Oil Prices At Historic High

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Because gasoline is already taxed, those who use more pay more. What's the problem with that?

If you see nothing wrong with people driving an Escalade around town just so they'll feel "safe", then there is no problem. Keep at it -- the "non-problem" will take eventually take care of itself as global demand outstrips supply over the coming years.

Me, I think it's a moral question. Joe "Big Wheels" American is just plain wrong to throw away a non-renewable resource just so's he can feel "safe" or "powerful". or whatever it is on his way to work.

Let's have the government be the moral (and strategic) compass by raising taxes on gasoline.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Skolls081102 0]

Just some food for though- I compared a 2005 Cadillac Sedan Deville to a 2005 Dodge Ram Pickup, 1500 Series, Quad Cab, 4x4.
Cadi M.P.G. 18 City/26 Highway 18gal. cap.
Dodge M.P.G. 14 City/17 Highway 27 gal. cap.
Using only the city mileage first:
Based on 30,000 miles a year (577 miles a week), the Cadi has to refill the tank 1.78 times a week (92.56 times a year). Thats 1,666.08 gallons of gas.
The Dodge will fill the tank 1.52 times a week (79.04 times a year). Thats 2134.08 gallons of gas.
For a grand whopping differance of 468 gallons in a year. Thats 1.28 gallons a day.
Now for highway miles:
Cadi- refill 1.23/week, 63.96/year for 1151.28 gallons of gas.
Dodge- 1.26/week, 65.52/year for 1769.04 gallons.
A differance of 617.76 gallons, or 1.69 gallons a day.
The whole point here- why stop at penalizing people who want trucks/SUV's? Get the big V8 cars in on it too. And like I said, lump in all the little cars going over 80 m.p.h. on the road, because they are not getting the fuel economy that they are supposed to.
Seriously, rather than penalize the people in the trucks and SUV's, why don;t we pressure the auto makers to produce fuel efficient engines for bigeer vehicles. I am sure the technology exists, but it's in Big Oils best interest that it not be made public.
So let's stop picking on the SUV folks. We're people too

The sole intention, is learning to fly.Condition grounded, but determined to try.Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies.Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Me, I think it's a moral question. Joe "Big Wheels" American is just plain wrong to throw away a non-renewable resource just so's he can feel "safe" or "powerful". or whatever it is on his way to work.

Why? He's paying for it, he can do with it what he chooses. Who are you to decide that he's wasting? Who are you to decide that he's wrong and you're right? Disgusting.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[rwieder 0]

Quote

it's not feasable.

I can remember when people said that about computer engine controls, and fly by wire, and hybrids.

referring to utilizing alternative fuels for drilling equipment, i said originally it's not feasable, thus your reply. if you remember originally in 1901 at spindletop the rig was steam powered, environmentally friendly enough right? right! but it's still not feasable because your normal mid range depth class drilling rig requires 2,000 HP, that's a lot of wood! this is what i meant, i guess it didn't come out right! i'm all about alternative fuels, but i'm also about the environmental idiots getting off of their high horse and stop bitchin' and let us energy explorers get about our rat killing.

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[kallend 1,635]

"Big V8 cars" are already regulated under the CAFE standards. SUVs and trucks are not.

SUVs for commuting in cities or driving the kids to school in the burbs are just stupid fad!

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

He's paying for it, he can do with it what he chooses. Who are you to decide that he's wasting? Who are you to decide that he's wrong and you're right? Disgusting.

Be disgusted if you'd like, but it seems a sign of shallow thinking. I'm not deciding anything for anybody, except that they should pay higher taxes on oil as a means of cutting waste and slowing depletion.

Oil is a non-renewable resource. Therefore, every barrel wasted today means somebody else down the road won't get to use it. That may be a simplistic view, but it's true.

Good oil management falls right in line with any other form of non-renewable resource management. Should a landowner be allowed to pollute and rape his land simply because "he paid for it"? No, because there exists a concept called responsible citizenship, and we've developed laws over the years to help people uphold that citizenship since they won't do it on their own. Why not do the same thing with oil through higher taxes?

Running down to Safeway to grab a 12-pack in a Suburban is a great example of poor citizenship, and not giving a damn that you're throwing away a non-remewable resource in the process -- that's what's truly disgusting.

It's just pure selfishness -- just another symptom of the total "me first" society that is the western world today. Not that we shouldn't have any fun with oil (RVs, ATVs, Boats, Otters, etc. . .), but throwing it away getting people around paved streets in a 300 HP 4WD LandLubber is just short-sighted and selfish.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Alias 0]

The war plan is a long term one, driven not by a present need for oil, but by the realization that in the decades ahead the world's oil will be concentrated more and more in the Middle East. The energy policy needs to look that far ahead too. If it does, and if it includes the economic and human cost of war as part of the cost of oil, it will conclude that an affordable, sustainable energy future requires as little oil and as much efficiency as possible

Carpe Diem

[StreetScooby 5]

I heard somewhere that Argentina is/used to be the largest supplier of crude to the USA, until that crazy socialist came into power. The Middle East isn't our largest supplier.

We are all engines of karma

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

The whole point here- why stop at penalizing people who want trucks/SUV's? Get the big V8 cars in on it too. And like I said, lump in all the little cars going over 80 m.p.h. on the road, because they are not getting the fuel economy that they are supposed to.

My motorcycle (one of the least aerodynamic vehicles out there) still gets over 40mpg at 80mph. The prius doesn't lose that much either - it's still going to do in the ballpark of triple your durango, esp when that turkey is going 80.

You can look to other people to blame, but the drop and fuel economy and the rise of SUV sales are pretty clearly related. You are right though - policy should be driven by fuel economy, and secondarily by vehicle weight.

[Alias 0]

Quote

The Middle East isn't our largest supplier.

Who said it was?

Re-read my post

My point was, think of the future. The total cost. The countries with the top five oil reserves are located ......in the middle east

Carpe Diem

[Alias 0]

Quote

I heard somewhere that Argentina is/used to be the largest supplier of crude to the USA

Canada is the largest supplier of oil, natural gas and electricity to the United States...

(edit) Mexico 2nd - depending on what month you look at. It seems the Saudi's have a new #1 customer. China

Carpe Diem

[feuergnom 22]

welcome to the real world, low gas prices in the states always seemed a bit obscene to me. maybe the general population will start to think.
you can't waste preciuos energy without thinking ad infinitum....

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666

[Beerlight 0]

Quote

welcome to the real world, low gas prices in the states always seemed a bit obscene to me. maybe the general population will start to think.
you can't waste preciuos energy without thinking ad infinitum....

Could you please define the meaning of "real world" for me? I'm at such a loss........

[rwieder 0]

See This Article For More Information

-Richard-
"You're Holding The Rope And I'm Taking The Fall"

[kallend 1,635]

Quote

I heard somewhere that Argentina is/used to be the largest supplier of crude to the USA, until that crazy socialist came into power. The Middle East isn't our largest supplier.

I heard that extraterrestrials landed in Roswell, NM, back in the 1940s.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,417]

>Seriously, rather than penalize the people in the trucks and SUV's,
>why don;t we pressure the auto makers to produce fuel efficient
>engines for bigeer vehicles.

No problem there. The name of the game is efficiency, not what sort of body the vehicle has (or even its size.) SUV's are just the most blatant offenders, but I agree with you that it's really any inefficient vehicle that's the problem. You can make the fuel efficiency happen by getting rid of the SUV loophole in the CAFE requirements, then gradually increasing CAFE requirements over the years. That will have the nice side effect of making the smallest/most efficient vehicles even cheaper and more affordable.

[FallRate 0]

Quote

LOL, point made but you are a bit off the mark.

Yes. Point made, and I hit the mark dead-on.

BTW, I'm not defending SUV's. I happen to drive a VW Golf TDI...about 44-45 mpg and I use biodiesel wherever I find it. However, I would be a hypocrite if I were to pass judgment on those who drive SUV's only because they enjoy it, seeing as my favorite activity is a power sport.

In other words, I am responsible for the burning of fuel for the sole purpose of entertaining myself, as is everyone else on this site. (Except for the BASE'rs who walk or climb to the top.)

FallRate

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Yes. Point made, and I hit the mark dead-on.

If you see a fair comparison between a) partakers of a sport that uses about one billionth of the gas produced in the world and b) systematic wasting of very significant amounts of gas by institutionalized, commercialized "big wheels syndrome", then please enjoy feeling like you're "dead-on". I certainly don't agree.

. . =(_8^(1)

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

I heard that extraterrestrials landed in Roswell, NM, back in the 1940s.

They did, and that's ultimately how we came to discover the technologies behind the IC and Kevlar.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Skolls081102 0]

Ok, nobody flame me for this comment (this is not how I feel, and is meant in a completley sarcastic way)-
If you are going to tax SUV's and trucks because of thier poor fuel economy, add to the list any, and all Boats (especially them big fishing boats- because you could go fishing in a row boat), watercraft (Jetskis etc...), ATV's, Dirt Bikes, etc... Anything that is deemed non-neccasary. While your at it, you may as well tax those jump planes you all use, because it's not a necessity of life to jump out of them.
Now for the serious part of my post- I own a Durango. I feel safer, and I feel safer transporting my child in it. Because you dont like it, and you think I use too much fuel- tough. Your not going to tell me to drive a car because thats what you think I should do. As other people have said, this is America. On top of the Durango, I own a 2005 Hyundai Sonata (good gas mileage). My wife drives that to, and from work (25 miles one way). I drive the Durango the same distance to work (but we work different hours). I'm not buying a third car just to drive to and from work. That is absolutley ridiculous.

The sole intention, is learning to fly.Condition grounded, but determined to try.Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies.Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit.

[BaconStrip 0]

Hiking gasoline taxes would have a major impact on US oil consumption. However it wouldn't be because pump prices cause "Joe Big Wheels" to decide to buy a Mo-ped. Increased gasoline taxes would strangle the US economy, which would slow oil consumption.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

Hiking gasoline taxes would have a major impact on US oil consumption. However it wouldn't be because pump prices cause "Joe Big Wheels" to decide to buy a Mo-ped. Increased gasoline taxes would strangle the US economy, which would slow oil consumption.

Well, we're going to be paying a lot more for the stuff in the near future, tax increases or not. Got any better idea than increasing taxes early to cut waste? Revenues from increased gasoline taxes or an "MPG tax" could support research.

The last guy who engaged me in this conversation solved the whole thing by declaring my opinions to be "disgusting" without offering any forward-looking solutions, so I'm ready to hear anything that involves actual brain activity. Got anything?

. . =(_8^(1)

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

without offering any forward-looking solutions

We don't need any forward looking solution and high taxes certainly aren't 'forward looking', anyhow. The already high price of gas is driving the demand for fuel efficient cars, and that in turn is driving the development and distribution. Fuel efficient cars will be here in force in the next 5 years, I'm sure of that. Until then I think we're doing just fine with what we've got.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[FallRate 0]

Quote

If you see a fair comparison...

I do see a fair comparison between people who choose to amuse themselves by driving a less efficient vehicle and those who choose to amuse themselves by riding a jumplane to altitude.

Quote

I don't understand why people think they have the "right" to piss away their grandchildren's oil.

So how many gallons of your grandchildren's oil have you needlessly pissed away on the ride to altitude?

FallRate

[Skolls081102 0]

Quote

Well, we're going to be paying a lot more for the stuff in the near future, tax increases or not. Got any better idea than increasing taxes early to cut waste? Revenues from increased gasoline taxes or an "MPG tax" could support research.

Let me ask you a question since you seem to have it out for SUV's. This of course is a hypothetical, but I'm sure it fits someones scenario out there-
Say I drive an SUV, and I use it to commute to work, and for whatever else I need. Let's say I put an average of 12,000 miles a year on my SUV.
Then you have someone in a fuel efficient little car, who uses their car the same way, but instead puts 30,000 miles a year on their car.
The little car is wasting alot more fuel than I am. So why should I pay higher taxes???
Why is it a waste only when its a driver of an SUV or a Truck??? I still need to use my vehicle to get to work. I still need to get myself around. So why am I wasting fuel???
A blanket tax on SUV's and Trucks is not proper. Just because it's big and has less fuel efficiency, doesn't mean that I am using more fuel than somone driving a car that gets 25-30 m.p.g.

The sole intention, is learning to fly.Condition grounded, but determined to try.Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies.Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit.