This sure wont help OBAMA. Gas prices will be over 4.00 by spring

[candycorn]

Gas Prices on the Rise, Expected to Top $4 Per Gallon This Spring

In Europe gas prices are $8-10 Per gallon. 4$ gallon is nothing.

It is to Americans.

Yeah...I was a little puzzled by that comment myself.

 

[Lovebears65]

Its like yoiu people never read the history of WWII?

do you understand what this country accomplished in a year?

BAHAHAA you think Obama will do that. He has not done anything but hurt our country since being in office

 

[Truthmatters]

If we cranked on solar panels we could kick Chinas ass.

We would create a shit load of production, instalation and matainence jobs.

The energy savings would be huge.

That is JUST one idea in this area.

there are many other paths.


All the cons can see is OIL because Fox tells them to see only it.

 

[Lovebears65]

Bull and shit. You cannot logistically convert this nation over to an alternative energy source in 1 year, let alone realize any damn savings. This is particularly obvious when you realize that NONE of the alternatives equal the efficiency and energy density of oil, particularly gasoline.

especially when our country is near bankrupt and our credit line is down graded. TDM lives in Fantasy world.

 

[Lovebears65]

If we cranked on solar panels we could kick Chinas ass.

We would create a shit load of production, instalation and matainence jobs.

The energy savings would be huge.

That is JUST one idea in this area.

there are many other paths.


All the cons can see is OIL because Fox tells them to see only it.

yeah ok, It hasnt work yet and there hasnt been a crisis. We have been near crisis and Obama has done nothing but throw money to people who went bankrupt. Solyndra ring a bell . No, because you have nothing in your brain but rocks!

 

[Big Fitz]

Whole industries were cranked from cars to tanks in months

Yes, and paid for by the US government by bond selling for the war effort. It also took them over 2 years of dedicated distribution to get even a few thousand tanks over to the fronts and have a real difference. Now you're talking millions of cars on a totally incompatable power structure to what's there. You think it's going to only take months? Again. Bull and Shit. You have no idea what the requirements are for a modern era changeover of industrial output. This changeover could not be done in 10 years let alone 10 months, and you can fully expect in the second year, the mid term elections will end most of this bullshit because it's an ineffective solution for the needs of a prosperous nation.

I know you're used to living in the third world (a la detroit this week), but the rest of us don't want to live that way nor do we have to.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

It sure will effect him since he will not ok the pipeline open more drilling in the gulf. He helping hurting us with his policies then help!! The left blamed bush all the time when the gas prices raised but when Obama is on watch its not his fault.

For the thousandth time, the Keystone debacle will not result in any oil or money for the US.

I don't remember hearing the BushBaby being blamed for oil prices but let me take this opportunity to say -

Bush did every single thing wrong but if he were responsible for high oil prices, then all that open mouth kissing of oil sheiks was for nothing.

 

[merrill]

Blame it on the oil giants such as the Exxon-Mobil,the Koch brothers/Phillips-Conoco and the oil industry in general.

Hell yes. People buying 300-500 cu in motors tell the oil giants bring on those big dollar gas prices cuz we want to burn some dough. Really now what's the oil industry to do when americans are begging for higher prices?

 

[Big Fitz]

In Europe gas prices are $8-10 Per gallon. 4$ gallon is nothing.

It is to Americans.

Yeah...I was a little puzzled by that comment myself.

And half that price the Europeans pay is in taxes.

 

[candycorn]

Bull and shit. You cannot logistically convert this nation over to an alternative energy source in 1 year, let alone realize any damn savings. This is particularly obvious when you realize that NONE of the alternatives equal the efficiency and energy density of oil, particularly gasoline.

I don't agree. We could do it; all it takes is the will and determination to do so. Which is why, when the topic comes up, I recommend that we stop all development of new weapons systems but still continue with the research. Because we don't need to mass produce fighter jets 3 generations ahead of what the other guys have (yet) because their designs are likely ones that they copied from us anyway.

We need catalyst for the determination and outside of a real and palpable threat to our national security, it isn't coming. You're right about the savings short-term though. There will be none.

However, it is foolish to think that if everybody started getting 40-60 mph from their cars, that we would use as much oil. That is pretty easy to see that we would use much less.

TM is off the mark when it talks about saving heating costs. Very small percentage of your electrical power comes from oil fired power plants. Coal is the source of that power more or less.

