• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Anyone capable of discussing gas without politics? Anyone?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
MililaniBuckeye said:
You think for two seconds that the oil companies will alow that? Case in point: When I was in Okinawa, the military TV channel which showed American programs there played filler material in place of commercials, and one of the filler spots was a "Technology Today" blurb. One of them featured this guy who invented a very small 2-stroke engine that overcame all the problems of a normal 2-stroke (having to add oil to the gas, poor emissions, etc.) while being very powerful and extremely fuel efficient. The engine weighed around 100 pounds (the guy picked it up by himself and carried it to a work bench) and produced something like 150 HP...they put it in a Geo Metro or similar small car and could smoke the tires with it. They also claimed to get about 70-80 miles per gallon with it on the test track. This was in the 1995-1996 timeframe. Gee, I wonder why no one has heard of this engine...
Click to expand...

Mili- I agree 100% with what you said. There are all kinds of Urban legends regarding technologies being developed that could change energy consumption greatly. I have no doubt on that. But-- and this is all I'M saying---- but that does not change the fact that we as Americans could do better in terms of the way we think about our own energy consumption. If we were to make real, tangible changes to the way we operate, it would have a dramatic effect on our wallets, and would spur energy companies to change with the times.

I do agree that there are 'fat cats' in the energy businesses getting rich at our expense. But I also come from a market-based, capitalistic school of thought that says that is their perogative(sp) to do so. No one goes into business- either small business or large corporations- to lose money. Obviously, they felt as though those new technologies would hinder their ability to do so. But if a dramatic shift in public opinion and attitudes occured, they may steer their way clear to rolling with the punches more and try to change and adapt to the public needs and wants. That is just my opinion, though. I just get tired of hearing all these conspiracy theories all the time about "an elite group of seven in the Catskill mountains who completely orchestrate the entire world economy". It can't be both ways. We are either an open free-market economy or we are not.
 
Upvote 0
Got this in an e-mail today...

GasPrices2003.jpg
 
Upvote 0
buckalum01 said:
I have no doubt on that. But-- and this is all I'M saying---- but that does not change the fact that we as Americans could do better in terms of the way we think about our own energy consumption. If we were to make real, tangible changes to the way we operate, it would have a dramatic effect on our wallets, and would spur energy companies to change with the times.
Click to expand...
One idea which I love is solar panels on the rooftops of homes. This is not as radical today as it was even five years ago, but aside from having a limitless, free energy source, you can actually make money. When your home energy consumption is below the power you're generating from your solar panels, the meter will spin backwards since you are providing power to the grid. Some homeowners are actually receiving more money from their power companies than they would spend. Eventually, society has to look at a grid of solar and wind energy sources. Couple this with plug-in, electric automobiles and you make a severe impact on the quality of life and the environment with the bonus of limitless, free energy.

What is frustrating about this proposition is that these are technologies that have been around for nearly four decades! For most of the people on this board, we (or our parents, rather) could have eliminated our dependance on oil a generation ago.

Anyhow, aside from rising gas prices as a result of Katrina, I think all of us are going to see the price of everything go up. Every good or service we purchase is brought to us by planes or automobiles which require oil, and the cost of transportation will be passed on to consumers. Companies can't just absorb a one-week 70% increase in fuel prices. I really wouldn't be surprised if pizza delivery this football weekend jumps $2.00.
 
Upvote 0
MolGenBuckeye said:
Solar power is certainly a great way to go if possible. I'm not an expert on it, but I don't think Columbus is a viable location to make back the money you spend on the panels. I could certainly be wrong, though. Anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...
What? You're saying you don't want to go outside and shovel your roof 4 months out of the year? :wink:
 
Upvote 0
MolGenBuckeye said:
Solar power is certainly a great way to go if possible. I'm not an expert on it, but I don't think Columbus is a viable location to make back the money you spend on the panels. I could certainly be wrong, though. Anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...
It's not really the panels that are the expensive part actually they are quite affordable fior their purpose. The problem is being able to store the energy, That's the part that starts to get expensive requiring large batteries also you run into the whole ac/dc conversion.
 
Upvote 0
MolGenBuckeye said:
Solar power is certainly a great way to go if possible. I'm not an expert on it, but I don't think Columbus is a viable location to make back the money you spend on the panels. I could certainly be wrong, though. Anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...
Solar power is only practical if it is used on a long-term basis. Rechargable cells are somewhat costly up front, and energy conversion is expensive. Columbus, not having a lot of sunny days, especially in the winter, would not be that suitable of a location. You really need 3 of 4 days to be sunny in order to be useful and with the winters we have where we sometimes go 5 days in a row with little to no sun, it is impractical here. Geothermal energy is a good place to look for an alternative around here, but it still needs more research before implementation
 
Upvote 0
buckalum01 said:
Mili- I agree 100% with what you said. There are all kinds of Urban legends regarding technologies being developed that could change energy consumption greatly. I have no doubt on that. But-- and this is all I'M saying---- but that does not change the fact that we as Americans could do better in terms of the way we think about our own energy consumption. If we were to make real, tangible changes to the way we operate, it would have a dramatic effect on our wallets, and would spur energy companies to change with the times.

I do agree that there are 'fat cats' in the energy businesses getting rich at our expense. But I also come from a market-based, capitalistic school of thought that says that is their perogative(sp) to do so. No one goes into business- either small business or large corporations- to lose money. Obviously, they felt as though those new technologies would hinder their ability to do so. But if a dramatic shift in public opinion and attitudes occured, they may steer their way clear to rolling with the punches more and try to change and adapt to the public needs and wants. That is just my opinion, though. I just get tired of hearing all these conspiracy theories all the time about "an elite group of seven in the Catskill mountains who completely orchestrate the entire world economy". It can't be both ways. We are either an open free-market economy or we are not.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The problem is very simple - supply has not kept pace with demand, on a global scale. The United States is not alone in this at all.

The "fat cats" would love to be able to produce more oil and gas, because they know they can sell it. The problem we've had domestically is we've made so many parts of our country off-limits for drilling, building refineries or building nuclear power plants. If we used more nuclear power to heat/light our homes and businesses we could reduce our consumption of fossil fuels dramatically, leaving it mostly for gasoline and other fuels.

"Oh no, we can't drill! It'll hurt the environment!"
"Oh no, we can't build a refinery THERE!"
"Oh no, nuclear power is DANGEROUS!"

Unfortunately, we've spent 30+ years finding every reason in the world to NOT drill, to NOT increase our refining capacity and to NOT decrease our demand for fossil fuels where viable alternatives exist, and now we're paying the price for it. It IS as simple as that, and the oil campanies were NOT the ones making those childish decisions. It was our government, and the courts.
 
Upvote 0
Dryden said:
One idea which I love is solar panels on the rooftops of homes. This is not as radical today as it was even five years ago, but aside from having a limitless, free energy source, you can actually make money. When your home energy consumption is below the power you're generating from your solar panels, the meter will spin backwards since you are providing power to the grid. Some homeowners are actually receiving more money from their power companies than they would spend.
Click to expand...

My friend, you've been reading too many urban legend e-mails. Solar panels do NOT supply power back to the grid.
 
Upvote 0
gotwoody said:
i was out driving yesterday and i was out in the middle of nowhere and the gas price was 1.69, and i know thats cheap, but that's really cheap compared to the 3.09, 3.39, etc. that im seeing
Click to expand...

There was an article in the Business Journal that said many of the older stations pumps are not able to go over $3.00/gallon. They had to get permission from the state to price it by the half gallon. They are supposed to have it clearly marked that the pricing is for a half gallon instead of a gallon. I would guess that this affects more of the rural stations that do not have a digital or LCD readout on the meter.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top