electric cars

[Maxter28]

hi everyone
i think by late 2004 we are going to be driving electric and gas cars, they are more efficient in gas milage. Ive seen this car that is called Hybrid and gets about 45miles per gallon. Or hopefully the Car agency will make something new to help save more gas per gallon.

[Maxter28]

ive seen some gas stations hit $3/per gallon in nothern U.S

[Buckeye]

Prices will go down but then go UP again. Time to bring the size and weight of cars down. The market will cause people to give up their large S.U.V.s' and that's a good thing.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Buckeye
Prices will go down but then go UP again. Time to bring the size and weight of cars down. The market will cause people to give up their large S.U.V.s' and that's a good thing.

Everyone except Detroit learned that in what, 1973? 74?

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Buckeye
Prices will go down but then go UP again. Time to bring the size and weight of cars down. The market will cause people to give up their large S.U.V.s' and that's a good thing.

Why is giving up our S.U.V.'s a good thing? I am interested to hear your thoughts on this.........

[Buckeye]

Tom,
It's not Detroit's fault that people (and I use this term loosely) demand to drive S.U.V.s' and large pick-ups, but I could not be happier about what's going to happen and the pain that $3 gas will bring at the pump. You are correct that many ignored the lesson of the 70s' and - until now! - have considered their own desires as superior to what is only common sense. These vehicles are a menace and will soon be removed.

[Dan Montilion]

This loosely held person will continue to drive my menace of a 1986 F-150 4x4. Paid $8100 for it, could get $4500 right now and even after factoring in previous expenses at 235,000 miles the price to mile driven is pretty damn cheap. Not demanding anything and I feel no pain filling up both tanks. They could hang $10 per gallon and I'd drive this sucker untill it stops running. Then I guess I'll have to pay $40,000 for some POS being made now by Detroit, Frankfurt or Tokyo by way of Alabama.

Dan (getting looser by the minute) Montilion

[cj]

I'll pay for the gas before I drive one of the little POS these Europeans drive. I'll keep driving my SUV and suck it up. I've earned the right (and enough money) to make that choice. Isn't America grand? :p

[Buckeye]

I drive?

[Buckeye]

My problem is with the PEOPLE (loosely defined) who drive these POS no-can-skid-pad overpowered OVERSIZED gasguzzling ion beam headlights set too high completely doomed vehicles. :)

[cj]

Nobody is stopping you from driving a hybred car or whatever they are called. I don't care what you drive. Why do you care what the rest of us drive?

[Buckeye]

Ever hear of efficiency? I support your right to drive whatever you want CJ, but I am talking about "the masses" here. The S.U.V. is going down, not because I want it to. Market forces.

[Tom]

Detroit is hurting right now. Cars are not selling. Assembly plants are closing for periods of a week or two at a time. The new car inventory is tremendously huge. A normal 30 day inventory is now up to 80-100 days, up to 120 or ore for some models.
This in turn ripples thorugh the entie automotive support secotor. Tens of thousand of suppliers are laying off, cutting back production. This in turn will affect the vendoprs to these suppliers.

With so much of our economy linked to the auto industry and it in turn depending a limited resource-oil-controlled by a basically undependable, unstable part of the world, it is not surprising that we are payinfg a high price now. The auto industry could be putting out SUV that are far more fuel efficient than what they have today, but the Detroit mentallity is to rush out whatever will bring back the fastest return on investment. Detroit is a short-term minded town. Cars are a lot like Windows@ - each new one is not quite ready yet, but they sell them anyway.


BTW, you libs crying about SUV's, remember, like terrorism, SUV's flourished under Clinton-Gore.

[chickenhead]

I can't wait until we have full electric, hybrids are a flash in the pan I hope. Of course, you have to xome up with the extra electricity to power them....not an easy trick.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Oh yeah, more demand for electric power. As if this country isn't having enough problems with power in some major areas of the country. New plants or upgrading current ones would take a lot of time and money. And may very well end up being Nuclear Powered! We may end up with Electric Cars, but the environmentalists still won't be happy! I'd be worried about more Nuclear Plants too!

[Steve 'StatMan']

But gee, heaven forbid we ruin a portion of pristine land and displace or kill off some polar bears, elk, and other wildlife. We're told that that is bad (and it isn't nice or pretty, to be sure). So to save all the above, we end up having to give our money (and some economic power and self-sufficiency) to the Arabs (friendly and unfriendly) instead! Gads! That's a whole 'nother issue. The just aren't any solutions that don't have a cost to somebody or some critters. Sorry critters! We tried harder than before, but we're in trouble too. And yes, we're bigger than you. Sometimes, we have to do what we really HAVE to do. Meantime, we need a better solution than all this.

No wonder I like handicapping! Every day, it's seems easier to deal with than all the troubles in the world!

[Buckeye]

There really isn't enough oil in Alaska to do us that much good in the long term. If they could get every drop and kill every animal up there, how long would it take to use it all? I don't have the exact figures to give you, but MAYBE there would be enough to supply our current level of consumption for about TWO years. They'd never get it all out quickly enough or cheaply enough to solve this current situation. The USA cannot produce enough oil domestically with or without Alaska! There is no choice to be made. The animals are not guarding the answer to our energy needs.

[Hosshead]

If everybody drove hybrid cars that got 10 times the gas mileage. You know what the oil companies would do?

They would charge 10 times the price, for a gallon of gas.

[Buckeye]

Make's sense to me, the lower the demand the higher the price :rolleyes:
All we need to do is drive twice as far and the oil companies will sell it for less!

[cato]

Tom identified the issue: we are depending on "...a limited resource-oil-controlled by a basically undependable, unstable part of the world,"

How can this be a point of debate (or, apparently manhood)?

Oil is, generally, located and controlled by the bad guys. And even if we continue the current policy of let's go kill all the bad guys and steal their oil, even that oil will run out soon enough.

We can turn Alaska and Florida into shitholes and squeeze the last of the oil out of those places and that will give us another year or two or oil.

And then as the China economy joins this century, their demand for oil will increase exponentially.
________________

So, the ultimate, #1 priority of fighting terrorism and bringing some semblance of stability to the world is to come up with alternative energy sources--develop, perfect them and then USE them.

Put another way, if you want to secure America's future in the world (and really, the future of the world itself), without constant, warfare, we have to explore these other alternatives.

Everyone should be able to see that; and yet many many people seem to suggest that this is complete non-sense and some sort of pussy-whipped approach to life. It constantly baffles me.

Cato

[chickenhead]

I think Steve nailed it, at the end of the day, when oil goes away, unless they've perfect cold fusion (they haven't even come close yet), all we are really left with if good ol' nuclear reactors(or nucular, if you're the president). This is a dirty little secret no one wants to talk about. Kind of like Social Security.

[Buckeye]

Jimmy Carter said WAY back then, "we are running out"
Did they listen? No.
I remember back in the early 70s', an oil executive told my Father, "You're going to see 50cent gas," to which my Father replied: Bullshit! Only a few years earlier gasoline cost about 25cents per gallon!
It's over folks.
It is essential to "conserve" (remember that term S.U.V. people?) and develop new technologies. It must be done and it will be done.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by cato
Oil is, generally, located and controlled by the bad guys. And even if we continue the current policy of let's go kill all the bad guys and steal their oil, even that oil will run out soon enough.


Current estimates say there is probably at least 400 years more oil in the middle east. Even at a 10% percent increase in demand per year.

Get your gun.............I say we take it............;)

[cj]

By driving an SUV, I am speeding up the development of alternative fuels. Sounds like SUV drivers are doing a good thing.

[Buckeye]

I got your back JustRalph.
Where did you get the 400 year estimate?
That seems to be a bit presumptuous.

[schweitz]

Originally posted by Buckeye
I got your back JustRalph.
Where did you get the 400 year estimate?
That seems to be a bit presumptuous.

I read the same thing somewhere--'they' have said we are running out of oil every decade since the 50's but technology keeps improving and we are able to locate and extract oil from places never dreamed about just 20 yrs ago.
By the way, all this talk of how dependent we are on the Persian Gulf region is just that---talk--. The US imports only 14% of the oil it uses from the Persian Gulf.

[Buckeye]

Not going to dispute the 14%.
Question for you though, what country has proven reserves of over 250 Billion Barrels of oil?
Current OPEC production is about 17 million barrels/day.
There is a limit to how much improving technology can extract.
It's a numbers game in the end.
Finite resource.

[schweitz]

[i]Originally posted by Buckeye [/
It's a numbers game in the end.
Finite resource. [/B]

Agreed---but predictions of running out have been wrong for 5 decades.

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Buckeye
I got your back JustRalph.
Where did you get the 400 year estimate?
That seems to be a bit presumptuous.

I saw it on the Discovery Channel a while back. It was a show about how efforts to uncover oil have progressed with new technology. it was pretty cool how they do it now........from Ultra-sound to soil sampling........just like everything else.....technology improves our lives..................;)

I typed that last line with a little tongue in cheek..........


I don't want the Amish coming after me.............

[Buckeye]

There's oil in Lancaster?

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Buckeye
There's oil in Lancaster?

Now that is funny........! You must be a buckeye

[PaceAdvantage]

All those without an agenda know there is PLENTY of oil in this world for as long as the mind can project into the future.

We are NOT in danger of running out of oil at the current rate of consumption. Not by a long shot.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by PaceAdvantage
All those without an agenda know there is PLENTY of oil in this world for as long as the mind can project into the future.

We are NOT in danger of running out of oil at the current rate of consumption. Not by a long shot.

And can you cite your proof on this? Or is this just Dorothy tapping her red shows together....You totally ignored Hcap's graph on the reserves of oil, or my British Petorleum study or even Cheyney's warnings while with Halliburton and the dire need to drill in the arctic precisely BECAUSE we are running low on oil.

[PaceAdvantage]

Put this in your pipe and smoke it....this guy's MIT material, so SUFF should really approve (MIT being in Massachusetts and all)...

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv27n1/v27n1-1.pdf

About the author:

M. A. Adelman is professor of economics emeritus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of several books, including The Economics of Petroleum Supply:
Selected Papers 1962–1993 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1993) and The Genie Out of the Bottle: World Oil Since 1970 (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995). More recently,
he published “World Oil Production and Prices 1947-2000” in the Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance (Vol. 42).

Some choice quotes:

It is commonly asked, when will the world’s supply of oil be
exhausted? The best one-word answer: Never.

The dwindling of reserves is a legend firmly believed because it seems so obvious. Assume any number for the size of
reserves. From it, subtract a few years’ current output. The conclusion is absolutely sure: Reserves are dwindling; the wolf is
getting closer. In time, production must cease. Oil in the
ground becomes constantly more valuable — so much so that
a gap forms between how much oil we want and how much we
are able to afford because of scarcity. Civilization cannot continue
without oil, so something must be done.

And indeed, in some times and places the oil does run down.
Output in the Appalachian United States had peaked by 1900,
and output in Texas peaked in 1972. But the “running out”
vision never works globally. At the end of 1970, non-opec
countries had about 200 billion remaining in proved reserves.
In the next 33 years, those countries produced 460 billion barrels
and now have 209 billion “remaining.” The producers kept
using up their inventory, at a rate of about seven percent per
year, and then replacing it. The opec countries started with about 412 billion in proved reserves, produced 307 billion, and
now have about 819 billion left. Their reserve numbers are
shaky, but clearly they had — and have — a lot more inventory
than they used up. Saudi Arabia alone has over 80 known
fields and exploits only nine. Of course, there are many more
fields, known and unknown. The Saudis do not invest to discover,
develop, and produce more oil because more production
would bring down world prices.

[Steve 'StatMan']

I guess it depends on the who is meant by "We". The entire world? OPEC? U.S. and/or it's territories?

Adding to this, the public in general is guardly skeptical about dealing with the Arab World right now, including OPEC. But the public also guardly skeptical of all the oil companies as well, and we sure can't leave out others like Haliberton. So even if all the oil was coming from the good ole USA, many folks are still uncomfortable. Looks we're stuck choosing a combination of powerful devils to dance with, no matter what happens. And those who have differences with us are dancing with us devils because we're paying cash.

