Oil $100 a BBL.........
02-24-2008 | 11:36 AM
#151
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
From: A320 Right Seat
I will concede the point of definitions to Webster.
Duke, Your point on the production of hybrid cars actually using more oil only stands true if those hybrids are made in addition to conventional cars. If the same percentage of cars are replaced by hybrids then the same amount of oil is used to build them. Then when they are used the hybrids burn less fuel if used for comparatively similar driving. This is better efficiency, how is that bad?
This is the same as buying new airplanes which are more efficient. New airplanes will be bought either way. So buying efficient airplanes certainly results in less consumption.
And on your final point about the longer we wait the harder the fall. That is the real argument behind pursuing these technologies now as we develop more efficient ways to maintain the lifestyles we all hope to keep with both fossil fuels and alternative energies.
Duke, Your point on the production of hybrid cars actually using more oil only stands true if those hybrids are made in addition to conventional cars. If the same percentage of cars are replaced by hybrids then the same amount of oil is used to build them. Then when they are used the hybrids burn less fuel if used for comparatively similar driving. This is better efficiency, how is that bad?
This is the same as buying new airplanes which are more efficient. New airplanes will be bought either way. So buying efficient airplanes certainly results in less consumption.
And on your final point about the longer we wait the harder the fall. That is the real argument behind pursuing these technologies now as we develop more efficient ways to maintain the lifestyles we all hope to keep with both fossil fuels and alternative energies.
02-24-2008 | 12:01 PM
#152
With The Resistance
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,191
Likes: 0
From: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
I'm European, Norwegian actually, yes we have been driving vehicles for decades at 30-40 mpg. These vehicles are mostly diesel powered. I think its safe to mention on approximately 50% of the autos in Europe are diesel powered.
We also have old/small roads in most urban areas and this contributed to a steady growth of small cars. not big SUVs. Small cars were developed for these tight parking and small streets. I believe most Europeans would love to have an SUV, however they won't acknowledge it in public.
Unfortunately, the expensive and mandated environmental policy that has taken hold in the last twenty years in Europe was only really possible because we always had access to a viable public train and bus system. European culture is totally different than North America. We also have hundred of thousands of Bicyles with riders riding to work everyday in the rain. I don't understand why people envy this lifestyle.
Yes, Europe looks very tempting to an increasing gullible American public. I can guarantee you Europe is very inconvient and expensive for personal living. Its hard to really get ahead. Please don't look at us as a role model on most economic, social and environmental policy unless you like socialism.
Energy efficiency, not conservation is what should be the goal. Oil industry is like most industries with a cyclical flow of peaks and valley.
The sky is not falling but I think the price of oil and gold will.
EAHINC
We also have old/small roads in most urban areas and this contributed to a steady growth of small cars. not big SUVs. Small cars were developed for these tight parking and small streets. I believe most Europeans would love to have an SUV, however they won't acknowledge it in public.
Unfortunately, the expensive and mandated environmental policy that has taken hold in the last twenty years in Europe was only really possible because we always had access to a viable public train and bus system. European culture is totally different than North America. We also have hundred of thousands of Bicyles with riders riding to work everyday in the rain. I don't understand why people envy this lifestyle.
Yes, Europe looks very tempting to an increasing gullible American public. I can guarantee you Europe is very inconvient and expensive for personal living. Its hard to really get ahead. Please don't look at us as a role model on most economic, social and environmental policy unless you like socialism.
Energy efficiency, not conservation is what should be the goal. Oil industry is like most industries with a cyclical flow of peaks and valley.
The sky is not falling but I think the price of oil and gold will.
EAHINC
Thanks for posting, it is great to hear from the people who have been there.
How we get to be a better place is just as important as technology. It does no good to end up with a government monopoly dictating the car you drive, your retirement , health care, and schooling.
Without individual and financial freedom we may start to depend on the nanny state for all.
And then this happens:
Jan 2008 From the series: Victorious Socialism Is The Path To The Future:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biggest brain drain from UK in 50 years
By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 21/02/2008
Britain is experiencing the worst "brain drain" of any country as highly qualified professionals settle abroad, an authoritative international study showed yesterday.
Your view: How can we halt the brain drain?
Record numbers of Britons are leaving - many of them doctors, teachers and engineers - in the biggest exodus for almost 50 years.
