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

[thereisnospoon]

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

Obama sets gas prices?????????

Who Knew?????

The administration's train wreck of an energy policy, antagonistic relationship with fossil fuel development and prolific deficit spending are contributing to high gas prices.
If you think the actions of the federal government do not move commodities markets, you are out of the loop.
You should stick with things you know about rather than post nonsense about issues you know very little or nil.

 

[rightwinger]

That's almost as high as they were under Bush

 

[thereisnospoon]

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.

Shut the **** up..First European countries cannot produce their own oil and gas.
Second, roughly 70% of the price of gas in European countries is due to taxes.
Great, we should pay ten bucks a gallon as a "political me too"...
You ******* libs would be going out of your minds if gas was that expensive. You'd accuse the oil companies of price gouging. You's scream that Republicans and Wall Street made gas expensive so that only "the rich" could drive cars...

 

[rdean]

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

Gasoline is our number one export. We have loads of gas.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4Tmi_fpUHs]Obama Supports High Gas Prices If They're Gradually Hiked - YouTube[/ame]
Gas prices near here have risen 25 to 30 cents/gal since late December.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Its like yoiu people never read the history of WWII?

do you understand what this country accomplished in a year?

What are you babbling about?

 

[thereisnospoon]

Whole industries were cranked from cars to tanks in months

Your point? You do know what a "point" is?

 

[Lovebears65]

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

Gasoline is our number one export. We have loads of gas.

You are a total utter idiot. How is gas made?? One guess.. OIL?? Yeah!! thats right oil which most is gotten in the middle east!! We make the gas but we do not provide all the oil!!

 

[Rozman]

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

Obama sets gas prices?????????

Who Knew?????

Of course not.....

But when George W. Bush was President
not only was he responsible for the price of gas...
He was responsible for the gas mileage....

Democrats got some ******* pair of balls for being outraged
every time this President is criticized.

Get the **** over it.

 

[Lovebears65]

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.

Shut the **** up..First European countries cannot produce their own oil and gas.
Second, roughly 70% of the price of gas in European countries is due to taxes.
Great, we should pay ten bucks a gallon as a "political me too"...
You ******* libs would be going out of your minds if gas was that expensive. You'd accuse the oil companies of price gouging. You's scream that Republicans and Wall Street made gas expensive so that only "the rich" could drive cars...

Umm. She is far from being a lib if you see most of her post

 

[Lovebears65]

That's almost as high as they were under Bush

BAHAHAHAHA . when Bush left office gas was 1.88 .. It did get up over 4.00 agallon but it was short lived, on average during Bush in office it was 2.47

 

[Big Fitz]

Whole industries were cranked from cars to tanks in months

1940's tech is considerably simpler than modern technology which means changeover and production is much simpler too.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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.

Gas and other traditional fuels are still too cheap to force us into alternative markets, particularly with the amount of infrastructure in place

too cheap?
Our economy is barely hanging on now. Just what do you think would happen if the price of fuel ( which would drive prices for everything else) would do to the economy..
You are another one of these people deluded by the notion that petroleum can simply be eliminated from use.
Almost everything we use is manufactured with some type of petro-chemical substance.
You can't paint a house with a wind mill. You can't manufacture plastics with a solar panel.
Grow up!

 

[Big Fitz]

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

You don't need to be an engineer. This info is freely available online if you look for it. Shit, even Sim City 2 figured it out.

The point is you want to get the most energy out of the smallest area with the best efficiency and least impact. There is no free lunch in power generation. Water you sacrifice SOME land, but you get dependability and an almost environmentally friendly side effect with the lake you create. Nuclear's almost as good save for the concentrated waste and possibility of meltdown. Coal is very good too if you use safe environmentally responsible (not restrictive) mining techniques, and pay attention to emissions.

Solar? Not cost effective to manufacture compared to the rest of the energy sources... YET. What it is best at is supplemental generation because it is inconsistent and low volume. Help a house or small business? Good. Power an industry... shitty.

Wind is more land intensive AND inconsistent.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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.

"Will and determination" doesn't pay for anything.
Here's the issue. The federal government cannot raise enough tax revenue to pay for these grandiose projects. The private sector sees little chance of return on investment.
These things MUST BE PAID FOR. As long as it is money that it takes to get these thngs done, it is what it is.

 

[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.

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.

actually the ecofascisti fight new nuclear every step of the way. The French have it figured out, but not these guys.

 

[merrill]

Choices:

* Move closer to employment

* Park the cars and use public transportation

* Ride Bicycles and buy one more

* Ride 100 mpg motorcycles

* Drive cars that get 35-48 mpg in the city

* Get 3 pair of new walking shoes

* When going out on a date walk or ride a bike to discover how
romantic life can be. Do a little wine over cheese and fruit while out and about.

Think: Gas powered vehicles are large tax dollar budget items. Cars are constantly whining for more lanes or new roads or snow removed or fix the damn potholes or etc etc etc. all of which require tax dollars and more tax dollars and more tax dollars and more tax dollars.

Gas powered vehicles are tax dollar moochers![/QUOTE]

Face it folks it's up to the consumers.

Stop buying so much gasoline. Learn to travel by other means. Think green like green backs and stop burning so many in a gas tank.

Whining will change nothing. Actions speak louder than whining. It's time for consumers to step up to the plate and accept responsibility.

 

[thereisnospoon]

$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.

Closing that shipping lane hurts Iran as well. The Iranian government knows this. AND they could maybe close the Strait for a day or two before they would be forced to withdraw.
The Iranians are known for empty bluster. Or Sabre Rattling if you will. Iran is a paper tiger.
No worries.
We can knock Iran's dick into the dirt without firing a single shot

 

[Big Fitz]

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.

"Will and determination" doesn't pay for anything.
Here's the issue. The federal government cannot raise enough tax revenue to pay for these grandiose projects. The private sector sees little chance of return on investment.
These things MUST BE PAID FOR. As long as it is money that it takes to get these thngs done, it is what it is.

They can afford it by stopping waste on government health care. Take that money and instead of playing games with 'unique services' which medicine isn't, and start doing something productive with it that will advance this nation like infrastructure building, repair and expansion. We need to increase our energy production nationwide by 250% if we are to make it through this century as a leader. that's a lot of jobs to create. Our transportation infrastructure needs updating. Our information infrastructure needs completing.

That's how we can afford it.

But then again, this money should not be spent by the feddies (save for highways and railroads since that is in their constitutional power) and turn it over to the states to improve themselves.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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

Easy...There is NO MONEY in it.
It takes private sector investment. This has been tried already with Ethanol. It was a fail. It's use drove up the price of corn to record levels. The amount of corn being used for Ethanol production was enough to create a cattle feed shortage which drove up the cost of beef.
Ethanol is a major fail .So much so, that the federal government has ended ethanol subsidies.
Ethanol is garbage.