anyone noticed yet that the OP hasnt' replied back yet. all he does is stir up trouble.
You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan
(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)
OPEC doesn't set prices, they set production limits to try to manipulate the price, then they sell to the highest bidder. For a long time they had a policy of trying to maintain a $25 per barrel price. What's changed is that they have no way to up production significantly to try and bring prices back to this level. They don't want prices too high because it causes contries to start looking to alternative energy, drilling their own sources and consumer start buying more efficient cars and appliences which hurt the profits for years to come.
China's economy on steroids is somewhat to blame. Also, commodity traders were speculating on the price of oil and this caused the prices to become artificially inflated. China can't be faulted for the economic expansion they're experiencing, but you can blame the greedy speculative traders who were the ones making the profits at the expense of the average consumer.
^^^^^^
I agree 100%.
Free your mind - shoot your TV.
You can buy non-OPEC oil, but you won't get a deal. They also sell to the highest bidder. That's the point. Oil sell for whatever price the market will bear, period. If everyone reduced consumption the price may start to slide. If I had the oil, I would not lower the price though because no matter how much I have, it's a finite resource and once sold I can never get it back. To me that means that I can charge whatever I want and sooner or later buyers will pay my price.
Up production, down production.. It doesn't matter because there is only X amount and regardless of extraction rates the base supply will never increase, only demand will.
PAX
just one question...
What happens when we use it all up?
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Eloquent, but follow my logic here. With our dependence on oil, we're actually going to war over the bloody stuff now. It is a finite resource, and will dry up.
What do we do then? We're fighting each other to posses it more so we can have our Gas guzzlers and/or sports cars, but what do we do then?
Why i say we should try and use less and look for alternative sources...otherwise we're @!#$...proper @!#$.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Sooner or later we're going to have to change our ways, or we're in BIG trouble. When gasoline hit $1.20/L here in Calgary due to the hurricanes in the states (up from ~85cents) I noticed absolutely NO change in the number of SUVs and Hummers on the way to work. It still makes me shake my head to see that 3 out of every 4 vehicles on the street here are 4wd (and we hardly get ANY snow or rain here - NONE of them ever have any mud on them). Conspicuous consumption is probably one of the first things that needs to be addressed, followed by radical changes to industrial petroleum useage.
The only other things I can think of (other than parking the SUVs and implimenting things like Kyoto) are finding ways to extract the enormous methane hydrate resources found on continental shelves (again, it's a finite resource, and we'll be in the same boat once it's gone), putting more R&D into alternative energy research, and/or realize that nuclear power isn't the last step before apocalypse.
I agree with you, Keeper, and most certainly share your concern.
Free your mind - shoot your TV.
Free your wallet, park your SUV.
I think that we're just becoming acquainted with the idea that there is now competition for resources.
Once they're gone, whoever was less dependant on expendible power will be king.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
I honestly don't really complain about gas prices because if you go to Europe, they spend rediculous amounts of money for a gallon of gas (I think in the area of $5 or something like that).
I think us Americans are too spoiled and we can spare $10 more than we normally use for gas instead of buying useless crap.
These posts are pointless. It's just complaining and whinning about a topic which won't solve anything. Gas prices are like this for a reason, just get used to it.
As far as taking over another country for oil, that's pointless and stupid. Just think about it, the war in Iraq increased taxes...another big "takeover" would increase taxes again, have soldiers die and for what? So you can save .30 cents more to a gallon? Makes sense.
This is why you're not in politics and international trade. Why do you think we aren't in rich arabic countries? We are "friends" with them...remember, if you can't beat them join them.
www.kronosperformance.com / 732-742-8837
Actually, it goes like this: If you can't beat em, try to buy them off but carry a big stick.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
unholysavage wrote:When gasoline hit $1.20/L here in Calgary due to the hurricanes in the states (up from ~85cents). It still makes me shake my head to see that 3 out of every 4 vehicles on the street here are 4wd (and we hardly get ANY snow or rain here - NONE of them ever have any mud on them).
WTF are you talking about??? There's no snow or rain in Calgary??? Which Calgary do you live in because it's obviously not Alberta.
unholysavage wrote:The only other things I can think of (other than parking the SUVs and implimenting things like Kyoto) are finding ways to extract the enormous methane hydrate resources found on continental shelves
Again, WTF are you talking about??? What does methane have anything to do with gas for our cars? There's already tons of methane in Alberta, so again, which Calgary do you live in?
unholysavage wrote:When gasoline hit $1.20/L here in Calgary due to the hurricanes in the states (up from ~85cents) I noticed absolutely NO change in the number of SUVs and Hummers on the way to work.
What are you expecting, everyone trades in their vehicles just cause gas went up? I don't know who would take the time or
money to do that because I for sure wouldn't. Granted, you may see people start to buy more fuel efficient cars because of gas, but to expect people to trade in their SUV's etc RIGHT AWAY because of gas is........retarded. You also didn't mention that gas has dropped back down to 84.4/liter.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that out oil and gas consumption should go down. Your arguments and logic however are very questionable to me.
______________________________________________________________
ToBoGgAn wrote:we are gonna take it in the ass and like it, cause thats what america does.
Slo2pt2 (Projekt Unknown?) wrote:One my SON is ADHD N.O.S and Autistic Spectrum Disorder. I will nto medicate him he will battle throught this himself and learn to control it.
Glace wrote:unholysavage wrote:When gasoline hit $1.20/L here in Calgary due to the hurricanes in the states (up from ~85cents). It still makes me shake my head to see that 3 out of every 4 vehicles on the street here are 4wd (and we hardly get ANY snow or rain here - NONE of them ever have any mud on them).
WTF are you talking about??? There's no snow or rain in Calgary??? Which Calgary do you live in because it's obviously not Alberta.
Having grown up in Saskatchewan, and living in Montreal for 4 years before moving here, I can tell you without a DOUBT that Calgary gets VERY LITTLE snow. Calgary's lucky to get 3-4 feet a year (if even close to that), Glace, and it hardly ever gets a chance to accumulate around due to chinooks. If you look at last year, the biggest dump we had was 10cm; getting 1-2 feet at once is pretty rare these days. The only places in Canada that get less snow or rain than Alberta are the interior of BC and the arctic. If you're trying to use this past summer's unusually high rain fall, that's fine (my friends did nothing but get stuck at Maclean Creek with their trucks, and one guy even runs 44" Boggers). It was extraordinarily unusual for Alberta to get that much rain, but my parents in Saskatchewan received literally triple that amount (basically flooded), and my friends in Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec all had more rain than they normally get. Maybe we'll get a ton of snow this year, which will make driving a 4x4 worthwhile....doubtful, but possible.
Anyway, the whole point of that statement was that (snow or rain amounts aside), 99.99% of those 4x4s NEVER SEE GRAVEL, nevermind off-roading, which is what they were really designed to do (at least initially). Many of my friends here have SUVs, but they bought them as second vehicles to pull trailers/campers in the summer, and for mild off-roading, and don't use them as their primary mode of transportation (just like me, they realize just how useless and pointless it is in driving them to work unless you absolutely have to). I own a 92 Explorer 4x4 in addition to my cavalier. It has gotten as high as 31mpg on the highway, but averages around 15-16mpg in the city, and it's one of the smaller, more city-friendly SUVs on the road. In comparison, Ford Excursions are rated at 8mpg city (my boss drives one to work every day). The exploder was useful in Sask and Quebec (which get enough snow to get stuck in, and I have off-roaded it on many occasions), but is just an unnecessary expense here in Alta if it stays on the road its whole life.
Glace wrote:unholysavage wrote:The only other things I can think of (other than parking the SUVs and implimenting things like Kyoto) are finding ways to extract the enormous methane hydrate resources found on continental shelves
Again, WTF are you talking about??? What does methane have anything to do with gas for our cars? There's already tons of methane in Alberta, so again, which Calgary do you live in?
I didn't say that methane had anything to do with our cars (please read before pointlessly attacking - this entire post was about worrying about fighting over hydrocarbon supply, not only gasoline supply and demand). Alberta does have a ton of methane, but up until ~3 years ago (when NG was worth next to nothing) a large proportion of bi-product NG was flared off unless the infrastructure was already in place to transport it (pipelines). Even today a ton of wells are being flared (most are remote, but some of them aren't far from Calgary).
The reason I mentioned methane hydrates is simple: taken directly from the USGS site, "The worldwide amounts of carbon bound in gas hydrates is conservatively estimated to total twice the amount of carbon to be found in all known fossil fuels (including your conventional NG and oil" on Earth." The amount of methane/NG in Alberta is nearly nothing compared to the amount of methane in clathrates. If we could figure out a way to extract it, petroleum analysists estimate that it would extend our hydrocarbon resources for hundreds of years (yes, taking into account the increasing rate of consumption). IF we can make use of this huge energy resource, there shouldn't be any need for wars fought over energy (at least in the relatively near future). Of course, Kyoto would drastically reduce current hydrocarbon consumption rates, which would also help out with easing tensions caused by the current limited supply.
