Have you noticed that the weather is getting worse?

[SFviii]

Originally Posted by BiggestBest

You're absolutely right, Bubba. Playboy has articles? I'll check that out.

If that were true then Penthouse and Hustler might have journal articles to check out too...

I also noticed the weather report too...some record with all 49 states getting snow and only one state holding out...Hawaii.

SF8

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by Bubba

This has been a fascinating, informative and pretty civil discussion! Thanks!!! I really enjoy these types of threads. It's kind of like actually reading the articles in Playboy. You never know what you will learn!!

Expect to see more Hookernomics in the future. I think that's the best way to get the message across.

[Guest072311]

Non OPEC*
Canada
Mexico
United Kingdom

Antilles
Aruba
Belarus
Argentina
Bahamas
Belize
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Costa Rica
Colombia
Dom. Republic
El Salvador
Guatemala
Peru
Jamaica
Uruguay
South AM/CRB

Cameroon
Chad
Ivory Coast
Gabon
Congo
Egypt
Liberia
South Africa
Africa

Belgium
Bulgaria
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Latvia
Lithuania
Netherlands
Norway
Sweden
Portugal
Spain
EUROPE

Russia
Singapore
Japan
Korea
India
Indonesia
Israel
Kazakhstan
China (both)
Azerbaijan
Ashmore and Cartier Islands
Oman
Thailand
Ukraine
Turkmenistan
Syria
Vietnam
Turkey
Tunisia
Asia/Middle Est

Australia
Guinea
Malaysia
Midway Islands
Trinidad
Virgin Islands
PACIFIC

[Guest072311]

Originally Posted by Bubba

Here is my nickel's worth:....

In the short term I think we need to become less dependent on foreign oil. I think most people would agree with this!

For the long term I think we have to develop some type of renewable energy source.. We can't keep taking from the earth. Regardless of how much oil or natural gas there is left we can't keep using if forever.

http://www.priweb.org/ed/pgws/system...e/capture.html

Hum,....opinion? or fact?

In spite of some popular misconceptions, oil doesn't come from dead dinosaurs. In fact, most scientists agree that oil comes from creatures the size of a pinhead. These one-celled creatures, known as diatoms, aren't really plants, but share one very important characteristic with them - they take light from the sun and convert it into energy. (Humans can't do this - this is why you have to eat your veggies!)
Diatoms float in the top few meters of the oceans (and lakes, for that matter - which is part of the reason why not ALL oil comes from ocean deposits!) and also happen to be a major source of food for many forms of ocean swimmers. Their skeletons are chemically very similar to sand - in fact, they are made of the same material (silica). Diatoms produce a kind of oil by themselves - both to store chemical energy from photosynthesis and to increase their ability to float. But this small amount of oil still needs to become concentrated and mature before it can be taken from the ground and used as fuel.

http://www.livescience.com/environme...l_origins.html
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...from-dinosaurs
http://www.greenprophet.com/2009/08/...lly-come-from/

So another interesting question....to consider....?

[Guest072311]

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pe...im0_mbbl_m.htm

OPEC 41%

OPEC-GULF 14%
OPEC-AFRICA 16%
OPEC-SOUTH AMERICA 10%

NonOpec 59%
Mexico 10%
Canada 22%
SA Carrbn 6%
Europe 5%
Asia/Middle East 8%
Pacific 4%
Africa 2%
UK 2%

For a total of 2,099,779 barrels in the last 6 months.
Our biggest non-Opec was Canada?

Originally Posted by BigMikeinKC

Perhaps if we (Europe actually - most of our oil imports are from Mexico) drain the OPEC dry, then guess who is in the catbird's seat...

THat is on import, what about the US production, and increasing that???? Some one just said that????

[Guest072311]

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/energyexpla...page=oil_where

Where Is Oil Produced?

The world's top five crude oil-producing countries are:
Russia
Saudi Arabia
United States
Iran
China


Over one-fourth of the crude oil produced in the United States is produced offshore in the Gulf of Mexico. The top crude oil-producing States are:
Texas
Alaska
California
Louisiana
North Dakota
About 53% of the crude oil and petroleum products used in the United States in 2009 came from other countries.


Also on Energy Explained
Oil: Crude and Petroleum Products
Oil Imports and Exports
Offshore Oil and Gas
Energy Use for Transportation
Energy Use in Commercial Buildings

Learn More
Where oil comes from — http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pe...mbbl_m_cur.htm
Oil Supply & Disposition — http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pe...adc_mbbl_m.htm
State Offshore Production — http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pe...adc_mbbl_m.htm
Oil Market Basics

SO 43% comes from the US, and is there more available here? Why is it not being harvested?

[Guest052813-01]

Originally Posted by ss4699

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/energyexpla...page=oil_where

SO 43% comes from the US, and is there more available here? Why is it not being harvested?

Simple answer - Because the environmental lobby has successfully shut down the development of new refineries,
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12227

prevented the exploration of oil in ANWAR (northern Alaska),
http://www.anwr.org/

and convinced the state legislatures of Florida, California and Louisiana to halt the increase of exploration off their state's shores in the Gulf of Mexico and Pacific Ocean.
http://www.farallones.org/e_newslett...illingplan.htm

[Guest052813-01]

Just published in the UK Daily Mail today:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...organised.html

The jist of this article: no global warming since 1995; the data that supported global warming has disappeared; warming periods in the past have NOT been caused by human activity.

[john_galt]

All this talk is moot; the global warming fraud is over...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...organised.html

[Longermonger]

Did you not read the article or did you not understand it?

It seems simple enough to me. The debate would all be over and you would have won IF he was the ONLY scientist studying global warming (he isn't) and the hockey stick graph was proven to be wrong (it wasn't) and the hockey stick graph was the ONLY evidence of global warming (it isn't) and it mattered that the data had 'gone missing' (it hasn't...it is still out there) and he admitted that the MWP was warmer than today (he didn't) and it made a difference what a 15 year time period means (it doesn't). This may be why;

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/06/0...r-times-ahead/

There are MANY cycles. Cyclical solar "weather" needs to be taken into account when you look at short periods of time like 11-15 years. If you overlay a cool solar period to a hockey stick graph...guess what you get.

[lacrew_2000]

Longer, I don't even know how this became such a sticking point. I'm glad there's an aluminum diesel. However, since there have been aluminum gasoline engines for as long as I can remember, gas engines are still lighter and are the most appropriate for automobiles (as demonstrated by the fact that most cars do run on gasoline). Trust me, if diesel were so much better, we'd all be driving diesels.

But back to the original point - I said that gasoline was hands down the best fuel. We have been arguing back and forth over which fuel is better, gas or diesel....pst...both are made from oil. Yes, good old fashioned oil. Our cheapest and most viable energy source.

I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me it isn't...for somebody to explain to me how plug in cars are better. They still use energy, just from the power plant. The batteries require mining of exotic metals (with no known supply to scale up to widespread consumer use). The batteries are going to become a disposal nightmare. Yet, a bunch of misinformed do gooders feel great about themselves when they drive them around.

And I don't want to hear about just needing to invest more in the technology. Why not invest that same money into the technology of making more fuel efficient gas engines, or more oil exploration.

Global warming is fast becoming this era's Salem witch trial. Fifty years from now, people will look back with amusement on how we thought changing our light bulbs would alter the temperature of the Sun, smile, and wonder how we could be so foolish. The head of the CRU, Jones, is at risk of criminal investigation. He doesn't have any data to back up anything...and is essentially saying 'the dog ate my homework'. The famous hockey stick graph is based on 'modified' data. Its all conjecture, using an algorithm. Most scientists would brag about their work, and gladly show their algorithm to anybody who wanted to see it...most scientists would want their algorithm challenged by others, and want others to unsuccessfully try to disporove it. Not Jones. He has refused to make his algorithm public. This all stinks to high heaven. Global warming is turning out to be worse than I suspected....and it smells really, really bad...pull the lid off the septic tank bad. It will all come out in the end - and if you read some of the papers in the UK, the truth is already coming out. In a very short period of time, I predict politicians who pushed global warming will take the 'the scientists lied to me' position, and retract their previous stance. As an added bit of political theater, there will be investigations of Penn State and other institutions in this country that are suspected of fraud. The 'scientific community' will shift to something else to write their grant requests about, and hopefully we will concentrate on conservation and efficiency, rather than 'alternative fuels'.

[Longermonger]

http://www.exxonsecrets.org/maps.php

I haz maps nao! Click on the 'show info' button and it even tells you how much money Exxon paid to their shills! Being an anti-global climate change conspiracy nut is lucrative.

[Longermonger]

Originally Posted by lacrew_2000

I'm still waiting for somebody to tell me it isn't...for somebody to explain to me how plug in cars are better.
And I don't want to hear about just needing to invest more in the technology. Why not invest that same money into the technology of making more fuel efficient gas engines, or more oil exploration.

Wait no more! I assume that you already know that an internal combustion engine (both Diesel and gasoline) waste about 2/3 of their energy as heat. The radiator gets rid of a huge chunk. Some of the heat gets blown out the exhaust pipe. Some heats up the transmission and diff. And some escapes via the brake disks. Only the clever engines out there with turbos (pretty much all modern Diesels) recover any power from this wasted heat.

So for starters, any car with regenerative braking has a leg up on these cars. That includes every hybrid car out there. So before you even get to advanced plug-in hybrids like the Volt, hybrids have already won the efficiency game.

Plug-in hybrids get to tap into cheap electrical power...especially if they charge overnight when off-peak rates are cheaper. Why would you want to pay $3,$4,$5/gal for gas when you can pay pennies for the same amount of energy? Before you even get into the pollution aspect, plug-in hybrids have won the fuel price game. Hands down. Not. Even. Close.

EXAMPLE TIME! Let's say you live in a place like Tennessee where your electrical power comes from hydro. And let's say you drive your Chevy Volt 50 miles round trip on your daily commute. Instead of burning 3 gallons of gas every day, you burn zero (0!) because the electrical charge is used up before the gas engine even fires up. At the end of the five day work week you've spent a few dollars for your electrical charge instead of $50+ on 15 gallons of gas. In fact, the gasoline car has likely cost more to idle during this work week than the plug-in hybrid cost to run. It has also polluted more. From the perspective of OPEC, Americans have invented a car that doesn't need to run on any (of their) oil.

ICEs have had over a century of development and will continue to be developed into the future. Why wouldn't you allow battery technology to be developed similarly...especially since the payoff is bigger and there is more low-hanging fruit? Gasoline engines still have the problems they had 80 years ago anyway (...poppet valves, butterfly valves, static compression ratios, pumping losses, have to run richer than stoic to make peak power, power-sapping valvetrains, etc) At least they still don't have Butterworth valves or sleeve valves. lol

You can drill all you want but you'll never change the price. You can drill all you want but you won't even make a dent in the supply. You can drill all you want but you'll still have millions more cars in the world raising the price. You can drill all you want but you'll only be discovering more, not making more. Oil is a finite resource and we're past the peak. Drill baby drill and I'll laugh baby laugh.

You can try to make engines more efficient, too. But they'll still only use about 1/3 of the power to make the car go. But let's assume that there's a huge breakthrough and you double the efficiency of an ICE in the next five years (note: billions of people have tried this for a century). That still won't mean a thing if that breakthrough engine is in an overweight brick-shaped SUV.

[Omahan]

Cars running on electricity would be more environmentally friendly IF we generated nuclear plants rather than coal burners. France kept building nuclear plants after we let the environmentalists scare us off. Now France is almost 100% nuclear with none of the problems we were made to fear. If no one trusts environmentalists it's because they earned it.

[ANONONE]

All I know is I have about 35 inches of Global Warning on my front lawn, and they are saying another 8 inches will fall today.

Not to point fingers, but in my mood. . .

Al Gore should be strapped down on Fountain Square, once they clear it off, and then sodomized by this guy, bareback, in public: