Save the Dinosaurs

The environmentalists keep insisting that we must curb our ever-growing demand for more energy. The problem is, in the world in which we live, all forms of progress are dependent on energy. The rate of industrial and technological progress has increased exponentially over the last century. So has the demand for energy. It’s not a coincidence.

We could reduce our energy demands by renouncing progress and going back to doing things the way people did them in the “good old days.” We could give up cars and airplanes and electricity, central heat and air conditioning, computers, etc., slowing any future progress to a the same plodding pace it was a century ago. But in what way would that be a good thing? — Except in that we would use less energy. But is using less energy really intrinsically good? And is it so good that it’s worth giving up all kinds of benefits man has striven to achieve over the last couple of centuries?

Of course, that isn’t what the environmentalists have in mind. They don’t want to completely curtail the use of energy. They just want to control it to make sure it’s only used in acceptable ways for acceptable purposes. The question is, who defines what’s acceptable? — The answer is them, of course.

On a personal level, they want people to use less electricity, less gasoline, less toilet paper, etc. And it’s true that some people do waste a lot of energy. Personally, I abhor waste. I admire efficiency. I would love to see more efficient forms of energy, and I certainly would love to see less gratuitous waste. However, different people define waste differently.

I enjoy driving. I do it for pleasure. If I were confined to my home, or wherever I could propel myself by foot or by bicycle, I wouldn’t be a very happy camper. Sure, I could sit at my desk all day and cruise the Internet, but that uses energy, too. Is there anything truly wrong with driving out into the country, up in the mountains, to enjoy the natural beauty? It isn’t necessary to my survival. So here I am, wasting a limited natural resource for my own selfish gratification. But, somehow, it doesn’t seem to me like an intrinsic evil. I realize I could significantly reduce my carbon footprint by never leaving my house. I could reduce it even more by never getting out of bed. I could reduce it even more by dying. But what exactly is the point?

There’s a lot of research going on in the field of alternative energy. By the time fossil fuels actually do start to run out, I expect at least some of these “new” forms of energy will be viable. Today, they’re even more expensive than fossil fuels. That’s why so few people use them. If they were less expensive, and more practical to use, everybody would be using them already. But there’s still a ways to go before they’re competitive in the marketplace. I’m all for alternative energy. The sooner it becomes viable, the better. But, in the meantime, I’m not going to stop living my life to save the dead dinosaurs for future generations.


Bookmark/Rate this post: Digg it Stumble It! add to del.icio.us
Advertisements

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://notyourdaddy.wordpress.com/2008/04/29/save-the-dinosaurs/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

216 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Once upon a time, there was a government-owned, local utility in the largest “city” in VT (Burlington) that started an energy conservation program in the 1990s. Ten years later, the city was using 10% LESS energy than it was before the start of the program, and no…the city didn’t shrink or turn pitch-black at night. :)

    Once upon around-about the same time, a former co-worker of mine built himself a house up along the New York/Quebec border…mostly with his own labor and time. He super-well insulated it, and he added both solar panels & a small wind turbine to his property. He’s never paid a NYSEG electricity bill to my knowledge, ever. He was even “off-the-grid” for the first decade or so that he lived in his new house…not by choice either, but that’s a longer story. ;)

    There is no large majority of the environmental movement in this country that is looking to take us back to the Stone Age. Quite the contrary…what a lot of us would like is if we used energy more efficiently now and developed renewable, sustainable alternative energy sources as quickly as possible that can replace our dependance on finite forms of energy that are usually highly pollution-prone. These forms of energy will get cheaper the faster that we put money and effort into developing them.

    It’s not about giving up things…like more efficient & alternatively fueled cars & airplanes, electricity from clean energy sources, highly efficient central heat/air conditioning & computers…we want MORE of those things. What’s so hard about getting behind that??

    No one that I know of is out to confine you to your home…lol…

    “By the time fossil fuels actually do start to run out”

    Hello? They are running out now and have been for quite a few years now…remember those high energy bills that you and I (and likely everyone else) have been paying? Yea, buckle up for a LOT more of that unless we do something different.

  2. I’m all for alternative energy. As I said, when it’s cost-effective, I’ll use it. But I can’t afford the cost of setting up solar panels for my house, and a hybrid car is so much more expensive than a comparable dinosaur-powered vehicle, the savings in fuel over the lifetime of the car won’t make up the difference.

    We’re not quite running out of dinosaur goo yet. There’s a whole lot of it sitting under us that we’re not drilling. There’s a bunch of it Alaska that we’re not drilling. A good friend of mine opines that that’s because we’re saving it for the end-game, when everybody else runs out. Maybe so. Or maybe the environmental lobby is so powerful that our politicians can’t afford to offend them.

    But the environmentalists don’t seem too fond of alternative energy, either, once it’s actually implemented. They protest to shut down wind farms and demand the removal of hydro-electric dams. Don’t even get them started on nuclear energy. They don’t like that at all. Nor are they fond of coal. They loved the idea of biofuels, but ethanol has been a disaster, both from a humanitarian and ecological perspective. What the environmentalists don’t seem to understand, or be willing to accept, is that every form of energy comes at a cost, and only part of that cost is economic. They don’t seem willing to make any tradeoffs. So, as long as they’re driving the agenda, we’ll always end up at a stalemate.

  3. “Of course, that isn’t what the environmentalists have in mind. They don’t want to completely curtail the use of energy. They just want to control it to make sure it’s only used in acceptable ways for acceptable purposes.”

    What is your point? That’s a pretty broad brush your painting with. Your goal appears to be to simply frame the arguments of those you disagree with in a ridiculous manner. Therefore making your case without really making your case. You have been trained to counter the arguments of those you disagree with by dismissing them in the simplest of terms.

    To even consider the concept of reducing your usage by “never leaving my house” as part of your argument is silly. Many hardcore right-wingers have difficulty seeing beyond black and white. So you are not alone there. It is not a question of ‘to consume’ or ‘not to consume’. It is a matter of being a responsible adult and being mindful of your actions.

    Also, keep in mind that the combustion engine has seen very little advancement since it’s inception. If the computer industry moved that slow you would need a machine the size of a large room to enlighten us with your stellar blog entries.

  4. “I’m all for alternative energy.”

    Given some of the other postings on this site about alternative energy & fossil fuel companies, I don’t believe this statement for a second, but whatever. You’re also missing the point…for example, the point of getting a hybrid now is so that in the future you can easily convert it to a plug-in hybrid & be done with gasoline entirely (that’s what I plan to do).

    “We’re not quite running out of dinosaur goo yet.”

    Ever hear of Peak Oil?? Peak of oil extraction will occur in 2020, and the world’s “proven” oil reserves are expected to last a maximum less than 50 more years…that’s, of course, assuming that you believe the past suspicious official estimates of oil reserves from OPEC countries like the UAE, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela. They’ve been cooking those books to make it seem like they have more oil than they actually do for decades now.

    “They protest to shut down wind farms and demand the removal of hydro-electric dams. Don’t even get them started on nuclear energy.”

    When it comes to wind and hydro power, these are fringe elements of the environmental movement, period. Uranium resources will be exhausted within 70 years, and coal will be exahausted within 160 years. The sooner we start fixing our crazy energy useage & source problems…the less likely we’ll all experience more pain and hardship IMO.

  5. To even consider the concept of reducing your usage by “never leaving my house” as part of your argument is silly.

    Yes, it is silly, Kenny. Sometimes I make little jokes. You don’t have to laugh if you don’t feel so inclined. (I do have a peculiar sense of humor.)

    Mr. Guy, why would you not believe me? I really do want alternative energy sources to become viable. Oil is too darned expensive. I’m hoping that, once they work the kinks out, alternative energy sources will ultimately be cheaper as well as cleaner. Who would not desire that?

    But then you come around and say all energy sources are ultimately doomed, and the only solution is to curb our demand. I live very modestly, and am not wasteful by nature. But I do use energy for non-essentials, like driving up into the mountains for pure sensory gratification. I’m sure some would consider that wasteful. I’m not sure where you stand on it.

    The problem, from my perspective, always comes down to people trying to control other people. You seem to see government as a tool to legislate your will upon those to whom you feel morally superior. I see the (legitimate) role of government as protection from those who wish to impose their will on others.

  6. Well, people that are genuinely in favor of alternative energy usually don’t spend their time thinking up excuses for big oil and thinking of any way that they can criticize the utility of alternative energy in the first place.

    “But then you come around and say all energy sources are ultimately doomed, and the only solution is to curb our demand.”

    I never said that all energy sources are doomed…it’s just the ones that we are, unfortunately, mostly relying on now that are doomed…lol… Why is conservation such a dirty word with you guys? It actually works in making our limited resources last longer. The reason that the Bush Regime and a lot of other “conservatives” poo-poo conservation, I think, is because it does cut into the bottom line of their buddies in the energy industry. For instance, my local electric company certainly is getting less money from me because I use CFLs now, but screw them! ;)

    If you want to go for a ride in the country, then go for a ride in the country. Just don’t complain to us about the extra cost in gas and wear-and-tear on your vehicle. :)

    “You seem to see government as a tool to legislate your will upon those to whom you feel morally superior.”

    Now you’re getting philosophical on me. You want free markets…and to hell with everyone else that doesn’t want them everywhere and anywhere. You guys on the Right *love* to force your own ways on the rest of us. I’d simply prefer that we use alternative energy sources that will basically never run out, and, in the meantime, conserve as much of the finite energy sources that we still have so that they will last longer for ALL of us. These aren’t Gestapo tactics that we’re talking about here…

  7. Mr. Guy, I’m not against conservation — as long as it’s by choice. Personally, I’m very conservative in my energy usage. (It’s too expensive not to be, and I’m fiscally conservative by nature.) However, just because I’m conservative myself, I don’t try to force that on other people. What I do is my business; what they do is theirs.

    Thank you for permission to go for a ride in the country. Who’s complaining? Not me.

    I don’t think you understand the free market. The whole idea of the free market is that nobody forces their will on anybody. Everybody is free to make their own choices. If you value a commmodity or service more highly than the price that’s asked for it, then you buy it. You’re happy. The seller is happy. If not, you don’t buy it. It’s all about free will. In what way do you see that as coercive?

  8. Except for the tiny fact that we don’t *have* a truly free market in this country…we have a mixed economy. Your side basically wants more of the market in just about everything because of a blind belief that free markets solve anything. Our side basically realizes that history shows a us a different story…that mixed economies are best, but the facts don’t matter I guess…ideology does…

  9. Facts do matter, Mr. Guy. But you have to back them up with evidence. Saying something doesn’t make it a fact.

  10. The facts were discussed in another thread when, I think Jackson and I, were going back and forth on what turned out to be highly sucessful mixed economies…like the USA and some countries in Europe.

  11. Sometime in the distant past the hippicrits repealed the law of supply and demand. Politicians of all stripes have encouraged population growth, mostly through immigration. More people means more cars and houses. Guess what, more demand. At the same time, the green crowd has strangled increases in energy supply. I wonder who really is to blame for high oil prices?

    Am I the only person who remembers the mid 1980’s. After years of high prices and shortages, oil became cheap. WHY?? It was not because of alternatives.

  12. Ah, the 1980s, you mean when:
    -U.S. oil production rose (for the very last time in history) in the early 1980s…kiss those days goodbye BTW, then U.S. oil imports rose for the latter half of the decade…right through today
    -there was more turmoil in the Middle East (sound familiar?)…the Iran hostage crisis, the U.S. boycott of Libyan oil, and the Iran-Iraq War (where we were helping both sides, but mostly the Iraqis)
    -the *Windfall Profits Tax* was enacted for 8 years (sound familiar to something that you may have heard of recently??)
    -the Exxon Valdez tanker spill took place

    The price of oil did mostly fall throughout much of the decade despite all this happening.

    Now imagine if during the same time-frame that fuel economy standards weren’t basically stagnant due to undue pressure from the oil & auto industry, and alternative fuel wasn’t surpressed by those same two entities. There have been plenty of ways out of the mess that we’ve gotten ourselves into, but we’ve been listening to the wrong people for waaaay too long IMO. It’s time to learn from the past once and for all…

  13. Mr. Guy,

    Like most liberals you take historical facts, put them in a blender and poor out what ever conclusions fit your pre-conceived notions. Bear with me, stay focused, keep your eye on the ball.

    Let’s just stick with the period of 1981 through 1985. Riddle me this Batman. Why did gas lines go away? Why did crude oil prices drop so much that many oil drilling workers in the US had to find new occupations?

    One word—–and I will repeat it so that you will understand, actually you won’t, but the word is supply,supply,supply.

    When I hear demagogues like Senator Schumer say that all the oil in Anwr would only drop the price of gasoline 1 cent per gallon and that we can’t drill our way out of high prices, I fondly recall all of the misery during the reign of Jimmy Carter.

    Sane energy policy could not be enacted until the pain got so bad that Carter was thrown out of office. It occurs to me that history has to repeat itself. We will again have to go through a series of expensive mistakes such as ethanol ,before the green pied pipers are finally laughed out of power. I wonder if that misery threshold is $5 per gallon or $10 per gallon.

    Care to dispute my facts?

  14. Ah, OK, forget “the mid 1980’s” then…it’s really all about 1981-1985…OK then, that would be when:

    -U.S. oil production rose (for the very last time in history)…kiss those days goodbye BTW due to Peak Oil (see below), which occured in the U.S. back in 1970…ooppps…
    -there was more turmoil in the Middle East with the U.S. boycott of Libyan oil & the Iran-Iraq War
    -the Windfall Profits Tax was in effect

    So, the price of oil indeed dropped during this time-frame when there was a shift from oil consumption to alternate energy sources in this country. New passenger car fuel economy rose from 17 mpg in 1978 to more than 22 mpg in 1982, and the CAFE standards stopped rising back in…the mid-1980s!

    Peak Oil, which occurred in our allies in:
    Japan: 1932
    Germany: 1966
    France: 1988
    New Zealand: 1997
    UK: 1999
    Norway: 2000
    Mexico: 2003
    Australia: 2004

    and which will occur (if you believe their claims about “proven” oil reserves, which are false BTW) in:
    Iraq: 2018
    Kuwait: 2013

    We consume more oil in the U.S. right now than Japan & most of Europe *combined* BTW. Ethanol is merely a stop-gap measure until *real* alternative energy sources can be exploited…you know, those ones like electric cars that were squashed in part by Big Oil & the car companies.

    ANWR (you know, the place that Eisenhower orginally protected?) only contains about a few months worth of oil in it. All of our remaining oil reserves in the U.S. only contain about a year or two of oil supply in them as well. Drilling for more of a small, finite resource is only putting off the envitable…we need to get off the oil habit & fast!

    Keep moving that threshold for the debate on the issues BTW… :)

  15. Mr. Guy, do you have sources for your claim that ANWR only contains a few months worth of oil, and all of our remaining oil reserves in the U.S. only contain about a year or two supply?

    This is not consistent with what I’ve heard, though I don’t have sources off hand to support the figures I’ve heard, either. I’d like to compare data sources to analyze the discrepancies.

    Alan, do you by chance have any sources on the quantities of oil available in untapped U.S. oil reserves? (Otherwise, I’ll have to look them up, myself… =:[] )

  16. Mr. Guy,

    Please, please, stop I’m laughing so hard I might burn the dinner I’m in the middle of cooking. I have to keep this short right now.

    I will just address one of your talking points .You say Anwr only has a few months of supply. You are not talking to one of your green zombies. In case you don’t know, we would not be only pumping out of Anwr. It would supplement our other supplies. Depending on how much is really there, we would be pumping for 2 or 3 decades. Over that time I am quite sure the savings would be more than 1 cent per gallon.

    Believe it or not,I do agree that in the very long run we will transition out of oil. It’s just that intentionally restricting supply as you will force us to do is economic suicide. I predict that Obama’s green collar economy will be a bust. Unfortunately, at present more Americans agree with you than me. I WISH you were right and I was wrong.

  17. Not Your Daddy,

    I do not have good sources on untapped oil reserves. It’s hard to find ‘good’ sources on anything in this field. I did a fast search for estimates on ANWR and found this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Refuge_drilling_controversy
    “A 1998 United States Geological Survey (USGS) study indicated at least 4.3 billion (95% probability) and possibly as much as 11.8 billion (5% probability) barrels (0.9 to 2.5 km³) of technically recoverable oil exists in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 1002 area, with a mean value of 7.7 billion barrels”

    http://www.sibelle.info/oped15.htm

    “95% probability of being able to technically recover 4.254 billion barrels of oil, and a 5% probability of recovering 11.8 billion barrels of oil.”

    According to my math that is 531.75 billion to 1475 billion dollars that we would not be sending to OPEC.

    Now there might be no oil in ANWR at all. However since the evil oil companies would pay to find out, it would cost us nothing. The environmental impact would be minimal.

    Sometimes I think that the whole environmental movement in Western society is funded by OPEC.

    I haven’t had time to search on http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip.asp which is the US gov. site to see their figures. Their price predictions on oil for the recent past have been terrible. I’ve looked on the American Petroleum Institute’s site, but can’t find it.

  18. Thank you, Alan.

    Your turn, Mr. Guy.

  19. Mr. Guy,

    If they would pay me to shoot holes in your arguments I could make a career out of you. I started reading your earlier posts and this comment struck me, “You’re also missing the point…for example, the point of getting a hybrid now is so that in the future you can easily convert it to a plug-in hybrid & be done with gasoline entirely (that’s what I plan to do).”

    Why would you invest in a transitional technology, when you could buy a new “plug-in hybrid” if that becomes the dominate technology?

    Frankly I would not hold my breath waiting for that anyway. Since you are against nuclear power the electricity to charge your “plug-in hybrid” will cost more than the gasoline you used to buy when you were still melting the polar ice caps.

  20. The U.S.’s proven oil reserves are a little less than 21 gigabarrels as of 2007, a 46% decline from the 39 gigabarrels it had in 1970. These reserves *alone* could satisfy U.S. demand for only three years.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#United_States
    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2178rank.html

    The key part to these numbers is how much they would statisfy U.S. demand (which will likely continue to increase with time) alone. That’s *real* energy independance IMO.

    There are presently no roads within or leading into ANWR.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_National_Wildlife_Refuge

    Having total oil independence and using all the oil in ANWR would only supply the United States for 525 days.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Refuge_drilling_controversy#Estimates_of_oil_reserves

    “Why would you invest in a transitional technology, when you could buy a new ‘plug-in hybrid’ if that becomes the dominate technology?”

    Well gee, if the powers that be hadn’t killed the electric car (it may be making a comeback soon BTW), then I wouldn’t have to buy a hybrid at all after I’ve saved enough money to buy a new car!! Also, if you buy a hybrid now and make the transition to it being a plug-in, it apparently voids the warranty, so it’s better to wait until the warranty runs out IMO.

    Nuclear power is a dead end…solar, wind, hydro, tidal, etc….renewable, SUSTAINABLE energy sources are the only way to go at this point IMO.

  21. Not Your Daddy,

    I have to apologize for taking up so much of your thread, but I truly love to argue with nice folks such as Mr. Guy. If I become tedious just throw me out.

    Mister Guy,

    You have an irrational hatred towards energy sources that actually work. I on the other hand do not have an irrational love for those same energy sources. I am perfectly willing to go green when green becomes more than an empty promise.

    I am not forcing you to use non-renewable energy. If you want to wrap your home in solar panels, kill birds with windmills in your front yard, and drive a hybrid, go for it. Just stop forcing me to over pay for fuel, and pay a carbon tax.

    By the way you do know that you are killing both the trucking and airline industries. Wait, those workers will all get green collar jobs inspecting homes to make sure no one is using incandescent light bulbs.

  22. Alan, you’re welcome to take up as much of any thread on this blog as you like. As is Mr. Guy.

    I’m happy to provide a forum for debate on interesting and controversial issues. I find these discussions very informative and I appreciate all substantive contributions!

  23. Mr. Scott, I’m sorry, but your posts here so far have been short on facts and long on mouth. First you want to talk about the mid-1980s, then the early 1980s, then ANWR, and now you’re just rambling & repeating GOP talking points (windmills killing birds & shilling for completely inefficient & archaic light bulbs)…yawn…who the hell mentioned anything about a carbon tax here?? Your constant bobbing & weaving is boring the hell out of me…

    The powers that be for the last 40 years or so have worked *damn* hard to get those oil prices through the roof…dismissing alternative energy sources & energy conservation/efficiency efforts, causing continuous instability in the Middle East, and giving tax breaks to companies & industries that didn’t need them in the first place. How does it make sense to give a larger tax break to someone that wants to purchase a Hummer instead of a hybrid? Where have everyone’s long-term planning skills gone??

    What I have sir is a rational argument that says that we shouldn’t continue to focus on finite energy resources that are going to go away VERY soon, and instead we should try & focus on renewable energy sources that will never fade away, period.

    Imagine if someone told you with “great certainty” that there was a $100 bill buried several hundred feet under the ground in your backyard. Would you spend the time, money, and effort digging it up? I certainly hope not, because you’d be wasting your time…and in that time that you’d waste in that endeavour you could be out making several times that amount of money out in a real job. Drilling for more oil is the same thing…we’re waaaay past the point that either ourselves or our allies can drill ourselves out of the mess that we’re in.

    Why send more money & troops to the Middle East when there are viable energy sources available right here in our own backyards?? Wake up…

  24. Mr.Guy,

    I can match you fact for fact, because I have researched everything I’ve said. I even know the history of the competition between alcohol fuels and petroleum going back to the late 1800’s and the first internal combustion engines. Modesty and the fact that I would bore everyone here to death, keep me from expounding on this.

    You are the one who is all over the map. You can’t stick to one train of thought. I even know more about your side than you do because I truly was trying to see if any of the new technologies were soon to be practical. Do you even know which of the alcohol fuels is most compatible with current gasoline engines? Here is a hint, it ain’t ethanol.

    You have thrown out so many facts that are not facts, it’s hard to know where to start. Let’s pick an easy one. “Nuclear power is a dead end”

    You have heard of France, have you not? It’s a country in the very heart the eco-crazy European Union. Here is an article on what the French are doing with your ” dead end”. http://www.acdis.uiuc.edu/research/OPs/Pederson/html/contents/sect2.html

    Granted towards the end of the article it says that the French have to constantly find new uranium sources, but they seem to be able to manage that.

  25. Here is a new wrinkle. The Senate has just voted to tell President Bush to stop filling the Strategic Oil Reserve. Presently 70,000 barrels per day is going in there. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,355256,00.html

    Could someone explain to me why the Senators that say 5 to 12 billion barrels of oil in ANWR is so insignificant that drilling for it is not worth it, then suddenly these same wise men and women think that adding 70,000 barrels per day to the market IS significant???

    Is the US Senate now ready to unrepeal the law of supply and demand?

  26. Yea, France gets a lot of their energy from nuclear. They also recycle at least some of the waste that they generate…we apparently don’t. Nor can we widely match their claim that: “The average age of a French reactor is only thirteen years.” I *wish* that were the case in this country. It also sounds like they are coming to the end of the line in terms of their home-mined uranium, which is bad given the fact that uranium resources will be *exhausted within 80 years*.

    Nuclear energy is not only a dead end…it’s a dead end that leaves us with hazardous nuclear waste dump sites in this country at every nuclear power plant for many, many centuries to come….forget that fact that they are ALL terrorist targets.

    “Do you even know which of the alcohol fuels is most compatible with current gasoline engines?”

    Now you’re going to switch the conversation AGAIN to something else? I’m in favor of ANY fuels that can be used as a stop gap measure to displace oil & gas use in this country so that we can stretch out the dwindling supply of oil at our disposal and give us more time to develop energy alternatives. How hard a concept is that to understand??

    Moves with the Strategic Oil Reserve are mostly symbolic since it only stores around 60 days worth of oil in it. Any amount of release from the U.S. Strategic Oil Reserve would do some good for short-term oil & gas prices in our country.

    Let me spell it out for you on ANWR since your head appears to be thicker than most nuclear plant containment shields. The oil that is or isn’t under ANWR hasn’t been drilled out of the ground yet…the oil in the Strategic Oil Reserve has! In the DECADES that it would take to get the roughly one year’s amount of oil out of ANWR (make note of the fact that there is completely and totally ZERO infrastructure there right now) we could have made a HUGE amount of progress in terms of getting our country off of oil dependance entirely. Heck, if we had started doing this 35 years ago when it was originally proposed, we might be done by now!!

    “Modesty and the fact that I would bore everyone here to death, keep me from expounding on this.”

    “I even know more about your side than you do”

    Sure, sure…lol…you seem to be nowhere near as smart of you might think you are Mr. Scott…

  27. Mr. Guy,

    You said, “we could have made a HUGE amount of progress in terms of getting our country off of oil dependance entirely. Heck, if we had started doing this 35 years ago when it was originally proposed, we might be done by now!!”

    We proved that you cannot just conserve your way out of an energy crisis during the late 70’s. No matter how much we conserve, our population continues to grow. Give me one place in the world where your solutions are working with a growing population and economy.

    You said,”I’m in favor of ANY fuels that can be used as a stop gap measure to displace oil & gas use in this country so that we can stretch out the dwindling supply of oil at our disposal and give us more time to develop energy alternatives. How hard a concept is that to understand??”

    I seek clarity. I find contradictions with in your arguments. You talk about our dwindling supplies of oil and natural gas yet you are in favor of making them dwindle as fast as possible by restricting new supplies. These new supplies will buy us time until your pie in the sky solutions work. How hard a concept is that to understand??

    I not only can match you fact for fact, if I want to I can bury you in them, but in the spirit of trying to understand your side maybe you could distill your position down to a couple of core beliefs.

    Is it global warming? Is it a hatred for American capitalism? Is it guilt for American prosperity? Is it the balance of payments deficit?

    I can summarize my position down to 2 or 3 basic ideas , can you?

  28. More hot air and NO facts from you Mr. Scott. This is fun, but you’re making it too easy for me though. :)

    “We proved that you cannot just conserve your way out of an energy crisis during the late 70’s.”

    Oh? So, of course, you must not remember the following being implemented (mostly in the mid-1970s):
    -the national maximum speed limit of 55 mph to help reduce consumption
    -daylight savings time
    -utilities providing residential consumers with energy conservation audits & other services to encourage slower growth of electricity demand
    -the implementation of CAFE regulations, which caused automakers to downsize existing automobile categories as mandated by the U.S. DOT and phase out the traditional front engine/rear wheel drive layout in favor of the more efficient front engine/front wheel drive
    -NASCAR reduced all race distances by 10%, at the Indianapolis 500…qualifying was reduced from 4 days down to 2 & several days of practice were eliminated

    What do you think the 80s “oil glut” was caused by? This was, in part, due to reduced demand through energy conservation that was spurred by high fuel prices! The U.S. imported 28% of its oil in 1982-1983, which was down from 46.5% in 1977, due to lower consumption.

    “yet you are in favor of making them dwindle as fast as possible by restricting new supplies.”

    Apparently, you don’t know how to read either…so let’s review…employing energy efficieny and conservation techniques allows us to use LESS energy, which allows our limited, finite energy reserves to last *longer*. You refuse to acknowledge that the days of drilling for more oil and massively boosting supplies are gone, which is fine…ignore the reality of Peak Oil…it’ll get you a long way for sure…lol…

    “These new supplies will buy us time until your pie in the sky solutions work”

    LOL…these “new supplies” that you keep talking about are buried deep in the ground and can’t be extracted for DECADES…lol…there’s almost no time left to continue the same ole same ole…wake up!

    “Give me one place in the world where your solutions are working with a growing population and economy.”

    Just one…how about 5 or 6 instead? If you learned to read, you could just scroll up and look at what’s already been done at several places in the Northeast USA.

    Or, you could look to (of all places) the UAE emirate of Abu Dhabi. The UAE does not believe that relying on oil revenues is sustainable (sound familiar?), and they are moving to diversify their economy. Besides allotting land for solar power plants & partnering with MIT to build an alternative energy research institute, they are building a new city (Masdar) near Abu Dhabi which will rely entirely on solar energy with a sustainable, zero-carbon, zero-waste ecology. By relying on sustainable energy sources, keeping cars out of the city, returning to older architectural conventions (such as reducing air conditioning costs with large tents & narrow spaces between buildings), using sewage to produce energy & create soil, taking advantage of all recycling opportunities (including for & from construction), and reusing gray water, Masdar is designed to be a city which will consume NO OIL.

    I would also say that if the UK, Sweden, and Cuba can plan to be more efficient and phase out the old ways of doing thing with respect to energy, so can we.

    I LOVE how I own you on issue after issue and then you keep switching the argument that you want to have with me…LOL…it’s hillarious!

    “I can summarize my position down to 2 or 3 basic ideas, can you?”

    I can summarize *your* argument in 4 WORDS…more of the same…lol…good luck with the same failed policies…

    I don’t believe in global warming. Mixed economies are proven to work the best. I’m not against prosperity either, but more of the same rich getting richer and poor getting poorer isn’t the way that I’d prefer to go tuvm. The “balance of payments” (or as I would call it…our trade deficit) doesn’t really bother me too much. What does any of that have to do with the discussion that we were having though? LOL…

    “I not only can match you fact for fact, if I want to I can bury you in them”

    No you can’t, and you know it…

  29. I wanted a short and sweet answer from you. It certainly wasn’t short. I learned one new thing, you are not a global warming nut. I find it useful to strip away all of the secondary issues that my opposition uses as a smoke screen and try to find what they are really after.

    You mentioned the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer. This makes me believe that you have certain socialist leanings such as the Robin Hood syndrome so popular with today’s politicians. Instead of enabling the poor to rise, the rich must sink to achieve equality.

    This is relevant because solving the energy question has always been more of a political problem than a technical one.

    On my next post I hope to rip your green energy success examples to shreds.

  30. “I find it useful to strip away all of the secondary issues that my opposition uses as a smoke screen and try to find what they are really after.”

    Let me translate that for you…you like to change the subject when it’s apparent that you are losing an argument. It’s not like I haven’t seen these tactics employed before yanno.

    “This is relevant because solving the energy question has always been more of a political problem than a technical one.”

    Baloney…energy issues are issues of science and facts, period. The fact that we desperately need to move away from finite sources of energy is politically undebateable IMO.

    Supply-side economics is a dead issue now. It hasn’t worked under several different administrations and under *both* party’s control of Congress over the last 35 years or so. There is no “trickle down”, period.

    “On my next post I hope to rip your green energy success examples to shreds.”

    I’ll be waiting with bated breath to hear some more of your GOP talking points…lol…

  31. Mr. Guy,

    Do you even have a sense of humor? You should be happy because the country is going your way right now and even Senator McCain sounds like a left wing hippie when it comes to energy and saving the planet.

    I find it instructive that you point to the period of 1982-83 and note that oil imports had dropped from 46.5% in 1977 to 28% in 83 because of less consumption. You also realize that the one sure cure for cancer is to shoot the patient in the head.

    During 1982-83 I happened to be out of work. I was fortunate, because many of my friends were unemployed for 3 years during and after your golden age of conservation.

    You mentioned 55 mph, energy conservation audits,”-NASCAR reduced all race distances by 10%, at the Indianapolis 500…qualifying was reduced from 4 days down to 2 & several days of practice were eliminated”. Those are acts of desperation. Those days sucked. What you conveniently leave out is all the people who reduced their petroleum usage by switching to the greatest alternative fuel in the universe, to heat their homes, namely COAL.

    You say that increased drilling for domestic oil and let me add natural gas, had a very minor role in reducing energy prices in 1985. Actually let me correct myself, oil prices crashed in 1986.

    All of the conservation in the world would not have mattered if US oil and natural gas production had not remained steady during the period of 1980 to 85. That would not have happened with out massive drilling. You keep pointing out that US oil production will never reach previous levels, so you conclude that drilling is useless. The country will just return to your glorious days of yesteryear and find out the hard way AGAIN. We will have to drill massively again just to maintain our existing production. Do you really think that conservation and solar cells can replace 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day??????

    Since your side forbade drilling in ANWR and off the coasts of Oregon, Caleefornia, and Florida it sure has not worked or I could still afford to take that vacation I’m not taking this year.

    I asked you for examples of where your alternatives were working. Again you failed miserably. You mention what’s been done in NE US but, I admit I can’t find it.

    Abu Dhabi may be doing all you say but they ain’t off oil right now are they? They sure aren’t givin up drillin are they?

    Now lift yourself off of the canvass and answer the bell for the next round.

  32. Well, just to add insult to injury in terms of the early 1980s, not only did U.S. oil imports decline rapidly during that time-frame, U.S. oil production looks to have been nearly flat as well:

    Sorry to hear that you were unemployed then, but long-term recessions tend to have that effect on people though.

    “Those are acts of desperation.”

    No, those were sane acts taken to reduce energy consumption, period.

    There certainly is more coal left on our planet than there is oil or uranium left. Last time I checked though…you can’t run a car on coal.

    “oil prices crashed in 1986”

    No, they didn’t…they started to fall way before that, and they actually started to *rise* around-about 1986:

    “You keep pointing out that US oil production will never reach previous levels, so you conclude that drilling is useless.”

    And you keep denying the *reality* of Peak Oil without providing any facts to back your side up, which is just plain silly IMO.

    “Do you really think that conservation and solar cells can replace 20,000,000 barrels of oil per day?”

    Did anyone ever say that solar power and energy conservation alone would wipe out where currently 40% of the nation’s energy comes from?? Heck the rest of the world only gets 37% of their energy from oil, and they get roughly 8 times as much energy from biomass (where countries like Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, and Poland are leading the way). We need to take the lead from other countries around the world that are getting more of their energy from wind (like Spain & Denmark), hydro (like Canada, China, Brazil & India), solar (like Japan & Portugal), and geothermal.

    LOL…the fact that the U.S. hasn’t started to waste its time drilling for the roughly year’s worth of oil that we *might* be able to get out of ANWR several DECADES from now has nothing to do with your vacation plans. Bushy Boy has mismanaged our economy so badly that the country is teetering on (if not already in) a recession…that’s why. Lay the blame where the blame belongs…

    As far as Oregon, California, and Florida go, you might want to lay some of the blame on the state govt.’s of those states as well for the lack of drilling off their coastlines.

    “I asked you for examples of where your alternatives were working. Again you failed miserably. You mention what’s been done in NE US but, I admit I can’t find it.”

    That’s simply because you don’t know how to read, and you are just plain lazy:

    “Once upon a time, there was a government-owned, local utility in the largest ‘city’ in VT (Burlington) that started an energy conservation program in the 1990s. Ten years later, the city was using 10% LESS energy than it was before the start of the program, and no…the city didn’t shrink or turn pitch-black at night.

    Once upon around-about the same time, a former co-worker of mine built himself a house up along the New York/Quebec border…mostly with his own labor and time. He super-well insulated it, and he added both solar panels & a small wind turbine to his property. He’s never paid a NYSEG electricity bill to my knowledge, ever. He was even ‘off-the-grid’ for the first decade or so that he lived in his new house…not by choice either, but that’s a longer story.”

    Cuba:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Period

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Crisis_and_The_Power_of_Community:_How_Cuba_Survived_Peak_Oil

    Sweden:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_phase-out_in_Sweden

    the UK:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_use_and_conservation_in_the_United_Kingdom

    The point is you idiot that the UAE has roughly *5 times the amount of oil* at its disposal than we do right now, and they are taking real steps NOW to become less dependant on oil! Wake up!!!

    “Now lift yourself off of the canvass and answer the bell for the next round.”

    Enjoy living in your fantasy world Mr. Scott…lol…the bout is already over…you lost…ding ding…

  33. Mr. Guy,

    I see that my joke about the cure for cancer went right over your head. Sure your stuff will work, as long as you don’t mind severely lowered living standards. You might enjoy living in a cave, cooking over a solar stove, or better yet since you cited that socialist paradise, living as a slave of the Castro brothers. I want a better life.

    If you are going to cite examples of green success, please give me some references from reputable sources so that I can independently check out what you say. Not that I don’t trust your word, but I fear you may have been brain washed, ahh sorry I mean mislead by your handlers. I have a rather large book myself with many pages that begin with “Once upon a time”, it is called Grimm’s Fairy Tales.

    Now just to show you how it should be done I leave you with this modest effort on my part. This site is referencing a Wall Street Journal article,you may have heard of that little paper, comparing government subsidies of competing electricity sources.

    http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=16532

    Excerpts: ” * For electricity generation, the EIA concludes that solar energy is subsidized to the tune of $24.34 per megawatt hour, wind $23.37 and “clean coal” $29.81.
    * By contrast, normal coal receives 44 cents, natural gas a mere quarter, hydroelectric about 67 cents and nuclear power $1.59.”

  34. Mr.Guy,

    I ran a little long on my last post and I regretfully neglected to address some points which evidently are vitally important to you.

    You said “Last time I checked though…you can’t run a car on coal.” True but we may be able to run our trucks on it. There is a pilot program in Schuylkill County, Pa to turn coal waste in to diesel fuel. No wait the environmentalists have it tied up in lawsuits even though it is backed by the Democratic Governor. Sorry.

    Further you said, “And you keep denying the *reality* of Peak Oil without providing any facts to back your side up, which is just plain silly IMO.”

    I don’t out right deny it, I just question whether anyone can truly know that. You are obviously very young. When you have lived as long as I have, you’ve see a lot of fads, so called FACTS come and go. As an example I submit the following excerpt:

    New York Times

    Published November 20, 1921

    ” While alcohol may not be used directly in the manufacture of textiles,automobiles or sugar, any chemist can draw a flow sheet to show its relation to some to some of the contributing industries. Furthermore, petroleum experts issued a warning at the last meeting of the American Chemical Society in Rochester ( April, 1921 ) in regard to the visible supply of liquid fuels. They pointed out that, in fifteen to twenty years, the rapidly diminishing supply of petroleum will compel the world to turn to some other source for liquid fuel. The only possible solution of the problem in this distressingly short time is alcohol. ”

    http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=980DE6DB1539E133A25753C2A9679D946095D6CF

  35. I’m really sorry to have to say this Mr. Scott, but we have a word that is used quite frequently on the Internet to describe people like you…*troll*. You start shooting your mouth off about a topic that you obviously do not want to be educated about, and you don’t even bother to read the *entire thread* (who knows if you even read the original posting from NYD) before you start to run your mouth! The second link that you tried to post doesn’t even go anywhere! I could give you a couple of dozen more real links to real information that would make your face pucker, but what’s the point, since you never even bother to read anything?? Give me a break…but by all means…don’t bother to read any of the following:

    http://www.eesi.org/programs/Smartgrowth/cs.stdy.burl.vt.htm

    http://www.burlingtonelectric.com/bed/perfmeas.htm

    “Sure your stuff will work, as long as you don’t mind severely lowered living standards.”

    Another hollow GOP talking point…NO ONE is saying that we need to go back to the good ole days of the Middle Ages before electricity and mass transit, period. No one that is serious is advocating for a communist takeout either you dolt. The point of the Cuban experience is that they have roughly 21 times *less* oil resources at their disposal than we do, and the main source for their oil fix went belly up a while back. What’s going to happen to us when our main sources of oil go belly up as well?? Have you ever heard of planning for the future?? I guess not…

    Ah, so you use an editorial from the Right-wing WSJ that apparently originated from a Right-wing think tank as unbiased “evidence”. I see how your mind works…not very well, which is why Peak Oil is just a “fad” to you.

    It’s called science you buffoon! I mean sure, Hubbert first used the Peak Oil theory in *1956* to accurately predict that U.S. oil production would peak between 1965-1970, and the Hubbert peak theory has since been used to predict the peak petroleum production of many other countries…but I’m sure that it will just go the way of the hula hoop.

    Seriously though…I think that I’ve humored you enough now…you obviously have nothing to contribute to this discussion. Go back to your cave troll…

  36. Mr. Guy,

    I do apologize for the bad link. It is however a real article published in 1921 saying that oil would run out
    in the late 1930s- early 40s. It was of course by that right wing think tank the New York Times.

    You said “You start shooting your mouth off about a topic that you obviously do not want to be educated about,”. Gee that sounds like the education camps that Joe Stalin used to run in the good old days. And I’ve been called far worse than a troll.

    The writing on your links is even fuzzier than what you write.

    Now for some useful and clear information. Can you tell me why Brazil, the only country that produces mass quantities of alternative fuel in an economically viable way (ETHANOL), would bother to look for oil?????

    http://www.brazzilmag.com/content/view/8998/54/

    Excerpts: “Petrobras has also just announced that it will invest US$ 54.8 billion in exploration, production, commercialization and refinement of oil and natural gas in the first year of its Business Plan for the five-year period from 2008 to 2112.”

    That’s a lot of money to waste in a dead end energy source.

    Excerpt: “The finding contains light petroleum and is located 280 kilometers (174 miles) from the shore at a depth of 5,350 meters (17,552 feet).”

    Not many countries have the engineering ability to drill at 17,000ft. Wouldn’t they do better using that genius to build state of the art , I don’t know ,uhh wind farms?

  37. Mr. Guy,

    I am guilty of not fully reading the articles in your links. I find them loaded with irrelevant material. I at least have had the courtesy to excerpt the important points from my links. Through sheer force of will I read the articles that you posted. They are incredibly boring.

    When I asked you to give me examples of where green was currently working, that is what I expected. I find a lot of references to urban sprawl, future energy savings, carbon emissions. The only legitimate example of renewable energy in quantity I could glean was of a wood burning plant in Vermont.

    Wood is a renewable resource. However, if you think 300 million people should go back to wood, I can give you links to the deforestation that was rampant in the 1850s. Guess what brought back the trees, coal? For that matter, what saved the whales back then, Mr. Greenpeace? Can you say Petroleum?

  38. This is just silliness.

    “Gee that sounds like the education camps that Joe Stalin used to run in the good old days.”

    Is all that you have to offer…more (literal) red herrings??

    “Can you tell me why Brazil, the only country that produces mass quantities of alternative fuel in an economically viable way (ETHANOL), would bother to look for oil?”