 

[Big Fitz]

time to run from oil and build alternatives that dont cause damage like oil.

That would be the smart thing to do.

I bet the right wants to drill drill drill still and keep the terror coffers full of American money

Sounds great.

So you ready to read by candlight and warm yourself with a fire in the meantime?

Love it.....you dont know the difference between solutions and dreams

GOnna love to see the forestry programs that winter.

 

[Katzndogz]

$4.00 a gallon for gas will be cheap once Iran closes the Strait of Hormoz to all exept what they want to export going to whoever they want to export it to.

 

[jaybags]

Whole industries were cranked from cars to tanks in months

Yes, and paid for by the US government by bond selling for the war effort. It also took them over 2 years of dedicated distribution to get even a few thousand tanks over to the fronts and have a real difference. Now you're talking millions of cars on a totally incompatable power structure to what's there. You think it's going to only take months? Again. Bull and Shit. You have no idea what the requirements are for a modern era changeover of industrial output. This changeover could not be done in 10 years let alone 10 months, and you can fully expect in the second year, the mid term elections will end most of this bullshit because it's an ineffective solution for the needs of a prosperous nation.

I know you're used to living in the third world (a la detroit this week), but the rest of us don't want to live that way nor do we have to.

i agree it wont happen in months, but why keep procrastinating? when do we start seriously investing in alternatives?

i agree oil certainly produces the most energy, but are u telling me start to invest in a power grid and solar panels in a desert would not be a good long term investment? and at least reduce demand for oil somewhat in the future

 

[Big Fitz]

Coal is the source of that power more or less.

Hydro
Nuclear
Coal

The three most efficient forms of generating electricity. All three have negative environmental impact that the left refuses to acknowledge as an acceptable sacrifice. It's either submerged land or destroyed wetlands. Or possibly nuclear waste and possible meltdown. And of course burning coal throwing emissions into the air and tearing up mountains is unacceptable too.

No, they want us to play with pinwheels, mirrors and moonshine, pretending it can do the heavy lifting of a modern nation when it most certainly cannot. Modern society costs. If these risks are too much, they should go live in the jungles of Brazil or Africa, bareassed, dirty sick and hungry.

 

[Big Fitz]

Whole industries were cranked from cars to tanks in months

Yes, and paid for by the US government by bond selling for the war effort. It also took them over 2 years of dedicated distribution to get even a few thousand tanks over to the fronts and have a real difference. Now you're talking millions of cars on a totally incompatable power structure to what's there. You think it's going to only take months? Again. Bull and Shit. You have no idea what the requirements are for a modern era changeover of industrial output. This changeover could not be done in 10 years let alone 10 months, and you can fully expect in the second year, the mid term elections will end most of this bullshit because it's an ineffective solution for the needs of a prosperous nation.

I know you're used to living in the third world (a la detroit this week), but the rest of us don't want to live that way nor do we have to.

i agree it wont happen in months, but why keep procrastinating? when do we start seriously investing in alternatives?

i agree oil certainly produces the most energy, but are u telling me start to invest in a power grid and solar panels in a desert would not be a good long term investment? and at least reduce demand for oil somewhat in the future

Consider how land intensive solar is, and then realize it only works when it's light enough. Compared to hydro which works 24/7/365 as long as there is water which if you're smart is always, there is no comparison.

 

[Jarhead]

Whole industries were cranked from cars to tanks in months

Yes, and paid for by the US government by bond selling for the war effort. It also took them over 2 years of dedicated distribution to get even a few thousand tanks over to the fronts and have a real difference. Now you're talking millions of cars on a totally incompatable power structure to what's there. You think it's going to only take months? Again. Bull and Shit. You have no idea what the requirements are for a modern era changeover of industrial output. This changeover could not be done in 10 years let alone 10 months, and you can fully expect in the second year, the mid term elections will end most of this bullshit because it's an ineffective solution for the needs of a prosperous nation.

I know you're used to living in the third world (a la detroit this week), but the rest of us don't want to live that way nor do we have to.

i agree it wont happen in months, but why keep procrastinating? when do we start seriously investing in alternatives?

i agree oil certainly produces the most energy, but are u telling me start to invest in a power grid and solar panels in a desert would not be a good long term investment? and at least reduce demand for oil somewhat in the future

Several reasons.

