Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Wolfala on August 31, 2005, 02:28:34 AM
-
Just a background question. But Say Feb 2004 the prices were a fairly normal, say $1.49 for 87 and slightly higher for 91. What was the cause for going from that to nearly double in a year or so?
Wolf
-
DUH!
BOOSH!!!
-
Don't think there is one isolated cause, but increased demand without the same ammount of increased production sounds reasonable.
-
Increased demand
Continued chaos in Iraq
Nuclear crisis in Iran
Hurricane in the gulf of M.
All of the above
-
- Expanding economies in China and India causing increased demand.
- People driving 10mpg gas guzzlers who "see no reason" to change, especially as they have convinced themselves that they "need" such vehicles as these because they're a "tradition" in their country. And anyone who doesn't agree is a "treehugger".
- One particular country has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. Can you guess which one it is?
-
Originally posted by beet1e
- Expanding economies in China and India causing increased demand.
- People driving 10mpg gas guzzlers who "see no reason" to change, especially as they have convinced themselves that they "need" such vehicles as these because they're a "tradition" in their country. And anyone who doesn't agree is a "treehugger".
- One particular country has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. Can you guess which one it is?
[/B]
<---- Looks at the average "treehugger" vehicle... usually its some decripid socialist car from 50's that does 9mpg with a large smoke cloud trailing behind it dripping large puddles of oil along the motorway.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
- Expanding economies in China and India causing increased demand.
- People driving 10mpg gas guzzlers who "see no reason" to change, especially as they have convinced themselves that they "need" such vehicles as these because they're a "tradition" in their country. And anyone who doesn't agree is a "treehugger".
- One particular country has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. Can you guess which one it is?
[/B]
don't worry beetle, one day you will grow up and be a big man!
-
Harry Truman, Doris Day, Red China, Johnnie Ray
South Pacific, Walter Winchell, Joe DiMaggio
Joe McCarthy, Richard Nixon, Studebaker, television
North Korea, South Korea, Marilyn Monroe
Rosenbergs, H-Bomb, Sugar Ray, Panmunjom
Brando, "The King and I", and "The Catcher in the Rye"
Eisenhower, vaccine, England's got a new queen
Marciano, Liberace, Santayana goodbye
CHORUS
We didn't start the fire
It was always burning
Since the world's been turning
We didn't start the fire
No we didn't light it
But we tried to fight it
Josef Stalin, Malenkov, Nasser and Prokofiev
Rockefeller, Campanella, Communist Bloc
Roy Cohn, Juan Peron, Toscanini, dacron
Dien Bien Phu and "Rock Around the Clock"
Einstein, James Dean, Brooklyn's got a winning team
Davy Crockett, "Peter Pan", Elvis Presley, Disneyland
Bardot, Budapest, Alabama, Khrushchev
Princess Grace, "Peyton Place", trouble in the Suez
CHORUS
Little Rock, Pasternak, Mickey Mantle, Kerouac
Sputnik, Chou En-Lai, "Bridge on the River Kwai"
Lebanon, Charles de Gaulle, California baseball
Starkweather, homicide, children of thalidomide
Buddy Holly, "Ben-Hur", space monkey, Mafia
hula hoops, Castro, Edsel is a no go
U2, Syngman Rhee, payola and Kennedy
Chubby Checker, "Psycho", Belgians in the Congo
CHORUS
Hemingway, Eichmann, "Stranger in a Strange Land"
Dylan, Berlin, Bay of Pigs Invasion
"Lawrence of Arabia", British Beatlemania
Ole Miss, John Glenn, Liston beats Patterson
Pope Paul, Malcolm X, British politician sex
JFK, blown away, what else do I have to say
CHORUS
Birth control, Ho Chi Minh, Richard Nixon, back again
Moonshot, Woodstock, Watergate, punk rock
Begin, Reagan, Palestine, terror on the airline
Ayatollolah's in Iran, Russians in Afghanistan
"Wheel of Fortune" , Sally Ride, heavy metal, suicide
Foreign debts, homeless vets, AIDS, Crack, Bernie Goetz
Hypodermics on the shores, China's under martial law
Rock and Roller Cola Wars, I can't take it anymore
CHORUS
We didn't start the fire
But when we are gone
Will it still burn on, and on, and on, and on...
And that is why the price of Oil is High....
;)
-
No ones mentioned the limited number of refineries and the increased demand.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
People driving 10mpg gas guzzlers who "see no reason" to change, especially as they have convinced themselves that they "need" such vehicles as these because they're a "tradition" in their country.
Doh!
(http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/MPG.gif)
-
"What was the cause for going from that to nearly double in a year or so?"
Times are tough for the oil corporations. Their profits were almost non existant over the past year and they've been shunned by thier ex-friends in high government places.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
One particular country has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. Can you guess which one it is?
Germany?
(http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Cars-per-1000.gif)
(surely you would fairly use "per capita", right? I mean, if I compared the state of texas to hawaii.....)
-
Ha! Ripsnort...you and your graphs, charts, statistical data..pffft! Why can't you just blame Cheney or something like everyone else?
By the way, the price of gas in Iraq was somewhere in the 35 cent per gallon range last time I checked. Interesting, eh?
-
Originally posted by Westy
"What was the cause for going from that to nearly double in a year or so?"
Times are tough for the oil corporations. Their profits were almost non existant over the past year and they've been shunned by thier ex-friends in high government places.
Yeah, just look at the profits compared to other industries! Why, we out to boycott banks! ;)
(http://www.conocophillips.com/NR/rdonlyres/913F0601-03DA-432D-86C2-E439DAB0BB87/0/OilProfitsVsOtherIndust3rdQ2004Revised.gif)
-
Originally posted by VOR
Ha! Ripsnort...you and your graphs, charts, statistical data..pffft! Why can't you just blame Cheney or something like everyone else?
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Germany?
(http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Cars-per-1000.gif)
Source?
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/tra_mot_veh
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar4.htm
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar4.htm
1996 data? :lol
Welcome to the 21st century, Thrawn.
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/DrivingMadness.html
-
No matter whose chart you use it seems like the top ten countries with good economies all have about the same number of cars per capita.... I would also say that the U.S. has a lot more room to drive in (more need) than say... some tiny little island.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
1996 data? :lol
Welcome to the 21st century, Thrawn.
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/DrivingMadness.html
Okay wise guy, in what year was the data collect for the graph you posted?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar4.htm
From this source, Germany has more cars per capita. Thanks for proving my point Thrawn, even if its old data.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Okay wise guy, in what year was the data collect for the graph you posted?
2004 was the copyright date. But what does it matter, your data shows what mine does.;)
-
I smell burning wannabe hippies!
It's BOOSHes fault! oh and the greedy Amereeekans!!!
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
2004 was the copyright date. But what does it matter, your data shows what mine does.;)
Point, but if it doesn't matter why did you ridecule the data I posted. Secondly your article might have been copywrited in 2004, but that doesn't indicate when the data for your graph was collected.
-
So Beet1e was talking about Germany? Damn, I got him all wrong!
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Point, but if it doesn't matter why did you ridecule the data I posted. Secondly your article might have been copywrited in 2004, but that doesn't indicate when the data for your graph was collected.
Translate:
"I'm taking my ball and going home!"
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
2004 was the copyright date. But what does it matter, your data shows what mine does.;)
Ripsnort wins, Game, Set, Match!
Glad yer back bud <> Rip
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Germany?
(http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Cars-per-1000.gif)
(surely you would fairly use "per capita", right? I mean, if I compared the state of texas to hawaii.....)
humm ...
Nice flawed reasonning :D
Let say their is 1 car / 2 people
Germany
(82431390 * 0.5 ) == 41215695
USA
( 295734134 * 0.5) == 147867067
41215695 != 147867067 !
3.6 more car in the US than in Gemany !
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Translate:
"I'm taking my ball and going home!"
Uh no, but thanks for the redicule again. I concede the point that my data shows the same as yours vis a vis Germany having more cars per capita than the US.
I do not concede your redicule of my data because you thought it was antiquated when you don't even know how old your data is.
Futhermore, although you are correct in Germany having more cars per capita, it in no way supports your implied contention that Germany has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles.
-
(http://sassnet.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)
-
The answer is really a simple concept.
It is because, we here at ***, GAZ & GRAZZ INC. want Yo money. :)
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
Ripsnort wins, Game, Set, Match!
Glad yer back bud <> Rip
Karaya
Pardon? Ripsnort implied arguement is that my data isn't acceptable because he feels it's antiquated, however he doesn't have a date for the collection of his data, just the date when the article was published. That's a hypocritcal arguement.
He then decides that data is acceptable, not because he no longer feels it isn't antiquated but because it further's his arguement, which is a hypocracy on top of a hypocracy.
I don't think that sort of reasoning should be encouraged.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Translate:
"I'm taking my ball and going home!"