    For the same reason that they are looking into joining up with OPEC…to export it & make money off all those countires out there (ourselves included) that aren’t planning for the future and are still using massive quantities of oil, period. This would be along the same lines as to why the oil companies suppress the development of real alternatives to their product. The fact is that even though oil supplies worldwide are dwindling rapidly…there still are *trillions & trillions* of dollars left to be made in selling oil. Do you think they really care that the oil will run dry within this centiry? Of course not…all they see is dollar signs. The fact is that your side wants to coddle the oil industry and play right into their greedy, lil hands, period. Science doesn’t matter…facts & figures don’t matter…all that matters on your side is blind ideology that sez that things must be done this way because that’s the way that they’ve always been done. What’s good for a small set of big businesses is what’s fine with you, period.

    It is indeed true that Brazil is the world’s largest ethanol producer. Brazil’s ethanol fuel is produced from sugar cane, the world’s largest crop in both production & export tonnage. With the 1973 oil crisis the Brazilian government initiated in 1975 the Pró-Álcool or Programa Nacional do Álcool (National Alcohol Program), which was a nation-wide program financed by the govt. to replace automobile fuels derived from fossil fuels in favor of ethanol. The program successfully reduced the number of cars running on gasoline in Brazil by 10 million, thereby reducing the country’s dependence on oil imports. Brazil is also the third largest hydroelectricity producer in the world after China & Canada. In 2004, hydropower accounted *83% of Brazil power production*. Brazil co-owns the Itaipu hydroelectric power plant on the Paraná River, which is the world’s largest hydroelectric power plant by energy generation. Imagine if we had learned our lessons from the 1970s and done even *some* of what a country like Brazil has done in the last quarter century!

    Of course, you gloss over the fact that for the city of Burlington, VT:

    “Overall electricity use in 2007 was only 1% greater than in 1989. Thus, we are meeting the needs of a growing local economy with about the same amount of electricity as we used 18 years ago. Without energy efficiency, Burlington’s (electricity) load would have been 17% more in 2007 than it was in 1989.”

    So much for conservation being a waste of time & money eh? And so much for you having anything meaningful to say. I’ve wasted over a week dealing with the likes of you…go back to your closed minded way of thinking.

  39. Mr. Guy,

    Since you are incapable of showing me any examples of green power actually producing energy in large quantities and at reasonable costs, I will give you an example of green failure. Unlike the junk that you post, this is readable. Pay close attention to how a bunch of green idiots took a 900 megawatt nuclear plant and converted it to a 4 megawatt solar plant and then wondered why their electric rates are among the highest in the country and why they had rolling black outs. You are really going to have to spin fast to answer this.

    http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_wsj_californias_energy_colonialism.htm

  40. Mr. Guy,

    I forgot to answer this, you said. “So much for conservation being a waste of time & money eh? And so much for you having anything meaningful to say. I’ve wasted over a week dealing with the likes of you…go back to your closed minded way of thinking.”

    You have as yet gotten nothing straight that I have tried mightily to pour in to your head. I am all for conservation. I am all for alternative energy. What I am not for is restricting energy supplies. We have not found any intelligent life on Planet Green.

  41. “Since you are incapable of showing me any examples of green power actually producing energy in large quantities and at reasonable costs”

    Talking at you is like talking to a brick…only bricks can read & comprehend things better than you apparently do.

    “I am all for conservation. I am all for alternative energy. What I am not for is restricting energy supplies.”

    News flash…you’re NOT in favor of conservation then. Conservation involves doing things more efficiently and using LESS energy in the process. No, that doesn’t mean living in the dark and cooking by candlelight either you moron.

    Yet again, you try and pawn off an opinion piece from the Right-wing WSJ penned by none other than some Right-wing flunkie that hangs out with the likes of Glenn Beck & Neil Cavuto from FOX “News” and who was involved in developing GWB’s “National Energy Policy in 2001″…yawn…

    The Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station had a lifetime capacity average of only 39% of those potential 913 MWe BTW. On March 20, 1978, a failure of power supply for the plant’s non-nuclear instrumentation system lead to steam generator dryout, which was the third highest ranked failure at a U.S. nuclear facility (second highest if one omits the actual disaster at Three Mile Island).

    “The degree to which rapacious power-company executives and traders were responsible for the shortages remains open to debate.”

    LOL!!! The CA electricity crisis (also known as the Western Energy Crisis) of 2000-2001 resulted from the gaming of the partially deregulated CA energy system by energy companies such as Enron & Reliant Energy, period. CA was the first state to deregulate its energy market. In a market technique known as “megawatt laundering”, wholesalers bought up electricity in CA to sell out of state, creating shortages. In some instances, wholesalers overscheduled power transmission to create congestion and drive up prices. Many trading strategies employed by Enron & other companies violated the anti-gaming provisions by economic withholding & inflated price bidding. GOP-backed electricity deregulation in action baby!! You haven’t learned a thing from history…man, are you stupid…

  42. Mr. Guy,

    What kind of work do you do? Most of us have our opinions shaped by out occupations. I am always curious as to how a mind set such as yours evolved.

    As for occupations, I’m glad that I’m not in the heating oil business. Along with the truckers they are being hurt by your foolishness.

    http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip.asp

    Excerpt: ” The latest data shows that the number of households using distillate fuel oil (also known as heating oil) for their main space heating fuel has declined steadily from its peak of 17.2 million homes in 1973. By 1980, EIA estimated that 13.4 million homes (16 percent) of U.S. homes were heating with fuel oil; 8.2 million were in the Northeast Census Region, which comprises the New England and Middle Atlantic Census Divisions. Data from the 2005 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) now show the number of U.S. homes heating with fuel oil has fallen by more than half to 7.7 million homes (6.9 percent of the U.S.).”

  43. Mr. Guy,

    The California electrical mess is a reflection of what your ideology has been doing to MY country. Pretend that you are replacing existing energy resources with renewables that do not fill the gap. Fill the gap with imports from other areas and then complain when charlatans from those other states or other nations royally screw you over.

    When you act stupid the world lines up to help you on your way.

  44. Mr.Guy,

    As I reread our conversations I find little revelations which confirm my suspicions that you are a anti-capitalist. You care more about promoting green political control than the well being of your fellow American citizens. I refer to this exchange.

    I said,

    ““I am all for conservation. I am all for alternative energy. What I am not for is restricting energy supplies.”

    You answered,

    “News flash…you’re NOT in favor of conservation then. Conservation involves doing things more efficiently and using LESS energy in the process. No, that doesn’t mean living in the dark and cooking by candlelight either you moron.”

    Let’s see, you called me a Troll, a Brick, and now I’m a Moron.

    Again I find so many inconsistencies in your positions that I question your ability to reason. Since you believe in cutting domestic oil production in order to spur conservation, why not just ban the importation of 14 million barrels per day of oil. By your logic wouldn’t that work even better??????????

  45. […] presents Save the Dinosaurs posted at Government is not your Daddy., saying, “The environmentalists keep insisting that […]

  46. Just keep right on changing the subject after I own on topic after topic…lol…

    I’m a scientist, therefore I am swayed by facts & figures, and I try real hard not to cling to half-truths & falsehoods like you do.

    Heating oil businesses & truckers are being hurt just like everyone else is in the joke that our Bush economy has become. Do you know why less people use oil to heat their homes now? It’s because they can get a better deal using other types of energy, period. I’m sure the horse trolley industry suffered a lot in the days gone by…so what?

    Keep sticking your head in the sand on the CA crisis, and by all means don’t read up on anything to learn more about it:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_electricity_crisis

    BTW, I am anti-capitalism, and I’m pro-mixed economy, which is what most (if not all) of the sucessful world economies are these days. Even the good ole USA is a mixed economy…wake up fool…

    If you really think that continuing more of the same failed policies on energy that this country has been doing for decades is good for “your fellow American citizens”, then you must be dumber than I originally thought.

    “Since you believe in cutting domestic oil production in order to spur conservation, why not just ban the importation of 14 million barrels per day of oil. By your logic wouldn’t that work even better?”

    LOL…domestic oil production is doomed…just like oil production across the rest of the world. Peak Oil is real & not just some fad that will go away because you want to wish it away. The only thing that is needed to “spur” conservation is for the govt. at all levels to embrace it & encourage others to do things more efficiently. As I’ve pointed out before, this works, not that you & Dick Cheney would admit that though.

    We “only” use about 20 million barrels of oil per day, the maximum that we can refine is about 17 million barrels per day, and we only import around 12 millions barrels of oil per day (mostly from Canada, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, Iraq, Norway, Angola, and the UK).

    http://thirdworldtraveler.com/Oil_watch/World_Oil%20_Table.html

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb1109.html

  47. GREEN CONSERVATION

    I hope Mr. Guy and his friends are happy with all of the conservation they are causing. If they can just put a few more truckers out of business by idling their rigs, maybe the polar bears will smile.

    http://www.usnews.com/blogs/beyond-the-barrel/2008/3/27/fuel-pain-prompting-some-truckers-to-park.html

  48. Hmmmm…I wrote a response to most of the above the other day, but it doesn’t seem to have showed up yet. Maybe I’ll try again later…without any weblinks this time…oh well…

    As for those truckers potentially going on strike, I say more power to them. The Bush administration has worked awfully hard to get those gas prices up so high. I support suspending “all state and federal fuel taxes” BTW…as long as we find a way to do that without blowing a huge whole in our federal & state transportation budgets, which our Senator Sanders has a plan for.

  49. Mr. Guy, there’s a problem with the Akismet spam filter that WordPress uses. It automatically marks anything with more than 3 links as “potential spam,” and potential spam is supposed to sit in the moderation queue until I approve it. Unfortunately, there seems to be a bug in Akismet that deletes spam (and apparently also “potential spam” ) much too frequently. I usually check the spam filter at least once a day, but often the spam count shoots up and, when I check it, there’s nothing there.

    I recently changed the parameter to allow the maximum number of links (10) without triggering the “potential spam” queue, but I don’t know if that worked, and it may even have had the opposite effect. I’ve complained to WordPress about the buggy Akismet spam software, but they say there’s nothing they can do about it.

    I apologize if your post was deleted. Data loss sucks. I just checked the spam filtere and it’s empty. The buggy spam filter is the only thing I don’t like about hosting my blog on WordPress.

  50. That’s OK…I know that managing spam can be a pain in the butt. I’ll try & post again later today.

  51. Mister Guy,

    Please,please tell me that even you think this is stupid!

    ” House passes bill to sue OPEC over oil prices ”

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080520/pl_nm/congress_opec_dc

  52. So, let’s try this again. I’m a scientist, which means that facts & figures are more important to me than half-truths & falsehoods.

    As far as the heating oil business and the trucking industry, pretty much *all* sectors of the Bush economy have been hurting due to massive mismanagement by his govt….lay the blame where the blame belongs. Why have more & more households trended away from heating oil? Because they can find better deals using other types of energy sources to heat their homes, period. I’m sure a while back the horse-drawn trolley industry took a massive hit for the same reasons…I thought you were *for* progress?

    By all means, don’t bother to read up on the CA electricity crisis (or the Western Energy Crisis as it’s known)…you might actually learn something about what *really* happened back in 2000-2001…lol…

    I am anti-capitalism, and I’m pro-mixed economy, which has proven to be the most successful type of economy to date…even the good ole USA has one!

    “Since you believe in cutting domestic oil production in order to spur conservation, why not just ban the importation of 14 million barrels per day of oil?”

    LOL…domestic oil production is *doomed*…just like foreign oil production…that’s why plenty of countries have already started to move away from basing a huge portion of their energy consumption on a finite resource like oil. Do you really think that the “well being of your fellow American citizens” is being helped by continuing down a path to nowhere?

    BTW, the NYT recently had an article about how the city of Juneau, AK has cut its electricity use by more than 30% in a matter of weeks. How did they do it? Conservation! Don’t tell Dick Cheney that though.

    The USA consumes about 20 million barrels of oil per day, and our maximum refining capacity is about 17 million barrels of oil per day. We consume more oil than any other country in the world (actually, we consume more oil than Japan & most of Europe *combined*), and our production of oil has been outpaced by our oil imports since the early 1990s. We currently import about 12 million barrels of oil per day (mostly from Canada, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Nigeria, Iraq, Norway, Angola, Algeria, Russia, and the UK). Let me spell that out for you, since you appear to be mentally challenged…even if the USA could drill enough oil out of the ground per day (which it NEVER has been able to do to satisfy this current level of demand), we couldn’t refine it all! The only way forward is to conserve what we have and use it more efficiently.

    I laughed when Huckabee in a GOP Presidential debate a while ago said that the govt. should offer a $1billion prize for the design of a car that would get 100 miles/gallon. A car like that was developed (that produced NO emissions) well over a decade ago in CA I believe, and the big car companies bought it up & we never heard about it again! CAFE standards need to be raised drastically IMO. We should at least incentivize being more efficient in energy use and not do the opposite with our public policy…like has been the case in recent years. Breaking OPEC up? Sounds like a great idea to me…

  53. Mister Guy,

    I beg your pardon, even though we are on opposite sides of this and other issues, I had reason to believe you were rational. My mistake.

    You said “I am anti-capitalism, and I’m pro-mixed economy, which has proven to be the most successful type of economy to date…even the good ole USA has one!”

    The anti-capitalism is obvious, but what does pro-mixed economy mean.

    You said “I’m a scientist,” What kind, and from what University do you hold your credentials? Mail order and online do not count.

    You said, “Let me spell that out for you, since you appear to be mentally challenged…even if the USA could drill enough oil out of the ground per day (which it NEVER has been able to do to satisfy this current level of demand), we couldn’t refine it all!”

    You have a narrow mind that is incapable of understanding the most rudimentary aspects of an integrated energy economy. Oil is merely a part of the overall picture. All of the fossil fuels along with hydro and nuclear are part of the whole. As supply or cost in one of those parts becomes a problem, reliance shifts to another part. However, when political forces over rule market forces by restricting SUPPLY the process fails.

    You said, “Do you really think that the “well being of your fellow American citizens” is being helped by continuing down a path to nowhere?”

    I can only surmise that you are somehow shielded economically from the havoc, the policies of your fellow greens in Congress, have inflicted on the rest of us.

    You said,” car that would get 100 miles/gallon. A car like that was developed (that produced NO emissions) well over a decade ago in CA I believe, and the big car companies bought it up & we never heard about it again!”

    This comes under the category of , ‘why do I bother’ . In the 1970s, these idiotic stories that were never proven, were rampant. The guy that invented the 100mpg carburetor in his garage that was bought up by the oil companies.

    Here is a newsflash Einstein, if any of these inventions had merit, the inventor/developer would be a multi-billionaire.

    You said, “By all means, don’t bother to read up on the CA electricity crisis (or the Western Energy Crisis as it’s known)…you might actually learn something about what *really* happened back in 2000-2001…lol…”

    I had this same argument 4 years ago with a gentleman who believed what you do. If I had saved the back and forth documentation and posted it now, I would probably crash this site. I’ve forgotten more than you will ever know.

  54. Wow, your ignorance knows no bounds eh? It’s amazing…anyways…

    A mixed economy is an economic system that incorporates aspects of more than one economic system. This usually means an economy that contains both private-owned & state-owned enterprises or that combines elements of capitalism & socialism, or a mix of market economy & planned economy characteristics. You know…”ratholes” like the USA, France, Germany, Australia, the UK…they have mixed economies.

    “You have a narrow mind that is incapable of understanding the most rudimentary aspects of an integrated energy economy.”

    That’s it…keep changing that subject after I completely & totaly own you on the subject of oil imports…lol…too funny…

    “As supply or cost in one of those parts becomes a problem, reliance shifts to another part.”

    Sure, but then why exactly were you whinning about your buddies in the heating oil industries again?? Oh, because you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about…that’s why… The market will solve everything…sure, keep worshipping at the alter of the market…it really will save your soul…for a price that is.

    “I can only surmise that you are somehow shielded economically from the havoc”

    Sure…right…let me tell you something…every single time that I begrudingly fill up my car with gas, I say out loud “Thank God we’re in Iraq”. I can’t think of that many people out there that aren’t feeling some pain right now…myself included…that’s what recessions do stupid.

    The reality is that right now (not later) cars that are being manufactured in this very country can be easily modified to get 100+ mpg, period.

    “If I had saved the back and forth documentation and posted it now, I would probably crash this site. I’ve forgotten more than you will ever know.”

    More useless, idle threats from someone who doesn’t know that much in the first place…

  55. Mister Guy,

    You said “The reality is that right now (not later) cars that are being manufactured in this very country can be easily modified to get 100+ mpg, period.”

    Prove it.

  56. Sheesh…whatever you do, don’t Google “100 mpg car”, because you might find this:

    “Steve Lapp, a professor from Ontario, says the moment has nearly arrived. ‘I’ve actually gotten over 100 mpg on some trips in my 2001 Toyota Prius,’ he says. The secret? He mounted solar panels on the car’s roof to keep the batteries charged when the sun is shining.”

    http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/how_to/3374271.html?page=1

    “The ES3, the initials stand for Eco Spirit, achieves 104mpg in the official European fuel consumption tests, a record for a four-seat car.”

    http://www.wanttoknow.info/carmileage

    “‘In 2001, we put a European Lupo3L (Volkswagen) hypereconomy car through the now-archaic EPA testing and got 80 miles per gallon in the city and 100 on the highway,’ says Keith Price, the public relations manager. ‘So in terms of the X Prize, we wish them well but from our perspective, we’ve been there, done that.'”

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0324/p01s14-usec.html?page=1

    “If you want a car that will get 100 miles per gallon of fuel, you can build your own right now. … Start with a small car that weighs no more than about 2000 pounds. Many small sedans and hatchbacks from Honda, Toyota, Ford, Geo, Suzuki, Nissan, and the like are available. It must have a standard transmission and a good clutch. Next, throw out (remove and sell) the 80 hp engine it comes with and replace it with a 20 hp diesel engine. EPA certified engines in this range can be purchased from Yanmar. Then connect a belt-drive torque converter between the engine and the manual clutch. These simple transmission systems are used in snowmobiles, ATV’s and Jet-Ski water craft, and are available in power ranges up to 120 hp.

    As odd as this may sound, this system will give the following performance. First, mileage will be above 60 mpg in the city and close to 100 mpg on the highway.”

    http://www.zpenergy.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2312

    Hmmmm…maybe it wasn’t CA…maybe it was NM instead:

    “In the Spring of 77, Mr. Ogle equipped a 1970 Ford Galaxy with his new invention. On less than 2 gallons of gas, Mr. Ogle and a friend drove from El Paso to Deming (NM); a distance of over 200 miles.”

    http://www.kvia.com/Global/story.asp?S=4137051

    Once again, you’re making this waaaay to easy for me, but it must be hard for you with all your handicaps…lol…

  57. Mister Guy,

    I went to your links and it was difficult to get hard information as to what your wonder cars actually looked like and why they are not in production. There must be some technical difficulties. If they were any good, they would be on the market,,period!!! Anyone can take a glorified motorcycle or cover a puddle jumper with solar panels to make a concept car and then coast it downhill to get fantastic results. It doesn’t automatically make it a good production car.

    I personally would rather go with proven technology. I believe the Germans have the right idea. I was shown a FULL SIZE 2004 Volkswagon diesel sedan which the owner claims averages 50 mpg cruising at 80 mph. I believe him over you. That is my kind of CONSERVATION.

    No solar panels, no kiddie car size, and no freakin hybrid batteries to replace after 5 years. Just high quality German engineering. Not bad for a $24,000 car.

  58. You are living proof that you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink…or, in your case, a lead a donkey to water…

    Never heard of a Toyota Prius eh? I’m not surprised. Still concerned on how “cool” the car looks eh? My 1975 Ford Grand Torino Elite sure looked cool when I drove it ages & ages ago, but it got 6.5 mpg in the city & 10 mpg on the highway. Cool doesn’t quite cut with me anymore. Exactly how often do you get a chance to go 80 MPH for prolonged length of time? LOL…

  59. Mister Guy,

    Toyota Prius “48 / 45 MPG” $21,300 ”

    I know what they are. I just can never get anything useful out of the crap you link to. Where is the Prius that these people built??????I could not find it!!!!! I can only think that the article was written by a “scientist”.

    Here are some snippets from your first link.

    “The best choice for building a 100-mpg car would likely be a carbon-fiber composite, which can weigh less than half as much as steel.” “Low-volume production of such large automobile structures is expensive–up to $100,000 per copy-” “How many people would spend $200,000 on a car that would ultimately save them a few thousand dollars on fuel over the life of the car?”

    It sure doesn’t sound like they have anything that is worth producing. Why don’t you try to link to ,,,I don’t know,,,information that is useful.

  60. The problem basically is that you don’t know how to read troll…it’s sad. I highlighted the relevant text of that link above. You’ll obviously never learn though.

  61. Mister Guy,

    I went to your last link. It was like reading about area 51 in Roswell.

    “In the Spring of 77, Mr. Ogle equipped a 1970 Ford Galaxy with his new invention. On less than 2 gallons of gas, Mr. Ogle and a friend drove from El Paso to Deming (NM); a distance of over 200 miles.