Glace wrote:unholysavage wrote:When gasoline hit $1.20/L here in Calgary due to the hurricanes in the states (up from ~85cents) I noticed absolutely NO change in the number of SUVs and Hummers on the way to work.
What are you expecting, everyone trades in their vehicles just cause gas went up? I don't know who would take the time or money to do that because I for sure wouldn't. Granted, you may see people start to buy more fuel efficient cars because of gas, but to expect people to trade in their SUV's etc RIGHT AWAY because of gas is........retarded. You also didn't mention that gas has dropped back down to 84.4/liter.
I didn't suggest trading your SUV in AT ALL, and it wasn't even implied. I wish you wouldn't twist my words around. When gas hit $1.20/L, I didn't expect people to sell their SUVs, but these people didn't park them during the week and take public transit, either. You and I know that the public transit system in Calgary isn't on par with the bus/subway systems in New York or Montreal (likely due to the physical size of the city and the spread-out population), but I don't find that a good enough reason to take something like an Excursion or 4-runner downtown to work (most often alone) every day just to avoid standing on a half-filled C-train car. These people could have saved some gas, and avoided traffic stress/parking costs, and driven to the nearest C-train station (to avoid the irregular buses, which are Calgary's biggest public transit problem), but the vast majority of them didn't and continue not to. If you have a good answer as to why that is (other than conspicuous consumption and laziness), I'd be happy to hear it.
Anyway, I hope that I've better explained myself this time around. If something I've said is confusing, please ASK me to expand upon my ideas - I'd be more than happy to.
Chamillionaire wrote:
I'm being who I am, not what you want me to be...
Trogdor burninates all! wrote:Having grown up in Saskatchewan, and living in Montreal for 4 years before moving here, I can tell you without a DOUBT that Calgary gets VERY LITTLE snow. Calgary's lucky to get 3-4 feet a year (if even close to that), Glace, and it hardly ever gets a chance to accumulate around due to chinooks.
http://www.calgaryarea.com/calgary_weather.htm
Trogdor burninates all! wrote:
I didn't say that methane had anything to do with our cars (please read before pointlessly attacking
Why even bother mentioning this then since this thread is abour gas for CARS?
Trogdor burninates all! wrote:Even today a ton of wells are being flared (most are remote, but some of them aren't far from Calgary).
I'm calling BS on this one. Every well must have a vent/flare system in place BUT that doesn't mean that every well is continuously vented/flared. The systems are there for safety reasons only. The only times when they are continuously flared is if they are sour wells, and you wouldn't want sour gas anyway. Trust me, companies would not unneccesarily flare/vent anything if they can make a profit from it, which they can.
Trogdor burninates all! wrote:I didn't suggest trading your SUV in AT ALL, and it wasn't even implied. I wish you wouldn't twist my words around.
If you have a good answer as to why that is (other than conspicuous consumption and laziness), I'd be happy to hear it.
That was my fault, I admit it. I read this:
"I noticed absolutely NO change in the number of SUVs and Hummers on the way to work. It still makes me shake my head to see that 3 out of every 4 vehicles on the street here are 4wd"
and thought you were talking about people getting rid of their vehicles, not leaving them at home.
But as for WHY they don't leave it at home, there's quite a few.
1) They don't need to. My tank is about 50 liters, and assuming the $0.30 price increase, that's only a $15 extra for fuel. I can afford it, so I don't worry about.
2) Work is too far
3) C-train doesn't go that way
4) Convienence and laziness
______________________________________________________________
ToBoGgAn wrote:we are gonna take it in the ass and like it, cause thats what america does.
Slo2pt2 (Projekt Unknown?) wrote:One my SON is ADHD N.O.S and Autistic Spectrum Disorder. I will nto medicate him he will battle throught this himself and learn to control it.
Glace wrote:Trogdor burninates all! wrote:Having grown up in Saskatchewan, and living in Montreal for 4 years before moving here, I can tell you without a DOUBT that Calgary gets VERY LITTLE snow. Calgary's lucky to get 3-4 feet a year (if even close to that), Glace, and it hardly ever gets a chance to accumulate around due to chinooks.
http://www.calgaryarea.com/calgary_weather.htm
I was pretty darn close - 126.7cm=4.15 feet per year. It's not very much, especially when you factor in the multiple chinooks.
Glace wrote:
Trogdor burninates all! wrote:
I didn't say that methane had anything to do with our cars (please read before pointlessly attacking
Why even bother mentioning this then since this thread is abour gas for CARS?
True, this thread is about potentially attacking/invading other countries to take control of their oil because gas prices are considered too high. I threw in the methane hydrates because methane (natural gas) is a completely viable alternative to gasoline for use in our vehicles. If we decided to start using NG more for this purpose, the argument of war for cheaper gasoline prices would become null.
Glace wrote:Trogdor burninates all! wrote:Even today a ton of wells are being flared (most are remote, but some of them aren't far from Calgary).
I'm calling BS on this one. Every well must have a vent/flare system in place BUT that doesn't mean that every well is continuously vented/flared. The systems are there for safety reasons only. The only times when they are continuously flared is if they are sour wells, and you wouldn't want sour gas anyway. Trust me, companies would not unneccesarily flare/vent anything if they can make a profit from it, which they can.
I never said they ALL flare - far from it, but like it or not it is common in more remote areas. Like I said earlier, this ALL depends on what infrastructure is there to take advantage of the natural gas/propane/butane production. If there are no pipelines nearby, then it isn't necessarily economic (and may be far from it). With gas as high as it is now, you can bet that, if there's a way to make money on it, oil companies aren't going to flare a single MCF unless there's an emergency.
I'll give you an example. I did a month of fieldwork in the area around Grande Cache (middle of nowhere), Alta this past summer. Talisman Energy had several wells in my field area, and every single one was flaring the whole time I was there (the flames on 2 of them were likely 100 feet high). These were oil wells, part of a very large oil field (not sour), but with no pipelines to tap into, they had to flare off the NG. Speaking with the Talisman people (I was working on one of their projects), they told me that there was quite alot of gas, but not economic due to lack of infrastructure in the area.
I just did a quick search, and the AEUB reported that, in 2000, approximately 1.4 billion cubic metres (~50 billion cu ft) of gas was flared, which would be considered a medium sized discovery in exploration terms. It's only 0.1-0.2% of the total NG produced, but it is a considerable amount.
Glace wrote:Trogdor burninates all! wrote:I didn't suggest trading your SUV in AT ALL, and it wasn't even implied. I wish you wouldn't twist my words around.
If you have a good answer as to why that is (other than conspicuous consumption and laziness), I'd be happy to hear it.
That was my fault, I admit it. I read this:
"I noticed absolutely NO change in the number of SUVs and Hummers on the way to work. It still makes me shake my head to see that 3 out of every 4 vehicles on the street here are 4wd"
and thought you were talking about people getting rid of their vehicles, not leaving them at home.
But as for WHY they don't leave it at home, there's quite a few.
1) They don't need to. My tank is about 50 liters, and assuming the $0.30 price increase, that's only a $15 extra for fuel. I can afford it, so I don't worry about.
2) Work is too far
3) C-train doesn't go that way
4) Convienence and laziness
Your first point is probably the main reason why people here keep driving SUVs to work. There's alot of money floating around Calgary - enough that many people aren't concerned whether their vehicles get 3mpg or 33mpg in the city - as long as it's big and shiny that's all that matters. That's a mindset that I wish would change, because we both know that even driving something smaller like a Tacoma 4x4 to work would save alot of gas (and the environment) over driving a hummer or all these damn avalanches and expeditions/excursions.
The city has exploded in size, yet the C-train/transit system hasn't expanded to provide service for new suburbs - it's certainly a problem that needs to be addressed. My biggest beef is with people who drive downtown to work every day (almost invariably alone). The C-train goes right through downtown, so the lack of C-train access to the downtown core isn't an excuse. I know where you're coming from when you say that work might be too far, but what's wrong with driving only as far as the C-train station (provided your place of employment can be easily reached by train), rather than driving all the way there and back? Parking at a C-train station is free, and it keeps vehicles from plugging up the downtown (and at the same time reduces pollution and cuts down on gas consumption). I think it would be worth it just to avoid the traffic headaches on the major roads/trails. I'd happily spend $2 to take the train if I can avoid one instance where a person stops in a merge lane
Chamillionaire wrote:
I'm being who I am, not what you want me to be...