:D Fire up the band and bring in the limo.
We have a winner folks.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
From this source, Germany has more cars per capita. Thanks for proving my point Thrawn, even if its old data.
tsss tsss ... don't change the reference in the middle of the discussion
Originally posted by beet1e
One particular country has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. Can you guess which one it is?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Futhermore, although you are correct in Germany having more cars per capita, it in no way supports your implied contention that Germany has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles.
My point was that you (Beet1e) can't compare apples to oranges.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My point was that you (Beet1e) can't compare apples to oranges.
If that was your point, why did imply that the method of comparison was one that could be fairly used?
"surely you would fairly use "per capita", right? I mean, if I compared the state of texas to hawaii.....)"
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
If that was your point, why did imply that the method of comparison was one that could be fairly used?
"surely you would fairly use "per capita", right? I mean, if I compared the state of texas to hawaii.....)"
Doh. (Slaps forehead) THrawn, hit the bong again...you've totally lost it in the subconscious fear of losing face...
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Doh. (Slaps forehead) THrawn, hit the bong again...you've totally lost it in the subconscious fear of losing face...
I'm not sure how you ascribing motivations to me that you have no way of knowing are true or not, or attacking my character furthers your arguement.
If your"... point was that you (Beet1e) can't compare apples to oranges.".
Then why did you put forward a comparison arugement using a method (per capita) that you apparently deem acceptable? Why did you redicule me and my data, and make hypocritical arguements involving it? What does any of that have to do with not being able to compare apples and oranges?
As far as losing face is concerned, I already conceded that my data agrees with your's regarding the per capita amount of vehicles in Germany in the US. I dont' see why I should fear losing face over it. I was wrong, so be it. I learned something new.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
- People driving 10mpg gas guzzlers who "see no reason" to change, especially as they have convinced themselves that they "need" such vehicles as these because they're a "tradition" in their country. And anyone who doesn't agree is a "treehugger".
[/B]
.............Or people who are so bored with their dreary homeland that they drive to other countries to dine.
.........Or people who travel extensively just to look at buildings made of stone. Some of which are rock barns they have been duped into to believing are "villas". :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
My point was that you (Beet1e) can't compare apples to oranges.
Oh he can & does, it is just the comparison will come across as ridiculous to the rational mind.
-
" Why did you redicule me and my data, and make hypocritical arguements involving it? "
Bingo. But after seeing this for the past couple of years WHY do you reply, let alone pose this question, to him?
FWIW if you weren't quoting him things would fine. :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Doh!
(http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/MPG.gif)
Mine does something like 53 mpg - 2 ltr turbo diesel - does the job.
-
Seems to me if the 2 charts or studies are showing the same trends / data they are both equally flawed OR valid irregardless of the data gathering date.
Now how about a rational discussion of the burning question. How far is up?
:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
(surely you would fairly use "per capita", right? I mean, if I compared the state of texas to hawaii.....)
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/jester.gif)
I didn't say anything about "per capita". I said that one country had 5% of the world's population and 40% of the world's vehicles.
Does Germany have 5% of the world's population? Erm... no.
Does Germany have 40% of the world's vehicles? Erm... no.
Now, go and practise your Ameritard dance routine, and accuse me of "dodging", "smoke & mirrors", or of "changing my argument". Slapshot will be able to offer you a few tips. ;)
-
I didn't say anything about "per capita".
Of course not. If you had you would have made a reasonable comparison.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/jester.gif)
I didn't say anything about "per capita". I said that one country had 5% of the world's population and 40% of the world's vehicles.
Does Germany have 5% of the world's population? Erm... no.
Does Germany have 40% of the world's vehicles? Erm... no.
Now, go and practise your Ameritard dance routine, and accuse me of "dodging", "smoke & mirrors", or of "changing my argument". Slapshot will be able to offer you a few tips. ;)
The true statistic you failed to point out is that Germany has the highest ownership rate in the world, at 572 vehicles per 1000 population. Now, if you really want to get down to the nitty gritty, if we eliminated all foreigners from our population per vehicle owned, I could skew my numbers as well.
The fact that the US has money to consume automobile products based on population is one driven by economics.
Would you suggest that we not consume 40% of the vehicles? if so, what economic impact do you think that would have on the world, and what downstream effects would affect you personally?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Of course not. If you had you would have made a reasonable comparison.
Thank you. He and thrawn have totally missed on reasonable comparisons.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
- One particular country has 5% of the world population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. Can you guess which one it is?
[/B]
you know one funny part of this you fail to even think about, is commercial vehicles.
name another land mass as large as the US with similar development, and the need to transport as many resources?
im not going to bother looking up the data (because frankly i dont care) but i'd hazard a guess a minium of 1/3 the vehicles in the US are commercial.
it sure seems like you think every thing with a combustion engine in the USA is an SUV driven by a soccer mom.
-
Originally posted by VOR
Ha! Ripsnort...you and your graphs, charts, statistical data..pffft! Why can't you just blame Cheney or something like everyone else?
By the way, the price of gas in Iraq was somewhere in the 35 cent per gallon range last time I checked. Interesting, eh?
:lol :rofl :rofl :rofl :lol :D
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
The true statistic you failed to point out is that Germany has the highest ownership rate in the world, at 572 vehicles per 1000 population. Now, if you really want to get down to the nitty gritty, if we eliminated all foreigners from our population per vehicle owned, I could skew my numbers as well.
I didn't fail to point anything out. Why should I mention Germany? I wasn't talking about Germany when I said that there is a country which has 5% of the world's population and 40% of the world's vehicles.
Hey Jackal!!!! .............Or people who are so bored with their dreary homeland
You never did answer my question in an earlier thread. So I'll ask it again: If you know so much about my homeland, as you would need to in order to know how dreary it is, can you name the small town located 5 miles North of where I live, which last month hosted an internationally famous sporting event which attracted teams from all over the world, including the USA?
-
Originally posted by beet1e
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/jester.gif)
I didn't say anything about "per capita". I said that one country had 5% of the world's population and 40% of the world's vehicles.
My guess is the same country that has a disporportionate share of the worlds GDP and wealth, therefore they can afford all them cars.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Hey Jackal!!!! You never did answer my question in an earlier thread. So I'll ask it again: If you know so much about my homeland, as you would need to in order to know how dreary it is, can you name the small town located 5 miles North of where I live, which last month hosted an internationally famous sporting event which attracted teams from all over the world, including the USA?
I didn`t answer you then because it was assinine..............and it still is.
Evidently you knew exactly who I was talking about and tried to find a way to skate around the facts as usual. You bash mine, I`ll bash yours. How`s that work for you? :)
I don`t really see how you living near Heathrow or any other airport or town, city, village, bar, cathouse, outhouse or any other facility relates to anything. The 'sporting event" ,as you put it, could have been held in the Sahara and they would still have participated. You relate this to what?
-
Originally posted by beet1e
I didn't fail to point anything out. Why should I mention Germany? I wasn't talking about Germany when I said that there is a country which has 5% of the world's population and 40% of the world's vehicles.
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Of course not. If you had you would have made a reasonable comparison.
-
Originally posted by BigGun
My guess is the same country that has a disporportionate share of the worlds GDP and wealth, therefore they can afford all them cars.
...thereby increasing the demand for road fuel and driving up the price.
There. We got there in the end. Wolfala's original question finally has an answer. :aok
Oh and Ripsnort - does your "per capita" figure take account of the number of people who are actually eligible to DRIVE? Otherwise it's meaningless. And there comes a time when further a further increase in vehicles per capita won't have any effect on that country's road fuel consumption, because a driver can drive only one vehicle at a time.
-
And there comes a time when a further increase in vehicles per capita won't have any effect on that country's road fuel consumption, because a driver can drive only one vehicle at a time.
Since the highest number per 1000 pop is near 500 cars, we are nowhere near your statistical worry so that point is moot.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
...thereby increasing the demand for road fuel and driving up the price.
There. We got there in the end. Wolfala's original question finally has an answer. :aok
Oh and Ripsnort - does your "per capita" figure take account of the number of people who are actually eligible to DRIVE? Otherwise it's meaningless. And there comes a time when further a further increase in vehicles per capita won't have any effect on that country's road fuel consumption, because a driver can drive only one vehicle at a time.
You should return to what you best Beet1e, smacking around people...because logical debate is way above you.
-
why would a brit be whining about america's share of cars? i mean, jeez, you can walk the length of england in, what, 4 hours?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
You should return to what you best Beet1e, smacking around people...because logical debate is way above you.
Clearly the concept of supply and demand is lost on you. Road fuel in the US is relatively cheap, so people think nothing of driving 10mpg guzzlers. Hence demand for fuel is higher. OK, your cars get better mileage now - thanks to many Japanese and European imports.
HG said Since the highest number per 1000 pop is near 500 cars, we are nowhere near your statistical worry so that point is moot.