    As the story goes, before crossing back into Texas, a rock flew underneath the car and punctured the gas tank. None-the-less, history was made. Newspaper articles that weekend quoted other engineers as saying: “this is the hottest thing of this century.” and “Is a young high school dropout the most important American inventor since Thomas Edison?”

    ABC-7 has learned that the US Energy and Research Development Administration (now the Department of Energy) declared Mr. Ogle’s vaporized fuel system “not a fake.” Mack Massey thought he saw an opportunity of a lifetime. He immediately became a financial supporter of Mr. Ogle.

    Massey tells ABC-7 that, “We took it to the manufacturers, we thought we’d change the world. So did Tom…but we ran into roadblocks. When we got to looking at it, it cost hundreds thousands of dollars.”

    To add fuel to the fire, Mr. Massey says it was an invention that would have cost the oil and gas companies billions of dollars. Mr. Massey adds, “If it’s going to put them out of businesses, they’re going to fight!” ”

    You are amazing. You post these little fairy tales that you can’t prove independently. This country could not keep the secrets of the atom bomb from the Russians in the 1940s and you want me to believe that car and oil companies were able to suppress the “this is the hottest thing of this century.”

    You stated that you were a scientist. I again ask you, in what field and where did you study. I think you are a quack.

  62. Mister Guy,

    I’m sorry but you are just so full of,,how can I be tactful,,hot air.

    You said, “The problem basically is that you don’t know how to read troll…it’s sad.”

    The problem is I am going back through your links and I am actually rereading them. They are even worse the second time around.

    I said,
    “Sure your stuff will work, as long as you don’t mind severely lowered living standards.”

    You said,
    “Another hollow GOP talking point…NO ONE is saying that we need to go back to the good ole days of the Middle Ages before electricity and mass transit, period.”

    You say that and then you post this.

    “BTW, the NYT recently had an article about how the city of Juneau, AK has cut its electricity use by more than 30% in a matter of weeks. How did they do it? Conservation!”

    You conveniently left out some facts. I independently checked it out and found this.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90755754

    Excerpts:

    “One month after an avalanche knocked out its connection to a hydroelectric dam, much of Juneau, Alaska, is still relying on diesel back-up generators. Residential electricity rates have gone up about 400 percent.”

    “Now members of the Graves family eat dinner by candlelight, do dishes by hand, plan to dry their clothes on a rack by the wood stove, and limit their time on the computer.”

    I doubt there is anything you could post that I could not find something misleading with in it.

  63. More “leading a donkey to water” nonsense from you…it’s sad. You are shown the truth as confirmed by several different media sources *and* the U.S. govt., yet you deny the reality of it. You live in a fantasy world of your own making troll.

    “I again ask you, in what field and where did you study.”

    Why don’t I just post my name and address while I’m at it…no thanx troll…lol…

    Read any of this?:

    “Threatened with a fivefold increase in utility bills, Juneau quickly powered down.”

    “In an effort to cut back on electric use during the energy crisis the department store shut off half of it’s overhead and parking lot lights, lowered the heat and shut off most of its displays according to director Don Bennett. Robertson, who lives in a University of Alaska dorm, said the school is also keeping lights off and heat down but won’t charge those living in student housing more for utilities if they do their part to conserve.”

    “Energy conservation is a hard sell in much of the U.S., but Juneau has proved that people will change their ways if the financial incentives are big enough.”

    The article also goes on to say how Brazil cut it’s electricity usage by 20 percent & never really returned to their former level of consumption after that.

    And what’s wrong with that? They a made a choice…pay higher bills or conserve more. We can either conserve now and develop alternative energy sources (relying one just one source of power…oil, hydro, or otherwise is stupid) or do it all later. I’d prefer doing it now.

  64. You must have attended a very exclusive university, and majored in a highly esoteric field, Mr. Guy, if telling where you went to school and what field you studied would reveal your identity… ;)

  65. Yea, something like that…the reality is that who I really am is completely irrelevant to this conversation. This topic comes up quite often though…usually when my opposition has gotten throughly schooled by me & then they start to wonder who this guy is that’s owning them at almost every turn. I’m no one from nowhere… :)

  66. Mister Guy,

    I only have an associate degree in electronics. I am not bragging that it is my education which entitles me to say what I do. It is my life experience and my wide range of reading and evaluating what has worked and failed in the past. You said you were a scientist, back it up. At least tell us your field of expertise. That surely would not unmask your true identity.

    Unlike you, I do not limit my reading to sources that agree with me. I have read a great deal about renewable energy sources and I’ve hoped for them to be true. What I have inevitably found is that they are always long on promises and short on delivery.

    I will read about some new solution to energy that is just around the corner and then I’ll remember that I read the same thing 5 years ago.

    As far as conservation, you would be proud of me. My personal energy use is very small overall. Not because I believe anything you say, but because I am not a rich liberal ” scientist “. You know what, Mister Scientist Guy, though it has saved me money, it has not helped reduce energy consumption in my area one bit. All the energy that I have ” conserved ” has been ” consumed ” 10,000 times over by all of the new population that has arrived in my area over the last decade.

    That is one of the many flaws your logic does not address, population growth.

    I am eagerly waiting further schooling by you. All I ask is that you no longer post misleading and unclear garbage.

  67. Since Mister Guy seems to have left with his tail between his legs, I feel I must pick up his side of the argument. I really am not at all against alternative energy, although I believe that wind and solar will never be more than 10% of any modern country’s energy supply.

    My two favorite alternative energy sources are methane gas hydrates and butanol. Both have the potential to solve all of our energy needs. However both have big economic and technical hurdles which may never be overcome.

    Gas hydrates

    http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/415215

    Excerpt:”And gas hydrate fields are found in abundance under the coastal waters of every continent. Calculations suggest there’s more energy in gas hydrates than in coal, oil and conventional gas combined.”

    Then there is Butanol.

    http://www.energyrefuge.com/blog/butanol-the-next-generation-bio/

    “Although the science behind this newly found bio-fuel is not fully complete and ready to implement, butanol leaves us with a hope greater than that of ethanol.”

    On the minus side of this ever amounting to anything is the energy intensity problem of distilling the water out of bio-butanol.

    http://i-r-squared.blogspot.com/2007/06/problem-with-biobutanol.html

    “The Problem With Biobutanol”

    Now all I have to do to be truly bipartisan is to take up the cause of conservation.

  68. LOL!!! I just love how I get out and enjoy a Memorial Day weekend away from my computer and Mr. Troll declares “victory” here. Sounds like something that GWB did on an aircraft carrier a few years back.

    Here’s a news flash for you troll, I’m not sitting at my computer wondering who the heck “Alan Scott” is, why he apparently went to college for 2 years vs. my 4 years, or anything else about what makes you spew the ridiculous Right-wing hot-air talking points that you do. I don’t need to do that…because you’re a troll (“someone who posts controversial & usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online discussion forum with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion”), period.

    “though it has saved me money, it has not helped reduce energy consumption in my area one bit. All the energy that I have ‘conserved’ has been ‘consumed’ 10,000 times over by all of the new population that has arrived in my area over the last decade.”

    Yea, you sound like a real, hard-core conservationist…lol…one that realizes that what they do individually multipled with other similiar actions by many other people can really change things. Our actions combined together can be greater than actions made by just one individual. But keep trying to change the subject there…lol…

    “I feel I must pick up his side of the argument”

    You haven’t even picked up YOUR side of the argument yet troll…which side are you really on again??

    “I really am not at all against alternative energy, although I believe that wind and solar will never be more than 10% of any modern country’s energy supply.”

    “Both have the potential to solve all of our energy needs. However both have big economic and technical hurdles which may never be overcome.”

    And in just a few sentences, you prove that you’re really NOT in favor of alternative energy after all.

    Sure, sure…solar lighting, solar heating & cooling, solar desalination & disinfection, solar electricity, solar chemical & mechanical, solar vehicles, and wind power (Denmark generates nearly one-fifth of its electricity with wind turbines, Germany is ahead of schedule to meet 12.5% of its electricity needs – Germany’s Schleswig-Holstein province generates 36% of its power with wind turbines, and Mexico will provide 13% of the electricity needs of the state of Oaxaca with wind power) will basically amount to nothing.

    “Now all I have to do to be truly bipartisan is to take up the cause of conservation.”

    Which you’ve already proven that you’re not really for in the first place…let us all know when you get around to twisting yourself into a knot over that one…lol…

    “there are no automobiles in production right now that are ready for butanol”

    This sounds to me like the pipe-dreams that the car & oil industry sells about hydrogen fuel cells, which have been a “decade or so away from being ready” for several decades now. The amount of infrastructure that would need to be put in place for that to happen is HUGE. Most butanol in the U.S. is produced commercially from fossil fuels BTW, and the feedstocks are the *same* as for ethanol.

    “Getting that energy to flow consistently and predictably, however, has been the problem. Using heat to release the gas works, but requires too much energy to be useful.”

    What we need are advancements & investments in *real* alternative energy sources…not more finite, fossil fuel sources like “gas hydrates”. These real technologies are here NOW, not later.

  69. He’s back.

    Mister Guy,

    You said, “with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response”.

    So that’s what I’m doing. Seems to have worked.

    You said, “Germany is ahead of schedule to meet 12.5% of its electricity needs – Germany’s Schleswig-Holstein province generates 36% of its power with wind turbines, and Mexico will provide 13% of the electricity needs of the state of Oaxaca with wind power”

    You will forgive me, but with your current track record I will have to check on your facts when I get around to it. Wind power supporters have tended to, pardon the pun, ‘inflate’ the actual amount of power their toys deliver. I do know that the real problem with wind power is that you must have considerable conventional capacity in reserve, which adds to the true cost, because it is strictly a matter of chance that peak winds match peak demand. It’s all very technical and I would not expect a non troll to understand it.

    You really have finite on the brain. Even the Sun is finite. Solar power will be a dead end if your time frame is long enough.

    I have proven that I can argue even your side of the issue more competently than you. When time permits I will take up conservation. To start that topic I leave you with the following nugget, which I acknowledge I oringinally found on a board run by someone on your side of the fence. I am open to ideas from the other universe if they are offered by thinkers.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

    excerpt: “In economics, the Jevons Paradox is an observation made by William Stanley Jevons, that as technological improvements increase the efficiency with which a resource is used, total consumption of that resource tends to increase, rather than decrease.” ” improved efficiency lowers the relative cost of using a resource – which increases demand.”

  70. “I do know that the real problem with wind power is that you must have considerable conventional capacity in reserve, which adds to the true cost, because it is strictly a matter of chance that peak winds match peak demand.”

    It certainly is a minority view that wind power can take over entirely for our energy needs. Of course, a simple mind like yours won’t understand that a few fractions of 100% added together may very well equal the whole shebang. You let me know when you want me to stop feeding you troll. In the meantime, I wouldn’t want you to work your brain too hard:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power

    “Even the Sun is finite. Solar power will be a dead end if your time frame is long enough.”

    Just when I think that you have breached a new low in stupidity, you come up with something like this. Sure, we’ll all need to worry about the Sun getting so large that it will swallow the planet Earth…in a few billion years!! LOL…

    “I have proven that I can argue even your side of the issue more competently than you.”

    The only thing that you have proven is how much of a fool you really are troll. Mentally beating up on the handicapped like you should be illegal, but it’s just so much fun that I can’t help it… :)

    It’s a good thing Mr. Jevons didn’t live to see the 1980s oil glut, which was caused in part by increased conservation efforts that were started in the 1970s, but we’ve already discussed that troll…forgotten already?? LOL…

    “First, in the context of a mature market such as for oil, increased efficiency usually reduces resource use, as demand for the associated good or service is usually inelastic (i.e. does not respond much to prices). Second, improved efficiency may mitigate the fuel shortages and painful disruptions in the global economy caused by the advent of peak oil. Third, even if increased efficiency does not reduce the total amount of resources used, this ignores the additional benefits associated with increased efficiency and increased use. Improved fuel efficiency will at least improve the standard of living for consumers of fuel.”

    You really need to learn how to read troll…work on that & come back again for some more schooling…

  71. Since we all have to endure these Government induced energy shortages and this same government will force on us solutions which won’t work, I have decided to begin listing strategies which I believe will help us regular people survive until sanity reestablishes itself in Washington.

    Drive less. We are all doing that.

    Insulate your house. I helped my neighbor do this a month ago . You rent a machine and it makes a mess. My neighbor seems to think it will be worth it.
    http://www.raftertales.com/home-remodeling/cellulose-insulation-facts-do-it-yourself-guide/

    “Blown cellulose can be installed in new or existing structures. It is popular in retrofit applications because existing wall finishes are not removed to install the insulation. It is favored in attic applications because you can blow unrestricted depths of fiber to achieve deep coverage with very little labor.”

    If you are like me and live close to the coal regions, take the plunge and go back to coal. There are 6.3 billion tons of anthracite left. In spite of what M.G. thinks, that is enough to last through your grand children’s life span. Don’t think green, think black as in carbon. Screw the polar bears, melt the ice caps.

    When the seemingly inevitable carbon taxes and cap and trade regulations get forced down our throats, do your best to evade and corrupt them. It’s what killed prohibition.

  72. Well, I guess I’m done trying to post anything here that has a real web link in it…ugh…let’s try this again then.

    “I do know that the real problem with wind power is that you must have considerable conventional capacity in reserve, which adds to the true cost, because it is strictly a matter of chance that peak winds match peak demand.”

    I don’t know of too many people that advocate wind power as being our sole source of energy, but I wouldn’t expect a troll like you to realize that adding up several sources together that can produce a certain average percentage of energy individually can equal the whole she-bang eventually. I wouldn’t want you to strain your limited mental abilities too much either:

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power

    “Even the Sun is finite. Solar power will be a dead end if your time frame is long enough.”

    Wow, just when I think that you’ve set a new low in stupidity, you drop something like this. Yea, we’ll need to worry that the Sun will grow to such a size that it will swallow Earth…in a few billions years you idiot…lol…

    “I have proven that I can argue even your side of the issue more competently than you”

    The only thing that you have proven is how much of a fool you really are, period.

    It’s a good thing that Mr. Jevons didn’t live long enough to see the oil glut of the 1980s, which was caused in part by conservation efforts that were started in the 1970s, but we already discussed that earlier…or did you already forget that troll??

    From your own link:
    “in the context of a mature market such as for oil, increased efficiency usually reduces resource use, as demand for the associated good or service is usually inelastic (i.e. does not respond much to prices). Second, improved efficiency may mitigate the fuel shortages and painful disruptions in the global economy caused by the advent of peak oil.”

    You really should learn to read your own links fully troll.

    Coal will be exhausted within 160 years BTW, and do you really want to be responsible for all that pollution?? Good luck breaking those future laws that you’re afraid of…

  73. Mister Guy,

    Here is a real link to the 99 mpg Volkeswagon Lupo. It shows a picture of the car and gives the reasons why we can’t buy it in the US. It sounds like big government and good ole economics is more to blame than your conspiracy theory of big auto and big oil.

    http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Daily_Auto_News/No_Chance_For_American_Lupo.S173.A6167.html

    Excerpts: “DETROIT-Wouldn’t it be great to have the 99-mpg Volkswagen Lupo TDI in the U.S.? Maybe, but it’s not going to happen. Not now. Not ever.”
    “”We looked at the Lupo for the States, but it is not Federalized for crash safety, and to re-engineer it to meet U.S. crash standards would cost way too much money, and you can’t make very much profit at the economy car end of the market anyway.”

    VW is concentrating on the premium niches in the U.S. Because currency fluctuations can make low-profit imports languish, the Lupo will have to remain a European rental for American enthusiasts.”

  74. I will try this link again.

    http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/No_Chance_For_American_Lupo.S173.A6167.html

    Sorry it seems to be a problem with long links.

  75. Man, why I am bothering to post links for a troll that can’t be bothered to go to any of them? I already told you about the VW Lupo car before! My understanding was that it wasn’t even in production anymore, but who knows.

    “But it’s fun to look at the Lupo and talk about it to see what engineers can do with technology that is here now, rather than listening to people talk about what’s possible in 2030 in some hydrogenated future that may or may not ever arrive.”

    Exactly my point from before…thanx for proving my case some more troll.

    Remember that Toyota Prius? Well now it may get 94 mpg:

    usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/daily-news/080429-2009-Prius-May-Reach-94-MPG

    Also, there’s this:

    http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11363

    “Hypermilers get 100 mpg; you can, too”

    You really are hopeless…

  76. Mister Guy,

    You are fortunate that these links are messed up or I could make my point even better. I’m going to try posting the link on 3lines so that it could be pasted in.www.thecarconnection.com/Auto
    _News/No_Chance_For_American
    _Lupo.S173.A6167.html

    You have proved nothing. If you paste in my link and can get to the site there is a picture of the real car. I believe your point was that these high mileage cars were being held back just to sell oil. The site says that besides economics( which they did not teach you at your ALMA MATTER, Karl Marx University) it is US crash standards that were the problem, in other words, your big government.

    I will post links to other cars that would lower our oil consumption. These are real cars that the average person could drive. The Lupo, while I would be happy to drive it, really is not practical for older, larger,non minimalist drivers. Guess what Mister Scientist Guy, even if we all drove Lupos we will still need every drop of oil that your good friends in Congress are denying us.

    I’ve told you that I’m all for conservation. You are just not capable of understanding that more supply will still be needed.

  77. Do yourself a favor troll and stop posting the same link over & over again. I already went to it, where do you think that I got this quote from before:

    “But it’s fun to look at the Lupo and talk about it to see what engineers can do with technology that is here now, rather than listening to people talk about what’s possible in 2030 in some hydrogenated future that may or may not ever arrive.”

    From that very same link! Do YOU even bother to read the links that you post here?? Apparently not stupid!! Like I said before, I told you about this car back on May 22nd…scroll up…

    “I believe your point was that these high mileage cars were being held back just to sell oil.”

    Wrong again troll, if you bothered to scroll up to that date, you’ll see that I was responding to your lame & ignorant “prove it” challenge that 100 mpg cars were possible RIGHT NOW with current (not future) technologies. I also showed you on that date merely one example of a 100 mpg car from a long time ago that was never taken seriously by the big car companies, but of course you denied that it was true because it doesn’t jive with your warped view of the world.

    “I’ve told you that I’m all for conservation. You are just not capable of understanding that more supply will still be needed.”

    LOL…and again, in just a few sentences, you prove that you are, in fact, NOT in favor of conservation…lol…you’re so stupid it’s amazing that you are allowed the use of a computer…

    What you are not capable of understanding is that you’re never going to win this lil argument that you started by coming into this thread a looong time ago like the troll that you are, half-coked & ill-informed. You can prematurely try & declare “victory” (like you did before) or give up now and stop trying to sound smart when you have added very little in the way of facts to this discussion, period. You really have nothing important to say on this issue…

  78. Alan, I fixed up your links. If you capitalize the “h” in http://, it won’t work as a live link. “http” must be all lower case.

  79. Mister Guy,

    Your ego is even bigger than mine and that just won’t stand. I am used to discussing these issues with greens who think as you do but actually have something to say.

    First of all you are not consistent in your use of the word time. What is a long time or a short time? You have said that drilling in Anwr is out because it would take decades. Actually estimated 12 years. If your boy Clinton had not set ANWR aside, oil might be flowing just about,,,,,,,NOW.

    So anyway 12 years is a long time to you, but 160 years of coal is a short time. We discussed France’s Uranium requirement’s running out in 80 years. That is a short time to you.

    Speaking of “time” I really hate to have to explain the jokes to the slow kids in the class. In my native troll language we use a device where we illustrate the ridiculous by being ridiculous. I said, “Even the Sun is finite. Solar power will be a dead end if your time frame is long enough.” I will write slow when I translate it so that you will understand. In English it is called S-A-R-C-A-S-M.

  80. I still believe that diesel vehicles are the way to go if you are serious about conservation. I have tried to find out the truth as to what is really holding them back. I find more evidence of big government than big oil or big car companies.

    Enlightened states like Caleefornia put emission standards on, that diesels can’t meet. Also why is diesel fuel more costly than gasoline? I believe that diesel fuel is more heavily taxed than gasoline, though I have not confirmed that yet. The big thing is the Ultra Low Sulfer fuel that has added to the cost.

    As long as Washington is run by green idiots like Nancy Pelosi, I am pessimistic about the future. I said it before, things are not bad enough yet. $4 per gallon is starting to hurt. Maybe the tipping point is $7 per gallon.

    Private enterprise is being held back at every turn from solving the energy problem. Tell me Mister Guy, what is your tipping point? What price starts to hurt you? What kind of car do you drive and how far must you drive every day? Wait that might reveal your true identity. I personally believe that anyone who is against more supply should pay 3 times what us smart folks pay for energy.

    http://www.dieselforum.org/where-is-diesel/cars-trucks-suvs/diesels-for-sale-in-the-us/

    “Please note that light-duty diesel models are not available for sale in California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.”

    http://mydrive.roadfly.com/blog/ExJxZ3/

    Excerpts:

    Big Oil seems slick as U.S. turns to diesel cars
    Wednesday, April 16, 2008
    John McCormick: Car culture

    “It’s bad enough that gas prices are shooting up, but Big Oil’s reluctance to produce sufficient supplies of diesel — thus driving up the price — does seem like an effort to snuff out a promising, extremely fuel-efficient technology just as it gains a foothold in the United States, the world’s most energy profligate nation.”

    “BMW 118d Wins ‘World Green Car Award’, Then Goes Back Home””59 mpg”

    Long popular in Europe, diesel cars poised for big U.S. future
    By CANDICE FERRETTE
    THE JOURNAL NEWS

    “Eric Larca of Brewster purchased his second diesel car, a 2006 Jetta, for about $25,900 when he lived in Connecticut. He said he was pleasantly surprised to find out that the car gained value with age. According to the Kelly Blue Book Web site, the suggested retail price for his car is now about $27,400.”

    An owner of a 2004 VW diesel told me a similar story of his car increasing in value.

  81. “Actually estimated 12 years.”

    Wrong…there’s no way to get the oil out of there within 12 years. There aren’t even any roads up there!

    “So anyway 12 years is a long time to you, but 160 years of coal is a short time. We discussed France’s Uranium requirement’s running out in 80 years. That is a short time to you.”

    All you have are GOP talking points…more coal, more nuclear, more oil drilling…more, more, more of FINITE resources. You really just don’t understand that concept, and you’re not alone either. Doing more of the same thing and expecting a different result is moronic.

    In English, what you have been writing here from the beginning is S-T-U-P-I-D-I-T-Y. Case in point:

    “I still believe that diesel vehicles are the way to go if you are serious about conservation.”

    Been by a gas station recently troll?? Diesel costs waaay more than regular gasoline, or are you a millionaire troll? $4/gallon?? How about more like $5/gallon, right now troll! Yea, sign me up for one of those 12 mpg diesel trucks…lol… People like me are hurting right now, not later troll. Could it be that these cars pollute more than other types of transportation, or are you pro-smog as well troll? Gee, I wonder why the “*Diesel Technology Forum*” is pushing these types of vehicles?? Hmmmmmm…

    You’re really, really not helping anyone out…

  82. Mister Science Guy,

    I still wonder what you drive, what you really do for a living that high fuel costs do not seem to affect you.

    I know you do not care about workers who are losing their jobs in the airline industry, the trucking industry, and the heating oil industry. Since you are a big government socialist, perhaps you at least care about the school districts who are seeing the costs to run their bus fleets and heat their buildings go through the roof. Tell me Mr Scientist, did some high school drop out invent a 100mpg bus before he killed himself??????????

    No wait the cost just gets passed on to the taxpayer. You sure don’t care about him or you would not push tax give aways to big solar, big wind, and big agri-business.

    And before you start on tax incentives for big oil, big coal, and big nuclear, they pay their way more than your (renewable I can’t compete in the market place green idiot energy sources)!

    The only renewable source that is not totally politically dependent is hydro, and I can tell you that they have their own issues with the environment. The white water community hates them even more than you hate big oil.

  83. More idiot ramblings from you & NO facts, again…ugh…

    “high fuel costs do not seem to affect you.”

    What part of “People like me are hurting right now” do you not understand troll??

    “I know you do not care about workers who are losing their jobs in the airline industry, the trucking industry, and the heating oil industry.”

    Would they be losing jobs if we had taken the lessons of the 1970s and applied them to more conservation & alternative energies? I think not…hence the pain now…

    “the school districts who are seeing the costs to run their bus fleets and heat their buildings go through the roof.”

    This is actually one of several things that are causing school budgets in VT to go up at multiple times the rate of inflation (that as well as health care costs & the cost of other types of insurance), but don’t tell that to the local & state GOP officials here. They’ll get angry & tell you that those aren’t “the real cost drivers”…lol…

    I would think you would be the expert on high school dropouts troll…I graduated & then went on to graduate with a Bachelor of Science…sorry…

    Ah, “tax give aways”…I’m opposed to giving them to industries that don’t need them due to their profitability…like agriculture, oil, nuclear, coal, etc., etc.. The point of these kind of incentives is to encourage the type of activity that the govt. feels there needs to be more of, not less or the same amount of. We don’t have unlimited tax dollars yanno. There’s no such thing as “big solar” or “big wind” BTW. I like hydro plenty…VT gets over a third of it’s energy from hydro in the USA & Quebec right now.

    So much for you being for alternative energies, but we already knew that about you, didn’t we troll?

  84. Mr. Guy,

    You said,

    “Ah, “tax give aways”…I’m opposed to giving them to industries that don’t need them due to their profitability…like agriculture, oil, nuclear, coal, etc., etc.. The point of these kind of incentives is to encourage the type of activity that the govt. feels there needs to be more of, not less or the same amount of.”

    So you are for taking money from businesses that the free market has pronounced viable and give it to non viable businesses that may even be competitors. I’m glad you are for economic efficiency.

    These activities as you call them are rewarded on the basis of what the central government feels. It tends to feel good about which ever activity has the better PR and lobbyists. Right now the greens are spreading the best green around.

    You never really spelled out your mixed economy ideal.

    You said,

    You know…”ratholes” like the USA, France, Germany, Australia, the UK…they have mixed economies.

    I believe that you must have had a bad day when the USSR, the most famous mixed economy in the history of mankind collapsed. In the old Soviet system your buddies really had those capitalist pigs under their heels.

    I found out a little more about you. You seem to have a BS degree in BS.

    You said, “What part of “People like me are hurting right now” do you not understand troll??”

    No way man. I bet you are still sponging off of your parents. That basement must be a warm place to wage war on American capitalism.

  85. You too can become a recruit in the war on energy ignorance and economic suicide.

    http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?
    Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659

    Drill now petition

    For an update on the corporate front of this same war.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,360003,00.html

    Junk Science: Poseur Shareholders
    Thursday, May 29, 2008

    By Steven Millo

    Excerpts:

    “The green blitzkrieg hit the ExxonMobil annual shareholder meeting this week.”

    “The meeting featured 17 shareholder proposals, the vast majority of which were filed by left-leaning “investors” seeking, in one way or another, to pressure company management into implementing the green agenda.”

    “As a portfolio manager of a libertarian/conservative activist mutual fund, I attended the meeting to defend company shareholders”

    “ExxonMobil employs more than 80,000 people and earns and returns billions of dollars to millions of investors every year.”

    “”Ironically, the alternative energy strategy failed miserably at oil giant BP. As BP CEO John Browne chased the alternative fuel fantasy and advocated climate alarmism, his inattention to safety and maintenance led to 15 tragic deaths at the 2005 Texas City refinery explosion, the largest-ever oil spill in the Alaskan North Slope in 2006 and ensuing harm to BP’s reputation and share price.”

    “”Under new leadership, BP reportedly will ditch the alternative energy business entirely since its shares have received little, if any, uplift from renewable energy.”

  86. Mister Guy.

    You alternative energy guys are really good at killing energy that works. My side on the other hand may oppose giving tax breaks or subsidies to your renewable pipe dreams but, we generally do not try to stop them as you stop us. We actually hope you succeed.

    Now who is it that has stopped renewable projects? I offer this blast from the past to remind you.

    http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/2/27/113830.shtml

    Monday, Feb. 27, 2006 11:34 a.m. EST

    Ted Kennedy Wants Windmills Killed

  87. “So you are for taking money from businesses that the free market has pronounced viable and give it to non viable businesses that may even be competitors.”

    And when did I say that?? Of yea, it was never…I forgot that I was talking to an idiot. Why give tax breaks to businesses that don’t need them…ever hear of “corporate welfare”?

    I already explained the basics of what a mixed economy is…learn to read troll. Mixed economies are NOT central planned economies (like the Soviet Union was or like North Korea & Burma are now), period.

    More nonsense from that has-been Newt Gingrich…we’ve already been over the FACT that we can’t drill our way out of this situation…how quickly you forget troll.

    Since ExxonMobil is “perhaps the most profitable business venture in the history of capitalism”, I say that they are an excellent candidate again for a Windfall Profits Tax. Those guys have a lot of nerve complaining about other people’s oil spills too…Exxon Valdez anyone??

    “We actually hope you succeed.”

    Sure…sure you do…lol…all this “encouragement” from you side has gotten us real far down the path to real solutions and not just more of the same…sure…

    From your very own link:
    “Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, has called for a ban on all wind turbines within 1.5 nautical miles of shipping and ferry lanes, The Washington Post reports.

    Young cited research in Britain suggesting that the wind turbines’ huge blades could interfere with shipboard radar, and he singled out the Cape Wind site – close to sea routes between the Cape and the islands of Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard”

    “a contractor for the Army Corps of Engineers stated that the wind farm ‘is not expected to create negative impacts to navigational safety.’”

    I know that area around Cape Cod very well, and, personally, I think it’s kind of weird place for a wind farm. One good winter storm or a hurricane, and I think those windmills would all be gone…better to locate them on land IMO.

  88. Mister Guy,

    You said, “I know that area around Cape Cod very well, and, personally, I think it’s kind of weird place for a wind farm.”

    I think you are just covering up for the Kennedys. I hate to defend a renewable energy project, but I am sure some expensive engineering went in to picking that site. Just more of the liberal hypocricy called NIMBY.

    You said “we’ve already been over the FACT that we can’t drill our way out of this situation”

    Don’t state an opinion and put it out as fact. I’ve heard the double speak before. You present a false premise ” out of this situation ” and then conclude that drilling is not the solution or even a part of the solution.

    Yes Mr. Bachelor of Science Degree ,in we have no idea what, drilling on it’s own can’t solve the whole situation. You and your cohorts twist this fact and use it to say that drilling will do nothing to help the situation.

    To state this, you are either incredibly ignorant or or worse, you are deliberately misleading the ignorant. You should work for Sen. Schumer. He speaks like you write.

  89. “I hate to defend a renewable energy project”

    because you’re NOT in favor of renewable energy in the first place.

    “You present a false premise ‘out of this situation'”

    So the situation that we’re in is GOOD in your warped mind? Huh??

    “drilling on it’s own can’t solve the whole situation”

    Wow, how many WEEKS has it taken me to get this one, small nugget of truth out of you? Wow…

  90. Mister Guy,

    I am sure we both have the same opinion of each others intelligence. Neither one of us has convinced the other of anything. . I will continue to argue for any increase in domestic SUPPLY of energy. Green, black or invisible. You will continue to argue for US energy starvation, because it will force us quicker in to your green utopia. Can you say North Korea? I still say you do not account for population growth.

    I’ve tried to find some small area of agreement with you. This is my last olive branch.

    There are countries who because they lack the energy resources that we have, are in an even more desperate situation than us.

    My point is that these countries should be far ahead of the US in your renewable technologies. Perhaps we could find agreement on THAT. The two countries I am focusing on are Israel and Japan.

    Israel in particular has some solar partnerships with California.

  91. “You will continue to argue for US energy starvation”

    More utter nonsense from you…what a surprise… can you say that you’re stupid?

    There ARE countries that are far ahead of us in renewable technologies…I’ve already listed TONS of them here in this thread.

    Japan is already ahead of us in the area of solar. Honda & Toyota vehicles were named to have the highest fuel economy & lowest emissions due to the advanced technology in hybrid systems, biofuels, use of lighter weight material, and better engineering.

    Israel is a global leader in water conservation & geothermal energy.

  92. Mister Guy,

    I feel like President Bush. I reached out to the other side with the bi-partisan hand of friendship. Just like when you reach out to a vicious dog, my hand came back with a few fingers bitten off.

    Just so that you are made aware of it. The Japanese are engaged in DRILLING for natural gas offshore. In fact they have had serious disputes with China over some of the gas fields. Israel is also involved in offshore natural gas. The Palestinians claim Israel is stealing their natural gas.

    The only reasons these two countries are not drilling for oil, is that they can’t find any. The US is the only country that I know of, which voluntarily limits it’s oil and natural gas supplies. Why?

    Because your crowd has used it’s influence to stop every energy source that works. Why has your crowd done all of this? Why have they not learned from history? Because, in the words of Ron White, ” you can’t fix stupid. “

  93. You know what? You *are* just like President Bush…dumber than a post & married to the past when it comes to energy supplies. I’m still waiting for this “uniter not a divider” nonsense that he was selling in 2000 to happen.

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

    Your two examples of Japan & Israel are basically in the same boat. They both have less than 0.1 of a billion barrels of oil (we have about 21 billion barrels of oil), and they both have over 200 times LESS natural gas than we do, which is why…”Japan is the largest importer of Liquefied Natural Gas in the world”!

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/Japan/NaturalGas.html

    Note the blip that is Japanese production of natural gas compared to their consumption of it. It’s a dead end, and I suspect that they know it.

  94. Mister Guy,

    I wish to correct what I said about Israel not drilling for oil. They are drilling for it ,they just have not found any significant amounts that I’m aware of.

    http://www.zionoil.com/the-joseph-project/the-joseph-project.html

    The point which I keep making is that even a country such as Israel with very little proven oil and small proven natural gas resources, is drilling. I guess they have not read your statements that they can’t drill their way out of the situation.

  95. I’ve tried to post and I get a discard message

  96. So, futilely drilling for oil that might not even be there is a GOOD thing in your mind?? The Israelis are also actively & brutally oppressing a huge portion of their own population. I don’t think that we need to be taking our cues from the likes of Israel. It also appears that not everyone over there is on your pro-oil bandwagon:

    http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525933299&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

    “I’ve tried to post and I get a discard message”

    It’s the spam thing again…it happened to me a while back too.

  97. Mister Guy,

    I am used to arguing on boards such as this with YOUR KIND. Generally they are just as passionate as you, but they and I are able to elevate the discussion beyond calling each other stupid.

    I have to wonder whether you have ever had a serious challenge to your point of view. You retreat in to rude remarks and cliches. You do a poor job in defending the details when I point out, what I believe, are weak points in your positions.

    None of us have arrived at our point of view in a vacuum. You are afraid to give out much of your life experience that shaped your thinking.

    Try elevating the level of your argument before you elevate the level of your insults.

    If you are not too afraid, spell out this brutally oppressed part of the Israeli population.

  98. Mister Guy,

    I read the article from your link. It would be helpful to know the background the author, Evelyn Gordon of The Jerusalem Post. He knows as little about fighting terrorism as he does about energy.

    Speaking of people who do not know what they are talking about. I believe you said previously that you do not believe in Global warming, or climate change as they call it now. From your point of view these folks must come under the title of useful idiots.

  99. “I have to wonder whether you have ever had a serious challenge to your point of view.”

    Well, you certainly haven’t been much a challenge…you’re just a mouthy troll that’s way, way short on facts.

    “spell out this brutally oppressed part of the Israeli population.”

    You’ve never heard of the Palestinians?!?! Come on now…I have to explain that situation to you too?? I don’t think so…go read a book about it troll…

    I really don’t think that “Evelyn Gordon” is a he BTW…sheesh…

    Just because I don’t believe in global warming or that CO2 is necessarily a pollutant, a lot of the “greenhouse” gases that a lot of people are worried about aren’t the kind of stuff that you’d like to breathe…CO, methane, O3, nitrous oxide, etc.. I don’t think we need to dry the atmosphere out to combat the “problem” either, since water vapor is the largest “greenhouse” gas.

  100. Mister Guy,

    ” The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    You and the global warming crowd have the same people you wish to destroy. It is natural for me to assume you could be friends.

    Evelyn is sometimes a male name. I am surprised you had the courage to name the Palestinians as Israel’s oppressed minority.

    It is difficult for me to have sympathy for a group that uses children as homicide bombers, murders at the Olympics, and shoots Bobby Kennedy.
    —————————————————-

  101. Mister Guy,

    And now for something completely different.

    History has proven this to be a ( what did you call it?******* Oh yea, a dead end.) :) :)

    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=30746
    Excerpts:

    President Carter 5/3/78

    “And now, at last, we have made a promising start towards conserving our limited resources of fossil and mineral fuel.

    “As the plan itself states, and I quote, “America’s hope for energy to sustain economic growth beyond the year 2000 rests in large measure on the development of renewable and essentially inexhaustible sources of energy.” ”

    “The Department of Energy believes that photovoltaic cells can be competitive with conventional energy sources, perhaps as early as 1990. “

  102. Sirhan Sirhan was a Christian Palestinian that was raised in the Maronite Church…he also made several religious conversions, joining Baptist and Seventh-day Adventist churches…certainly not your typical “terrorist” IMO. I’m sure it’s also difficult to imagine the amount of baloney that the Palestinians have been going through over the last 50+ years…you’d get desperate at some point too I bet.

    Yea, and Carter was right, if we would have continued a lot of the progress that we had made towards conserving and development of alternative energies (instead of going in the opposite direction under Reagan), who knows where we’d be by now.

    “No matter how good a job of conservation we do, the world’s supply of oil and gas will dwindle, become more expensive, and finally run out.”

    “I intend to put in a demonstration solar hot-water system at the White House.”

    And Reagan pulled it all down.

  103. Mister Guy,

    “Reagan pulled it all down.”

    I had some replies to this. They keep being discarded the way Reagan discarded Carter’s policies.

  104. Mister Guy,

    You said, “amount of baloney that the Palestinians have been going through over the last 50+ years…you’d get desperate at some point too I bet.”

    We will have to agree to disagree on this since the topic on this board is energy. Besides, I am becoming more and more convinced that your guy Obama will be our next President. Like Carter he is more sympathetic to the Palestinians than McCain.

    I see Obama as unstoppable because of the mood of the country. Very similar to how mad the country was at Ford for the Nixon pardon. Obama’s energy policies will fail like Carter’s did and he will be out in 4 years.

    Unfortunately I do not see a Ronald Reagan in the wings this time to save us.

  105. http://www.mediastudy.com/articles/av6-24-04.html

    Excerpt: “One of Reagan’s first acts in office was to order the working solar panels removed from the roof of the White House. He then scrapped the rest of Carter’s energy plan, never replacing it with one of his own. Americans went on a 25-year drunk, buying larger and more powerful cars while building more and more roads to drive them on, all while starving mass transportation coffers.”

    That was a wonderful 25 year dead end.

  106. Yea, and discarding Carter’s policies was a huge mistake, which we’re still paying for (literally) today! Reagan is dead…and good riddance to him!!

    “That was a wonderful 25 year dead end.”

    For who, the oil companies?? And to think that I supported the Contras at the time…lol…

    “the Reagan administration covertly raised funds for the Contras by selling weapons to the US’ official enemy, Iran, as well as aiding the Contras in illicit narcotics shipments to US-based drug dealers.”

    “After conspiring with the Iranians, however, Reagan also double-crossed them, selling weapons to their enemy, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. The Reagan administration continued to sell not only conventional weapons, but biological and chemical weapons components to Iraq even after it was documented that they were using banned chemical weapons against their own Kurdish population and against the Iranians. The Reagan administration also worked to thwart international condemnation of Saddam’s regime.”

    “Reagan also was a friend to the racist apartheid regime in South Africa, vetoing a bipartisan congressional bill that would have enacted sanctions against that government.”

    “He promised to shrink government but instead gave us record deficits driven by tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations coupled with increases in military spending. He allowed Savings and Loan administrators such as Neil Bush to loot their own banks, ultimately costing us almost one trillion dollars.”

    And to think that I actually voted for Reagan in 1984…LOL!!! You live and learn…well, some of us do anyways…

  107. Mister Guy,

    The Reagan-Bush 12 year reign gave us low energy prices and a secure military position by defeating the Soviets and their South American allies.

    Now Bill Clinton comes in. Instead of using the window of opportunity that peace and cheap energy gave him, he squandered it. He did not make any long term policy directives to prepare us for the coming reality.

    With the cold war over, the security challenge was Islamic terrorism. He dealt with that by not dealing with it.

    He did nothing substantial to promote energy conservation. He closed off oil and COAL supplies to developement. He drained oil out of the strategic Reserve to keep oil prices low. This kept the economic party going, and was the only thing that kept him in office. All of this was bad for the long term.

    Bush Jr. came in and said we had to increase domestic energy ( coal, oil, nuclear,). Unfortunately even though Congress was nominally under his party, he got little of this done.

    He compromised on a lot of this. The worst being the Ethanol boondoggle.

  108. I’ve been trying to figure out why the laws of supply and demand have not been working lately, and then I found this little nugget.

    http://www.buffalonews.com/180/story/364512.html

    Excerpt: “With consumption of gasoline slumping in the United States, one of the main drivers behind world oil demand has been China’s rapidly rising imports of diesel fuel to make up for coal-fired electricity lost since the Sichuan province earthquake and to stockpile in advance of the Summer Olympics.”

  109. Reagan-Bush and their policies have bankrupted the country, period. It’s amazing how every problem with you guys somehow comes back to Clinton…lol…

    Let me quote what I wrote in another thread on this website:
    “Remember when Clinton tried to attack Al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan & the GOP whined about ‘wagging the dog’? Also, remember when former Clinton administration officials warned the Bush Regime about the threat from Al-Qaeda in 2001 & they did *nothing*? I didn’t think so…”

    I remember when Clinton proposed a “BTU Tax” (basing energy taxes on how efficient the energy source was – the less efficient they were, the higher the tax) and Congress not going along with it.