Over a quarter of qualified professionals who have moved abroad had health or education qualifications
There are now 3.247 million British-born people living abroad, of whom more than 1.1 million are highly-skilled university graduates, say the researchers.
More than three quarters of these professionals have settled abroad for more than 10 years, according to the study by the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
No other nation is losing so many qualified people, it points out. Britain has now lost more than one in 10 of its most skilled citizens, while overall only Mexico has had more people emigrate.
The figures, based on official records from more than 220 countries, will alarm Gordon Brown as tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money is spent on educating graduates. The cost of training a junior doctor, for example, is Ł250,000.
The most popular destinations are English-speaking countries such as Australia, America, Canada and New Zealand and holiday areas including France and Spain.
Almost 60 per cent of those leaving take jobs, although hundreds of thousands of retired people live abroad.
advertisementThe report is a statistical analysis which does not study the motivation for leaving Britain. However, high house prices and taxes and poor climate are frequently cited.
A spokesman for the Paris-based OECD said last night: "British people have lots of opportunities to move and work abroad so very highly-skilled people are travelling around. It is seen by many British people as part of their personal development to have some experience abroad."
Britain's exodus is far higher than any of the OECD's other 29 members. Germany has lost only 860,000 highly-skilled workers, America 410,000 and France 370,000.
The OECD found that 27.3 per cent of those emigrating had health or education qualifications, 37.7 per cent had humanities or social science degrees and 28.5 per cent were scientists or engineers.
Britain has a shortage of graduates in many of these fields and universities have long warned that some of the brightest hopes are being lost to higher salaries abroad.
The report cited research suggesting that 62 per cent of the world's "star scientists" live in the US, primarily because of the efforts made by American research universities to attract them.
Danny Sriskandarajah, a migration expert at the IPPR think-tank, said: "There is a long-term trend of British people lured abroad by a slightly better lifestyle. They are actively targeted by countries such as Australia and New Zealand."
The emigration was leading to a rapid change in British society as large numbers of highly-skilled immigrants moved to this country to replace those leaving, he said.
"Britain has been lucky - although it has lost substantial numbers of people, it has attracted more than a million skilled immigrants to replace them. If they stop coming then that would be a problem."
Figures from the Office for National Statistics last year, suggested that 207,000 Britons - one every three minutes - left in 2006. The emigration rate is at its highest since just after the Second World War.
The term brain drain was coined in the 1950s following the mass emigration of scientists and other experts to America. Tens of thousands of people also left the country to escape the industrial unrest and high taxes of the 1970s.
Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, said: "Ten years of Labour has re-created the brain drain. High taxes and Government interference are driving people away."
The study found that foreign-born people make up 8.3 per cent of Britain's population. A House of Lords report into the economic impact of migration is due next month.
Prof David Coleman, of St John's, Oxford, said the brain drain was "to do with quality of life, laws and bureaucracy, tax and all the rest of it".
Prof Christian Dustmann, of University College London, said: "The costs of leaving a country are substantial. The rewards must be very high."
============================
02-24-2008 | 01:26 PM
#153
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,215
Likes: 0
From: Capt
Hi!
For the guys who've posted about electric/hybrid electric cars requiring LOTS of new electrical power, that is wrong, in the short term.
Electrical power plants run generators, with produce "X" amount of energy. They run 24 hours a day, basically producing the same amount of energy all the time. We have enough plants to cover (normally) the max electrical energy use, which is normally about 1300-1700 local time.
During the night, approx. 2300-0600 local, the electrical demand drops WAY off. During this time period, electric/hybrid electric cars could be plugged in, and draw the electrical energy that is being wasted.
So, in the short term, we don't need more electricity.
In the LONG term, if most cars ran off of electricity, then we WOULD need more electricity than is currently being generated.
cliff
LRD
For the guys who've posted about electric/hybrid electric cars requiring LOTS of new electrical power, that is wrong, in the short term.
Electrical power plants run generators, with produce "X" amount of energy. They run 24 hours a day, basically producing the same amount of energy all the time. We have enough plants to cover (normally) the max electrical energy use, which is normally about 1300-1700 local time.
During the night, approx. 2300-0600 local, the electrical demand drops WAY off. During this time period, electric/hybrid electric cars could be plugged in, and draw the electrical energy that is being wasted.
So, in the short term, we don't need more electricity.