OK, random sample - 1000 people, 500 cars. But have you stopped to consider how many of those 1000 people are actually licensed drivers? The legal age limit for driving in Germany is 18, so right away exclude anyone below that age. Then there will be many elderly no longer able or willing to drive. Then there will be people of legal driving age who have never learned to drive. Suddenly your 1000/500 ratio of population/vehicles goes out the window. I'd say that only about half of the population are active drivers, and the rest cannot/do not. So 500 cars, 500 drivers. Parity. Maybe my point is not moot after all?
-
In 2003, 86.8% of driving age population in the US were licenced drivers.
89% of the vehicles were private as opposed to commercial.
196,165,666 drivers out of a total population of 290,809,777, for 67.5% of the total population.
Your 50% is a little shy.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Your 50% is a little shy.
Two things... 1) I thought we were talking about Germany? 2) How do you know how many of those licensed drivers are ACTIVE drivers, ie. not those who have given up driving but still have a licence?
While I was waiting for Ripsnort to come up with something sensible (I knew I'd have plenty of time) I visited the UK's Driver and Vehicle Licensing Authority website (DVLA). I had to root around for the stats I wanted but this is what I found: DVLA tracks 38m drivers. Of those, 5.5m are provisional license holders. A provisional licence holder must be accompanied by a full licence holder when they drive, so at any time, there are 32.5m drivers available to drive a vehicle, and there are 28m vehicles. As a proportion of the British population of around 58m, the number of drivers with full licences is about 56% of the population.
Source: http://www.dvla.gov.uk/forms/pdf/dvla_millenium.pdf - look on page 3.
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
I didn`t answer you then because it was assinine..............and it still is.
Evidently you knew exactly who I was talking about and tried to find a way to skate around the facts as usual. You bash mine, I`ll bash yours. How`s that work for you? :)
I don`t really see how you living near Heathrow or any other airport or town, city, village, bar, cathouse, outhouse or any other facility relates to anything. The 'sporting event" ,as you put it, could have been held in the Sahara and they would still have participated. You relate this to what?
ROFL! No need to get rattled! :cool:
The point, which you have missed, is not what it's like around here. The point is that you don't know where I live, and are therefore unqualified to comment on it. True, I'm not 1m miles from Heathrow. Bear that in mind if you ever decide to visit. (Don't forget to apply for a passport)
Have you ever been out of the US, jackal? I'd love you to write a list of places you've been to, and to hand it to me. If you can't find a sheet of writing paper, the back of a postage stamp will do. :D
And hey - when did I "bash yours"?
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Two things... 1) I thought we were talking about Germany? 2) How do you know how many of those licensed drivers are ACTIVE drivers, ie. not those who have given up driving but still have a licence?
I quote you USA stats (because there was a US / Germany comment earlier in the thread) Then you say you thought we were talking about Germany, then quote me UK statistics....
WTF?
-
you know what.... if we are all going to get thchnical, and show statistics, i'd like to see where beetle got the "40% of the worlds vehicles" also.
plenty of other "data" being shown here.
Ps. Holden, 89% private? wondering if that is counting ATV's boats and stuff. personally i was only thinking about road vehicles, as in street legal.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I quote you USA stats (because there was a US / Germany comment earlier in the thread) Then you say you thought we were talking about Germany, then quote me UK statistics....
WTF?
HG - I was trying to make a point - that "per capita" is not a good way of measuring the ratio of cars to drivers. As you can see from the British stats, around 44% of the population are not licensed drivers. There are 32˝m fully licensed drivers, and 28m vehicles. DVLA doesn't keep track of who actually drives. I suspect that a significant number of the 38m license holders do not drive at all.
Ripsnort's graph suggests that the number of vehicles per driver might be even higher in Germany. I would investigate it, but I can't. I apologise for not being able to speak German.
-
No aploogy necessary, as I have the same shortcoming.
44% of the UK is not licensed. That seems reasonable. If you took the northeast US as a comparison, maybe you could compare apples to apples. Boston and New York have well used public transportation, like those who use the London Underground. Berlin, Hamburg, Stuttgart and Munich I would assume have public transport on par.
You probably would have a difficult time making a meaningful comparison of Henley-on-Thames with Elko Nevada.
I am surprised that with the concentration of population in Germany as opposed to Kansas that Germany's per capita number of automobile is that high.
The number of cars per capita is probably a better generalization with all Euro vs US, and Ripsnorts graph shows equity between the two.
-
All I see is when it's for a Tsunami the per capita is not pertinent but when it's about global polution it work.
blerchhh.
-
HG - I suspect the proportion of drivers in Germany is lower, if only because the driving age is higher. It's 18 in Germany, and 17 here. I understand it's 16 in the US - is this in all states?
LOL - I have passed through Elko,NV on I-80. And I had a haircut in Henley on Thames this afternoon! :p
-
Nice hijack - how about back to the actual question?
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Just a background question. But Say Feb 2004 the prices were a fairly normal, say $1.49 for 87 and slightly higher for 91. What was the cause for going from that to nearly double in a year or so?
Wolf
The cost of crude went from $40 to $70 per barrel.
------
Now about the German vs UK vs greater Euro community vs USA automotive demographics, ....
-
$4 a gallon here on cape cod today. i broke out my bike.
-
Originally posted by moose
$4 a gallon here on cape cod today. i broke out my bike.
If more people did this, it will drive the cost of fuel down...supply vs. demand.
I cut back to commuting from 5 days a week to 2. I work from home virtually.
-
Hi All,
A few factoids contributing to the overall high cost of Gas, most of the stats are summarized information from the US Energy Information Administration and the industry broadsheet The Oil and Gas Journal
As of 2005 the USA had 21.9 Billion barrels of proved oil reserves, making it the 11th most oil rich country in the world.
However, American drilling, refining, and research and discovery at home all continue to decline, even as consumption increases. Despite the fact that the US has the capacity to hugely reduce its reliance on foriegn oil by utilizing domestic oil reserves, political pressure makes this less feasible with every passing year. Specifically, drilling in many of the most oil rich areas is severely restricted. In a sense, environmentalism has made us more prone to the charges of "selfishness" in that US unwillingness to drill at home means that they consume more of the total foreign oil production than is necessary and drive prices up worldwide.
Almost as critical as the production problem however, is the refinery crisis. As has been pointed out the USA has not built a new refinery in over 30 years and several have closed in the meantime. Our consumption is already far outstripping our refining capacity, and the chances of building a new refinery are actually probably worse than the chances of renewed drilling in Californian coastal waters.
The following US Gov. stats should show how serious the problem actually is, I've tried to order them to make the data more useful:
Oil Consumption (2003E): 20.0 million bbl/d; (January-October 2004E): 20.4 million bbl/d
Crude Oil Refining Capacity (1/1/05E) (Oil and Gas Journal): 16.8 million bbl/d (132 refineries)
Proven Oil Reserves (1/1/05E) (Oil and Gas Journal): 21.9 billion barrels
Oil Wells Drilled (2003): 6,284 (down from 8,060 during 2001); (January-September 2004): 4,391 (down from 4,871 during Jan.-Sep. 2003)
Oil Production (January-October 2004E): 7.7 million barrels per day (bbl/d), of which 5.4 million bbl/d is crude oil
Net Oil Imports (2003E): 11.2 million bbl/d (56% of total consumption); (January-October 2004E): 11.8 million bbl/d (58% of total consumption)
Gross Oil Imports (2003E): 12.2 million bbl/d (of which, 9.6 million bbl/d was crude oil and 2.6 million bbl/d were petroleum products)
Crude Oil Imports from the Persian Gulf (2003E): 2.4 million bbl/d; (January-October 2004E): 2.4 million bbl/d
Top Sources of U.S. Crude Oil Imports (January-October 2004E): Canada (1.61 million bbl/d); Mexico (1.59 million bbl/d); Saudi Arabia (1.48 million bbl/d); Venezuela (1.29 million bbl/d); Nigeria (1.09 million bbl/d)
Total Oil Stocks (12/10/04): 1.65 billion barrels (including about 673 million barrels in the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve)
With the situation above, it would be odd if prices weren't going up. Supply is dropping, while demand is increasing, the most basic rule of economics dictates prices will increase until supply begins to match demand. US efforts to date have primarily been to decrease demand at home and increase supply abroad (which is very difficult to do), personally I believe its time domestic supply (which the US can control) was actually increased as well.
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
Nice hijack - how about back to the actual question?
Sorry Wolf - I'm as guilty as any...
Nice post by Seagoon.
Yes, supply and demand. In Europe, prices have always been much higher than in the US, so there's never been much of a market for 10mpg gas guzzlers. We have a few Rolls Royces, big Jaguars/Mercs etc. Plus we have many - far too many IMO - SUV type vehicles which use a disproportionate amount of fuel. What needs to be faced is that oil is a precious resource. Several European countries now have more diesel cars than petrol cars.
