miles too the gallon now, and wants too increase that too 100 miles.

Richard

Sky, anybody that has a "miracle" alternative fuel system doesn't need the federal government to supply $. There are several silicon valley venture capital firms that will throw piles of money at any program that remotely appears viable. If there is a legitimate system that is used in other parts of the world those boys would be on it like white on rice. If something genuine is to be found I'd bet those folks will finance it. And if you or anyone else thinks the "big evil oil companies" and their master, the more evil Darth Cheney, can buy those uber rich guys off you need to put down the Olbemann pipe.

Yeah, the Brasil ethanol story is really neat until you start studying the realities of it. They essentially use just about all they make, as you mentioned, from sugar cane. Sugar cane produces about three times more product per acre than corn, and the efficiencies of it as far as energy yield are increased by the use of the waste (cane stalks mostly) being used to fuel the conversion process. In this country we're mostly not able to grow sugar cane (Except Fl, and Hi), and our environmental watchdogs wouldn't allow us to burn the stalks either. Ethanol can't come close to surviving without federal subsidies, and foreign sources of sugar cane based ethanol are priced out because Congress won't drop a 54 cent per gallon import duty that makes that source uncompetitive. And if you think Brazil has forsaken petroleum based fuel you need to do a database search on Petrobras, and their latest OFFSHORE oil discoveries that will likely put them in the world's top 10 of oil producers. Since Petrobras is a state owned oil company, and Brazil is mostly a socialist nation the enviro nuts don't bother them. Hmmmm. They have also discoverd offshore oil under thick salt layers where geologists in the past believed there could not be oil reserves, so yet another potential expansion of previously unknown geologic formations that haven't been explored could be available to further expand the potential for more new crude discoveries.

There are all sorts of proposed alternaives out there, but over and over they fail to be price competitive when they have to be scaled up to meet the full market demand. There's only one other form of energy that has anything close to the distribution system in place to readily displace gasoline.........that's electricity, and again, even with all the chat about plug in hybrids, and Honda's newly announced vehiclle yesterday, they still only compete in a boutique market of short, local trips.

One thing though Bob, to produce marketable quantities of fuel in this country you need Gov. approval ie licensing , permits , ect. ect. Let alone the overwhelming process of getting approval to store , release , transport , sell said product . I have nothing against fossil fuels , but if you believe that there is enough oil or coal out there ( when we've made it possible for new millions of people around the globe to buy cars every quarter ) to not fully develope bio fuels , and that the oil companies/government ane not manipulating anything and everything involving oil , then I say YOU are the one smoking the funny stuff . I've taken 3 trips to Iraq , to work on the pipeline which the oil/gas companies of this country is building from there , through Afganistan , into Uzbekistan . Now the US was kicked out of the joint run airbase there in 05 . But you know that these idiots will keep us in Iraq working on and defending ( YES DEFENDING !!!! THERE ARE US SOLDIERS GUARDING IT ) a pipeline because of coruption , but I brought this up dispite very bad memories ( which I don't like to revisit ) to make a point . That point is that the oil/gas companies have way more influence in DC than all the silicon valley venture capital firms put together . And the fed bank and the international bank are tied strongly to the petro-chemical industry . And they have just as much pull in DC . Oh , I'm not a democrat or a liberal , I'm a republican . But for my money you can take all the pukes in DC ( dem and rep ) out -n- hang the lot and let GOD sort em out .

I am not a democrate, I am not a republican, I am not someone who believes everything the goverment tells me. I am an INDEPENDENT. I AM AN AMERICAN. You will not see a viable alturnitive to gas until the oil companys have it due to their distribution system already in place.Yet the federal government has been giving oil companys billions in tax breaks since the 70's in order for them to invest in other business not related to oil.This was being done so that big oil has a golden parachute when the oil runs out. Run out it will and it is only a question of when. Hydrogen is the best alturnitive and they are already setting up a distrubition system in southern california for test cars from toyota.

I have neither the time nor energy this morning to deal with the notion of the government not taking more of the honestly earned income of a company or individual being called a golden parachute or a gift. If you're a true independent you may not have meant that as you wrote it.

As for hydrogen being the future fuel it begs the question; where do you get the hydrogen?

I'm interested in hearing about the "billions in tax breaks" that the oil companies have received from the government..
...I have searched and can only find accelerated depreciation....those of you "experts" who are quoting these facts; can you point me to the facts you are quoting?
I'm interested in reading about them from a viable source..
but not some slanted enviro swill.

mike in tucson

Originally Posted by Bob Parmenter

As for hydrogen being the future fuel it begs the question; where do you get the hydrogen?

H2o 2 parts hydrogen 1 part oxygen other wise known as water

Originally Posted by pizzi-man

H2o 2 parts hydrogen 1 part oxygen other wise known as water

Well (no pun intended......maybe ) that's one of the two answers I expected. Coming from someone in No. Cal it surprises somewhat. You guys have been at a low level "war" with the folks to the south over water rights for something like 40 years. Your reserviors, e.g. Lake Shasta are reported to be at record lows. Those fine folks down south have a lot of cars. Where's the huge supply of water going to come from to convert into fuel (won't even try to get into where the energy to separate the h from the o will come from).

Not really trying to pick on you hear, it's just that folks seem to think more clearly when they have to justify their beliefs. And, you may be able to convince me to see something you're privvy to that I'm not.

For hydrogen, using the density of H2 = 10.1 KWH/gal. you can convert the volume of gasoline used daily in the USA to the equivalent volume of hydrogen....if you want to look at facts instead of wishing. Bob is right (of course), there is no established infrastructure to distribute these miracle energy sources....it took 100+ years for oil/gas to get where it is today. Of course, we should be working towards other energy sources BUT we can't expect any new source to be an overnight success nor should we piss away our economy and our way of life to make a change.