In the LONG term, if most cars ran off of electricity, then we WOULD need more electricity than is currently being generated.
cliff
LRD
02-24-2008 | 01:27 PM
#154
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Thanks for posting, it is great to hear from the people who have been there.
How we get to be a better place is just as important as technology. It does no good to end up with a government monopoly dictating the car you drive, your retirement , health care, and schooling.
Without individual and financial freedom we may start to depend on the nanny state for all.
And then this happens:
Jan 2008 From the series: Victorious Socialism Is The Path To The Future:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biggest brain drain from UK in 50 years
By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 21/02/2008
Britain is experiencing the worst "brain drain" of any country as highly qualified professionals settle abroad, an authoritative international study showed yesterday.
Your view: How can we halt the brain drain?
Record numbers of Britons are leaving - many of them doctors, teachers and engineers - in the biggest exodus for almost 50 years.
Over a quarter of qualified professionals who have moved abroad had health or education qualifications
There are now 3.247 million British-born people living abroad, of whom more than 1.1 million are highly-skilled university graduates, say the researchers.
More than three quarters of these professionals have settled abroad for more than 10 years, according to the study by the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
No other nation is losing so many qualified people, it points out. Britain has now lost more than one in 10 of its most skilled citizens, while overall only Mexico has had more people emigrate.
The figures, based on official records from more than 220 countries, will alarm Gordon Brown as tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money is spent on educating graduates. The cost of training a junior doctor, for example, is Ł250,000.
The most popular destinations are English-speaking countries such as Australia, America, Canada and New Zealand and holiday areas including France and Spain.
Almost 60 per cent of those leaving take jobs, although hundreds of thousands of retired people live abroad.
advertisementThe report is a statistical analysis which does not study the motivation for leaving Britain. However, high house prices and taxes and poor climate are frequently cited.
A spokesman for the Paris-based OECD said last night: "British people have lots of opportunities to move and work abroad so very highly-skilled people are travelling around. It is seen by many British people as part of their personal development to have some experience abroad."
Britain's exodus is far higher than any of the OECD's other 29 members. Germany has lost only 860,000 highly-skilled workers, America 410,000 and France 370,000.
The OECD found that 27.3 per cent of those emigrating had health or education qualifications, 37.7 per cent had humanities or social science degrees and 28.5 per cent were scientists or engineers.
Britain has a shortage of graduates in many of these fields and universities have long warned that some of the brightest hopes are being lost to higher salaries abroad.
The report cited research suggesting that 62 per cent of the world's "star scientists" live in the US, primarily because of the efforts made by American research universities to attract them.
Danny Sriskandarajah, a migration expert at the IPPR think-tank, said: "There is a long-term trend of British people lured abroad by a slightly better lifestyle. They are actively targeted by countries such as Australia and New Zealand."
The emigration was leading to a rapid change in British society as large numbers of highly-skilled immigrants moved to this country to replace those leaving, he said.
"Britain has been lucky - although it has lost substantial numbers of people, it has attracted more than a million skilled immigrants to replace them. If they stop coming then that would be a problem."
Figures from the Office for National Statistics last year, suggested that 207,000 Britons - one every three minutes - left in 2006. The emigration rate is at its highest since just after the Second World War.
The term brain drain was coined in the 1950s following the mass emigration of scientists and other experts to America. Tens of thousands of people also left the country to escape the industrial unrest and high taxes of the 1970s.
Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, said: "Ten years of Labour has re-created the brain drain. High taxes and Government interference are driving people away."
The study found that foreign-born people make up 8.3 per cent of Britain's population. A House of Lords report into the economic impact of migration is due next month.
Prof David Coleman, of St John's, Oxford, said the brain drain was "to do with quality of life, laws and bureaucracy, tax and all the rest of it".
Prof Christian Dustmann, of University College London, said: "The costs of leaving a country are substantial. The rewards must be very high."
============================
How we get to be a better place is just as important as technology. It does no good to end up with a government monopoly dictating the car you drive, your retirement , health care, and schooling.
Without individual and financial freedom we may start to depend on the nanny state for all.
And then this happens:
Jan 2008 From the series: Victorious Socialism Is The Path To The Future:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biggest brain drain from UK in 50 years
By Robert Winnett, Deputy Political Editor
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 21/02/2008
Britain is experiencing the worst "brain drain" of any country as highly qualified professionals settle abroad, an authoritative international study showed yesterday.
