Callico wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2010 at 7:17pm:


when fuel was approaching $5 a gallon per mile, the cost o f fuel was $.0.25 more than the cost of the labor (my paycheck). after a while there where loads on the boards that wouldn't even cover the cost of fuel.

now @ $0.54 a gallon  the gov't and oil companies thrive off of each other no?

Her ponit is that if the eco-nuts and Govt. would let us drill in places like ANWR (where a blow out could be fixed in a day), we wouldn't need extreme deep water drilling (where a blow out causes everyone to run around with a finger up their caboose, maybe if they used 2 fingers they could whistle).

Drilling ANWR does not imply ceasing in the Gulf, where those planet caring "standards" seemed to have been loosely applied.

Kevin_M wrote on Jun 4^th, 2010 at 8:30am:

This is what I'd like to see changed.  That if allowed to drill in ANWR, they DO cease in the gulf.  But it's just a pipe dream.

-johnny- wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2010 at 4:47pm:


There ARE options.  No one's keeping us in the dark about "options."  The problem is that "options" cost more.

Solar panels for your house, costly (and not to mention butt ugly).  Wind power; costly, and the environmental extremists worry about the bird loss in migration patterns and thus stall any movement forward on a large scale.  Geo-thermal heating and cooling: costly and not enough technicians to implement it at a reasonably economical scale.

Don't get me started on ethanol (living in the corn belt as I do).

These technologies don't develop because it's CHEAPER to depend on oil, foreign or domestic.

They "high road" costs more and there are not many who can afford to take it.

(modified for tense shifting)

stevegeebe wrote on Jun 3^rd, 2010 at 10:13pm:


There ya go. We've created a political culture in which compromise is out of the question.

The far out right is so far out there that the idea of being caught within screaming distance of someone not on the same page....even in their own party....is verboten. The left has its share of pulpit pounders too but they aren't as much fun.

What's good for the country isn't what matters, only what's good for the most extreme edge of the party.

Nothing gets done with this system until things get lousy enough.

The only good news from the oil spill is that when catastrophe strikes, even some hard-line conservatives, like Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana scream for the federal government to act, and act big.

Charlie

Charlie wrote on Jun 4^th, 2010 at 6:22pm:


I think it went something like this.


"You can always count on America to do the right thing, after it has exhausted all the other possibilities."            -- Churchill

At this time there is billions of dollars in research going on to build better batteries, solar panels, tide machines, geothermal power, wind machines. Guess where?
The Middle East countries where we now get a lot of our oil. Why are they spending billions on the research?  Because they know the oil will not last forever. If they can develop efficient alternatives to oil they can own the patents and rights and make billions selling the technology to us.

monty wrote on Jun 9^th, 2010 at 5:51pm:

Whatever you have to tell yourself to get through the day, Monty.

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to or

    The fact being that unless you walk every where you go (bicycle tires were made with oil), use no plastic, eat no food that was fertilized, cook with wood, etc, everyone one is as guilty as anyone else. Some of us wish for the country to become more self sufficient (unless you like shipping money out of the country). I would personally strive for us to be more energy self sufficient. Makes economical sense (jobs and $ loss out of the country, not to mention some of it goes to people that hate us).
    Did BP screw up?  Big time. Did the government departments that were in charge of keeping track of these people do their job? Don't make me laugh.Why check when you can surf porn instead.
    The bottom line is the government & certain people made it more difficult to harvest oil in our own country, while forgoing the legal duty to enforce the rules/laws that we already have on the books to supervise the drilling. Should everywhere have any oil well on it? Maybe not. But the fact remains, we will use oil and a lot of it. That is not going to change.
   The reality is there is no viable alternative in the present future (not realistically or financially). Wish in one hand and shit in the other and tell me which one fill up first.  Should we abandon the alternatives? No, but we should not rely on them until they are or can become a reality. To think otherwise, you are fooling yourself.
    We are all to blame for the mess that is our oil consumption. The only choice that you have is whether you look at it realistically, or if you believe that the government, in it's infinite wisdom, is somehow going to make this better without screwing us in the process.  At this time, I am going to go with the first option. We are going to have to drill some more. And more. The options are not there.

Thus ends the late night rant of the Mike

70% of our oil consumption is for transportation.  Unless we switch to electric vehicles, nuclear, solar, wind, etc. don't help.

Charlie wrote on Jun 20^th, 2010 at 2:04pm:


We must have grown used to the aesthetically designed gas station, reproducing its glowing stateliness by the multiple thousands, but appreciative of its utilitarian being when low on gas.  Cellular towers are like living in Paris.