We do, however, have our share of "soccer moms" as mustaine calls them. And they drive the most hideous vehicles. That thing that VW makes - the Toureng? It has a 5 litre 10-cyl engine! FFS!!!! Why the hell does anyone need a vehicle like that to do the school run?
Time to break out the Cayenne pic
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/cayenne.jpg)
-
I just now saw on BBC that the US dont have any finished product in strategic reserves, only crude. Is this correct?
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Plus we have many - far too many IMO - SUV type vehicles which use a disproportionate amount of fuel.
I read today that last years sales of SUV's in Norway was 10.8% of total sales.. up from about 9%. I bet 99% of those buyers are city dwellers and the rest actually needs them. Thank cod the sales of pickup trucks are down.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
I just now saw on BBC that the US dont have any finished product in strategic reserves, only crude. Is this correct?
Reserves for any country means "Stored underground in crude form" Our SOS is in a salt dome cavern.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Reserves for any country means "Stored underground in crude form" Our SOS is in a salt dome cavern.
Then why did the american guy interviewed on BBC say that america only has crude oil in its reserves while european countries tend to have a mix of crude and finished product in its reserves? Simplification for the viewers?
No idea what the situation is here but i do know that we have alot of both in storage both in the hands of the goverment (relic of the cold war i suppose) and the big oil companies.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Then why did the american guy interviewed on BBC say that america only has crude oil in its reserves while european countries tend to have a mix of crude and finished product in its reserves? Simplification for the viewers?
[/B]
In that case I stand corrected!
Here is a profile of our reserves:
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/reserves/spr/index.html
-
Yup Ripsnort. That was what the guy was talking about. Perhaps the reason why eurpean countries like Norway has larger stocks of finished product is because of the cold war and the need to quickly have diesel and gas ready to supply our military and potential American reinforcements. You really cant rely on refining enough while there is a war raging in your backyard.
When i was in the navy we could stop at almost any fjord with our boats and hook up to large underground/above ground tanks to replenish and so could allies. Just a few kilometers from my house ther is such an underground facility that is full of diesel and aviation fuel. I belive Shell owns it and uses it but has an obligation to top it up so that its always full incase of war or crisis.
-
just witnessed $3.45 for regular.
:huh
-
Just a question here. IIRC the strategic reserves were released before during a previous energy crisis. What was the resultant drop in price? I was told, and don't know if it was accurate, that the price dropped a penny.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
Yup Ripsnort. That was what the guy was talking about. Perhaps the reason why eurpean countries like Norway has larger stocks of finished product is because of the cold war and the need to quickly have diesel and gas ready to supply our military and potential American reinforcements. You really cant rely on refining enough while there is a war raging in your backyard.
When i was in the navy we could stop at almost any fjord with our boats and hook up to large underground/above ground tanks to replenish and so could allies. Just a few kilometers from my house ther is such an underground facility that is full of diesel and aviation fuel. I belive Shell owns it and uses it but has an obligation to top it up so that its always full incase of war or crisis.
Well I was thinking of your IEA, which is similiar to our SOR. The IEA has strategic oils reserves similiar to the US, stored crude oil.
We have gasoline and diesel reserves as well, for military purposes. I believe ours is reserved in a time of war only. And by the time it is exhausted a fresh batch will have been produced by the crude-to-refining process.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
ROFL! No need to get rattled!
Rattled? I realize as much as you would like that, I hate to burst your bubble and tell ya it would take a might more than your ramblings to get me 'rattled". :)
I find you sometimes comedic, overbearing, pompous and lame, but rattling is not in your cards. Sorry.
The point, which you have missed, is not what it's like around here. The point is that you don't know where I live, and are therefore unqualified to comment on it
You base this on what beetle? Have you moved to Siberia recently or something?
I base your personal case, as mentioned in my, post by your continuous posts regarding how often you have to get away from your home to find something a little more interesting than watching the grass grow. Must be pretty boring.
I have lived in the general area of where I do now for the majority of my life. I find new and exciting things constantly around me. It`s a pretty neat and enjoyable place to live with never ending entertainment.
Once again, I`ll ask you the question, that you so far, have refused to answer. You relate this to what and how does it pertain in this instance?
Bear that in mind if you ever decide to visit. (Don't forget to apply for a passport)
I think I can safely say that I won`t ever have to worry about that. I can`t think of a reason why I would wish to visit there. Usualy when I visit different places I don`t go in for the 'boring" aspect. If you have to continuously escape there to find something to interest you, then what would it offer me?
Have you ever been out of the US, jackal?
Beetle, how many times are you going to ask this question? How many times have you forgotten the answer and the fact you have repeatedly asked it?
Yes, I have been out of the U.S. a few times. It`s been a while. I can only think of a couple of countries that I would give much more than a hoot to visit now. There is really no need to leave my country in most cases. No place and I can think of can offer anything that I would be interested in or would be worth the effort. Your`s is certainly not one of them. We pretty much have it all right here in the vast country I reside in. I don`t have to go looking elsewhere for much. Wouldn`t mind a hunting safari in Africa. Very few of the big 3 around here, but I`ll get by without it unless I`m fortunate enough one day to be able to afford such extravagance.
I'd love you to write a list of places you've been to, and to hand it to me. If you can't find a sheet of writing paper, the back of a postage stamp will do.
Now tell me again who is making statements they know nothing about and are not qualified to make?
And hey - when did I "bash yours"?
The question should be more like...when do you enter a thread you do not?
Were you speaking of mother Russia here......................... .....
People driving 10mpg gas guzzlers who "see no reason" to change, especially as they have convinced themselves that they "need" such vehicles as these because they're a "tradition" in their country. And anyone who doesn't agree is a "treehugger".
If so, my apologies.
Now, once again, how does any of this relate in this instance?
-
Aw, Rip.
You're so insensitive.
Can't you understand? Some of our Euro-friends are suffering from what Dr. Fraud called "p_n_s envy," which manifests itself in criticism of anyone or any institution or any country that possesses large numbers of materialistic symbols of masculinity.
Just send them one of your crotch-rockets and they'll be satisfied.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Just a question here. IIRC the strategic reserves were released before during a previous energy crisis. What was the resultant drop in price? I was told, and don't know if it was accurate, that the price dropped a penny.
Found this:
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/reserves/spr/spr-drawdown.html#nonemergency
http://www.fe.doe.gov/programs/reserves/spr/spr-drawdown.html#nonemergency
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Well I was thinking of your IEA, which is similiar to our SOR. The IEA has strategic oils reserves similiar to the US, stored crude oil.
We have gasoline and diesel reserves as well, for military purposes. I believe ours is reserved in a time of war only. And by the time it is exhausted a fresh batch will have been produced by the crude-to-refining process.
Then it is pretty similar to our situation, only with different names for what the reserves are called.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Aw, Rip.
You're so insensitive.
Can't you understand? Some of our Euro-friends are suffering from what Dr. Fraud called "p_n_s envy," which manifests itself in criticism of anyone or any institution or any country that possesses large numbers of materialistic symbols of masculinity.
Just send them one of your crotch-rockets and they'll be satisfied.
Don't think any of the jealous Euros has regular access to the internet so you wont find many of them here ;)
-
Rip,
Neither one of those links indicated the average drop in price per gallon achieved.
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
I base your personal case, as mentioned in my, post by your continuous posts regarding how often you have to get away from your home to find something a little more interesting than watching the grass grow. Must be pretty boring.
I have lived in the general area of where I do now for the majority of my life. I find new and exciting things constantly around me. It`s a pretty neat and enjoyable place to live with never ending entertainment.
Hiya Jackal! - LOL - I don't "have to" go anywhere. I go because I can. :D OTOH, your existence would seem to mirror the contentment of a garden snail, who does not need to venture beyond the limits of my property line. He has everything he needs right there. Once again, I`ll ask you the question, that you so far, have refused to answer. You relate this to what and how does it pertain in this instance?
Well, form a proper sentence out of it, make it into a question, and I'll answer it. This your latest attempt does not know whether it is a statement or a question. There is really no need to leave my country in most cases. No place and I can think of can offer anything that I would be interested in or would be worth the effort. Your`s is certainly not one of them. We pretty much have it all right here in the vast country I reside in.
ROFL! The only time that sounds even funnier and more lame is when Dago says it. :lol
Go and fix yourself a nice bowl o grits - you'll feel better! :)
Back on topic - diesel 96p/litre here today.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Hiya Jackal! - LOL - I don't "have to" go anywhere. I go because I can. :D OTOH, your existence would seem to mirror the contentment of a garden snail, who does not need to venture beyond the limits of my property line. He has everything he needs right there.
Sure you don`t beetle. Watching that grass grow is all you need.