    Reagan enjoyed mostly falling oil prices during his term but that was mostly due to policies that were started before his term…like the Windfall Profits Tax and widespread energy conservation efforts. The Reagan years also started the trend whereby domestic oil imports rose while domestic oil production fell, which continues pretty much to this day.

    GHWB had oil prices that went at least slightly upwards during his term…getting involved in wars in the Middle East didn’t help matters at all either.

    Clinton also had oil prices that went mostly, slightly upwards, but he also released oil from the SPR to bolster oil supplies twice. You and I *wish* that oil was around $10/barrel (like it was during Clinton’s term), which was lowest since the 1970s.

    GWB? Please, to expect help from an oil man (just like his father was) on energy issues is just silly.

  110. Mister Guy,

    I realize that you have never read anything about economics except Das Kapital. As much as you would like to change it, we are a capitalist society. The market rewards economic value. The market punishes economic weakness. It does a better job of promoting REAL EFFICIENCY, not POLITICAL EFFICIENCY than a corrupted Congress, whose members have proven to be as ignorant as you about history and energy.

    The wind fall profits tax does nothing but punish the producers of what the market says is our most valuable commodity,OIL, and give it to the most inefficient part of the economy, namely your renewable energy favorites that have never stood on their own. The tax, like it’s creators does not produce one drop of oil.

    I will be happy to move away from dead end sources like nuclear, coal, oil, natural gas, when alternatives can produce plentiful and cheap energy. Those alternatives failed miserably under Carter and will fail miserably under Obama. The difference will be made up as always in imported oil and in the economic misery of Americans.

    Unfortunately we now have serious competition for imported oil from India and China, that we did not have 30 years ago. Obama is Carter, McCain is Ford and Reagan has not risen from the dead yet to save us again.

  111. Mister Guy,

    You said “when former Clinton administration officials warned the Bush Regime about the threat from Al-Qaeda in 2001 & they did *nothing*?”

    Geeeee I missed that part in the 911 report that said the Clintonistas warned about terrorists planning to fly planes in to buildings. These are the same people who blinded our intelligence agencies by making sure the FBI and the CIA could never chat to each other over coffee. This even after the 93 towers bombing.

    The stuff that the Bush people hand over to the Obama folks,you know the water boarding info that has protected you and me since 911, will actually be worth something.

    What Carter, I mean Obama does with it, is another thing.

  112. “we are a capitalist society.”

    No, it is YOU that is living in a fantasy world…we have a mixed economy here, period.

    The Windfall Profits Tax did NONE of the dire things that you say that it did, period. History & numbers don’t lie. You have a very, very warped sense of history. So much for you being in favor of alternative energies in the first place, period end of story.

    We have NEVER been able to produce oil in this country at the level that we are currently using it, period.

    There were plots stopped in the 1990s that involved terrorists flying planes into buildings in the USA you fool! Waterboaring is torture, and torture is NOT the American way. Anyone that defends torture is un-American IMO.

  113. Mister Guy,

    Are you happy paying $4.15 per gallon of gasoline?

  114. No, and I’m especially not happy that our govt. hasn’t done anything in the past to head-off this situation that we are in now…deriding alternative energy sources & conservation efforts, starting wars in the Middle East for no reason, etc., etc..

  115. Mister Guy,

    But $4.15 per gallon is forcing you to conserve. Why are you not happy about that?

  116. Mister Guy,

    I know you are happy about this.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,365627,00.html

    “House Subcommittee Rejects Plan to Open U.S. Waters to More Oil Exploration”

  117. With much better planning & foresight, the current economic pain that is high gas prices was completely & totally unnecessary, period.

    Did you know that the amount of federal oil drilling permits has more than doubled in recent years? I saw a Congressman on the floor of the House speak about it on C-SPAN the other day. So much for more drilling = lower costs eh?

    “We are kidding ourselves if we think we can drill our way out of these problems”

    I agree. The reality is that no one knows for sure how much oil & gas are out there in the depths of the ocean…even the Brazilians aren’t sure about their recent, “big finds” off their coast.

    I still say that if they could get all those GOP Governors of coastal states (that are *also* opposed to doing this kind of drilling) on-board, then it might actually happen.

  118. Mister Guy,

    You said “Did you know that the amount of federal oil drilling permits has more than doubled in recent years? I saw a Congressman on the floor of the House speak about it on C-SPAN the other day. So much for more drilling = lower costs eh?”

    Are they REALLY being ALLOWED to drill. I SAW a Congressman talking about Wyoming. Hundreds of thousands of acres with drilling rights already bought are being tied up in lawsuits and other obstacles by your green friends.

    I forget, what is your position on corn ethanol? Mine is that it is a waste. I heard Jim Cramer say that 30% of our grain is used to make 3% of our gasoline.

    And since you HATE BIG ANYTHING capitalistic, you should know that corn ethanol is pushed by big AGRI companies some of which are run by former executives of BIG OIL.

  119. “Are they REALLY being ALLOWED to drill.”

    They have permits to drill…what else do you need?? A lot of what the industry is saying about this is that oil companies are waiting for the price to go up higher so they can get more bang for their buck if they drill & strike oil.

    Jim Cramer is the EXACT same guy that said that there was nothing wrong with Bear Sterns the week before they went belly up. He’s entertaining for sure, but I wouldn’t take any advice or info from him.

    I’m not an ethanol fan…it’s a stop-gap measure at best until we can get off our oil fixation.

  120. Mister Guy,

    So you are not a corn ethanol advocate and you are not an Al Gore global warming idiot. See there is hope for you.

    Jim Cramer is frequently wrong about individual companies like Bear Stearns, however on many of the larger economic issues like ethanol he is well informed. You should be happy that a few weeks ago he was recommending the solar industry. Of course I believe that it was more that the political climate was favorable with the Bolshevics running Congress.

  121. Question, what country exports more bio diesel than it produces? Who,you may ask, made this miracle possible? The first answer is the United States. The second answer, can you guess,,,,,,,,is Congress.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,366601,00.html

  122. All is not gloom and doom fellow supply siders.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,367015,00.html

    “Bush Administration Grants Oil Companies Legal Protection in Polar Bear Habitats”

    Of course the usual suspects, enviromentalist wackos, are whining.

  123. You’re brushing aside the Cramer-Bear Sterns thing waaaaay too quickly. The move that was made by the Fed was very significant, and Cramer didn’t even have a clue that they were in trouble. Like I said, I like Cramer, but he’s just entertainment.

    How can you export more biodiesel than you produce?? Yea, I heard about this scam before. It is common to see B99 though, since 1% petrodiesel is sufficiently toxic to retard mold formation. Approximately 85% of biodiesel production comes from the EU. Sounds like Congress is all over it. :)

    I could see how this:
    “‘The oil and gas industry in operating under the kind of rules they have operated under for 15 years has not been a threat to the species,’ H. Dale Hall, the Fish and Wildlife Service’s director, told The Associated Press on Friday. ‘It was the ice melting and the habitat going away that was a threat to the species over everything else.'”
    would drive you nuts if you were a global warming fan…lol…

    Legal “protection” for oil & gas companies from the Bush Regime? What a surprise…

  124. Comrade Guy,

    The Bear Stearns issue is a little different than making a judgment about corn ethanol. I am sure Bear Stearns concealed just how bad things were to prevent the inevitable run on the bank. Cramer was not the only smart person who did not have that inside information.

    His corn ethanol argument is corroborated by the facts. Do you dispute that corn ethanol is energy inefficient? Do you dispute that it has drastically driven up food prices? Do you dispute that it has done little to substitute itself for gasoline, thereby reducing petroleum use? Do you even know that it must be transported by rail or truck instead of pipeline? This drives up blending costs.

    Everyone except your crowd knows that energy prices would drop fast if Congress and some misguided state governments would just get out of the private sector’s way. But wait, your guys would lose some of their control over us. We might become less dependent on them. They would rather watch the economy go over a cliff than have that happen.

  125. I’ve already said that I’m not a fan of ethanol, period. The reason that it’s just a stop-gap measure is that it’s use does displace a very, very small amount of oil use.

    The food price thing is a little more complicated since a lot of food is delivered by truck, and gas prices have also skyrocketed. I don’t think that the problem is all ethanol’s fault or even mostly ethanol’s fault. Most corn goes to high fructose corn syrup production anyways, which is a farce.

    There’s aboslutrely no way to dril ourselves out this situation, period end of story. Lay the fault of the Bush economy’s failure at the feet of the person repsonsible for its failure…GWB!

  126. Mister Guy,

    I realize that you are better educated than me. You have a 4 year degree in something, while I merely have a 2 year degree in electronics. However, I would like to take this opportunity to tell you that you have no idea what you are talking about.

    You said “Most corn goes to high fructose corn syrup production anyways, which is a farce.”

    I sourced this twice.

    http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/02/22/philpott/

    “About 5 percent flows into high-fructose corn syrup,”

    http://www.showmenews.com/2008/Jan/20080109Food006.asp

    “about 4 percent goes to the production of high fructose corn syrup.”

  127. Maybe I need to be more precise for someone as dense as you.

    From you own links:
    “A standard fast-food meal, for instance, contains a great percentage of corn despite none of it resembling golden kernels. Instead, most of it is ingested in the form of beef, from cattle that is raised on feed of mostly corn; and soda, which is mostly high fructose corn syrup”

    “Chances are likely those potatoes were fried in corn oil or that you’re dipping them in ketchup that also was made with high fructose corn syrup.”

    So, when you take away the corn that goes back to animals, outside the USA, or ethanol…you are left with a whole lot of corn that’s going to high fructose corn syrup, which was the point that I ham-handedly tried to make before.

    You should really watch the documentary that’s mentioned in those links, “King Corn”…it’s very eye opening in terms of corn use and farming IMO. Those kids didn’t even make any money off their corn field without govt. subsidies, which is a shame.

    “What Ellis and Cheney found was that despite thousands of acres of corns being grown by farmers, little to none was meant for direct consumption.”

    The Right-wing premise that ethanol is displacing too much corn that would end up in our system otherwise as food is just silly, and the movie shows that BTW. We don’t need all that high fructose corn syrup going into our food supply IMO.

    “the amount Americans spend on food as a percentage of disposable income has fallen from 15.4 percent in 1980 to 10.8 percent in 2004. But while we’ve spent less money on food, our waistlines have expanded. The obesity rate, after hovering around 15 percent from 1960 to 1980, surged to 31 percent in the last 25 years, USDA figures show. The percentage of overweight children tripled in the same time period. Meanwhile, incidence of type II diabetes, a diet-related condition with a host of health-related complications, leapt 41 percent from 1997 to 2004.”

    “people are gaining weight and getting sick because unhealthy food is cheaper than healthy food — thanks in large part to federal policies.”

    “Of the $113.6 billion in commodity subsidy payments doled out by the USDA between 1995 and 2004, corn drew $41.8 billion — more than cotton, soy, and rice combined.”

    “The huge corn payouts encourage overproduction, and have helped sustain a long-term trend in falling prices.”

    “Cheap corn, underwritten by the subsidy program, has changed the diet of every American. It has allowed a few corporations — including Archer Daniels Midland, the world’s largest grain processor — to create a booming market for high-fructose corn syrup. HFCS now accounts for nearly half of the caloric sweeteners added to processed food, and is the sole caloric sweetener for mass-market soft drinks. Between 1975 and 1997, per-capita consumption jumped from virtually nothing to 60.4 pounds per year — equal to about 200 calories per person, per day.”

    These are all points that the same film makes as well. Our agriculture policies have NOT been good for our society.

    http://www.corn.org/products.htm

    “corn sweeteners supplied more than 56 percent of the U.S. nutritive sweetener market.”

  128. Mister Guy,

    The lack of depth to your knowledge of corn and the ethanol issue is matched only by the shallowness of your grasp of energy.

    Just as your ignorance,,,, correction, the stupidity of your glorious leaders in Congress has lead directly to our present energy crisis, the stupidity of corn ethanol will lead to unimagined high prices for food in the next couple of years.

    Unlike you, I have no problem laying some of the blame on my side for ethanol. When did your side ever take responsibility for anything. Bush pushed ethanol. He and the Democrats were paying off the almighty farm lobby. The Iowa Caucus is first for a reason.

    Food inflation has competed with energy inflation in the recent past. This was before the big floods in the corn belt. Even a total supply and demand denier like you has to see what is coming, thanks to ethanol.

    To get back to energy. I said it before, history is repeating itself. Senator Obama is Jimmy Carter. His solutions are just an updated version of what did not work 30 years ago. In 2012 President Obama will not get reelected.

  129. Mister Guy,

    Every time I reread our back and forth, there is so much more I would like to pour in to your brain. I do realize that it is better to be brief and it is of course a lost cause.

    One more fact I will leave you with. Many people that owned horses can no longer afford to feed them. A friend of mine who goes to farm auctions told me that you can pick up horses with equipment for free. Just another ethanol by product. In Haiti you can pick up starving children from their parents for free.

    This winter you will be able to pick up frozen senior citizens for free. Unless of course they use coal.

  130. “the stupidity of your glorious leaders in Congress has lead directly to our present energy crisis”

    There is absolutely, positively NO evidence of this, period end of story. “energy inflation” has been through the roof you idiot!!

    For someone that doesn’t even have a grasp on the past, I would avoid making wild, irrational predictions about the future if I were you troll.

  131. Mister Guy,

    You calling me irrational is like a midget calling me short. As far as evidence, where do I start? Which group is always against new supplies of energy? As the population grows and old energy sources dwindle the energy gap is not filled by conservation or renewables. It has always been filled with imports!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Imports put us at the mercy of others. Imported energy makes speculation possible. As I so brilliantly pointed out with my California electrical example. California’s electrical supply gap was filled by imported power from out of state. That Enron shafted them the way OPEC is shafting us on oil was all predictable.

    Now for another example of liberal stupidity, no liberal hypocracy.

    http://www.tennesseepolicy.org/main/article.php?article_id=764

    “Despite adding solar panels, installing a geothermal system, replacing existing light bulbs with more efficient models, and overhauling the home’s windows and ductwork, Gore now consumes more electricity than before the “green” overhaul.”

    Just to show how bipartisan I am, here is the left wing rebuttal.

    http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/8163-debunking-the-bunk-the-truth-about-al-gore-s-lifestyle

    I won’t quote it, but the author makes 17 points.
    Nowhere does he disprove the facts that Gore consumes enormous amounts of energy and now consumes more after his green renovations.

    So much for your conservation and renewable energy reducing energy needs.

  132. “As the population grows and old energy sources dwindle the energy gap is not filled by conservation or renewables. It has always been filled with imports!”

    No, it isn’t…this was not the experience of the late 1970s and 1980s. The late 1970s & early to mid 1980s saw reductions in U.S. oil imports & slight increases in U.S. oil production due to the benefits of conservation & efficiency efforts (reducing demand) that were started in the 1970s.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_Oil_Production_and_Imports_1920_to_2005.png

    We’ve already went over your complete lack of any understanding of the CA Electrical Crisis…so let’s not go there again…it’s boring schooling you on the same issues over & over.

    Ah, Gore’s house in TN…more Right-wing noise. Is that all that you have left in the tank? Good…maybe we’re coming to the end of this ride finally…

    So, the Tennessee Center for Policy Research is another Right-wing organization that ignores that Gore likely produces a lot (maybe even most) of his electricity *himself* using those solar panels and that geothermal energy system.

    “Attack the messenger, that’s what the reactionary right does when they are no longer able to compete on the field of reasoned intellectual objectivity.”

    “Worry not when you are lacking rationality, intelligence, cognitive reasoning and substantive facts.”

    I agree. BTW, I’ve already shown you plenty of examples of alternative energy and conservation/efficiency successes…you just ignore them because facts don’t matter in your “analysis”…only ideology does.

    “He has created a rainwater collection system for irrigation and water management.”

    “Al Gore’s family has signed up for 100% percent green power through Green Power Switch.”

    That means that whatever power that they are getting from the grid is coming from clean, green sources only. So much for the high water bills of the past too I guess…nice job Al…too bad the Supreme Court took away your win in 2000…

  133. Mister Guy,

    You said, “Right-wing organization that ignores that Gore likely produces a lot (maybe even most) of his electricity *himself* using those solar panels and that geothermal energy system.”

    I believe we have a difference of facts. I will have to check this closer, but I still believe you are wrong. It is my understanding that the Tennesseepolicy.org site is monitoring how much electricity Al Gore is being metered for, by his local utility.

    If his solar panels and geo thermal energy system were producing most of his electric power, as you just said, then he would be getting very little from the power company. Either Tennesseepolicy.org is lying through their teeth or once again you have no idea what you are talking about.

    I don’t know anything about the Green Power Switch you mentioned ,but for your sake I’ll check it out.

  134. I’ve done a little checking on Green power switch. If Big Al signed up and wants to over pay for electricity, that’s his right. He can afford it. I think they should cut off his power from the grid, at least when the wind isn’t blowing. No dirty power for back up, just his solar cells. If I believed what he did and had his moola I’d be totally self sufficient. But then I’m not a hypocrite.

    I’ve done a rough calculation. Last year I used just 2.6% of the electricity that Big Al used. Or he used 38 times what I used. I conserved with out solar or geothermal technology.

    I am hoping to use more power this coming year. I have this idea to get rich printing up carbon credit certificates in my basement. The trail has been blazed.

  135. I intend to beat this dead horse to a pulp.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,369084,00.html

  136. The “TN Center for Policy Research” is a Right-wing organization dedicated to “free market policy solutions to public policy issues”, promoting “limited government”, “reduced tax and regulatory burdens”, school choice, and “personal responsibility”, and they are out to do a political hit-job on Gore, period.

    It’s not only the rich that sign up to have their power come from clean energy sources, many people do it now & you can do it in just about any increment (25%, 50%, 100%, etc.) that you want to. We even have a similar program here in VT, and I bet your state does as well. The problem with you’re overly simplistic, anti-renewable energy view of the world is that there will ALWAYS be a portion of the country where “the wind isn’t blowing”, but there will also be a portion of the country where the wind IS blowing…sometimes quite hard, particularly in the higher terrain.

    I can understand why your tiny head is exploding over this concept. No one with any seriousness on the Left is advocating a “cap” on the amount of KWs that a person can use in a day/month/year or “downsizing our lifestyles”. What we would merely like is that our power be generated from renewable (non-finite), non-polluting (or minimally polluting) sources, and that, in the meantime, people are empowered to choose to not waste the “dirty” power that they are using. If someone (Al Gore for instance) is generating their own clean power for their own use, who are we to dictate how he uses that power? If we are getting our power from clean energy sources, whether you or I are leaving the lights on all day should be a function of how much we’re willing to pay on our respective electric bills, period. A clean, renewable resource is one that will NEVER run out…you can *never* use too much of it. The ideas that we are putting forward are nowhere near as draconian as your side sez that they are.

    I’m not a fan of carbon offsets at all. If one believes that carbon is a pollutant (and I’m *not* of that opinion), then all that needs to happen is to set a cap on the pollutant in question and then go about reducing that cap over time until the pollutant is no longer a factor.

  137. Mister Guy,

    You have not been able to prove that anything the TN center said was untrue or misleading. They base their article on the public record of how much the power company billed Vice President Gore. Even with the glorious renewable energy toys he still used 38 times as much dirty energy FROM THE FREAKIN GRID, as I did. Of course that was before the green power switch, which is still backed up by RELIABLE, DEPENDABLE,PROVEN, ALWAYS ON,CHEAP, conventional electric power.

    You are a true Marxist. Why can’t I be EMPOWERED not to choose unproven, subsidized, unreliable, expensive, energy.

    You are doing everything that you just said you are not in favor of. You are already forcing all Americans to down size their vehicles, their vacations, their diets, their standards of living, their CHOICES. The fuel prices are the proof. You guys are not sorry about $4 a gallon gasoline or $5 a gallon diesel. You are sorry that all of it is not going to your Democratic Congress to buy more votes.

    I wish this forum had more room. You have said so many ignorant things that I don’t have the space to fully refute.

  138. Mister Guy,

    I realize I shouldn’t but, your last comment is so typical of your lack of reality that I cannot stop myself from correcting you.

    Quote “all that needs to happen is to set a cap on the pollutant in question and then go about reducing that cap over time until the pollutant is no longer a factor.”

    It’s all so simple. No consequences, no costs to the rule makers, or more accurate, the rulers. Just make a rule, excempt yourself and let others suffer with the unintended results. That kind of logic has worked wonders in Myamar.

    You have no expertise in energy, or economics. It’s also becoming apparent that you have no life experience dealing with them either.

    One day when my side returns to power we will set a cap on stupidity in government. That will serve as term limits to Democrats. Wait smart people can sell them moron credits.

  139. “You have not been able to prove that anything the TN center said was untrue or misleading.”

    LOL…so we’re back to you not being able to read again eh troll? It’s sad…

    “Even with the glorious renewable energy toys he still used 38 times as much dirty energy FROM THE FREAKIN GRID”

    Wrong…he has aranaged to purchase whatever energy that he needs from “the grid” from 100% clean energy sources, period.

    “which is still backed up by RELIABLE, DEPENDABLE,PROVEN, ALWAYS ON,CHEAP, conventional electric power.”

    Yea, like wind, solar, hydro, etc., etc….get it through your thick skull…this is non-issue…give it up!!

    “Why can’t I be EMPOWERED not to choose unproven, subsidized, unreliable, expensive, energy.”

    Renewable energy sources are NOT “unproven”, “expensive”, or “unreliable”, period!

    “You are already forcing all Americans to down size their vehicles, their vacations, their diets, their standards of living, their CHOICES. The fuel prices are the proof. You guys are not sorry about $4 a gallon gasoline or $5 a gallon diesel.”

    Wow, you’re really going off the deep end eh? Losing must be a hard thing for you to take. No one is being *forced* by anyone to downside their vehicles, leave their house less often, etc. because of anything. The high gas prices are an abomination, but the Bush Regime has worked DAMN HARD to get them up as high as they are none-the-less. I don’t like it any more than you do!

    “I wish this forum had more room. You have said so many ignorant things that I don’t have the space to fully refute.”

    Just more hot-air promises that you’ll never be able to keep…because you can’t. You haven’t refuted a single thing that I’ve posted here all along…lol…it’s just Right-wing nonsense after Right-wing nonsense with little to no facts…all the way back to when you started posting here troll!

    “Just make a rule, excempt yourself”

    Who said that anyone would be exempt from an environmental rule? Oh yea, nobody did…you just made that up…just like usual troll.

    “You have no expertise in energy, or economics.”

    And you have no idea what the heck you are talking about, but what else is new troll? That’s been going on here from the very start!!!

    “One day when my side returns to power we will set a cap on stupidity in government”

    How would someone like your heroes GWB & Reagan get elected then?? LOL…

  140. Mister Guy,

    You said, “The high gas prices are an abomination, but the Bush Regime has worked DAMN HARD to get them up as high as they are none-the-less. I don’t like it any more than you do!”

    How can the Bush admistration have worked to push gasoline prices high, when they tried to get more supply in this country???I’ve tried to teach you supply and demand fundamentals,so you can’t say , nobody ever told you about them. Defend what you say.

    When is it good to be a flipflopper and when is it bad to be a flipflopper? You decide.

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/22/campaign.wrap/?iref=mpstoryview

    Quote “Both sides tried to go on offense, with the Obama camp accusing McCain of “yet another flip-flop” on the issue of oil drilling and the McCain camp saying Obama broke his word on the issue of campaign financing.”

    Ignorance once again begins it’s glacial retreat.

    http://www.wkrg.com/consumer/article/gulf_coast_residents_favor_offshore_drilling/15041/

    Quote: “Gulf Coast Residents Favor Offshore Drilling”

  141. Mister Guy,

    I had a reply to most of your points and I raised some new ones, but my stuff just vanished when I tried to post.

  142. Alan, I was able to retrieve your comment from the Akismet Spam filter. I have no idea why it got tagged it as spam. (At least, this time, it was still accessible when I checked. After a few hours, the Spam filter usually clears itself, even though it’s supposed to hold spam for 3 days in the queue.)

    I apologize for Akismet’s behavior. It’s lousy software, and WordPress should dump it. IMHO.

  143. NotYourDaddy ,

    Thank you for your reply. In case anyone cares,it is 6:30 PM Eastern Time June 23, 2008. Jim Cramer is doing a better job, than I can,in making the case for offshore drilling in the US. If you can catch the rebroadcast and just watch the first 10 minutes of his show, it is more than worth it.

  144. I would just like to give a small history lesson as to the genesis of the anti drilling movement in the US. It goes back 39 1/2 years to the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill.

    http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/~jeff/sb_69oilspill/69oilspill_articles2.html

    Union Oil Co using substandard equipment and techniques caused a huge oil spill that haunts us to this day.

    I point out that since then nearly every other major spill including the infamous Exxon Valdiz were Tanker spills. The Democrats have not banned oil tankers from bringing imported oil in to the US. Why not??????

    I argue that given the safety records of tankers versus oil wells, it is probably more environmentally friendly to drill our own oil than to transport it further in tankers from overseas. Granted as the Exxon Valdiz demonstrated, domestic oil still gets transported sometimes in tankers. I still say that since the distance is shorter from offshore than Saudi Arabia, the choice is a no brainer.

  145. Since I’m on a roll.

    Ignorance is being beaten back. The tide of enlightenment is coming in.
    http://www.wkrg.com/consumer/article/gulf_coast_residents_favor_offshore_drilling/15041/

    “Gulf Coast Residents Favor Offshore Drilling”

  146. When is a Flipflop the result of a flexible mind, and when is it just old fashioned hypocrisy?

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/22/campaign.wrap/?iref=mpstoryview

    Quote: “Both sides tried to go on offense, with the Obama camp accusing McCain of “yet another flip-flop” on the issue of oil drilling and the McCain camp saying Obama broke his word on the issue of campaign financing.”

  147. Send me to the Gulag too. I’m a Global Warming Denier and proud of it.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,370521,00.html

    NASA Scientist: Put CEOs On Trial for Global-Warming Lies

    Hansen continues. “In my opinion, these CEOs should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature.”

    You could be in trouble also Mister Guy, you said that you did not believe in it either.

  148. “How can the Bush admistration have worked to push gasoline prices high, when they tried to get more supply in this country?”

    Oh boy, let’s see…starting wars in the Middle East for no reason, sponsoring a coup in Venezuela, enacting higher tax credits for buying an SUV than for buying a fuel-efficient car, denigrating the use of conservation to try & reduce demand, etc., etc., etc….

    Oh yea, McSame flip-flopped on the issue of offshore oil drilling…just like he did on the Bush tax cuts during a time a war…get ready for a LOT more of those too… It sure is something that it looks like we’ll finally have a Dem running for President that might outspend their GOP counterpart! Once again, we CANNOT drill our way out this energy crisis.

    “Gulf Coast Residents Favor Offshore Drilling”

    Too bad that Bush’s brother (the former Gov. down there) doesn’t though.

    “The Democrats have not banned oil tankers from bringing imported oil in to the US.”

    We should have mandatory double-hulled oil tankers.

    The rest of your recent posts, frankly, are just a bunch of unorganized rants…mostly about stuff that is not under debate. I think it’s about time for you to pack it in troll…

  149. Mister Guy,

    So Bush’s war pushed up the price of oil. Please explain, be precise. I have faith that you can, cause yer a scientist.

    What coup did Bush sponsor in Venezuela and exactly how did it push up the price of oil? Again I have faith in you because you have a BS degree in something or other.

    What SUV tax credits did Bush enact? You obviously have access to a treasure trove of information that I do not.

    Even a double hulled oil tanker does not meet the 100% guarantee against failure that your side demands of wells and pipelines. By that standard no oil tanker should be allowed with in 200 miles of the US coast line.

    Since you brought it up. Why do Democrats whine about the Republicans being the party of money, then say nothing when President Obama raises more money than Hillary and McCain combined??????

    You said “The high gas prices are an abomination,” “I don’t like it any more than you do!””

    Why would you and Al Gore care? Why haven’t you put solar panels in like Gore? Why don’t you junk your car and drive a moped, then you would not have to worry about gas prices? If I believed what you SAY you believe, I would do all of that and a lot more.

  150. Wow, if ignorance is bliss, your life must be heaven there troll!

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Oil_price_chronology.gif

    “So Bush’s war pushed up the price of oil. Please explain, be precise.”

    Oil prices when Bush took office – around $17/barrel. Oil prices now – around $137/barrel.

    “What coup did Bush sponsor in Venezuela and exactly how did it push up the price of oil?”

    Oil prices before unrest in Venezuela – around $16/barrel. Oil prices after the coup attempt in Venezuela backed by the U.S. govt. and resulting increased unrest there – around $33/barrel.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Venezuelan_coup_d’%C3%A9tat_attempt

    I strongly recommend watching the documentary “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”.

    “What SUV tax credits did Bush enact?”

    http://www.selfemployedweb.com/suv-tax-loophole-2.htm

    “In 2003, lawmakers expanded the tax deduction to a whopping $100,000 as part of the $350 million tax cut package. Yet Congress did not change the weight-based classification of the vehicles, creating a huge benefit for the largest, least efficient vehicles.”

    “In May 2002, the IRS declared gasoline/electric hybrids eligible for tax deductions as ‘clean fuel’ vehicles”

    “Toyota Prius total 1st year deductions – $9660. Hummer H1 total first year deductions – $101111.64”

    “Why do Democrats whine about the Republicans being the party of money”

    We do this because the GOP IS the part of money and big business, period. The fact that enough small contributors are finally starting to outweigh the usual GOP big-money monetary advantage that they’ve had for quite some time is both surprising and pleasing to me. REAL campaign finance reform is still desperately needed in this country though.

    “Why haven’t you put solar panels in like Gore? Why don’t you junk your car and drive a moped, then you would not have to worry about gas prices?”

    When I own my own house, I will. Like I’ve said before, when I save enough money, I’m buying a hybrid and then converting it into a plug-in hybrid once the warranty is up. For now, I just try and drive more efficiently, use CFLs, reduce my electricity use, etc.. What are YOU doing??

  151. Mister Guy,

    If you want to actually LEARN about energy, watch Cramer this week. His first 2 shows were about companies and the new technology of offshore drilling. I believe he is doing the whole week on that topic.

    What am I saying, you, Bill Richardson, and Barak Obama are blinded by your ideology. You would NEVER find out what people IN the energy field are actually doing. That would require expending mental energy and you guys have none to spare.

  152. Mister Guy,

    What am I doing???????????????????????????????? I am burning freakin COAL to reduce my natural gas bill. I walk to work in the snow, rain,and sun. Of course I was doing all of this before it was fashionable, before you guys pushed the price of energy up, before the f#&k*@g polar bears were put on the endangered species list. Before Al Gore even knew that CO2 was a gas.

    I asked you to explain how Bush’s war, Bush’s Venezuelan coup pushed up the price of oil and all you did was give me the before and after price of oil. One or two other things happened in the world during the same time. I see I had too much faith in your ability to think.

    The only thing that even remotely checks out that you said was your SUV comment. That one I have to dig in to a little more.

    Just so I am clear. When you get BIG MONEY out of your politics,I don’t suppose that will include UNION MONEY and the money from currency speculator G. Sorros. I did not think so. Something about all of this internet small money Obama has raised stinks to high heaven.

  153. Have fun shoveling coal troll…that’s very 19th century of you…

    “I asked you to explain how Bush’s war, Bush’s Venezuelan coup pushed up the price of oil”

    Hellooooo?? Do you think that encouraging MORE unrest in the exact portions of the world that we currently get our oil from is GOOD for the price of oil? Well, for Bushy Boy and his buddies it is…the price goes sky high and they make out like bandits!

    When it comes to campaign finace reform, I think that groups such as corporations, PACs, unions, and the like should have severe restrictions on the amount of money that they can contribute. First though, the Supreme Court needs to get rid of that Buckley decision…don’t hold your breath on that one…

    “Something about all of this internet small money Obama has raised stinks to high heaven.”

    Break out the conspiracy theories then…what else do you have to do to occupy your time anyways?

  154. Mister Guy,

    “Do you think that encouraging MORE unrest in the exact portions of the world that we currently get our oil from is GOOD for the price of oil?”

    Why is it that when I ask for specifics, you do not deliver? Are you saying that this attempted coup reduced the supply? Are you saying that your buddy Chavez won’t sell us as much because he is mad at us? Does this supposed cut in supply drive up the price that we pay for gasoline? I already know these answers. I doubt that you have a clue.

    If you want to know about the fall in production of oil in Venezuela and the reasons for it, just ask me and I will be happy to tell you all about it.

  155. Do you not know how the commodity markets work at all troll?? They don’t need much of a disturbance in the perceived “stability” of future oil supplies in order to go hog wild and drive the price of oil & gas up through the roof. Intentionally destabilizing the Middle East & Venezuela causes the markets to run around like Chicken Little…and the oil companies make out like bandits as a result!

    A nationwide strike between December 2002 & February 2003 (after the coup attempt in Venezuela) caused their real GDP to decline by around 9% in 2002 & 8% in 2003. They export most of their products (including oil) to the USA (ever been to Citgo?), but Chavez has made clear his intention to reduce his country’s dependency on us as an oil customer by actively courting other countries like China. Venezuela has begun shifting to making payments not in U.S. Dollars but in Euros in order to protect against our weakening dollar. Oil production has been generally falling in Venezuela since the mid to late 1990s, mostly due to depletion of existing oil fields. Like a lot of the other OPEC nations, their “proven” oil reserve numbers are likely bogus (too high).

    So let’s review, unrest in Venezuela in 2002 (including the coup attempt) contributed to a significant increase in oil prices between January & June, and a general strike in Venezuela caused oil prices to escalate further at the end of that year. Continued unrest in Venezuela caused oil prices to rise in January & February of 2003.

  156. Mister Guy,

    Wow, such big words coming from you. Commodity markets, stability. It’s almost like you understood something about supply and demand.

    Who would have thunk that YOU could have gotten so many neurons in a straight line. You really should pursue your study of the international energy business further. I might actually be able to have an intelligent conversation with you.

    Because I feel sorry for you, let me further enlighten you. Chavez has systematically drained the money out of what is a capital intensive industry. As his country’s old fields go dry there is not enough money to develope new ones. Similar to what Saddam did in Iraq to his county’s oil industry. You can guess where the money goes.

    Add to that, since he keeps kicking out more and more foreign oil people, mostly Americans, he is losing the technical know how to develope new fields.

    His oil production keeps declining and once world oil prices stop increasing, he will be in real trouble. Contrast that with Brazil, which actually knows how to run an oil industry.

  157. Mister Guy,

    I love it when you try to impress me with your level of knowledge. You said,”They export most of their products (including oil) to the USA (ever been to Citgo?)”.

    Many of us on the right have been boycotting Citco for a long time because of Chavez. I’m not sure though, how much Venezuela still controls their outlets in the US. I read awhile back that at least partly because of the boycott Chavez sold off some of their stations.

    You said, “Oil prices before unrest in Venezuela – around $16/barrel. Oil prices after the coup attempt in Venezuela backed by the U.S. govt. and resulting increased unrest there – around $33/barrel.”

    Two can play at this game Sir. I believe that when Madam Speaker Pelosi took charge of the House, she promised common sense solutions to rising gasoline prices. Now lets see, what was the price of gas when she said that??????????? $2.25. Now a year and a half later, what is it???????? Over $4 and rising!!!!!!!!!

    Here is a little article from an insignificant little rag that you may of heard of. Investors Business Daily.

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=297904745555169

    “The Drill Nothing Congress”

  158. So, what does all the above hot-air have to do with the FACT the Bush Regime has been doing almost everything that it can to drive up the price of oil for their buddies in the oil industry??

    Venezuela has multiples times the amount of oil that Brazil does. They don’t even know for sure how much oil they “discovered” off Brazil’s coast yet. News flash…Venezuela is running out of oil…so is basically *the rest of the entire world*…wake up!!

  159. “I believe that when Madam Speaker Pelosi took charge of the House, she promised common sense solutions to rising gasoline prices.”

    Man, how many times have I heard this Right-wing hot-air nonsense…you guys really must all go to the same meetings. Congress doesn’t set oil prices. Disrupting regions of the world where most of the world’s oil reserves are stored and driving up demand by incentivizing the purchase of gas guzzling vehicles does WAAAAAY more for oil prices than anything that the Speaker of the House can say or do.

    Yet another attempt to pawn off a Right-editorial as “fact”. As I’ve said before, federal oil drilling permits (a lot of them for offshore) have more than doubled in recent years. Some much for drilling our way out of this mess that we’re in…

    “More than 15 billion barrels of oil have been sent down the Alaskan pipeline from Prudhoe Bay, some 60 miles to the west of ANWR, over the past three decades, much more than the six months’ supply expected in the beginning”

    “ANWR’s estimated 10.6 billion barrels of oil off the market and out of our gas tanks.”

    Ooooooo…big numbers…now let’s do the math. It took over 30 years to pump out less than 2 years worth of oil from the North Slope of AK. Now they want to pump less than a year & a half’s worth of oil from ANWR (where there are NO roads at all), and somehow *that* oil will make it to market (and effect oil prices) waaaaay faster than that. Nope. Thanx for proving my point IBD!

    “The Western U.S. is estimated to have reserves of a trillion barrels (yes, that’s the real number) trapped in porous shale rock”

    No, it isn’t the real number.

    “The U.S. Congress has voted consistently to keep 85% of America’s offshore oil and gas off-limits, while China and Cuba drill 60 miles from Key West, Fla.”

    I’ve heard recently that this China/Cuba/FL thing is a hoax, but I haven’t checked up on it.

    “More than 7 billion barrels have been pumped from these wells over the past quarter-century”

    Ooooo…more big numbers…that’s less a year’s worth of oil, and it took over 25 years to pump it all out!

    You really have nothing new to offer here, do you? It’s a shame for you troll.

  160. Mister Guy,

    I always post what I believe is accurate. I’m still waiting for you to post something coherent.

    Even though you are so blinded by your hatred that you can’t accept facts, I will continue to post them because there is always the chance that knowledge will seep through one of the cracks in your skull.

    And since you would never go to someone in the energy field as a source, I will do it for you.

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/18/chevron.blitzer/

    “Chevron CEO: Market, not greed, driving gas prices ”

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/20/business/chevron.php

    “Why have these higher prices not spurred more meaningful supplies?

    The supplies are coming. But remember there is always a big lag.”
    ——————————————————
    Now I will answer some of your other points.

    When I asked you if you would put solar panels on your house. You said:
    “When I own my own house, I will. Like I’ve said before, when I save enough money, I’m buying a hybrid and then converting it into a plug-in hybrid once the warranty is up”

    When you grow up you will find that your left wing ideas are not cost effective. You would do much better in the long run just buying a subcompact car that gets 40 mpg than your stupid hybrid. I also predict that the electric to run your all electric Piece of S&#t will cost more than gasoline would.

    As far as this comment.
    “Have fun shoveling coal troll…that’s very 19th century of you…”

    :):):)

    Really, I am laughing with you and not at you. My coal stove has saved me more money in 24 years than your solar panel will save you in a 100.

  161. Mister Guy,

    Apparently the cyber gods agree with you. Humble though it may have been, I was quite proud of my last reply until it vanished. No matter, I never run out of material.

  162. “I never run out of material.”

    Yea, you seem to love a good beating…

  163. Mister Guy,

    If I ever get one, it won’t from a kid like you. The older liberals I’m used to battling at least can back up some of what they say. They have experience. You and Obama don’t. You don’t even own a house, so everything you think you know is theoretical.

    You have no track record. I’ve burned coal and natural gas for 24 years. I worked with coal at my former job. I KNOW what things cost, what works, because I’ve done it. I have friends that put solar panels on their homes in the 70s and disconnected them in the 80s. You know nothing.

  164. “The older liberals I’m used to battling at least can back up some of what they say.”

    Troll, all I’ve done here for weeks & weeks is OWN you on just about every issue that you try to bring up…all backed up by FACTS and not lame talking points that you heard on Fox “News”.

    “I KNOW what things cost”

    Yea, and I don’t have any bills…give me a break…

    “I have friends that put solar panels on their homes in the 70s and disconnected them in the 80s. You know nothing.”

    You have “friends” that are idiots then, which makes sense because birds of a feather stick toegther. You have demonstrated here for quite some time now that all you are is big-talking, no supportive facts, little troll…go crawl back under a rock…I’m bored with you…

  165. What real people, producing real energy say.

    http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/06/18/chevron.blitzer/

    Chevron CEO: Market, not greed, driving gas prices

  166. Mister Guy,

    You said, “for quite some time now that all you are is big-talking, no supportive facts,”

    Much of what I post with web addresses, gets deleted from this board as spam. Not that you’d be capable of understanding it. I’ll try this small pearl.

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/06/20/business/chevron.php

    Excerpted:

    “Why have these higher prices not spurred more meaningful supplies?

    The supplies are coming. But remember there is always a big lag.”

  167. Mister Guy,

    You said “Venezuela is running out of oil…so is basically *the rest of the entire world*…wake up!!”

    You are right for one reason. Venezuela is run by the same kind of left wing idiot as run both houses of the US Congress. There is a lot oil, and ,coal, and natural gas still out there. They are still the most efficient energy sources out there or you guys would not still be trying to kill them. Admit it, you WANT the people of this country to suffer so that they blame the oil companies, the coal companies, and President Bush. If you were honest and not stupid you’d admit that.

  168. Gee whiz, an oil company executive sez that they aren’t greedy…what a surprise…he’s not biased at all, is he? Also, he would like not to be taxed…WOW…what a news flash there. What would be REAL news is if they admitted the truth for once. Like that the last time that there was a Windfall Profits Tax in the 1980s, there was NO negative effect on the supply or the price of oil, period.

    “We don’t know yet how much oil is under there”

    No shit Sherlock, you don’t how much oil is out at sea, but I already said that!