Your view: How can we halt the brain drain?
Record numbers of Britons are leaving - many of them doctors, teachers and engineers - in the biggest exodus for almost 50 years.
Over a quarter of qualified professionals who have moved abroad had health or education qualifications
There are now 3.247 million British-born people living abroad, of whom more than 1.1 million are highly-skilled university graduates, say the researchers.
More than three quarters of these professionals have settled abroad for more than 10 years, according to the study by the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
No other nation is losing so many qualified people, it points out. Britain has now lost more than one in 10 of its most skilled citizens, while overall only Mexico has had more people emigrate.
The figures, based on official records from more than 220 countries, will alarm Gordon Brown as tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money is spent on educating graduates. The cost of training a junior doctor, for example, is Ł250,000.
The most popular destinations are English-speaking countries such as Australia, America, Canada and New Zealand and holiday areas including France and Spain.
Almost 60 per cent of those leaving take jobs, although hundreds of thousands of retired people live abroad.
advertisementThe report is a statistical analysis which does not study the motivation for leaving Britain. However, high house prices and taxes and poor climate are frequently cited.
A spokesman for the Paris-based OECD said last night: "British people have lots of opportunities to move and work abroad so very highly-skilled people are travelling around. It is seen by many British people as part of their personal development to have some experience abroad."
Britain's exodus is far higher than any of the OECD's other 29 members. Germany has lost only 860,000 highly-skilled workers, America 410,000 and France 370,000.
The OECD found that 27.3 per cent of those emigrating had health or education qualifications, 37.7 per cent had humanities or social science degrees and 28.5 per cent were scientists or engineers.
Britain has a shortage of graduates in many of these fields and universities have long warned that some of the brightest hopes are being lost to higher salaries abroad.
The report cited research suggesting that 62 per cent of the world's "star scientists" live in the US, primarily because of the efforts made by American research universities to attract them.
Danny Sriskandarajah, a migration expert at the IPPR think-tank, said: "There is a long-term trend of British people lured abroad by a slightly better lifestyle. They are actively targeted by countries such as Australia and New Zealand."
The emigration was leading to a rapid change in British society as large numbers of highly-skilled immigrants moved to this country to replace those leaving, he said.
"Britain has been lucky - although it has lost substantial numbers of people, it has attracted more than a million skilled immigrants to replace them. If they stop coming then that would be a problem."
Figures from the Office for National Statistics last year, suggested that 207,000 Britons - one every three minutes - left in 2006. The emigration rate is at its highest since just after the Second World War.
The term brain drain was coined in the 1950s following the mass emigration of scientists and other experts to America. Tens of thousands of people also left the country to escape the industrial unrest and high taxes of the 1970s.
Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, said: "Ten years of Labour has re-created the brain drain. High taxes and Government interference are driving people away."
The study found that foreign-born people make up 8.3 per cent of Britain's population. A House of Lords report into the economic impact of migration is due next month.
Prof David Coleman, of St John's, Oxford, said the brain drain was "to do with quality of life, laws and bureaucracy, tax and all the rest of it".
Prof Christian Dustmann, of University College London, said: "The costs of leaving a country are substantial. The rewards must be very high."
============================
The English are a mess from top to bottom, from Charles on down to the Pakistani shoe shiner. Nothing is right in that country and the same can be spoken for other nations across the channel. The deserve what they get.
I was in Brighton, a seaside village for vacation last summer and was paying approximately $10/gallon for auto fuel of perhaps 80% are taxes and it gets worse from that point on. This is why private boat ownership and general aviation is almost exclusively for the super rich.
From Fish & Chips to Burkas in less than a generation. I would be leaving also.
If you would like good cardio work-out read the book "Londonistan".
EAHINC
02-24-2008 | 03:27 PM
#155
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
I agree the net gain from hybrids is impressive, so re: hybrids alone, I stand corrected. However, the GDP needs to continue to grow (I think it's around 1.5-2% per year right now in the US) and that requires more oil. So my concern is that even w/ advancements in technology, such as hybrids, we will not be able to sustain our current growth. As we speak, China, by comparison, is roaring away @ about 11 to 10 % annual growth and is showing no signs of slowing...but they're arriving @ the party a bit late, so I do agree that their growth will inevitably slow, just not sure what their reaction will be when they have to face the music...