And of course, any good energy corporation should diversify, so we'll likely be turning to some of these same groups/corporations for the alternative sources to oil.

All this kind of puts the "crud" in "crude oil", doesn't it?

[JustRalph]

New finds on the way?

http://english.epochtimes.com/news/4-5-2/21226.html

How about Stanford University

http://sepwww.stanford.edu/sep/jon/world-oil.dir/lynch/worldoil.html

[Secretariat]

Pa,

I've done some research on this and you guy's are relying on economists, not geologists.

I don't care if he is an MIT” economist”, I prefer a Princeton "geologist", although an MIT professor Robert Solow does endorse the book below. (Oh, by the way, Professor Solow, is an MIT professor in economics who won the Nobel Prize in 1987. In other words Adelman's senior within the department. But forget Solow, I'm interested in the geology.)

Hubbert’s Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes should be required reading. It not only includes the Princeton geologist's viewpoint, but a Shell geologist’s M. King Hubbert and asserts the severe geological depletion of oil in the earth. I’ll trust a geologist over an economist any day.

http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/links.html

http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/current-events.html

In addition to the above however, Dr. Campbell below reaches somewhat the same conclusions:

Dr. C. J. Campbell, on behalf of Petroconsultants of Geneva, performed an an estimate of the global ultimate for oil production, which takes into account both ‘political reserves’ and the different kinds of oil that exist. The Petroconsultants database is the most comprehensive available for data on oil resources outside of continental North America, and is used as a 'bible' by all international oil companies - the information contained in this database is not in the public domain.

The conclusions reached in Dr. Campbell’s study are ominous: He arrives at a figure of 1750 Gb for the global ultimate.

This infers that the midpoint of depletion will occur in 1999.

This does not mean that the world is running out of oil: it means that we are running out of the cheap pumpable oil that has fueled the economic development of the 20th Century.

Additionally the geologist Campbell made a speech on the economist Adelman that PA cited in his CATO link.
.
http://www.mnforsustain.org/campbell_c_economics_oil_depletion_interview.htm

[JustRalph]

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1


Interior
http://www.teslamotors.com/images/content/wallpaper_interior.jpg


Exterior
http://www.teslamotors.com/images/content/wallpaper_front3-4_view.jpg

[NoDayJob]

I can't wait until we have full electric, hybrids are a flash in the pan I hope. Of course, you have to xome up with the extra electricity to power them....not an easy trick.

They run on 6 "D" cell battaries that last for at least 100,000 miles before they need replacing; 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds and a top speed of 250 m.p.h. Please e-mail me at ineedthisf**kin'car@electricdreams.net should this take place in my lifetime. :lol:

[PlanB]

It's NOT about the world supply of oil. It's more about who has that supply
and why are Americans hostage to them. All "they" do is have oil & ZERO
else. IOWs, their oil keeps them insulated from the world & that's why
they've never felt the need to change. As soon as we STOP needing their
oil, even by 25%, They will suddenly discover diplomacy.

[chickenhead]

All those without an agenda know there is PLENTY of oil in this world for as long as the mind can project into the future.

We are NOT in danger of running out of oil at the current rate of consumption. Not by a long shot.

Isn't T. Boone Pickens one of the big proponents that we've reached the midpoint or whatever? I haven't studied this, but I believe the idea is that of course we can find more oil, if the price continues to go up it makes different extraction methods plausible. But of course if the price goes up too much it begins to price people out of the market. If its too expensive to use because of the price, that's pretty much the same thing as running out of oil.

I only brought up Boone because his only agenda is making money, and I think he's made something like an 11,000% return on investment in his oil fund over the last ten years.

[chickenhead]

I actually sent Boone a letter. His fund has a minimum investment of $5 million bucks. I wanted to invest, so I sent him a letter asking to let me in for a smaller percentage (give the little guy a chance, big daddy!). I promised he could have my money for 10 years minimum, so he wouldn't have to worry about me being a nuisance.

I also suggested he consider a microshare fund, whereby he allow a group of smaller investors to pool together to create one $5 million share...

Hopefully he'll write back.

[JustRalph]

Derek is right. If they didn't have the oil we wouldn't even know who they are.