    “Huge demand around the globe”

    Wrong, the USA consumes more oil right now than Japan & most of Europe *combined*, and India & China combined only consume about 35% of what we do right now. China can produce 68% of what they use daily, while we can only produce 41% of what we use daily. The rest of the world is NOT the main factor behind oil demand, period.

    thirdworldtraveler.com/Oil_watch/World_Oil%20_Table.html

    However, once again, I’m repeating myself because we’ve been over a lot of this before troll. What exactly IS the point of this almost 2 month string of nonsense from you anyways? You’ll never admit that you have nothing but Right-wing hot-air talking points to spew, and you’re NEVER going to learn!!

  169. Mister Guy,

    You said,”Windfall Profits Tax in the 1980s, there was NO negative effect on the supply or the price of oil, period.”

    Lesson #1 LOGIC: Let’s say for the sake of argument that you Mister Guy, wanted the domestic production of any product to go up. It could be oil or anything. How about a recent example. How about Ethanol. What did the government do? It gave tax incentives to corn ethanol and it put an extra tax on imported sugar ethanol. It also mandated the use of ethanol in gasoline. What happened? Domestic ethanol production increased. If domestic ethanol producers had a windfall profits tax placed on them, do you think their production would go down?????? This is your IQ test for today, don’t let me down.

  170. Mister Guy,

    You said, ”Windfall Profits Tax in the 1980s, there was NO negative effect on the supply or the price of oil, period.”

    Lesson #2 FACTS:

    http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1168.html

    Excerpted:

    “(2) What was the effect of the last windfall profits tax enacted in 1980?

    The answer to the first question is that over the past 25 years, oil companies directly paid or remitted more than $2.2 trillion in taxes, after adjusting for inflation, to federal and state governments—including excise taxes, royalty payments and state and federal corporate income taxes. That amounts to more than three times what they earned in profits during the same period,”

    “CRS also found the windfall profits tax had the effect of decreasing domestic production by 3 percent to 6 percent, thereby increasing American dependence on foreign oil sources by 8 percent to 16 percent”

  171. Mister Guy,

    Now for a more current article on the issue.

    http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200806/POL20080610c.html

    Excerpt:

    “Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has acknowledged that Americans are hurting from the high energy costs but strongly opposes the Democrats’ response and has ridiculed those who “think we can tax our way out of this problem.””

  172. Mister Guy,

    Republicans, except for people like Guvenor Schwarzenegger, believe that yes we CAN drill and produce our way out of this energy crisis.

    Democrats think that we can tax our way out. Apparently they also believe we can sue our way out.

    http://ipthoughts.com/2008/05/26/congress-wants-to-sue-opec.aspx

    Excerpted:

    “If OPEC decided to retaliate for the lawsuit, we may look back longingly at the dates of $4 per gallon gasoline. Where will the U.S. economy snap $6/gal., $8/gal. or $10/gal?”

    I broke up my comments in to four separate posts because I was not sure if they would all post on one.

  173. Mister Guy,

    I double dog dare you to refute the points I made in my last 4 posts. Please be CLEAR in your response.

  174. European high MPG diesel cars that for the most part Americans can’t buy.

    http://www.bovinebazaar.com/deisel.htm

  175. “Lesson #2 FACTS:”

    “I double dog dare you to refute the points I made in my last 4 posts.”

    You have no “lessons” or “points” to give here troll, because, once again, we’ve already been over ALL of this before!! All I need to do here is review what I’ve already written…thanks for making it easy for me troll…

    The Windfall Profits Tax was in effect from 1980-88. During this time, “U.S. oil production rose (for the very last time in history) in the early 1980s…kiss those days goodbye BTW” due to Peak Oil. “Since ExxonMobil is ‘perhaps the most profitable business venture in the history of capitalism’, I say that they are an excellent candidate again for a Windfall Profits Tax.” Oil prices also FELL for most of this time in the 1980s.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:US_Oil_Production_and_Imports_1920_to_2005.png

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Oil_price_chronology.gif

    The “Tax Foundation” is another Right-wing organization, what a surprise that you would cite them…lol! The Windfall profits Tax took in less money over time because of the FACT that oil prices fell for the vast majority of the time that it was in effect!

    Yea, because Mitch McConnell is an unbiased observer on this whole issue…LOL!!! What about rescinding the “$17 billion in tax breaks the companies expect to enjoy over the next decade”? Yea, because when you’re making record profits, you really need corporate welfare…lol… What about making “oil and gas price gouging a federal crime, with stiff penalties of up to $5 million during a presidentially declared energy emergency”? What about requiring oil “traders to put up more collateral in the energy futures markets to curb speculation”? What about getting the oil companies to invest money “in alternative energy projects or refinery expansion”? What about “tax incentives for renewable energy sources such as wind and solar” in order “to promote energy efficiency and conservation”? Oh yea, the GOP filibustered all of that. BTW, the American Petroleum Institute is lying, but what else is new…they represent the oil companies!

    “Republicans, except for people like Guvenor Schwarzenegger, believe that yes we CAN drill and produce our way out of this energy crisis.”

    Yea, now tell that to members of the GOP like Jeb Bush & Charlie Crist, along with many other GOP coastal Governors, who are opposed to offshore drilling. Again troll, you have NO facts to offer here at all.

    That “IP Thoughts” opinion piece is FULL of falsehoods. They mention 1970, but fail to mention the FACT that Peak Oil is real, and THAT’S the main reason why the U.S. has produced less oil over time…we are running out of oil! Then they mention the *myth* that “China and India” are “suddenly becoming major consumers”. Once again troll, the USA consumes more oil than any other country in the world (actually, we consume more oil than Japan & most of Europe *combined*), and India & China combined only consume about 35% of what we do right now. China can produce 68% of what they use daily, while we can only produce 41% of what we use daily. The rest of the world is NOT the main factor behind oil demand, period. But, of course ONCE AGAIN, we’ve already, recently been over all that!!

    “Congress is virtually incapable of controlling spending.”

    Sure, leave the two GOP Presidents that presided over supply-side economic policies that lead to HUGE debt & deficits off the hook, sure. “President Bush, of course, has only recently realized that he is allowed to veto Congressional overspending.” LOL…yea, that explains his complete lack of vetoes when his buddies in the GOP were controlling Congress…lol… I also wasn’t aware that Congress set all those “low interest rates”…hmmmm, I guess the Fed is out business now? LOL…and then you *intentionally* leave this lil nugget out of your quotes:
    “We get much of our gasoline from Canada and other non-OPEC countries.”
    You lying troll!!

    “European high MPG diesel cars that for the most part Americans can’t buy.”

    Why? Because none “of the big 3 automakers has a diesel, unless you want a truck.”

    I’ll be honest with you here troll, I’m at the end of my rope with you…I’m simply NOT going to re-argue things over & over again with you that we’ve already discussed. If you have nothing to add to this discussion, then I’ll just let you rant away and leave you with this:

    You have NO facts whatsoever to back up your position, only blind ideology. REAL facts speak louder than trolls…

  176. Mister Guy,

    I see that you would rather go on an Olberman rant than calmly discuss facts.

    You said “I’m at the end of my rope with you…” No you are Knot. I keep giving you rope, and I don’t even have to put a hangman’s noose in it. You’ve hung yourself so many times and keep coming back for more.

    You said, “Why? Because none “of the big 3 automakers has a diesel, unless you want a truck.”” In the long run I will bet you that diesels win out over HYBRIDS. As dum as Europe is on some things, they got this one right.

    You said, “Then they mention the *myth* that “China and India” are “suddenly becoming major consumers””

    Once again you show that facts have no meaning to you. Once again you show that you have no life experience, or education that allows you to grasp the simplest concepts of energy supply and demand.

    I keep wondering what that 4 year degree you said you have, is in. Liberal Arts? Creative Writing? It wasn’t economics. It couldn’t even have been any kind of environmental engineering. That takes more smarts than you’ve demonstrated. I wonder someone like you manages to make a living. I doubt that you ever get your hands dirty.

    I would bet on political science. You have a wonderful talent for propaganda.

  177. “You’ve hung yourself so many times and keep coming back for more.”

    “Once again you show that facts have no meaning to you.”

    This second statement applies to YOU troll…I’ve already SHOWN you the facts on this issue, *twice now*. You really don’t understand when you’ve been so completely & totally owned…it’s sad to see how blind you are troll.

    Once agin, you have absolutely NO facts to bring to the table…just like always. Well, have fun “debating” with yourself troll…I’ve wasted enough time on the likes of you. There’s a couple of months of my life that I’ll never get back…you lose…

  178. Mister Guy,

    You said “I’ve wasted enough time on the likes of you. There’s a couple of months of my life that I’ll never get back…you lose…”

    You did not waste your time. You wasted everyone else’s time.

    I will continue to post relevant facts as I find them.

  179. OPEC’s next target $170 per barrel.

    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/Indicators/OPEC_rejects_price_band_says_crude_may_hit_170_a_barrel/articleshow/3181927.cms

    This is what you get when Congress is too stupid to allow America to produce it’s own energy. Does anyone other than Senator Shumer still believe that all of the gasoline that the ANWAR oil would produce is still only worth 1 cent per gallon.

  180. Even though all seems gloom and doom when it comes to the US energy market,for all of the efforts of the Democrats to run the country in to the ground so they can take power, from time to time little rays of hope break through.

    BP’s Thunder Horse oil field comes on stream

    http://www.petroleumnews.com/pntruncate/224091963.shtml

  181. Support is growing for oil exploration off of Florida coast. Just like 30 years ago, when the price got high enough people stopped being stupid. The music of the green pied pipers with their pixie dust called renewable energy is starting to fall on deaf ears.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,376641,00.html

  182. Europe is starting to have second thoughts about bio-fuels as an alternative to fossil fuel. Now they say it even contributes to Global Warming through deforestation. I wonder how long it will take for the green idiots in the New World to get a clue.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/business/worldbusiness/08fuel.html

  183. Just maybe we can continue to use fossil fuel. Just maybe the ocean won’t rise and drown us. You will note that this came from the NY Times, which is hardly a Global Warming denier.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/science/earth/04greenland.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

    Quote:

    “And the faster the ice flows, the faster sea levels rise. But a Dutch study using 17 years of satellite measurements in western Greenland suggests that the movement associated with the meltwater is not as rapid as had been feared. The acceleration appears to be a transient summer phenomenon, the researchers said, with the yearly movement actually dropping slightly in some places.”

    “But Dr. Alley and other experts said the new study showed that it was unlikely that Greenland’s ice had already become destabilized in ways that could cause a surge in sea levels.”

  184. Why would oil man T. Boone Pickens be calling for Wind Energy?

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,379702,00.html

    Excerpts:

    “First, it’s worth noting Pickens’ claim made in the op-ed that his plan requires no new government regulation. Two sentences later, however, he calls on Congress to “mandate” wind power and its subsidies”

    “Since Congress didn’t renew the wind subsidy as part of the 2007 energy bill, it will expire at the end of this year unless reauthorized. Subsidies are perhaps more important to the wind industry than wind itself. Without them, wind can’t compete against fossil fuel-generated power.”

  185. More good news on the domestic energy front. Natural gas production in the lower 48 states is increasing. YES, more drilling DOES work. Since natural gas can substitute for crude oil in many applications such as industrial and power generation, this is a positive for lowering oil prices.

    http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/energy_in_brief/natural_gas_production.cfm

  186. Speaker Pelosi wants President Bush to release oil from the Strategic Reserve.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,378241,00.html

    It seems the esteemed Speaker realized that Americans are suffering from the high cost of fuel.

    Gee I thought increased supply had nothing to do with lowering prices. Won’t this merely delay the transition to renewable energy? Why don’t we just build some more wind farms? A couple of more solar panels in Caleefornia ought to do it. How about more bio-fuels? More french fry grease and ethanol in our gas tanks, that’s what I’m for.

    I am just so darn proud of the 535 Congressmen and Senators who are providing such fine leadership, combating high energy costs. It is a total mystery why their approval ratings are the lowest ever recorded.

  187. What is a liberal’s favorite way to force his will on the rest of us???????? File a lawsuit. Preferably in front of a judge, nominated by a Democrat President. Which is another reason not to vote for Sen. Obama.

    I refer to the U.S. District Judge David Lawson, a Clinton appointee.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_M._Lawson

    This Honorable person stopped oil and gas drilling in Michigan, near the Au Sable river. Under what statute he over ruled the US Forest Service is beyond me.

    http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/michigan/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1316527&sectionID=756

  188. What does Joseph Petrowski , the president of Gulf Oil say about drilling?

    http://2cents.dailyreckoning.com/viewtopic.php?p=371726&sid=36a270301217b5da83cd28b1277650a4

  189. Who would have imagined it. One of the first anti-drilling groups in the United States has signed off on a scheme for off shore drilling. GOO, Get Oil Out, an environmental group formed after the 1969 Santa Barbara, California oil spill has agreed to a plan for drilling offshore.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121581714417147413.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

    I suppose that just leaves Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reed, and Senator Obama, who are bitter and cling to anti-drilling, or antipathy to people who don’t think like they do.

  190. Another Democrat, Rep. Edward Markey of Massachusetts wants to force President Bush to release 500,000 barrels of oil per day from the Strategic oil reserve to lower gasoline prices. I thought that it was all the greedy oil companies fault. I thought it was the greedy speculators fault. How many hearings and press conferences did these clowns have? Now it’s about supply.

    Could it be that since the Democrats run both houses of Congress, they are finally getting a little of the blame for the energy mess? To quote myself from an earlier post, “Won’t this merely delay the transition to renewable energy?” At this moment of crisis, it is renewable energy’s time to shine. So why isn’t it?????????????

    To a Democrat, if you can’t drill your way out of a crisis, maybe you can drain your way out. Congressman Markey : The question next becomes, what if OPEC just cuts production by 500,000 barrels per day? Also, once the reserve is dry, then what do you do? It will be winter and your voters in Massachusetts will be freezing to death with no heating oil. Frozen pipes and frozen bodies will be the way the idiots who voted for you, conserve their way out of this.

    http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-oil-congress.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

  191. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,381761,00.html

    President Bush will lift executive ban on offshore drilling. The ball is in Nancy Pelosi’s court.

  192. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/13/AR2008071301719.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

    The paranoid case for blaming speculators for high energy prices. At some point voters will figure out that our leaders in Congress are incompetent.

  193. Italy to start building nuclear plants with in 5 years. Italy is tired of importing energy. It’s amazing how the pain of high energy prices eventually produces clear thinking. The Italians get a lot of electricity from France, which has had a strong nuclear industry for decades.

    Since the Europeans are ahead of us on the green road to nowhere, they seem to also be ahead of us in finding an exit ramp.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,384441,00.html

  194. Idiot Al, I mean Mr. Gore is at it again. He wants the US off of fossil fuels with in a decade. How about leading by example. When he is totally off of fossil fuels, even as a back up, then let him tell the rest of us. One day the idiot will be right. The technology will enable us to be free of fossil fuels. It ain’t today and it won’t be in 2018.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/politics/18gorecnd.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

  195. The latest casualty in the food to fuel policy. Catfish farmers.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/business/18catfish.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

  196. Something good comes out of Beverly Hills, oil. It’s amazing how even Californians will go for oil if it’s onshore and expensive enough.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a5fyvudrWEoo&refer=home

  197. Senator Harry Reid once again shows that the only way renewable energy is viable, is with government killing competition from conventional energy. Also renewable energy REQUIRES government handouts. At least, this time Reid is only shafting his own state.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,388541,00.html

    Quote:

    “Coal, Reid says, is “filthy, it’s dirty stuff.” The only way for the renewable energy industry to grow in Nevada is for coal plants to stay out, he contends.”

    It’s a point coal advocates dispute. “You’re not going to be able to provide enough power in the short term with renewables,” said Frank Maisano, spokesman for Toquop Energy Project, one of the coal plants trying to come into Nevada over Reid’s opposition. “Las Vegas, Arizona, places like that — they need more power now.””

  198. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can’t believe that reporters are not swallowing the crap he is telling them about energy legislation. He is questioning their hearing and their understanding of the English language.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,390921,00.html

  199. Regulators say a Dutch trading company made 1 million dollars in profits by illegally manipulating the oil markets. Some how, I have a hard time believing that a $1,000,000 profit in a multi billion dollar market means squat.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/25/business/25cftc.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

  200. US Geological Survey says that there may be plenty of oil and natural gas north of the Arctic Circle. The funny thing is, global warming will make it easier to get it. Don’t tell that to Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi. How even Democrats can put up with these two clowns is beyond me.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/business/24arctic.html

  201. Economics 101. Eventually falling demand impacts prices.
    Now if only the Bozos controlling Congress would allow more supply to come on line. Not with Pelosi and Reid in charge.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/business/30crude.html

    Excerpt:

    “Oil has fallen more than $23 a barrel, or 16 percent, since peaking on July 3. Gasoline has slipped below $4 a gallon and is dropping fast as Americans drive less.”

  202. When an oil man and the Sierra Club come together, the right and the left better be worried.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,395304,00.html

  203. http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/oil-soars-past–storm-concerns/

    Hurricane Gustav is making oil prices jump. Why is it that Democrats cannot understand that we need more domestic oil supply, just to offset threats to existing supplies??? You can’t fix stupid.

  204. Democrats propose a phony solution to the oil problem.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,422164,00.html

  205. House Democrats to let offshore drilling ban expire.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/23/AR2008092303094.html?hpid=moreheadlines

    Now the Left wing will have to stop offshore drilling the old fashioned way, lawsuits.

  206. Oil drops $10.52 per barrel to $96.37 on failed bail out news.

    http://africa.reuters.com/wire/news/usnN29389346.html

  207. Oil drops to $77.70 per barrel.
    http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/industries/energy/oil-plunges–global-economic-concerns-281960446/

    It’s a shame that I’m the last man standing on this forum. In my first post 5/10/08, 6:42 PM I wrote about how after the big price run ups in the 1970s oil prices crashed in the 80s. I pointed out that it was economics, not alternative energy that did it.

    With the current economic melt down history is repeating itself. After years of high prices, new supplies are coming online, at the same time demand is finally declining. The danger is that, as in the 80s and 90s, that prices decline so far and for so long that energy production once again will be under invested in.

    It’s funny how the banking crisis has trumped all of the predictions that oil would go to $200 per barrel.

    Mister Guy may have had one thing correct. We did not drill our way out of the oil crisis, thanks to his Democrat friends protecting Fannie and Freddie, we have bankrupted our way out.

  208. “…thanks to his Democrat friends protecting Fannie and Freddie, we have bankrupted our way out.”

    Very well said!

  209. DJ,

    Thanks for the compliment. I thought this forum was dead.

  210. Wamba, you might try checking out some of the more recent posts on this blog. The reason this one seems dead is because it’s five and a half months old. :)

  211. No, the reason it’s dead is because no one wants to repsond the random, crazy rants of an Internet troll, period.

  212. “…to repsond the random, crazy rants of an Internet troll…”

    Yet we continually respond to you Comrade Guy.

  213. As per usual “DJ”, you have nothing useful to say…it’s sad really…

  214. Hey oil is at $70 per barrel.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/business/worldbusiness/17oil.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

    Maybe someone can tell me how alternative energy caused this. Wait, wait, it was world wide conservation. If you can’t politically increase production,just politically decrease demand by sending your country in to a recession. Starve your country of affordable energy for it’s growing economy. Cause a financial meltdown by refusing to reform 2 corrupt government sponsored banks. Then blame it on the policies of the Republicans.

    Don’t worry if your country goes down the tubes. You will have plenty of time to fix it, when you are in power.

  215. The NRC has received license applications for 25 new nuclear reactors between July 2007 and now.

    http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21541/

    Of course after the election, this will mean nothing.

  216. With oil at $40 per barrel, having come down from it’s peak of about $144 per barrel, I believe it would be appropriate to argue about who was right and who had no idea what they were talking about.

    The opening commentary by NotYourDaddy was basically about the best way to deal with the suffering caused by high energy prices, specifically high oil prices. There are 2 schools of thought on this board. The first school articulated by NotDourDaddy and myself believes that increased domestic oil production is the primary method of lowering prices. That does not mean we are against alternative energy or conservation.

    The second school of thought was advocated by Kenny and Mister Guy. They do not want to hear about increasing domestic supplies because all conventional energy is running out. Their solution is strict conservation and alternative energy, while continuing to discourage all domestic fossil fuel production, in the belief that it merely delays the inevitable conversion to a renewable economy.

    I pointed out that we have been in this cycle before, the oil boom and bust of the 70s and 80s.I further pointed out that market forces, increased world wide production, and decreased demand were the reasons for lower 1980s oil prices. The decreased demand was partially more efficient vehicles, home heating, etc. The more important reason was the severe recession of the early 1980s. Mister Guy argued “So, the price of oil indeed dropped during this time-frame when there was a shift from oil consumption to alternate energy sources in this country. New passenger car fuel economy rose from 17 mpg in 1978 to more than 22 mpg in 1982, and the CAFE standards stopped rising back in…the mid-1980s!”

    Mister Guy was wrong about why oil prices dropped in the early 80s and he would be wrong again if he said those same forces were significant now. World wide recession caused demand and prices to drop during both time periods because supply was too slow to catch up with increased demand. If more supply had been allowed to come online earlier, the recessions of the early 1980s and the present would have been far less severe.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: