Image of the day

Captured by

M97 Owl nebula

My Account

New to Astromart?

Register an account...

Need Help?

THE QUESTION - some of you shouldn't look - you have been warned

Started by AstroMart, 04/07/2018 10:51PM

Poll Results:

0 Total Votes
Posted 08/09/2008 02:49AM #60
Do you remember back in 2005 when oil hit $50/barrel for the first time ever, after climbing since 2002, and what a shock that was? Now it's still over twice that, a price which would have had us all reeling in dread a few years ago, and you're acting like it's a bargain. Holy cow, it doesn't take much to convince you the birds are singing again. What do you expect to happen now? Will it drop down to even that unprecedented $50 level again? I doubt it. Not surprisingly, the strong and steady rise since 2002 comes with temporary reverses. It will stabilize at around (not exactly) $100/barrel and then begin to climb again. See if it doesn't, all you rightist ostriches.

Of course, the numbers involved with the potential results of offshore drilling clearly show no chance of its ever having any serious impact on energy prices. I realize though that mere math can never trump ideology in some people's minds.

Joe Bergeron

Moderator, Astro-Physics Forum
Posted 08/09/2008 03:11AM #61
-Of course, the numbers involved with the potential results of offshore drilling clearly -show no chance of its ever having any serious impact on energy prices. I realize though -that mere math can never trump ideology in some people's minds.

What are these "numbers" you are speaking of? If there is very little oil there, then why are Russia, and China drilling, and pumping, off our shores? Logic tells me that..

This has nothing to do with "ideology" Joe. The oil is there. Even if it's only enough for say 10 years worth, by then we *should* have other energy resources in operation. That is if the environmentalists and Congress get out of the way and let the free market actually be a free market. Sure, safeguards have to be in place, but outright banning drilling is one of the things that got us into this mess to begin with. The time has come to open the spigots. This country has the technology and expertise to do it safely. If China can to it right off our own shores, then why can't we?
Posted 08/09/2008 03:54AM #62
you are correct, the chart is correct, no question. But is it really relevant? for it really tells only about the past.

Now, if I can offer my dimwitted query, considering these figures are of known reserves, they by no means reflect what is to be discovered (yes, I am an optimist). How will we know if we do not explore?
Posted 08/09/2008 12:49PM #63
Why the dark sarcasm?

It dropped from $4.09 to $3.69 here.. $.40 is a pretty good drop and it's still dropping.
What Don had "predicted" is coming true in a relatively short period of time. Only time will tell if it actually continues. It's getting closer to winter where gasoline usually drops some, and heating oil climbs a bit. Supply and demand..

Richard Wright said:

Yep, Well done sir! Now that we are paying $3.97/ gallon instead of $4.12, things are as right as rain. And you predicted it! Take this as a well earned pat on the back.

Don Barar said:

Several weeks in this forum in a discussion about drilling in ANWAR or What I wanted in my backyard I recall writing that energy prices were high at the moment but the market would eventually work to bring things back in line. Back then oil was hovering around $150/barrel and everyone was attacking the speculators, exchange rates, and Big Oil.

Alot has happened since then. Oil is at $116/barrel and sinking like a rock. The President has lifted the ban on offshore drilling, the Democrats are realing from being exposed as cronies for wacky enviromentalists and are expected to lift the Congressional ban, people have changed their driving habits, and the US dollar is on the rise against the Euro becuase of the chance of recession in Europe.

My words words at the time about high energy were and I quote "this too shall pass". Free markets work.

Ok all you leftist Henny Penny's. I told you so!!!!!!
Posted 08/09/2008 01:28PM #64
-So, we're going to have to do something a bit more drastic than just drilling.

Yeah, Captain Obvious, we know that. Drilling now should ease the prices a bit for us, the Americans, until other types of energy come online. Until then, we need this "insignificant" oil we know is there to carry us through.

How can you be sure that production data is relevant with respect to the actual market driven forces? Did domestic production drop off as a result of depletion? Or did production drop off because it was cheaper to just buy the foreign oil instead? All that chart shows is production has dropped. It doesn't explain why it dropped off.

Something has to be done with respect to heating oil costs, or people will die. Letting the oil prices continue to rise, or not drop, and raising taxes to send "help" for those too poor to afford the heat, will only serve to make things worse. The people that can theoretically, but barely afford the heat now, may not be able to if there is an added tax burden. That would only serve to perpetuate the problem we have now, not being able to afford it. The high price of fuels doesn't matter if you can afford it. It only matters when you can't.
Posted 08/09/2008 08:15PM #65
-In order for supply and demand pricing to help us, we need to kill the demand.

Absolutely! The only near-term "first step" that I can see is to start drilling for our own oil to "kill the demand" for the foreign oil. Then simultaneously begin to develop other alternatives that individuals can afford. Those that live outside the cities need to have alternatives so the cities can use what's at hand. It's much easier, and simpler for one to "modify" their own individual home and get off, or reduce, their consumption of petroleum products. Almost half of the population of this country are rural dwellers. Get them heading toward energy independence and you'll easily cut 30% off the demand for petroleum-based energy. The solar farms, windmill farms, and hydroelectric plants can then cover most of the urban sector. But there will still be a need for coal, oil, and nuclear facilities. But their consumption will be a fraction of the overall, thus "killing the demand" even further. Electric cars will not help the rural and mountain dwellers. They travel much greater distances and require more "power" to travel up and down hills. Plus, where would they "fill 'er up" at? And I don't know about you, but I like having a heater in my car in the winter. And electric car's batteries would be eaten up by the heater alone. ;-) But for the urban folks, it would be a viable alternative. Again, dropping the demand a bit more. Every little bit we chip away at the demand is going to help. When people begin to pay less for energy, they'll not only have money to spend, but prices overall will begin to drop back to reasonable levels again. Then the cost of health care will no longer be an issue for most people.

I've already done some "conversion" to my home. It is small, but cozy. I've added insulation to what was already there, put thermo-pane windows in, tossed the oil hot-air furnace and tore the vent (chimney) down so it no longer sucks the heat out. I installed a ventless Propane fireplace with blower, and on a thermostat. And at only 35,000 BTU, it heats this place quite nicely. I went from using over 1,000 gallons of oil, to less than 300 gallons of Propane (Liquified Petroleum Gas) a year. And it's not kept at less than 70°F all winter (except when we're not home). So I do have some room to save a little more. My "carbon footprint" is very small, well below the average.
Not everyone can do that. But those who can should do whatever they can to reduce their "demand". Many people rent their homes and cannot make any changes to their home. But their habits can change. Many landlords include heat in their rent. And most of those tenants do not care and don't even try to conserve. So yeah, there are some who will not "contribute" to the "killing of the demand". Those who drive Hummers and larger SUVs and Pickup Trucks just because "it's cool" add to the demand. Then those like Al Gore that demand you and I conserve, yet still fly their private jets, drive in SUV-equipped motorcades, and have some of the largest "carbon footprints" on earth will never contribute their share of "killing the demand". I'm not jealous of their wealth, I'm just sick of them demanding we conserve so they don't have to. Gore is not alone in that.

But there is always a down side to conserving. Electric companies want to keep their profits high, just like the oil companies. So if the demand is less, and they sell less (fewer kilowatt hours), then they scream and raise their rates. Here, we're in a CO-OP and it's just a joke. We have the highest rates around! Just a few miles down the road where the electric company is not a CO-OP, the rates are about half. And that is no joke! Thanks to the Lawyers and Judicial Branch of the Government, these crooks get away with it. These CO-OPs are not regulated by the PUC, and therefore are not bound by it's rules and regulations. Somehow a Public Utility is not covered by the Public Utility Commission. They just raise their rates whenever they want to. PUC-governed utilities must justify any rate increases. And they are normally granted so expect rates to climb if you do your part and conserve.
Another downside to conservation is you get looked at like you shouldn't be part of the human race. What? You don't have a new gas-guzzler SUV in your driveway? You don't own a 3 story, 10 acre mansion? You don't own 6 Takahashis? How dare you set that Tasco next to my AP StarFire! Why don't people compete for how little they can spend, instead of how much? That would help to "kill the demand"! LOL!

Just some reading if you're interested.. ;-)
Posted 08/09/2008 10:34PM #66
Joe...I guess I don't understand the logic from an educated person like yourself speaking that way about the only president we had that had the guts and talent to end the cold war and give us stability and prosperity as well. Shame on you for letting liberal politics dull your obvious intelligence. Use it....Dave Vosgien
Posted 08/10/2008 02:30PM #67
Please don't patronize me by suggesting that only by agreeing with you may I use my intelligence. The fact is that after the bombing of that poorly defended Marine compound, Reagan withdrew all forces from Lebanon within four months. I haven't said a word about what might have motivated this withdrawal. I'm sorry if these facts make you uncomfortable.

Joe Bergeron

Moderator, Astro-Physics Forum
Posted 08/10/2008 02:35PM #68
Just in case anyone is taken in by this "China drilling right off our shores" nonsense...

Joe Bergeron

Moderator, Astro-Physics Forum
Posted 08/10/2008 03:58PM #69
Bob Barr makes a lot of sense! I agree with most of what he says. He is a true Libertarian. I don't think many people know that our Founding Fathers were Libertarians. The U.S. Constitution, as it was written, has been made a mockery of by the left, and right "parties". And all "in the name of the party". Or in the name of "Progression". Nobody was supposed to be a "Career Politician". The Government is not supposed to "Lord over the People". In fact, to do so, is Unconstitutional! We The People, it says in the sacred document, not We The Government! So to vote for either of the two "Puppets of the Party" candidates Obama, or McCain, you'll just be getting, and perpetuating, "We The Government". Hey, it's only a 4 year term! But the two "we the parties" are so bitter, and jealous, that they will stop at nothing to prevent anyone from "outside the club" to do anything.
Look at what happened to Jesse Ventura. The two "parties" wouldn't let him do anything. They mocked him, ridiculed him, and frustrated him. I believe it was a Republican that said "We don't want an outsider to tell us what to do" (or something to that effect). And look at that idiot Democrat (I can't remember who) just a couple of years ago that vowed "Over my dead body" when someone "not from the party" petitioned to get on the ballot. Yeah, they don't want any competition. They use the "party" judges to make sure other choices Of The People are kept off, and out of sight, from the voters. They want the power to "Lord Over The People", and to keep all their perks and scandals kept secret. When they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar, they use taxpayer money for their lawyers and defense. The treasurer from Missouri just said "NO" to the Republican scandal who was using taxpayer money to "pay off" the plaintiff he got caught with in a sex scandal. The Democrats here in Pa. are doing the same thing! Performing illegal acts, breaking laws, and when caught, use taxpayer money for their lawyers, fines, and to "pay off"! Yeah, that made my day when that was brought to light. And is also currently under investigation by the Pa. Attorney General. So neither "party" has any of my respect at this time. Their credibility has tumbled..

Obama is out for me, he's too "progressive", and too inexperienced. McCain is probably out as well. He's too "liberal", but has experience. But "the party" is excess baggage we don't need. Bob Barr at least has the guts to "go against the grain". Obama just reacts to what the media "reports" and changes his campaign to what he "perceives" the people like, or dislike at any given moment. He stands for "change" alright, to "change his mind" just to get elected! McCain has also "changed" a few times, but still stands on most of his original beliefs that got him there. Nader, well he's just an extension of the far-left. I mean far, far, left field! Barr stands stout on the values of the Constitution. I like a man with guts. The two "party choices" both lack any real guts. But the jury is still out for all of them.

Ed Case said:

If you don't vote for Barr, you will be a slave to the NEW WORLD ORDER!!!