A very long-winded rant on whose fault are these high gas prices, anyway? I'm no scholar, and I'm sure my logic has many holes, but I still feel like sharing --

Who's to Blame?

btw: Our F-150 gets driven pretty much only on weekends, now.

 

Hmmm

1)The oil business isn't a free market.There is an oil Cartel that fixes the price, by fixing production quotas.They do not compete to sell their oil.This is legal(it is in other countries), and there isn't much we can do about it other than use less,and find-develope other sources of energy.

2)Even though there isn't really a free market, the price still responds to market forces.Current production is about 80,000,000 barrels/day.Current use is the same.Production could be increased to maybe 83,000,000 a day quickly, but it can't be increased much over that very quickly.

3)If a big Exporter-say Iran which(I'm guessing) exports 4,000,000/day-suddenly quit exporting there would suddenly be more demand than supply.The price would go waaaay up.

4)There are speculators who bet on the future price of oil.If they think there might be a disruption in the future,they bid higher.This is what is happening now,and has been happening since the Iraq war started.Gasoline was about $1.40 pre war. Now there is fear that Iran,Nigeria etc might suddenly drop exports by a lot.

We can use less,and push other energy technologies.Push the pols to support Nukes,wind,grown energy,shale,oil sands,coal scrubbed a bit,maybe made into liquid energy. The USA has lots of coal.Probably enough to supply ALL our energy needs for 50 years.We also have lots of oil shale.It can be economically developed at $70+ a barrel oil.
Now , worldwide energy use is going upward because China's economy-manu. is booming, and their citizens are buying cars etc.Same story in India.Our-USA- energy needs are also going up.We currently use 25% of the oil that is mined(20,000,000 11,000,000 imported 9000000 home mined). China probably uses about 20% of the energy we use, but their need is rising very,very fast.

My solutions ignore CO2 production,and fears of nuke plant accidents.If CO2 production is a big concern then conservation(always number one because it is really kinda painless for the 1st 10% or so-sayes $$ usually), -lightbulbs,insulation,more efficient car,bicycle,fewer trips,weatherstripping and caulking,turn the thermostat waaay up when you leave the house(in the summer-winter go the other way) more efficient AC-HEATER.
You can probably cut your electric bill(or gas,or heating oil) by -20% fairly easily if your house is a bit older,drafty,old AC,not much insulation, you use old fashioned bulbs etc.Many states will pay you up to $2000 to update your AC-heating system.It might cost $5500 to do it,you get $1500 back.You can save $50/month this way.Payback is 80 months-7 years.Since electricity is going up,payback is usually quicker.After 7 years it is like having a $50/mo pension for another 13 years during the systems life.Insulation and caulking are quicker paybacks.

This is more than you wanted to hear-sorry.We are kinda screwed oil price wise -.We will have to pay high prices.On the bright side, it should give impetus to other energy techs and sources.Luck,Charlie

 

Actually, no it's not in the least -- thanks for taking the time to communicate all of that. Like I said, I'm no scholar and I'm sure I have some flawed logic/understanding of the myriad issues affecting oil prices (and, thus, gasoline prices at the pump), but it was good to document my thoughts, and it's equally good to read yours.

Again, thanks!

 

It's our fault. We take gas for granted. If you couldn't count on gas being availabe everywhere and didn't know when the next time you could fill up would be, you would be very frugal with it. As it stands, there are many techniques that can take any car 50% over epa. People fell that its too much work and therefore just complain about the price of gas. If we are not willing to try to use every drop of gas efficiently we realy have no right to complain. The oil companies don't dictate how much gas we use, the just supply it. We dictate our own pain.

 

Not in my back yard!!! An omission that makes your ideas seriously flawed.

 

Gosh Lakedude why don't you like nukes?

They say a pic = 1k words:

 

But lakedude that could never happen here, we have containment and training and better designed plants and bla bla bla.....

Yeah right:

 

Hey,life is full of risk.We do have one in our backyard-the Waterford plant upriver.Doesn't keep me up nights.
We -as a country-take lots of risks to secure energy-coal mining,oil drilling-pretty dangerous-they kill lots folks every year regular as rain.Black lung kills 100 time more miners than cave ins etc.
Burning the coal also has huge a health effect.
I would bet that between the mining and burning ,coal fired generating plants probably kill >1000/yr.The Russkies only managed to kill a few hundred, and that was 20 years ago.Coal kills more than that every year in the USA.Our Nuclear plants haven't killed anyone(other than several hundred miners total-but we kill more coal miners than that every year(black lung-COPD etc).
Oil isn't as dangerous, but at least 100/yr are killed in the oil patches in the USA.
Now mining uranium isn't benign, but it isn't as bad as coal per unit of energy produced.
You have already chosen coal and oil; they are demonstrably many times more dangerous.,Nukes are safer-what is the deal?
Thanks.Charlie
PS-OIL=IRAQ=2500 DEAD+15000 SERIOUS INJURIES+$400,000,000,000-
Now THAT is dangerous! The Iraqis' #'s are 20x worse.

 

There is a huge difference between killing a few workers a year and laying to waste hundreds of square miles of land for hundreds of years due to radioactive fallout.

Why did you leave off Biodiesel, hydro, solar and wind? I'd galdly have any of those in my backyard. Hey wait, I do!! Call me crazy but I'd much much much rather have a lake than a nuke plant in my back yard .

 

Lake,I didn't leave off Bio and wind.Thi-below- was in my 1st post.Granted, it was a long rambling free association post, so missing it was pretty easy.I call Bio diesel,ethanol,biomass etc -grown energy, since that is what it is.




I covered the options for someone for whom CO2 is an overriding concern.The "solutions ignore CO2" was a prelude for covering that option.

"My solutions ignore CO2 production,and fears of nuke plant accidents.If CO2 production is a big concern then conservation(always number one because it is really kinda painless for the 1st 10% or so-sayes $$ usually), -lightbulbs,insulation,more efficient car,bicycle,fewer trips,weatherstripping and caulking,turn the thermostat waaay up when you leave the house(in the summer-winter go the other way) more efficient AC-HEATER.
You can probably cut your electric bill(or gas,or heating oil) by -20% fairly easily if your house is a bit older,drafty,old AC,not much insulation, you use old fashioned bulbs etc.Many states will pay you up to $2000 to update your AC-heating system.It might cost $5500 to do it,you get $1500 back.You can save $50/month this way.Payback is 80 months-7 years.Since electricity is going up,payback is usually quicker.After 7 years it is like having a $50/mo pension for another 13 years during the systems life.Insulation and caulking are quicker paybacks."

Now I did leave hydro and solar out. Originally I had hydro in there, but on reflection I removed it before posting because we can't increase Hydro, and it isn't as benign as it looks. My main reason is that hydro production can't be significantly increased.It has peaked(there are other problems, but I have run on enough).
I also had solar in there in there but removed it before posting because solar(other than growing stuff) isn't ready for prime time. We will never-NEVER-have fields of solar panels on earth; that is strictly SCIFI stuff..Why, because leaves do it better and cheaper?Small time things-roof panels- can supply small amounts of power, but they aren't economical yet. A panel that can-on average-produce one KWH PER DAY in a reasonably sunny climate costs $10,000!!!
I pay 10 cents for 1kwh(actually more like 12,but the math is easier with 10 cents). Payback is 100,000 days!! 30 years!! It won't last 30 years!I fully expect the price to drop. At $2000 per 1kwh/d-6 year payback-they will make sense.Electricity will increase in price,so the payback price will rise.

Your main point is that you think coal is safer than Nukes? Coal doesn't kill a "few workers a year" Coal production kills 100's directly every year just from Black Lung and COPD.It also shortens 1000's of lives downstream of the plume. Check the EPA site. If you wade through the numbers you will eventually find their guess on how many years of life are lost from burning coal.
Nukes aren't perfectly safe. They just aren't as bad as coal, or oil, if you compare the records over the last 50 years.How many Russians do you think died in coal mining in the last 50/y? Probably 100x Cher.
BEST OF ALL-NUKES PRODUCE ZERO CO2.
It looks like a good risk to me.Guess we will just have to disagree on it.Thanks.Charlie