• Why gasoline prices have risen sharply in the last month and why they should start to fall relativel
    73 replies, posted
[QUOTE=ghosevil;35573895]Yes, but for how long? It was never a matter of money- it was always a matter of outlasting every other superpower by consuming everything else, the subsequent monopoly is just a sweetener.[/QUOTE] Oil in the middle east isn't going to last forever either. The point in domestic oil exploration is to use is smartly to wage a war on speculation. Obama has proven he's too much of an idiot to do it. The job of a speculator is relatively simple, to limit supply of a commodity to as close to the demand as possible so there isn't excess commodity on the market that would drive down prices and prevent the speculator from making a profit. If you parked a huge reserve of crude oil somewhere that speculators weren't able to control, it throws a huge wrench in their plans from lack of control and makes them nervous. This alone would drastically effect oil prices. Now if you flooded the market with cheap crude oil for even a short period of time, it would cause all sorts of people to bail out of oil speculation. Doing that just a few times would keep people from trying to speculate on oil for a decade or more, since they know there's some crazy bastard out there ruining his bottom line. [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;35574160]What would you rather we do? Tear the planet apart? Turn green fields and forests into scarred oil fields and refineries? The biggest problem with oil is that it's running out, and we need to find something else or the entire planet will be left without electricity and transportation, set back 200 years because everything we use relies on oil and we're too stubborn to change that.[/QUOTE] Yeah, you sound like the average EPA pink-o-commie who knows absolutely nothing about oil exploration and how it's extracted from the ground. If you watched footage from the invasion of Iraq, they showed dozens of producing oil wells, and they each took up less than 2 acres a piece. That's like what, the space that two countryside houses have? You don't need to raze a forest to the ground or pave over hundreds of acres of tundra just to have a few oil extraction wells. Land exploration and drilling rigs take up less than 5 acres and aren't permanent. Once a well has been drilled, they install all of the piping and tanks to hold the crude oil to be shipped off to some refining plant hundreds/thousands of miles away. The rig is disassembled and moved elsewhere and life continues on. Obamas' mandated "clean energy" has caused far more environmental destruction than drilling a few oil wells ever would. You know all of those wind farms that are going up all over the states? Many of them are in bird migratory paths, and birds don't expect a 10 ton propeller to whap around and hit them on the head, killing them instantly. It's been documented on wind farms where thousands of birds are killed yearly from propeller strikes.
$3.68/gal from what I saw, passing by a gas station near my house.
hey guys, lets completely ignore the race that the rest of the world is having over thorium reactors! fuck the clean and safe nuclear option, lets just use oil.
Its a real shame that hardy anyone talks about public transit when fuel prices come up. It's the elephant in the room that has been constantly ignored because the upfront costs both political and financial are higher then just adding another lane to the highway.
[QUOTE=bohb;35574179]Yeah, you sound like the average EPA pink-o-commie[/QUOTE] oh my god you are so adorable.
[QUOTE=omggrass;35574507]hey guys, lets completely ignore the race that the rest of the world is having over thorium reactors! fuck the clean and safe nuclear option, lets just use oil.[/QUOTE] Sorry, but anyone who thinks nuclear power is clean is an idiot The history of nuclear power speaks for itself how it is by far the least clean of any of the known power generation systems. Nuclear reactors both big and small produce deadly radioactive waste that cannot be disposed of, and must be stored indefinitely on-site. Nuclear cooling tanks for spent fuel rods around the states have been getting increasingly full and are running out of room, and their brilliant idea was to ship hazardous stuff like that across the states and store it in yucca mountain (which was thankfully scrapped.) So we have 60 years of stockpiled spent fuel rods accumulated that won't be safe to be in the same state with for another 10,000+ years History has also shown us how dangerous nuclear power is by both scary mismanagement/regulation and natural disasters. Chernobyl was an example of and idiot that was given too much control and Fukushima was an example of a natural disaster that ruined half of a country. Compare 10,000+ years of toxic waste to maybe a decade or two for a major oil spill, windmills failing or a dam breaking. [QUOTE=thisispain;35574745]oh my god you are so adorable.[/QUOTE] The EPA is a vile and disgusting organization chaired by liberal tree huggers that don't know a thing about the environment, and their actions speak for themselves. Instead of doing something smart and studying an entire biome in some region that's having trouble, they pick things at totally random that MUST BE SAVED BECAUSE XYZ IS ENDANGERED. They never look into the cause of the phenomenon, they just throw money at the problem and hope it goes away.