02-24-2008 | 04:14 PM
#156
A moment please...
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
From: Just passin' thru
I agree the net gain from hybrids is impressive, so re: hybrids alone, I stand corrected. However, the GDP needs to continue to grow (I think it's around 1.5-2% per year right now in the US) and that requires more oil. So my concern is that even w/ advancements in technology, such as hybrids, we will not be able to sustain our current growth. As we speak, China, by comparison, is roaring away @ about 11 to 10 % annual growth and is showing no signs of slowing...but they're arriving @ the party a bit late, so I do agree that their growth will inevitably slow, just not sure what their reaction will be when they have to face the music...
It's a balance between the supply/demand curve and the level of economic activity. The supply side of the curve is deteriorating as extraction and refinement of oil has become more difficult. It is already overpowering the level of economic slowdown as part of the formula as the price moves UP in the face of recession.
What does logic say will happen as the economy heats up again? I don't like this any more that the next guy, but the denial on these boards and in Washington is frightening.
It's NOT going back down, ever. It can't! It's like the Terminator, it doesn't CARE.
Last edited by JetPiedmont; 02-24-2008 at 04:19 PM.
02-24-2008 | 04:27 PM
#157
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 645
Likes: 0
From: retired
Hi!
For the guys who've posted about electric/hybrid electric cars requiring LOTS of new electrical power, that is wrong, in the short term.
Electrical power plants run generators, with produce "X" amount of energy. They run 24 hours a day, basically producing the same amount of energy all the time. We have enough plants to cover (normally) the max electrical energy use, which is normally about 1300-1700 local time.
During the night, approx. 2300-0600 local, the electrical demand drops WAY off. During this time period, electric/hybrid electric cars could be plugged in, and draw the electrical energy that is being wasted.
So, in the short term, we don't need more electricity.
In the LONG term, if most cars ran off of electricity, then we WOULD need more electricity than is currently being generated.
cliff
LRD
For the guys who've posted about electric/hybrid electric cars requiring LOTS of new electrical power, that is wrong, in the short term.
Electrical power plants run generators, with produce "X" amount of energy. They run 24 hours a day, basically producing the same amount of energy all the time. We have enough plants to cover (normally) the max electrical energy use, which is normally about 1300-1700 local time.
During the night, approx. 2300-0600 local, the electrical demand drops WAY off. During this time period, electric/hybrid electric cars could be plugged in, and draw the electrical energy that is being wasted.
So, in the short term, we don't need more electricity.
In the LONG term, if most cars ran off of electricity, then we WOULD need more electricity than is currently being generated.
cliff
LRD
02-25-2008 | 05:11 AM
#158
With The Resistance
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,191
Likes: 0
From: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
I agree the net gain from hybrids is impressive, so re: hybrids alone, I stand corrected. However, the GDP needs to continue to grow (I think it's around 1.5-2% per year right now in the US) and that requires more oil. So my concern is that even w/ advancements in technology, such as hybrids, we will not be able to sustain our current growth. As we speak, China, by comparison, is roaring away @ about 11 to 10 % annual growth and is showing no signs of slowing...but they're arriving @ the party a bit late, so I do agree that their growth will inevitably slow, just not sure what their reaction will be when they have to face the music...
Our GDP has almost doubled since 1979 with very little increase in oil consumption. It is easy to see that very great gains have been made in overall efficiency. The typical peak oil theorists are baffled by the apparent disconnect between GDP and oil use. It is not a linear function due to improvements in efficiency, but it is obvious that the price of oil has a very strong influence on the state of world economy.
As always any projections made become less reliable the further they extend into the future-more so when the number of variables is increased.
You may have missed it, but the Chinese are predicting a rather dramatic slowing of growth for the next couple of years.
02-25-2008 | 05:13 AM
#159
With The Resistance
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,191
Likes: 0
From: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
You are correct. Plants produce as demand dictates. The grid really has no major storage capability.
02-25-2008 | 07:32 AM
#160
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 6,248
Likes: 0
From: 767A (Ret)
"Storing" electricity
As a demonstration project, the TVA built a large reservoir in the mountains, connected to the valley below by a massive water pipe. During periods of low demand, they would use surplus electricity to pump water up there, then let it out to run a turbine during peak demand. Don't know how successful this has been, or whether they will ever recover the cost to build it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