First...as we saw with Solyndra...it is not a profitable venture. We gave one company a half a billion dollars and a year later they were tapped out. So what should we do?
Second....exactly who can afford to refit their homes for solar power right now?

 

[Jarhead]

Yes, and paid for by the US government by bond selling for the war effort. It also took them over 2 years of dedicated distribution to get even a few thousand tanks over to the fronts and have a real difference. Now you're talking millions of cars on a totally incompatable power structure to what's there. You think it's going to only take months? Again. Bull and Shit. You have no idea what the requirements are for a modern era changeover of industrial output. This changeover could not be done in 10 years let alone 10 months, and you can fully expect in the second year, the mid term elections will end most of this bullshit because it's an ineffective solution for the needs of a prosperous nation.

I know you're used to living in the third world (a la detroit this week), but the rest of us don't want to live that way nor do we have to.

i agree it wont happen in months, but why keep procrastinating? when do we start seriously investing in alternatives?

i agree oil certainly produces the most energy, but are u telling me start to invest in a power grid and solar panels in a desert would not be a good long term investment? and at least reduce demand for oil somewhat in the future

Consider how land intensive solar is, and then realize it only works when it's light enough. Compared to hydro which works 24/7/365 as long as there is water which if you're smart is always, there is no comparison.

Hydro power has been around since the days of the water wheel.

But you will find it somewhat crowded when people are foced to live within a stones throw of moving water.

 

[jaybags]

Yes, and paid for by the US government by bond selling for the war effort. It also took them over 2 years of dedicated distribution to get even a few thousand tanks over to the fronts and have a real difference. Now you're talking millions of cars on a totally incompatable power structure to what's there. You think it's going to only take months? Again. Bull and Shit. You have no idea what the requirements are for a modern era changeover of industrial output. This changeover could not be done in 10 years let alone 10 months, and you can fully expect in the second year, the mid term elections will end most of this bullshit because it's an ineffective solution for the needs of a prosperous nation.

I know you're used to living in the third world (a la detroit this week), but the rest of us don't want to live that way nor do we have to.

i agree it wont happen in months, but why keep procrastinating? when do we start seriously investing in alternatives?

i agree oil certainly produces the most energy, but are u telling me start to invest in a power grid and solar panels in a desert would not be a good long term investment? and at least reduce demand for oil somewhat in the future

Consider how land intensive solar is, and then realize it only works when it's light enough. Compared to hydro which works 24/7/365 as long as there is water which if you're smart is always, there is no comparison.

i am no engineer and dont know what is most cost effective or produces the most energy, i just know i would like some serious investments made in alternatives very soon. no need to kick the can down the raod any further. unless the oil lobby continues to exert so much influence

 

[candycorn]

Coal is the source of that power more or less.

Hydro
Nuclear
Coal

The three most efficient forms of generating electricity. All three have negative environmental impact that the left refuses to acknowledge as an acceptable sacrifice. It's either submerged land or destroyed wetlands. Or possibly nuclear waste and possible meltdown. And of course burning coal throwing emissions into the air and tearing up mountains is unacceptable too.

No, they want us to play with pinwheels, mirrors and moonshine, pretending it can do the heavy lifting of a modern nation when it most certainly cannot. Modern society costs. If these risks are too much, they should go live in the jungles of Brazil or Africa, bareassed, dirty sick and hungry.

I can't argue with your premise although you seem to err toward the spectacular in your 2nd paragraph.

We need more nuke yesterday. Nothing comes without risks or offsets.

Which is why we also need a regulatory environment on steroids to try to make sure we don't have the same occurrence they had in Japan. Still, the risk is there.

We've had a nuclear navy for how many decades now? To think that we can't put their safety record of reactor maintenance, security, and stability on-land is stupid. Sadly, many of the lefties here are risk-adverse.

I think there is a big possibility for wind; I'm curious why they can't use clear plastic for the turbines though. It would seem as though that would get rid of a lot of the "sight pollution"/bullshit arguments.

 

[bodecea]

It sure will effect him since he will not ok the pipeline open more drilling in the gulf. He helping hurting us with his policies then help!! The left blamed bush all the time when the gas prices raised but when Obama is on watch its not his fault.

You seem to be saying that that pipeline would have been ready by Spring if he had ok'd it. To that I say.....