[QUOTE=The Baconator;35570642]No! It's all Obummer's fault! This man is using his voodoo magical powers to make our hard working citizens pay more for gas! [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/aweV5.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] The message may be wrong, but damn, that's a pretty good painting
[QUOTE=bohb;35574179]Obamas' mandated "clean energy" has caused far more environmental destruction than drilling a few oil wells ever would. You know all of those wind farms that are going up all over the states? Many of them are in bird migratory paths, and birds don't expect a 10 ton propeller to whap around and hit them on the head, killing them instantly. It's been documented on wind farms where thousands of birds are killed yearly from propeller strikes.[/QUOTE] I'm not even for wind energy anyway, wind energy sucks, it's too weak. I think we should look more into Nuclear Energy, or maybe Natural Gas. As for automobiles, maybe electric? I'm not sure. I don't know enough about it to argue. What I do know is that oil isn't going to last forever. [editline]14th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=bohb;35574800]Sorry, but anyone who thinks nuclear power is clean is an idiot The history of nuclear power speaks for itself how it is by far the least clean of any of the known power generation systems. Nuclear reactors both big and small produce deadly radioactive waste that cannot be disposed of, and must be stored indefinitely on-site. Nuclear cooling tanks for spent fuel rods around the states have been getting increasingly full and are running out of room, and their brilliant idea was to ship hazardous stuff like that across the states and store it in yucca mountain (which was thankfully scrapped.) So we have 60 years of stockpiled spent fuel rods accumulated that won't be safe to be in the same state with for another 10,000+ years History has also shown us how dangerous nuclear power is by both scary mismanagement/regulation and natural disasters. Chernobyl was an example of and idiot that was given too much control and Fukushima was an example of a natural disaster that ruined half of a country. Compare 10,000+ years of toxic waste to maybe a decade or two for a major oil spill, windmills failing or a dam breaking.[/QUOTE] Those don't even count, though. Chernobyl was the result of poor management and lack of responsibility, such a thing would never happen in the modern day. Fukushima was the result of an Earthquake [I]and[/I] Tsunami damage, and only got worse because the failsafes didn't work under the circumstances. The only other disaster I can think of is Three Mile Island, which was handled well by the plant workers, and nobody was hurt. It was deemed so safe that President Carter was on the scene for a speech. Oilspills, while less damaging, are far more common.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;35574822]Those don't even count, though. Chernobyl was the result of poor management and lack of responsibility, such a thing would never happen in the modern day.[/QUOTE] How the hell don't they count? What on earth are you smoking, peyote? Poor management and lack of responsibility have gone hand in hand with humanity since ancient times. It's why empires fell and wars were waged, and just because one incident happened somewhere, doesn't mean won't ever happen again. [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;35574822]Fukushima was the result of an Earthquake [I]and[/I] Tsunami damage, and only got worse because the failsafes didn't work under the circumstances.[/QUOTE] The reactors melted down because the core container on several reactors were ruptured by the earthquake, and by a huge oversight of the designers of the facility always assuming the reactors would have a secondary external power source in emergencies. The point is that you can never make a nuclear power plant 100% safe, it's just not possible. That and the ridiculously long life in-disposable toxic waste make it something that should never be looked into as a major source of energy. [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;35574822]The only other disaster I can think of is Three Mile Island, which was handled well by the plant workers, and nobody was hurt. It was deemed so safe that President Carter was on the scene for a speech. Oilspills, while less damaging, are far more common.[/QUOTE] You just stated that something like Chernobyl will never happen again, but this is EXACTLY what happened at three mile island. Mismanagement, inexperience and ignorance on the part of everyone involved with the plant was the cause of the reactor having a partial meltdown.
[QUOTE=bohb;35575064]How the hell don't they count? What on earth are you smoking, peyote? Poor management and lack of responsibility have gone hand in hand with humanity since ancient times. It's why empires fell and wars were waged, and just because one incident happened somewhere, doesn't mean won't ever happen again. The reactors melted down because the core container on several reactors were ruptured by the earthquake, and by a huge oversight of the designers of the facility always assuming the reactors would have a secondary external power source in emergencies. The point is that you can never make a nuclear power plant 100% safe, it's just not possible. That and the ridiculously long life in-disposable toxic waste make it something that should never be looked into as a major source of energy. You just stated that something like Chernobyl will never happen again, but this is EXACTLY what happened at three mile island. Mismanagement, inexperience and ignorance on the part of everyone involved with the plant was the cause of the reactor having a partial meltdown.[/QUOTE] you are literally holding humanity's advancement back do you understand the major advances we have made in nuclear safety in the past 20-30 years?
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;35574816]The message may be wrong, but damn, that's a pretty good painting[/QUOTE] they got his build wrong and the lighting makes absolutely no sense. it's really flat too. it's a bad painting.
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;35575113]you are literally holding humanity's advancement back do you understand the major advances we have made in nuclear safety in the past 20-30 years?[/QUOTE] No, you're just too ignorant to understand the dangers of nuclear power. 30 years ago, everyone was building mega reactors, which still follow protocol from 30 years ago. And since the government doesn't want to spend money modernizing these reactors, which were supposed to have been decommissioned a decade ago, they just renew the license and lower the standards. 30 years later, they're still building mega reactors, with the same flaws and inherent dangers. Oh, and you nor someguy have given any method to reduce the stockpile of spent fuel rods, the only option is to ship them somewhere (extremely dangerous) and convert them to some other form of toxic waste for storage. How about in your back yard? You seem so fond of nuclear power. Do you want a huge untapped source of power? It exists in the Earths' geomagnetic field. Basically limitless amounts of power with no bad baggage. All you'd have to do is figure a way to make a geosynchronous space station with an array of cables to capture it and beam it down to earth. Or you could go with an array of mirrors in space, focused on a singular target, like a mega solar power plant.
I was driving around and passed an old, abandoned gas station. The sign said 35 cents/gallon. If only that were true today.
[QUOTE=bohb;35575548]No, you're just too ignorant to understand the dangers of nuclear power. 30 years ago, everyone was building mega reactors, which still follow protocol from 30 years ago. And since the government doesn't want to spend money modernizing these reactors, which were supposed to have been decommissioned a decade ago, they just renew the license and lower the standards. 30 years later, they're still building mega reactors, with the same flaws and inherent dangers. Oh, and you nor someguy have given any method to reduce the stockpile of spent fuel rods, the only option is to ship them somewhere (extremely dangerous) and convert them to some other form of toxic waste for storage. How about in your back yard? You seem so fond of nuclear power. [/QUOTE] You fire them into space you dolt. You also seem to lack the intelligence that it took a NINE on the richter scale and a tsunami to even crack open a reactor. Chernobyl was a failed test, with Soviet era doctrines. Three mile island probably could of been put in closed doors and no one would know because it was just steam.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;35576931]You fire them into space you dolt. You also seem to lack the intelligence that it took a NINE on the richter scale and a tsunami to even crack open a reactor. Chernobyl was a failed test, with Soviet era doctrines. Three mile island probably could of been put in closed doors and no one would know because it was just steam.[/QUOTE] Thanks for reaffirming that no nuclear power plant can be 100% failure proof. And you must be insane to want to put nuclear waste on a rocket to send into space.
