Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Regional
woot woot for oil prices >

woot woot for oil prices

Search

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

woot woot for oil prices

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-20-2008 | 01:23 PM
  #71  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,733
Likes: 12
Default

Our country would be a better place if we stopped using gasoline to power our cars.

Aerospacepilot put it right on the head. I especially like the line about we are willingly allowing the largest transfer of wealth in human history. We need to get off of oil. Not just for environmental reasons, but primarily for economic reasons and national defense reasons. We are funding both sides of the war on terror.

Alternative energy is the only solution. As long as the world consumes large amounts of oil, the Arabs are going to be making money at our expense. And I don't like that. Unfortunately, too many people on these forums don't seem to care.
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 01:26 PM
  #72  
SilverandSore's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
From: CA
Default

Originally Posted by iahflyr
Our country would be a better place if we stopped using gasoline to power our cars.

Alternative energy is the only solution. As long as the world consumes large amounts of oil, the Arabs are going to be making money at our expense. And I don't like that. Unfortunately, too many people on these forums don't seem to care.

Alternative energy is the 'only' solution? I don't think you realize the scope of your claim.
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 01:31 PM
  #73  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,733
Likes: 12
Default

There are only two options:

1. Continue to use oil in massive quantities
2. Switch to an alternative


I chose number two. Not just because choice number one involves sending trillions of dollars to the Arabs. Not just because because choice number one involves keeping our economy in the toilet. Not just because choice number one is bad for the environment. I chose choice number two because it is the smartest thing to do. Imagine if the US could be making billions to trillions of dollars each year on energy rather than the Arabs.
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 01:38 PM
  #74  
BoilerUP's Avatar
Doing One Pilot's Job
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
Default

Originally Posted by iahflyr
There are only two options:

1. Continue to use oil in massive quantities
2. Switch to an alternative


I chose number two. Not just because choice number one involves sending trillions of dollars to the Arabs. Not just because because choice number one involves keeping our economy in the toilet. Not just because choice number one is bad for the environment. I chose choice number two because it is the smartest thing to do. Imagine if the US could be making billions to trillions of dollars each year on energy rather than the Arabs.
I don't think anybody disagrees with you...but its not as simple as "let's switch"!

What alternative fuel do you propose? What timeline do you think it should be rolled out in? What do we do about every single car currently on the road that burns gasoline? What about vehicles such as semi trucks, construction equipment, etc. that burns fuel and requires lots of torque...can they be converted to this new alternative?

Most importantly - who is gonna pay for all of this?
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 01:39 PM
  #75  
SilverandSore's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
From: CA
Default

Originally Posted by iahflyr
There are only two options:

1. Continue to use oil in massive quantities
2. Switch to an alternative


I chose number two. Not just because choice number one involves sending trillions of dollars to the Arabs. Not just because because choice number one involves keeping our economy in the toilet. Not just because choice number one is bad for the environment. I chose choice number two because it is the smartest thing to do. Imagine if the US could be making billions to trillions of dollars each year on energy rather than the Arabs.

How 'smart' would it be if tomorrow EVERYONE stopped driving and flying? Oh yeah, the environment is saved but now we face mass starvation and chaos! But hey, imagine how clean the air would be!
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 01:55 PM
  #76  
Timmay's Avatar
Line Holder
 
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 583
Likes: 18
From: FOD
Default

Originally Posted by SilverandSore
How 'smart' would it be if tomorrow EVERYONE stopped driving and flying? Oh yeah, the environment is saved but now we face mass starvation and chaos! But hey, imagine how clean the air would be!
And just think how much the airlines would save in fuel if there was NO flying!
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 03:44 PM
  #77  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,772
Likes: 1
From: 744 CA
Default

NOT all oil... hell not even MOST oil comes from the Middle East.... Many people profit from oil sales.... lets not forget that we still do produce between 40-45% of our own crude HERE in america... hell CANADA is our biggest importer of oil....

For all those who wish to switch.....nothing is stopping you..... the vehicles are available today.... sell your gasoline powered autos.... and I guess by association you are not helping the situation by being employed
by airlines who are huge users of petro products so maybe you should quit your job as well.....

I think we ALL probably agree that alternative sources and methods certainly need to be developed.... but it will take a generation or more to fully integrate any massive change into our economy... Gore and his 10 year carbon free statement is just so much BS and posturing its not even worth mentioning.
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 03:49 PM
  #78  
BoilerUP's Avatar
Doing One Pilot's Job
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
Default

Originally Posted by HercDriver130
For all those who wish to switch.....nothing is stopping you..... the vehicles are available today.... sell your gasoline powered autos....
DIY Electric Car Forums - Electric Vehicle Build and Conversion Community

I've been thinking of buying an early 90s beater Saturn SL1 with a blown engine and doing an EV conversion to it, just because I need something to tinker on and my wife would probably like an electric car better than my (increasingly expensive) gun habit...
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 04:23 PM
  #79  
ImEbee's Avatar
Portuguese Troubleshooter
 
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
From: Burrito Bomber
Default

Originally Posted by fit29
I think that we should all press our candidates to accept the "Gore Challenge" to produce all of our electricity from renewable sources by 10 years, Obama has accepted the challenge and McCain says it is Doable.

Facts are that the US is too Automobile oriented, I sincerely hope that the current energy crisis has put an end to our dependence on cars and more public transportation is built. Once we have efficient fast public transportation along with Hybrid/Plug Ins/Electric coupled with electricity that does not come from Coal or Gas we will see such a huge drop in oil demand that the US will be able to satisfy its remaining demand with domestic oil and lower prices will allow our industry (since there is no practical oil replacement for airplanes yet) to prosper.

One of the risks of allowing oil prices to go back down is setting the stage for a rebound in demand, therefore it is important that governments tax gasoline to keep it at 3-4 dollars ensuring that people drive only as a necessity, it worked in Europe, were most people use public transportation and have a "weekend car" and it can work here too.
There are so many things wrong with this:

1) The problem is that very few urban infrastructures are designed with mass transportation in mind. Look at Seattle for example. A light rail project was approved by the voters and after $2 Billion were spent on planning a proposal went out that sent a rail line from almost the University of Washington to almost SeaTac airport. Its too easy to say we need more public transportation but where are we going to put the rail lines in most of our cities. Even if could build a transit system, how are you going to get out of the city? Very few people who work in the city live in the city. Just imagine the cost of a transit system that connects all of the population areas.

2) Unless you want to fill our landscape with endless wind turbines (Which are only effective in certain areas) how do you propose we get away from primarily using coal for our electricity. I wonder how Gore feels about nuclear power?

3) Do you really want our government to implement taxes as a means of dictating how we live our lives. Like it or not, this country has thrived in a free market and the consumer dictactes the going price of goods. Though I don't think its coincidental that oil prices dropped the second Bush lifted the moritorium, the fact that Americans are driving less and the entire airline industry is reducing their use by 10% is a sign that gas and oil is priced too high. It will work itself out.
Reply
Old 07-20-2008 | 05:28 PM
  #80  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by fit29
I think that we should all press our candidates to accept the "Gore Challenge" to produce all of our electricity from renewable sources by 10 years, Obama has accepted the challenge and McCain says it is Doable.

Facts are that the US is too Automobile oriented, I sincerely hope that the current energy crisis has put an end to our dependence on cars and more public transportation is built. Once we have efficient fast public transportation along with Hybrid/Plug Ins/Electric coupled with electricity that does not come from Coal or Gas we will see such a huge drop in oil demand that the US will be able to satisfy its remaining demand with domestic oil and lower prices will allow our industry (since there is no practical oil replacement for airplanes yet) to prosper.

One of the risks of allowing oil prices to go back down is setting the stage for a rebound in demand, therefore it is important that governments tax gasoline to keep it at 3-4 dollars ensuring that people drive only as a necessity, it worked in Europe, were most people use public transportation and have a "weekend car" and it can work here too.
And thus the rub. Alternative energy is not an alternative because it is not efficient enough to use unless the government forces its citizens to use it through the force of law or tax the undesired behavior so high that alternative fuels can actually be considered competitive. Someone already posted it here. You can buy electric plug in kit cars. You can retrofit a junker with an electric engine. You can buy an ethanol burning car and force the cost of corn up even higher, not to mention depleting the fresh water supply. You can buy solar panels for your house and actually provide electricity to the grid. You can do all these things now. All it takes is money. But you don't want to spend your money on these sources because it is inconvenient and costs too much. Therefore the market is correct: oil, coal, and natural gas it is. They are the most efficient energy on the market now. Leaving it in the ground on purpose is not responsible energy policy. It just drives prices higher so the "alternative fuel" crowd can say "See? Alternative is almost affordable at these high prices. Where is our government subsidy?"

It isn't that hard folks. Develop the most efficient energy first to stay competitive. Or we could willingly choose higher energy costs than others and watch the competitive advantage of the American worker erode further. But hey, we can feel good about ourselves and all that environment we're saving while we sit unemployed.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SWAjet
Major
14
11-29-2014 05:31 PM
Past V1
Major
129
07-23-2008 01:04 PM
HIREME
Major
53
06-08-2008 08:06 AM
RedBaron007
Major
10
11-12-2007 03:20 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices