$10 per gal gas....a cool article

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Salsawonder @ Jun 8 2006, 03:50 PM) [snapback]268227[/snapback]</div>

What are you talking about subsidizing their vehicles?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 8 2006, 02:45 PM) [snapback]268221[/snapback]</div>

I think it would fare better than most. (That's entirely my point). If I lost my job, I can always go back to fixing cars. One thing is for certain, demand for car repairs tends to spike in a down economy. Car sales, on the other hand, tend to dip.

Nate

 

It's tough to buy gas for the guzzlers if it goes up much further. Or does GM have an agreement with the gas companies to offset their costs...I doubt it. GM has failed to look ahead. Course I already know there will be rabid remark from Malorn on anything that paints his lovely GMs in a negative light.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 8 2006, 04:21 PM) [snapback]268196[/snapback]</div>

You forget your original inanity: That $4 gasoline in the US would lead to global economic collapse. That is your question for Europeans. Or Australians. Or the Japanese. Or India ..

Europeans have adapted to to $8 gasoline. Are you saying the US is incapable of doing the same ?
~ 8/10ths of the world economies have adapted to $4 gasoline. Are you saying the US is incapable of doing the same ?

The Indian economy is prospering at $4 gasoline, even though the average Indian salary is a fraction of an average americans. But then again, they were not so stupid as to buy a 10 mpg truck to run around town in. They also remember how to walk or bicycle short distances.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Jun 8 2006, 04:19 PM) [snapback]268256[/snapback]</div>

Comparing the Indian economy to the American economy may be appropriate someday but today is nonsense. If gas gets to $4/gallon in the next three years the economy will enter a major slowdown in this country which will pull down the world economy(remember who the consumers of the world are). If it gets above $4.50/gallon in the next 3 years it will result in an economic calamity. I followed you're earlier links and found that most of the difference in world price is in the amount of tax collected per gallon. If the gasoline itself was free the cost would still be far greater than in the Us just to pay the gas tax. Nice try on the cost issue, or maybe that will be your next idea, slap say a $5.00 per gallon additional tax on gasoline so the liberals have some more money to blow on nonesense.

 

As for liberals just talk --

I'll hear back in about a week on quotes for a residential tie-in PV array. I expect to install one that will cover my household electricity use, and have excess to cover my car when it becomes PHEV.

All in all, I anticipate my family will be carbon neutral (if not negative) in about 5 years. I expect to save money by doing so from day 1. All it takes, really, is a willingness to adapt, deaf ears to people like you who think that gluttony is an american virtue, and a desire to live in a healthy sustainable local community.

What you call extreme left wing, I call common sense.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(EricGo @ Jun 8 2006, 04:36 PM) [snapback]268263[/snapback]</div>

i applaud you for the pv array I am investigating the same thing. If I ever build a new house it will be a -0- energy user with PV and geothermal I may also go after a LEED rating just for the example's sake. As for being carbon neutral I think it is great to try but not very realistic in the near future. You're post above is common sense and will get to be even more as the costs some down.

There needs to be a somprehensive energy policy in this country which encourages conservation adn greater r & d into alternative energies. The fact that there is not is really pathetic.

 

Is anyone else amused by malorn, driving down the road in his new 07 XL whatever, getting 13 mpg, going, "Wow, if gas gets to $4.50 a gallon we're all screwed. I better sell some more of these!"

Malorn, your 20 MPG on E85 is not accurate. Plot a lifetime average like john1701a.com, and the real mileage will come out. It won't be pretty.

I don't want to hear that you checked a few tanks on highway trips. I want to see TOTAL gallons burned and TOTAL miles driven since new, for a year or two. If you use any other method it won't be accurate.

Nate

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 8 2006, 05:41 PM) [snapback]268266[/snapback]</div>

I agree. It is also simply a result of having a federal government run by the oil industry, put there by votes like yours. I hope you reconsider next election.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daronspicher @ Jun 8 2006, 08:45 AM) [snapback]267794[/snapback]</div>

I'm driving my Prius because I can't get the 5 miles to work via public transportation. I'm not able to carpool because my work hours aren't very predictable. A bicycle isn't a practical alternative when roads are icy/snowy in the winter months, and most of the way to work is two lane roads without shoulders and without sidewalks or bike paths. It would require a change in 'local government' thinking to help provide more public transportation. Perhaps if a hefty tax on gas were devoted to providing better/more public transportation, we could reduce our dependency on petroleum, but it takes time to make those changes to our infrastructure, not just money. I wish I had a magic wand to solve it all, but even if I had a magic wand, I'd probably concentrate on helping my family and friends for a long time before I started doing things for the anonymous 'public'.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(malorn @ Jun 8 2006, 05:41 PM) [snapback]268266[/snapback]</div>

Consider these numbers:

Every barrell of oil the US buys from outside the country is $70 lost to the national economy (with some diverted to anti-US activity). The US imports about 10 million barrells daily, which works out to 255 BILLION dollars annualy. Lets make the arithmetic easy, and say there are 50 million american homes, which works out to $5000 each year per home.

You are the car dealer, so you tell me: how much PV/wind and PHEV can I amortize over 30 years at a payback of $400 a month at say, 6% interest rate ? Off the top of my head, it is about $70K -- but please, check the numbers.

BTW, these numbers are seriously slanted against alternative energy, because they do not include the cost of pollution or military that the current way of doing things costs, but are not present with PV or wind.

Bottom line: Alt energy is a NO-BRAINER. Only ignorance and vested interests slow its adoption.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JBJAG @ Jun 7 2006, 04:58 PM) [snapback]267505[/snapback]</div>

I disagree with this. Sure people may be helpful and nice and kind in the short term. Because they know it will end.

But make it forever and see how it brings out the worst in people. The "me first", self centered, greediness of humans will triumph over altruism. It's the same mentality that is in place now regarding energy and why nothing has changed. The very rich will buy their gas guzzlers despite any price of gas because they have the money and they can afford it no matter what. Or as my Father so aptly demonstrated: "Why should I care if elephants go extinct? I've already seen an elephant."

 

I just paid 2.81 for 89 octane...yawn

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Salsawonder @ Jun 8 2006, 01:20 PM) [snapback]268195[/snapback]</div>

Do you think they pay more for a barrel of crude than US refineries do? The Europeans "enjoy" higher taxes on their gasoline. That is their choice. I pay higher taxes on my gasoline than people in NH do, because I have sales taxes on my gas and NH doesn't collect sales taxes.

Everything you touch and buy is affected by fuel costs. Food, soft goods, everything you can imagine has an energy cost component. Internet access has one (your ISP has to pay for energy use). Higher fuel prices are coming soon anyway, even without a new, bloated government bureauracy to suck up the prices, hand out favors to its friends and waste the money. Daniel is right, world oil consumption is increasing in a dramatic fashion and the higher prices will be on us fairly soon. At $3 per gallon, some of the alternatives are looking feasible from a finanical angle. At $5 a gallon you'll see some real progress.

Why haven't the Europeans come up with the technological advances? They are at the forefront with us with the technologies that could help, but until the world's largest market is ready for the products, it doesn't make sense to produce them. But its coming.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(kimgh @ Jun 7 2006, 03:51 PM) [snapback]267534[/snapback]</div>

I'm not advocating shock changes either, though a practical program to finance complete US energy independence that taxed oil sales, would be ok by me as long as it went towards conservation first and funding production of alternatives second.

If I remember right, not so long ago, the current administration said that raising the price of gas by $1 (at that point about a 100% increase), would devastate our economy, put airlines out of business, etc. etc. Odd that we are now 200+% higher and the same administration is saying everything is economically rosy and growing fine.

 

Have any of your guys checked out Brazil?

There was a CNN news article about it.

Brazil's gas prices are around $1.80 per gallon. The reason why, is they import very little crude. Their gas is E80. It is 80% ethanol and 20% gasoline.

Ethanol is alcohol. They grow their gas by growing sugarcane. They grow so much gas they actually export it.

I think it would be simple enough to get most cars converted to be able to run on 100% pure alcohol.

The problems are, distribution, and a whole new set of pollutants that burning alcohol creates. BUT, it's a renewable energy source. Plant some corn, wheat, sugarcane, whatever, and make some moonshine!

We've got tons of poor farmers in the USA. They will be mad rich soon enough!

Jimmy

 

Cutting resource use by one-half has been discussed in detail:

Von Weizsacker, E., A. B. Lovins, L. H. Lovins. (1998 CE) Factor Four: Doubling Wealth, Halving Resource Use. London UK: Earthscan Publications ISBN 1 85383 407 6, and

Hawken, P., A. Lovins, L.H. Lovins. (1999 CE). Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution. Boston MA: Little Brown and Co. ISBN 0 316 35316 7

In a nutshell, these discuss that resource productivity can - and should - grow fourfold. The amount of wealth extracted from one unit of natural resources can quadruple. We can live twice as well using one-half as much. Stated another way, if you want to double your profit (cut your cost by one-half), then double your efficiency.

The authors provide seven good reasons for resource efficiency:
1. Live better
2. Pollute and deplete less
3. Make money
4. Harness markets and enlist business
5. Multiply use of scarce capital
6. Increase security
7. Be equitable and have more employment

These lead to people making good long-term sustainable decisions based on critical thinking vs. nonsustainable short-term decisions based on impulse. We presently substitute oil and water for knowledge - at increasing cost. Why not just apply the knowledge efficiently and reap the benefits?!

I very much look forward to $10 per gallon fuel, with the "extra" (above the current $3.25) used to build transportation infrastructure (light rail, bicycle and walking routes, energy efficient homes, schools and businesses) coupled to photovoltaics, wind, hydro and conservation. We will reap short- and long-term benefits and meet the above seven good reasons for resource efficiency.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JBJAG @ Jun 7 2006, 02:58 PM) [snapback]267505[/snapback]</div>

I love this! I've been thinking we need a dis-incentive tax for gas-guzzlers. The $1000 is simply not enough and doesn't include SUV's. ALL vehicles should be subject to it that are used like cars (so yes, SUV's). I'll give exclusions to tractors and other business vehicles.

And I love the idea that the $$$ goes to organic produce (although I'll take sustainable agriculture or energy as being recipients).

Steve

 

Ultimately, America needs to move away from the automobile as its primary method of transportation. Obviously we can't implement "new urbanism" and get improve our railroad system beyond third-world standards overnight, but that is the direction we have to go.
Immediate steps need to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Hybrids are a step in the right direct, so is driving less. I have incorporated both. I need a car to get to work, but I rely on walking or biking to do errands, etc., and my kids get to school that way.
It is ridiculous that CAFE standards have remained essentially the same for 20 years, despite the advances in automotive technology. They need to be raised, and trucks that are not used for commercial purposes (i.e. SUVs) should not be given any special exemption. Consumption taxes on inefficient vehicles (beyond the current "gas guzzler" tax) also make sense, and that money should be invested in alternative energy research and improving our mass transit.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jimmyhua @ Jun 13 2006, 07:40 AM) [snapback]270432[/snapback]</div>

Oil companies have a huge lobby and lots of money. That is why E85 is not already in much wider distribution.