[QUOTE=bohb;35573888]Among the wide range of idiotic things Obama has done during his presidency, having fuel prices skyrocket is one of them. His administration uses the turmoil in the middle east as a scapegoat for the high oil prices and continually preaches "his hands are tied". The thing that he isn't telling everyone is that he and the tree hugging EPA are cock blocking everyone who is trying to start up oil exploration in territories within the U.S. that would drastically reduce oil prices. The U.S. has enough oil in its own territories to supplant nearly the entire dependence on foreign oil. Even if he keeps cock blocking the domestic oil exploration, he could open up the strategic oil reserve and break the nose of all the speculators that are driving the price of oil through the roof globally. The companies that produce crude oil have nearly nothing to do with the final price per barrel of oil. Oil is a commodity and is not linked with the cost of production. Speculators who have no ties or interests in oil companies are the ones that drive the cost of crude oil up or down, and they can do it for any and every reason. The same speculators that buy and sell oil and gas futures also buy and sell commodities in other markets and fuck with their pricing too, it's not just oil.[/QUOTE] North America's existing production already has all the oil the US needs to run, and enough for everyone else on the continent. We just use ME oil because it's sweet and it gives us extra oil to refine and export.
Oil sucks these days now, i guess the next step is electric vehicles.
[QUOTE=bohb;35574800]The EPA is a vile and disgusting organization chaired by liberal tree huggers that don't know a thing about the environment, and their actions speak for themselves.[/QUOTE] The intelligence and complexity is really apparent here.
[QUOTE=bohb;35575548]No, you're just too ignorant to understand the dangers of nuclear power. 30 years ago, everyone was building mega reactors, which still follow protocol from 30 years ago. And since the government doesn't want to spend money modernizing these reactors, which were supposed to have been decommissioned a decade ago, they just renew the license and lower the standards. 30 years later, they're still building mega reactors, with the same flaws and inherent dangers. Oh, and you nor someguy have given any method to reduce the stockpile of spent fuel rods, the only option is to ship them somewhere (extremely dangerous) and convert them to some other form of toxic waste for storage. How about in your back yard? You seem so fond of nuclear power. Do you want a huge untapped source of power? It exists in the Earths' geomagnetic field. Basically limitless amounts of power with no bad baggage. All you'd have to do is figure a way to make a geosynchronous space station with an array of cables to capture it and beam it down to earth. Or you could go with an array of mirrors in space, focused on a singular target, like a mega solar power plant.[/QUOTE] Thats the reason why nuclear fusion is the way forward, not fission. Fusion produces no radioactive waste and is the most efficient form of energy release. Heck, its what powers the stars. Just that no-one is really giving a damn about it.
[QUOTE=bohb;35574179]stuff[/QUOTE] finally someone who said what I was dreading to type. you're right of course. having a dad who is in the oil field, gives you an inside view of what is really going on and what Obama is doing. My dad has to deal with EPA agent's and lawyers on an everyday bases. he says himself "everything would be allot cheaper if Obama went and fucked right off" granting my dad is a right winged republican who supports santorum, but nonetheless.
[quote]30 years ago, everyone was building mega reactors, which still follow protocol from 30 years ago. And since the government doesn't want to spend money modernizing these reactors, which were supposed to have been decommissioned a decade ago, they just renew the license and lower the standards. 30 years later, they're still building mega reactors, with the same flaws and inherent dangers.[/quote] i would like to see your sources on this, i'm sure if this actually happened there would be textbooks, papers, possibly even websites about it. please prove your point. [quote]Oh, and you nor someguy have given any method to reduce the stockpile of spent fuel rods, the only option is to ship them somewhere (extremely dangerous) and convert them to some other form of toxic waste for storage. How about in your back yard? You seem so fond of nuclear power.[/quote] no i am not fond of nuclear power, but toxic waste is taken care of far better than say, oil, gas, or coal waste, i hope you enjoy choking on toxic smog and drinking polluted water before running out of fossil fuels in 20 years oh and kudos on using the "NOT IN MY BACKYARD" argument, you are equivalent to a 1970's hippy housewife. [QUOTE=bohb;35575548] Do you want a huge untapped source of power? It exists in the Earths' geomagnetic field. Basically limitless amounts of power with no bad baggage. All you'd have to do is figure a way to make a geosynchronous space station with an array of cables to capture it and beam it down to earth. Or you could go with an array of mirrors in space, focused on a singular target, like a mega solar power plant.[/QUOTE] are you seriously fucking kidding me do you seriously think that scientists have not considered that? it's likely they have and didn't even note it because of how sheerly fucking impossible it was i am astounded at that post.