I can turn more miles in my home state than you do in your entire country. I can also see about anything in this state that you have seen in your entire travels. That eats ya up don`t it? :)
That`s just ONE state. I haven`t missed but very, very few of them as we have discussed before.
I DO have everything I need right here. Amazing isn`t it?
A couple of weeks ago I returned from a trip, by vehicle, turning nearly 4000 miles. Never had to leave the country.
Saw a little bit of everything, but didn`t even scratch the surface country wise. You would have to set up a test track and run laps to do that and then you would not see anyything worth the effort. :)
Go and fix yourself a nice bowl o grits - you'll feel better! :)
Just might do that. haven`t had grits in ages. Good idea.
You, on the other hand , might go......hmmmmm....let`s see...........Oh yeah............you could go see if you can find a female sparring partner and blow offf a little bit of that steam or hot air as the case may be.
BTW, I haven`t seen any 10 mpg autos around . :0
-
Was wondering. Are gasoline prices going up in Europe?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Doh!
(http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/MPG.gif)
That chart fails to mention the increase in the amount of vehicles on the road as well as demand. Use some common sense.
-
Originally posted by schizer
That chart fails to mention the increase in the amount of vehicles on the road as well as demand. Use some common sense.
Here, maybe you'll be able to actually understand this one, its more to your ....level...of understanding.
(http://[img]http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.jpg)[/img]
-
WTF? :D
-
So obviously the lack of pirates is what is causing global warming. Time to break out the eye patch and parrot......I'm going pirating. Arrrrrr!!!
Gas prices in Conroe (north Houston) jumped to $3.30 today. Glad I filled up last night at 2.59. :)
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
Sure you don`t beetle. Watching that grass grow is all you need.
I can turn more miles in my home state than you do in your entire country. I can also see about anything in this state that you have seen in your entire travels. That eats ya up don`t it? :)
That`s just ONE state.
What, TX? :lol I've been there twice - in 1978 and in 2001. Saw a little bit of everything, but didn`t even scratch the surface country wise. You would have to set up a test track and run laps to do that and then you would not see anyything worth the effort.
LOL - on the one hand, you brag about doing 4000 miles in your home state, and on the other you claim that "we have everything we need right here" in reference to your back yard. Which is it??!
I LOVE the way you turn things upside down, eg. defining someone who is well travelled as being bored with their own environs, and then crowing about how little you travel because "we have everything we need right here". So why the need to travel 4000 miles to seek fulfillment, huh? Guess you were wearing a different hat that day. :D I wonder how it was in the Columbus household in 1492- Hey, Christopher, why do you have to go discovering America? Sit down and eat your spaghetti - we have everything we need right here! :lol
Westy asked Was wondering. Are gasoline prices going up in Europe?
Yes, but perhaps more slowly than in the USA. Europe has always recognised that oil is a precious, finite resource. (Other countries are just waking up to this) For this reason, European countries have long had relatively high taxation on oil, and 10mpg gas guzzlers have never gained a foothold here. MOST EU countries (the UK is not one of them) encourage diesel use by having lower duty on diesel, which is why 60% of all cars are diesel powered in some countries. And those cars can achieve 50 miles on a US gallon. The annual taxation on cars in Europe favours cars which consume the least fuel. The end result of all these factors is that demand for fuel is lower that it otherwise would be, and therefore the price is not being forced up as much.
The other thing to consider is that because most of the price is tax, when the oil price goes up, it has less of an impact on the pump price - unless of course the tax is linked to the base cost of oil. Here, there's a combination of flat rate and variable tax. Fuel duty is about 48p/litre - that's about 87 cents. But then there's VAT (like sales tax) at 17˝% on top of the total.
-
Originally posted by Westy
Was wondering. Are gasoline prices going up in Europe?
yes but a lot slower - gone up about 20% in the UK - not as noticeable to me personally as I live in a large city and use public transport mostly - when I do use a vehicle it's diesel and only fill up every 3 months or so.
Indirect increases - air fares, transportation for freight etc have had a big jump.
-
Same here, about 20% increase in fuel price.
I fill up once per month so I really doesn't care that much :)
-
Two years ago, I could get diesel for 75p/litre. Now it's about 95p/litre. That's an increase of about 27% in 2 years.
-
Originally posted by Westy
Was wondering. Are gasoline prices going up in Europe?
Made a jump today.. 1,86 USD for a liter or just over 7 USD per gallon if my math is not way off.
-
Thanks guys. Prices were climbing rapidly before the hurricane so I was curious if this was a "local" supply & demand problem or a global issue.
!
-
Really surprising to see the amount of cars per capita is so low in the US. Anyone have graph on how many cars per average does a carowner own in US compared to euro area for example?
I had the impression that in US it's far more common to own 2 or 3 cars. If that's so it also means that the wealth is way more concentrated in the US -> you have way more poor people who do not own a car at all.
-
I think it means that those girly men metrosexuals who live in cities don't have cars. Cars and guns frieghten them.
I have 3 cars and a bike... I am a one person household. The only people I know who don't have cars are the ones who have lost their licence.... quite a few actually.
lazs
-
Then you have those that live in the city centers that dont need a car or perhaps no place to park it. Im sure its easyer to use public transportation some places than to own a car.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
...thereby increasing the demand for road fuel and driving up the price.
There. We got there in the end. Wolfala's original question finally has an answer. :aok
You are forgetting the other half of the equation in that quote, and your earlier statement about percentage of world population versus percentage of vehicle ownership omits an important factor as well. I guess you were "just trying to prove a point", as you said in this thread too. No reason to look at all the facts when you are trying to justify your position.
Supply is tied to demand and price fluctuation. The US could use twice as much oil as it currently does at lower costs if the supply was increased to compensate it. Supply includes harvesting, transporting, converting the commodity to usable and legal requirements(refineries), transportation to market and retailing to the public. Just about every aspect of the supply chain is restrained from it's potential for the US by overly protective and inhibitive legislature. Amending those laws so that they are less restrictive, while still protecting our environment, will allow us to increase our supply and offset, if not overtake, our demand. Try looking up the number of refineries currently operating in the US vs how many there were in 1983. Just an arbitrary year.
Someone already mentioned the absence of percentage of worlds wealth in those figures you posted. No need to say it again.
-
The way i see it is it's suicide by our government to allow it to stay above $3 a gallon. At this point with prices so crazy it drives up the cost of everything else, too, because the price of transporting it gets passed on to the consumer.
Here on Cape Cod where everyone survives on the 3-4 months of summer tourism (myself included), it's already hurting our business. Last year it was almost a buck cheaper avg. per gallon and our resort occupency was about 10% higher on average.. I can only assume the downward trend will continue if something isnt done. I certainly dont want to drive anywhere with it this bad.. I can't afford it.
-
I read somewhere once that in the 70s farmers were able to actually farm their own alcohol to power their equipment... speaking in terms of renewable energy that could be used sooner rather then later, I wonder if we might see a similar system now.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
You are forgetting the other half of the equation in that quote, and your earlier statement about percentage of world population versus percentage of vehicle ownership omits an important factor as well. I guess you were "just trying to prove a point", as you said in this thread too. No reason to look at all the facts when you are trying to justify your position.
Don't read into it what isn't there. I merely said that one particular country has 5% of the world's population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. I wasn't talking about Germany, and I wasn't making a comparison - I said what I said - is all. If there's a problem with that, then maybe it's your problem.
Moose - I think your concerns are perhaps short term ones. Back in 1974, we watched in horror as the price of petrol doubled from where it had been just 12 months earlier. We thought our world had ended! I think that the whole supply/demand/price issue will find its own level. People will learn to economise. Further up ^ someone said he was going to get the bike out, and you're indicating that you're going to cut back your driving. People will adapt by buying more economical vehicles. Folks will start to ask whether they really NEED that SUV. OK, I know it's not going to be without pain, and there will be cries of anguish in the coming months...
Nilsen - you are right. I know a lot of people living in New York - specifically Manhattan, and very few of them bother with cars - it's just not worth the hassle. One of my friends lives at the "crossroads of Manhattan" at 57th & 6th Avenue - right near Carnegie Hall. And she got rid of her car once she'd sold the house in the Hamptons - no longer needed it. Just to garage it was costing $4000/yr, and the insurance was in 4 figures - and that was in 1995. You can get a lot of cabs for that sort of money. A car is an inconvenience for anyone living in Manhattan.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
I think it means that those girly men metrosexuals who live in cities don't have cars. Cars and guns frieghten them.
I have 3 cars and a bike... I am a one person household. The only people I know who don't have cars are the ones who have lost their licence.... quite a few actually.
lazs
lolol have had to show my co-workers this post - talk about phd thesis material!!!!!
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Don't read into it what isn't there. I merely said that one particular country has 5% of the world's population, and 40% of the world's vehicles. I wasn't talking about Germany, and I wasn't making a comparison - I said what I said - is all. If there's a problem with that, then maybe it's your problem.
I only read what was written, but I took into consideration the attitude of the post. Perhaps I was wrong, but I don't think I was as others took it the same way. I made no mention of Germany, if you'll notice.
Either way, this (http://www.galtglobalreview.com/newtech/Thermal_Conversion_Process.html) could very well turn out to be a viable solution until hydrogen cells are economically feasable.
Gobble Gobble
-
yesterday it was $3 a gallon here, better go fuel up before it goes up nother 50 cents
-
Originally posted by beet1e
People will learn to economise. ......... Folks will start to ask whether they really NEED that SUV. OK, I know it's not going to be without pain, and there will be cries of anguish in the coming months...
Who cares what they need. They don't need internet, central heating and air, cell phones etc etc. The problem is the cost, not the consumption. Find a way to effectively change the cost and you don't have to sacrifice your 'wants'.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I only read what was written, but I took into consideration the attitude of the post. Perhaps I was wrong, but I don't think I was as others took it the same way.
Maybe you were wrong, and they were wrong too? I made no mention of Germany, if you'll notice.
Neither did I. It was Ripsnort!
HoldenMcGroin - update on the population: Apparently we've passed the 60m mark. I don't know how old that DVLA article is, but if it is correct in saying that there are 32.5m fully licensed drivers, then they represent a little over 54% of the population. I do apologise for being 4% out on my original guesstimate.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
Who cares what they need. They don't need internet, central heating and air, cell phones etc etc. The problem is the cost, not the consumption. Find a way to effectively change the cost and you don't have to sacrifice your 'wants'.
Econ 101:
High supply + low demand = low price
Low supply + High demand = high price
Consumption = demand
Therefore
Consumption drives the cost.
-
mukiwa... glad to be of assistance... hope you do well on your PHD...
what's it about, humor in America?
lazs
-
HMcG - very good post. You said it all, without a beetlesque wall-o-text. ;)
There's one other parameter - tax. Tax artificially depresses demand. So we have the choice - no tax, and see the price go up because of demand outstripping supply, or see the price go up because of tax, knowing that it won't go higher because tax is keeping demand within the available supply.
Not sure if I posted this article before - quite interesting, about all this fuel price supply/demand/price stuff - get it here (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/08/15/do1502.xml).
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #5
-
What boggles my mind is others whine, piss and moan about gas prices, and I don't. I drive a 2004 Explorer on top of it. I use the 4x4 (High and Low) unlike 90% of SUV owners.
As much as people whine about SUV's in here and elsewhere. I find it kind of ironic, that those owning SUV's, aren't the one's griping.
Karaya
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
It`s a shame you are so bored you have to travel that far for a little excitement. If you lived here, you could just hop down to Fredericksburg and get all of that. :)
Not bored. And it's about 600 miles drive to Munich, so a 1200 mile round trip. You had to go 4000 miles to escape your boredom. Besides, I don't think I could visit Nexx, the other AHers or the set of Das Boot by driving down to Fredericksburg, even if I lived in TX. We will be sitting on the edge of our seat awaiting this info. How totaly fascinating.
Well, it IS what this thread was about - gas/diesel prices. You thought it was sufficiently exciting to come to the thread in the first place. :p
I see from another thread that you're a truck driver - the hat fits! :lol
And now, I'm leaving the living room to go to my kitchen - to get my newspaper, not because I'm bored with the living room! :lol;)
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
I only read what was written, but I took into consideration the attitude of the post. Perhaps I was wrong, but I don't think I was as others took it the same way. I made no mention of Germany, if you'll notice.
Either way, this (http://www.galtglobalreview.com/newtech/Thermal_Conversion_Process.html) could very well turn out to be a viable solution until hydrogen cells are economically feasable.
Gobble Gobble
Well, if burning turkeys and horsehockie as alternative fuel ever catches on, Washington DC will become the new Saudi Arabia.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by Widewing
Well, if burning turkeys and horsehockie as alternative fuel ever catches on, Washington DC will become the new Saudi Arabia.
My regards,
Widewing
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :aok
-
well.... been to england... I don't think I would want to go there every year. Maybe once a decade or so.. Love to travel in the U.S. tho.
lazs
-
See Rule #5
-
One tank two tanks... what's the difference? For me... driving has allways been about the driving more than the destination.. it is about the road.
I like to look at America across the guages and SS hood of a 69 el camino say.... I like to feel and hear the big block under my right foot. I like going through the gears getting on the freeway... I even like getting it sideways in second gear getting on the freeway from a rest stop in the middle of nowhere...
I don't really expect you brits to understand any of that stuff... well not the average tame brit anyway... have met a few that do over the years...
Getting there in a boring car takes away from the trip anywhere from 50-100% for me... bragging about the milage I got or the $100 I saved on a 2000 mile trip just doesn't get it for me... sorry.
lazs
-
See Rule #5
-
Lazs - enjoy it while you still can.
For me, I like the driving too. But when I look back, I'll think of all the places this car has taken me.
Hah - the ultimate motoring icon - a 1969 Ford. :aok
-
beet... I guess we will never understand each other... I have "enjoyed it" for a good many years while you have not. I am proud to have lived in a country that made that possible.
I also know that no matter how bad things get.... they will never get as bad as your government has made em. We won't stand for it.
That is why I like it here... you can't understand that and I can't understand what you get out of england... it is a stalemate.
You are welcome to your taxes and socialism tho... just don't tell me that we need the same here.
lazs
-
See Rule #5
-
uhh... I don't own a 69 Ford.... but...
If I wanted too I could buy any kind of car with about any range of milage.
we are talking a trip costing me about the same as it costs you when I drive a Hot Rod and less when I drive my Lincoln Town car..
"Fast" is not only about top speed. Most people rarely get to the top speed of their car.... smoking the tires getting onto the freeway feels "fast" it is a type of fun that the rigs you have owned aren't even in the same univese with. I like to do it... it is worth a couple of dollars to me to do it.
lazs
-
Lazs - I think it's going to cost more than a couple of dollars in the coming months...
-
ok... so it cost me more than 200 bucks more to drive 2000 miles on vacation.... a room at a crappy motel costs 75-150... a meal on the road for two or three costs 50 bucks... so I drive all night one night and pack one lunch... not a real hardship... you spend more on one bottle of wine or a couple of meals (which I have no interest in).
lazs
-
See Rule #5
-
Having extra week winter vacancy; thinking if I'd like to see Astrakhan or some other strange place.
Ibiza is so last century :D
-
Weren't gas prices shot up in the 70's around the time Vietnam was ending?
And U.S. tax dollars are going to help Iraqis pay 5 cents per gallon for gas! http://www.rense.com/general53/tedx.htm
Imagine How pissed they will be when gas reaches a full 50 cents!
-
Beetle
Its top speed is 134mph according to the road tests I've read - only 6mph slower than a 1970s 4.2 litre E-Type Jaguar. Oh, excuse me - "Jagwah XKE", I think you guys call it.
It is not pronouced Jagwah, Jagwahr, or Jagyouare.
It is pronounced "Ford"
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #4
-
From the minds of Minolta.
-
Jackal! you silly sausage. :)
I think we ought to be nice to each other again.
No, I don't have anything against truck drivers. Why would I? Except of course when they block the overtaking lane while they overtake another truck in order to gain an extra ˝mph, at the same time slowing me down by 30mph. :mad:
Nothing against farmers either! A great uncle of mine (by marriage) was a farmer. Some of my fondest childhood memories are from that farm. Truck drivers are what keeps things ticking. They deliver the articles of life`s neccesties around the world. Food, clothing, building supplies, medicine................you name it.
Any masonry? :DThe Masonary Daily?
(http://www.zen33071.zen.co.uk/lmao.gif) - thanks! That was a real gutbuster!!!
I don't think they serve grits in Munich; I'll have to ask Nexx if he can cook some up. Otherwise we'll make do with blutwurst & kartoffel. :cool:
Tell me what you drove. Two of the makes I used to see were White, and those Big Mack things. Didn't they have something like 22 gears? It is pronounced "Ford" - HMcG
Not when the E-Type was being produced.
-
It is now
-
Rip
If my Mum can hear me I've been underestimating her all these years. She lives 150 miles away you silly burger.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Tell me what you drove. Two of the makes I used to see were White, and those Big Mack things. Didn't they have something like 22 gears?
:D
I drove a little bit of everything at one time or another.
Yea, some of the trucks I drove were triplexs and also a couple of twin stick quads.
The last few years I drove I went in style.
I custom ordered a conventional, long nose Peterbuilt with a 400 Cummins.
"Miss Pete" was a sweet ride. Extra long wheel base, Sundown brown with two-tone golden stripes running the length of the hood and cab, then sweeping diagonaly up the sleeper compartment. A double depth chrome front bumber, twin chrome stacks, chrome buds all around. She was a rolling artwork. :0
Chromnium plated, fully illuminated, double bedroom dieselcar. :)
-
:lol You Brits and calling us Americans "silly "
And I believe Jackal was going to be featured in one of those Big Rig video games but he couldn't think of a catch phrase. Had everything except the catch phrase:(
-
See Rule #5
-
Europe has over 40% of cars sold with highly eficient diesel engines, we have 3% in North America,
Most of european and japanese cars and SUVs are sold in Europe with diesel smaller and much fuel eficient diesel engines
bionic mercedes project -goes 74 mpg in city,80+mpg hwy,1.9 turbo diesel, but the engine is in production
(http://images.forbes.com/images/2005/06/20/1_0621vow.jpg)
Mercedes Smart , 60+mpg, 600cc turbo diesel
(http://www.auto.mmt.ru/merc/smart/foto/img0061.jpg)
-
or this tough VWPolo (http://phil.yanov.com/images/vwtough.wmv):rofl
-
Originally posted by ghi
Europe has over 40% of cars sold with highly eficient diesel engines, we have 3% in North America,
Most of european and japanese cars and SUVs are sold in Europe with diesel smaller and much fuel eficient diesel engines
bionic mercedes project -goes 74 mpg in city,80+mpg hwy,1.9 turbo diesel, but the engine is in production
(http://images.forbes.com/images/2005/06/20/1_0621vow.jpg)
Mercedes Smart , 60+mpg, 600cc turbo diesel
(http://www.auto.mmt.ru/merc/smart/foto/img0061.jpg)
Keep in mind that the manufacturers in Europe choose for the US folks which models we get. The market drives this. BMW doesn't sell their diesel model here because it was a market decision (although I know that in the future that they will start exporting the diesel versions of the 3 series)
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #4
-
He was talking about american trucks, not volvo. We already know the Volvo will have cutting edge tech inside.
-
Hey Beetle, if Ken Clarke gets in as leader I might just switch to blue;)
As for gas i use that to heat and cook, I use petrol in jmy vehicles ;)
I guess I'll have to keep on using my fuel efficient motorcycle and carry on beating those jams! :lol
-
thinking the price at the pumps reflects the true cost of gasoline is being naive, factor in the hidden costs to secure resources.
the public pays for it on both ends.
-
American big diesels are in same line with European competants; our local truck manufacturer is using Mack's and Cummins' engines and in some cases Eaton-Fuller gearboxes (thought usually synchronized ZF's AFAIK).
However the frames, brakes, suspensions and other technical equipments and ergonomy was far from what Mercedes, Scania and Volvo had in their models at least ten years ago; maybe they're better now.
I've driven (just for test when I had possibility) new MAN, Volvo F16 & F12 and Scania 142 (+ancient 110 Super & 140).
New are very impressive cars; better ergonomy than in ordinary sedans with a dashboard surrounding driver, gear robots, top of the line audio systems, leather steering wheels, alu wheels around + disc brakes... bling-bling :D
btw Scania made crashtests with trucks already in seventies.
btw2: I saw US embassy's truck maybe week ago; it looked like it was from seventies... or from Russia.
http://www.kolumbus.fi/staga/25082005.jpg
-
Originally posted by Staga
I saw US embassy's truck maybe week ago; it looked like it was from seventies...
Ummmmmmm...probably because it was. :)
That is no comparison point to what U.S. commercial trucks are in use on the highway here. Top of the line all the way and total workhorses with the luxury and comfort that bypasses even the finest autos. Besides that.....a KW or Pete doesn`t look like a tinker toy. :)
-
btw didn't Volvo buy some US truck manufacturer? Peterbilt?
Another question... why COE's aren't much used in US?
In here every meter (or foot if you like) is used for cargo space; max lenght of the "rigid" is 83feet and weight ~136000lb.
From max lenght of 83 feet the cargo has about 62feet leaving just about 20feet for the cabin and tow bar between truck and trailer. Why waste space; it costs money?
Edit: some tow bars are also telescopic; it's pulled "in" when driving in road to get overall lenght to stay under 83 feet but it's not possible to make tight turns in loading yards without crushing the corners of your truck and trailer without lenghtening the tow bar.
But you can fit in two more pallets and that's what counts in long routes.
-
"As a multinational technology company, PACCAR manufactures heavy-duty, on- and off-road Class 8 trucks sold around the world under the Kenworth, Peterbilt, DAF and Foden nameplates. The company competes in the North American Class 6-7 market with its medium-duty models assembled in North America and sold under the Peterbilt and Kenworth nameplates. In addition, DAF manufactures Class 6-7 trucks in the Netherlands and Belgium for sale throughout Europe, the Middle East and Africa and distributes Class 4-7 trucks in Europe manufactured by Leyland Trucks (UK)."
-
Originally posted by Staga
btw didn't Volvo buy some US truck manufacturer? Peterbilt?
i donn't think volvo owns Pete.
i know Mercedes/Crysler corporation owns Freightlinear, (+WesternStar) the largest truck producer in North America. They own Detroit Diesel engines,( That's why Volvo doesn't use anymore Detroit engines since 2001) but they use CAT and Cummins also . For 2 years now are building Freightlinear trucks with Mercedes engine in Portland ,Oregon plant. The mercedes heavy diesel engines are buit in Brasil,
-
Originally posted by Staga
btw didn't Volvo buy some US truck manufacturer? Peterbilt?
Now I remember... Volvo bought White in 1981 :)
-
'98 White Freightliner... Looks like '78 Scania...
http://www.hankstruckpictures.com/pix/trucks/john_highley/jh_frtlnr02.jpg
New Scania:
http://www.scania.com/imagegallery2/interior/low-res/03898-2.jpg
-
See Rule #5
-
Lazs get out on your bike more;)
-
Lasz should really be signing petitions and promote cars with low consumption, not the oposite. If overall consumption on the planet goes down he can enjoy his big engine for a few years longer. ;)
-
well... I figure you guys are the ones who don't get it. Breakthroughs in tech industries allway happen the quickest durrig times of desperation... cheap oil? let's just sit on our butts... everyone conserves or quits driving or is willing to drive golf carts around? cool.... end of problem.
I don't care if it is $6 a gallon here (it will be 12 for you euros) I will just drive the good cars less but when I do.... it will still be a blast. I figure you guys conserving are the real problem.
If you drive a car that gets over 12 miles to the gallon then you are part of the problem not part of the solution.
lazs
-
very once in a while laz, yah lay one out that just cracks me up.
new bumper stickers..
Stimulate Alternative Fuel Research. Drive a Street Rod
DRIVE A HYBRID AND THE TERRORISTS WIN
-
Ok lazs..
Then heavy smokers are heroes because when they get sick they highlight a problem..
..and
You should always vote for the party you least agree with so everyone sees how bad they are if they get elected.
Everyone! Go to a fastfood place and eat junk there for a few years. Then sit outside with a sign that says "hey, look at what happens when you eat here"
:D
-
Everyone! Go to a fastfood place and eat junk there for a few years. Then sit outside with a sign that says "hey, look at what happens when you eat here"
didn't they just do a movie....
-
well... every situation is different... we were talking about energy... if you want to talk about something else.... name it.
I'll start.... fast food? what's the problem? I don't see a problem.. if they are hiding something they need to come clean... if you can't figure out that eating it to excess can make you fat.... well... chances are even god can't help your dumb ass.
just like the boozers that can't figure out that it makes em fat and destroys their lives and their livers when done to excess.. none of my bussiness..
anything else on your mind?
lazs
-
Oh... and hang... that is exactly what I am saying... I would be glad to put those bumper stickers on a couple of my "cars"..
hey... when those sensitive women find out that their hair dryer won't work..... they will withold sex and be shrill and unbearable until them men get a couple thousand nuclear powerplants up and running..
lazs
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Econ 101:
High supply + low demand = low price
Low supply + High demand = high price
Consumption = demand
Therefore
Consumption drives the cost.
Exactly what I was saying. Our supply of refined crude oil (gas) is restricted severely. Change this and the supply:demand ratio will dictate lower costs.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
Hah - the ultimate motoring icon - a 1969 Ford. :aok
Originally posted by beet1e
drive a 10mpg car powered by a big block V8 hemi engine,
The 1969 Hemi powered Ford El Camino, the epitome of motoring pleasure.
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
The 1969 Hemi powered Ford El Camino, the epitome of motoring pleasure.
If so good, why don't they still make them?
-
Hell, beats me....I can't remember the last time I saw one.
-
Originally posted by beet1e
If so good, why don't they still make them?
ugly things wouldnt sell...people like cars that look like cars, and trucks that look like trucks
-
As ugly as you think they may be, I'll bet anything you want that the 1969 hemi powered Ford El Camino uses less fuel than the modern day hybrid car.
-
Was wondering about 'evil SUV's'....MOST are 6-bangers, which cant be considered gas-guzzlers, IMO---my Xterra gets 21-25 on highway, mebbe 18 around town....does anyone know what % of SUV's are those such as Hummers, Escalades, Expeditions, Envoys, etc.?
What exactly IS the cut-off mark, gas milege-wise, for a 'gas guzzler'? APAARENtly, EVERYONE in the US bought one of these about a year ago:) if one listens to the main-stream media, thus creating the current crisis.
(I dont think it's a crisis, personally; gas prices, indexed for inflation, are STILL less then the high-water mark of the late '70's when Jimmy Carter finally erased price controls.)
And Beetle, aside from those cute Minis, who BUYS British cars?:D
-
My dad has a British car, and I would not mind an Aston Martin :)
-
Mini is made by BMW now.
-
Originally posted by lazs2
Oh... and hang... that is exactly what I am saying... I would be glad to put those bumper stickers on a couple of my "cars"..
hey... when those sensitive women find out that their hair dryer won't work..... they will withold sex and be shrill and unbearable until them men get a couple thousand nuclear powerplants up and running..
lazs
Hell, I'd probably sell a million bumper stickers. :)
As for the women.. man yah got that right. You remember that scene in that harrison ford/ann heche movie where they've crash landed on an island and she gets all beatchy? "well, your a man, why don't you make a shopping mall out of a paper clip or something.."
LOL!
-
The new Mini was designed by Rover (when BMW owned it) by Brits. Its built in Oxford by British workers. So its quite British even if BMW are the company who financed its design and own the name.
:D
-
Originally posted by Lazerus
Mini is made by BMW now.
Ah..splains much :p ....You know why Brits don't make computers?.......cant figger out how to make them leak oil:rofl
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #4/#5
-
Jackal, it's no BS.
In 1979, I was working for the State of Illinois in Springfield. There were a few other Brits there. Most had just got there, and were in the process of buying cars. I got a 1977 Camaro Type LT. One of the other guys, Chris, bought a large 1967 Buick. I don't recall the model name, but it was an ordinary 4-dr car - saloon, or "sedan" as you guys call them. Remember that we had been used to paying more for fuel in Britain as you read this.
Chris was bemoaning the amount of fuel his Buick went through. I remember the conversation well. It went like this. Me: "I see you've bought one of those huge monsters - what made you buy that?"
Chris: "It was going very cheap because of the fuel crisis"
Me: "Oh - what IS the fuel consumption in one of those?"
Chris: "9mpg"
Me: "9 miles per gallon??? wow - what do you get on the highway?"
Chris: "That IS the highway mileage. In town it's around 6mpg"
I'm just reporting what I was told, Jackal. You might argue that his Buick needed a tune up, but so did thousands of other cars. Speaking of which...
A ladyfriend I met had a 1974 Ford Thunderbird. It was in such a bad state of tune that it could idle half a tank of gas away in 2 hours. Don't ask me how I know this. :D
A couple of weeks later, she took me to Springfield Memorial for emergency treatment - good job she filled up with gas before setting out! :lol
-
"The 1969 Hemi big block powered Ford El Camino, the epitome of motoring pleasure."
untill you have driven a showroom stock example of one beet... you and your brit friends will never understand what it is to be American!
It's like when you take the safety off of your .45 magnum revolver for the first time.... It can't be described except maybe by a brit action novel writer.
lazs
-
when diesels get good enough I may get one for a cruiser... no rush. They aren't where I want a car to be at the moment.
Diesel is going to go up even more than gasoline here in the states with our new 7ppm low sulphur laws... When you guys have to stop poluting... so will it there.
The only real advantage I see to it now is that it stores easy but until I have a lot of land it is a moot point.
Like I said... when the hair dryers and microwave quit working.... the women will use tree huggers and spotted owls to feed help keep the coal fired power plants running...
It may be a tad early to get all panicy and weepy.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
[Diesel is going to go up even more than gasoline here in the lazs [/B]
I think only in US the diesel has the same price like gasoline or higher in most of the states, but is cheaper in most of the world . From the same amount of crude oil can be procesed 10-15% more diesel than gasoline. On top of that diesel in US is taxed more than gasoline. But the diesel fuel powers the economy
-
Lazs
Esso (Exxon in the US) was producing low sulphur diesel 5 years ahead of the EU deadline. The brand name is ULS2000.
-
See Rule #4
-
:rolleyes:
I wasn't talking about a '54, and I wasn't talking about a Caddy. And I wasn't even talking of of a NEW car. I was talking about my friend's 1967 Buick, which was by then 13 years old. In all probability, the engine was not in as good condition as a new model, and probably wouldn't have been even after a tune up and/or other maintenance. THAT is the point. City driving under varied traffic conditions resulted in an 11 mpg average. Highway cruising average was about 16-17 mpg at steady speeds of 50-65 mph. Overall average was just under 14 mpg
14mpg is "good"? :lol
-
See Rule #4
-
I was referring to your statement you made pertaining to the U.S. consuming most of the gas supply in which you stated that the 50 models got 5 to 6 mpgs, Remember that?
No, I didn't state that 50s models got 6mpg,although that might well have been true as they got older. And I never said that any car got only 5mpg. I was referring to my friend's 1967 Buick, which got 6mpg in town - 9mpg highway. And from what I saw, there were many such cars driving around in 1979.
You mentioned some other cars, but always gave the BEST mileage for those cars. One of them got 11mpg. In town driving, it would have been much lower, and as the car got older and deteriorated as the carburator jets wore and the ignition system wore, it would have become lower still. Perhaps as low as 6mpg. :p
I was never talking about spanking brand new cars, but of the sort of rust ridden clunkers I saw driving around, with busted exhaust systems. And there were many.
I think I did say that America's fuel consumption in the past 50 years had been out of proportion to that of the rest of the world, largely because of those gas guzzling cars that America had. Surely you don't want to argue about that in front of a world-wide community?
-
See Rule #4/#5
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #4
-
beet... the low sulpur you are talking about is about 50ppm or so for eu... Ours will be like 7 ppm BIG difference...
And... Much as we all love to hear about your stay in America in the 70's... I think that I have told you more than once on here that the mid to late 70's... even early 80's were absolutely the bery worst years ever for American cars. It was the smog years..
Nanny forced emmission standards on the industry that were impossible to meet at the time with carburators and mechanicaly controlled distributors... they cut the HP in half and the cars ran so badly that any emission reductions were lost by the mere fact that they burned twice as much fuel and were in a perpetual state of out of tune. Only small 4 cyl cars (which we didn't make) were capable of meeting the new laws.
as for the 67 buick... A skylark is still a big car compared to anything you guys make except a gas guzzling RR or Bentley.. depends on the motor. For instance... you as usual, base things on one thing you have seen... In 67 Buick made a 225 V6 (160 hp) and a 300 V8 (210 hp) and a 340 hp V8 (260 hp) and a 400 V8 (340 hp) and 430 V8 (360 hp) Since you don't know what your buddy had or what shape it was in.....
the sixties were some good cars.. My 67 camaro had 300 hp and got aboutr 23 mpg on a trip.. a 77 camaro would have about 140 hp and get about 14 mpg on a trip.
computers and fuel injection have made it possible to make big motors get good emissions and fuel milage along with good HP.
Anyone who judges U.S. automobiles based on living here and driving the mid 70's vehicles is judging them based on our darkest hours.
lazs
-
See Rule #5
-
Originally posted by Staga
Now I remember... Volvo bought White in 1981 :)
And I think Ford owns Volvo, or at least controlling interest.
-
Originally posted by Nilsen
My dad has a British car, and I would not mind an Aston Martin :)
I think Aston Martin also owned by Ford.
-
See Rule #5
-
I'm doing my part as an American Citizen to cut down on the amount of gas I buy. (Pic editted to make it "Skuzzy-Friendly" :) )
(http://pic4.picturetrail.com/VOL767/2726312/7109603/111165240.jpg)
-
See Rule #5
-
See Rule #4
-
I guess my point is that you base your whole thought process on American cars on one era that you happened to have some experiance in (the absolute worst in American car history) on one American car that you have heresay evidence on from one person who woned one of indeteminate model with an indeterminate 1 of 5 engine in an indeterminate state of tune..
Basicaly... worthless info. I had a friend that had a 60's jag sedan that when it ran... which was extremely seldom.... it burned a quart of oil every 100 miles. I don't know how you guys afford to put oil in your cars.
lazs
-
See Rule #5
-
According to the EPA, 13 of 15 of the worst fuel economy 2005 model year cars available in the USA are of European manufacture. 3 are UK brands. The other 2 are USA pickups.
just my 2 cents..
-
See Rule #5
-
you are in violation of BSB protocol.
See rule # 387.1 section Ac143B, paragraph 2a,(b) sentance 73, word 24, letter 3.