[QUOTE=bohb;35575548]Oh, and you nor someguy have given any method to reduce the stockpile of spent fuel rods, the only option is to ship them somewhere (extremely dangerous) and convert them to some other form of toxic waste for storage. How about in your back yard? You seem so fond of nuclear power.[/quote] actually no. LFTR power stations can reprocess spent fuel and turn it into useable energy. [quote]Do you want a huge untapped source of power? It exists in the Earths' geomagnetic field. Basically limitless amounts of power with no bad baggage. All you'd have to do is figure a way to make a geosynchronous space station with an array of cables to capture it and beam it down to earth. Or you could go with an array of mirrors in space, focused on a singular target, like a mega solar power plant.[/QUOTE] the "magnetic field" idea is bilge, and as for space mirrors, we're not a type I civilisation yet. we simply don't have the capital or engineering expertise to do that yet. [editline]15th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=bohb;35574800]The history of nuclear power speaks for itself how it is by far the least clean of any of the known power generation systems.[/quote] actually no that's completely fucking wrong: [img]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_VyTCyizqrHs/R9rF7NuGzXI/AAAAAAAAAPw/KcnCX7ly6gw/s1600/deathTWH.JPG[/img] [quote]Nuclear reactors both big and small produce deadly radioactive waste that cannot be disposed of, and must be stored indefinitely on-site. Nuclear cooling tanks for spent fuel rods around the states have been getting increasingly full and are running out of room, and their brilliant idea was to ship hazardous stuff like that across the states and store it in yucca mountain (which was thankfully scrapped.)[/quote] again, there are many proposed ways to reprocess spent fuel. if all else fails we can drill a hole and dump it into the mantle. [quote]History has also shown us how dangerous nuclear power is by both scary mismanagement/regulation and natural disasters. Chernobyl was an example of and idiot that was given too much control and Fukushima was an example of a natural disaster that ruined half of a country.[/quote] compared to coal and petroleum which is on its way to ruining the entire earth's biosphere. also the effects of the fukushima disaster are exaggerated. chernobyl wasn't the fault of nuclear energy, it was the fault of terrible mismanagement at literally every conceivable stage of production. [editline]15th April 2012[/editline] Just fucking read this entire article: [url]http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/03/deaths-per-twh-for-all-energy-sources.html[/url]
[QUOTE=bohb;35574800]Sorry, but anyone who thinks nuclear power is clean is an idiot The history of nuclear power speaks for itself how it is by far the least clean of any of the known power generation systems[/quote] [B]are you shitting me[/B]? coal, gas, and oil produce incredible amounts of pollution, and guess what? unlike nuclear waste, we cannot control or contain oil smog, or coal smog, or gas smog! yes that's right kids! a smog we cannot control or prevent from entering the atmosphere! [quote]Nuclear reactors both big and small produce deadly radioactive waste that cannot be disposed of, and must be stored indefinitely on-site. Nuclear cooling tanks for spent fuel rods around the states have been getting increasingly full and are running out of room, and their brilliant idea was to ship hazardous stuff like that across the states and store it in yucca mountain (which was thankfully scrapped.) So we have 60 years of stockpiled spent fuel rods accumulated that won't be safe to be in the same state with for another 10,000+ years[/quote] jesus christ are you mentally incapable? we have plants out in the literal middle of nowhere designed to store and/or reuse this fuel, it's not kept inside nuclear power plants you absolute fool. also cite your sources for the cooling tank bit. [quote]History has also shown us how dangerous nuclear power is by both scary mismanagement/regulation and natural disasters. Chernobyl was an example of and idiot that was given too much control and Fukushima was an example of a natural disaster that ruined half of a country.[/quote] are you seriously comparing Chernobyl to Fukishima? are you genuinely comparing 1980's soviet union reactors to 2012 japanese/american reactors? the advancements in nuclear technology in the past 30 years are astounding and i am shocked that you even compare them. [quote]Compare 10,000+ years of toxic waste to maybe a decade or two for a major oil spill, windmills failing or a dam breaking.[/quote] because oil spills do not permanently damage the ecosystem, don't destroy wildlife, don't kill animals, and don't add to the burgeoning pollution of the world, happy days everybody! because a windmill or dam that powers a municipal area failing wouldn't cause needless deaths and possible widespread panic and looting! [quote]The EPA is a vile and disgusting organization chaired by liberal tree huggers that don't know a thing about the environment, and their actions speak for themselves.[/quote] the level of complexity blows my mind, that statement is probably the most senseless bilge you've ever posted. [quote]Instead of doing something smart and studying an entire biome in some region that's having trouble, they pick things at totally random that MUST BE SAVED BECAUSE XYZ IS ENDANGERED. They never look into the cause of the phenomenon, they just throw money at the problem and hope it goes away.[/QUOTE] there are entire teams of scientists trained to prevent exactly what you are describing. you [B]DONUT,[/B] [editline]15th April 2012[/editline] although i have been informed that Fukishima did have some shady shit going on a few years before the incident but really, shit like that is human nature, if you can't deal with the fact thats gonna happen, you're not gonna survive in this world, the same stuff happens with oil and coal and gas.
[QUOTE=Drsalvador;35579843]are you genuinely comparing 1980's soviet union reactors to 2012 japanese/american reactors? the advancements in nuclear technology in the past 30 years are astounding and i am shocked that you even compare them.[/QUOTE] Um. Fukishima wasn't built yesterday. Not to mention, the disaster was last year. I'm pretty certain it was built back in the 70's, and for that part, most of the US reactors.
If I'm not mistaken, Fukushima was actually scheduled to be decommissioned. The tsunami came at a bad time.
I noticed that the gas price climbed a lot at the payday not long ago, i though it would go back down, but it didnt, and my car has a vaccum leak, probably from the air intake, now my corolla take like 15L/100km instead of 7L/100.
Nuclear is the best way to go. And all it is, is some rods sitting in a big pool of water, steaming it up and turning some turbines. It's almost too simple.
All this fancy talk, I'm still pissed I gotta pay $4.19 per gallon.
[QUOTE=bohb;35574800]Sorry, but anyone who thinks nuclear power is clean is an idiot The history of nuclear power speaks for itself how it is by far the least clean of any of the known power generation systems. Nuclear reactors both big and small produce deadly radioactive waste that cannot be disposed of, and must be stored indefinitely on-site. Nuclear cooling tanks for spent fuel rods around the states have been getting increasingly full and are running out of room, and their brilliant idea was to ship hazardous stuff like that across the states and store it in yucca mountain (which was thankfully scrapped.) So we have 60 years of stockpiled spent fuel rods accumulated that won't be safe to be in the same state with for another 10,000+ years History has also shown us how dangerous nuclear power is by both scary mismanagement/regulation and natural disasters. Chernobyl was an example of and idiot that was given too much control and Fukushima was an example of a natural disaster that ruined half of a country. Compare 10,000+ years of toxic waste to maybe a decade or two for a major oil spill, windmills failing or a dam breaking. [/QUOTE] The spent fuel rods are a non-issue. They spend a year or so on site in tanks of water, then get carted off to a remote location to be buried in the ground. Considering the size of the Earth, there really is no problem for the forseeable future with digging and burying the fuel rods, which is safe and easy As for nuclear disasters, the power plants are incredibly safe, especially the new ones. They are designed to be fail safe, and the control rods drop automatically if there is a problem. Fukushima was an example of the unlikely meeting the highly unlikely. In most countries though, Tsunamis aren't a problem. Chernobyl was an example of bad engineering - the plant operators did what they thought was correct. The way the control rods were made actually made inserting the control rods increase the power output for a short period of time, since they displaced the water moderator between the fuel rods. There is probably more info about this on wiki, but basically the plant was designed terribly
And it should be mentioned that the containers used to carry nuclear waste are some of the safest in the world. They're built to withstand anything from an all out train wreck to the ravages of time.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.