2oldman
NM
Senior Member
Joined: 04/15/2001
View Profile
 Offline
|
eltejano1 wrote:it'll bring down our whole economy! I'm concerned too, and it could do just that.
The airlines are in serious trouble. That spells bad news for places like Las Vegas. And with the housing market already stinking, food prices soaring, ever-increasing oil prices are going to get real ugly real fast.
In the short term there is NOTHING we can do but stop using so much. It's just too bad in all these years we citizens have not taken to the streets in revolt against the eco-terrorists who file lawsuits against oil drilling, nuclear plants and refineries.
It's not good.
|
Camping Hoosiers
Southern Indiana
Senior Member
Joined: 02/17/2003
View Profile
|
Dick_B wrote:One other idea is to repeal the laws that require something like 8 or 9 different gasoline formulations depending on where you live in the U.S.
Excellent point. I don't care which one we use... pick the best and use it everywhere!
2006 Jayco Eagle 314 BHDS
2001 Dodge QC - 5.9L Gas
|
Camping Hoosiers
Southern Indiana
Senior Member
Joined: 02/17/2003
View Profile
|
I don't care what people drive as long as they are willing to pay the bill for it. If I choose to quit driving large gas guzzling vehicles that should be my choice and nobody else's.
If one were to take your thought here to heart... doesn't that eliminate most of the RV's and or tow vehicles out there today? It you want to haul big heavy stuff around... you have to have the power to do it.
* This post was
edited 05/21/08 10:28pm by an administrator/moderator *
|
lallen2
Texas
New Member
Joined: 03/20/2008
View Profile
|
>>($127 on mon, $129 yesterday and $132 this morning<<
Ended the day @ $133.75.
|
eltejano1
Woodville, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 08/05/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
Quote:doesn't that eliminate most of the RV's
Sure it does - just a tongue and cheek comment among guys who are the world's biggest fuel guzzlers - us! I am not an environmentalist - I'm a Texas Baptist who believes everything on the planet is for our use, as the Book says - and it's finite; we're expected to use it up.
But I doubt if we can drill our way out of this. Reserves are depleting - that's an established fact in the industry. We can buy a little time with ANWAR and some other offshore areas and eke-out every last drop, but in the long run only alternative energy - clearly nuclear/electric - will allow civilization to continue as we know it.
And, in the best scenario, were a decade away from accessing some of these remaining reserves - infrastructure to build, tech problems of drilling in the deep ocean, fighting the legal battles over ANWAR, and on and on. We're better off to focus our energies on clean atomic power, better, lighter batteries and even on futuristic technologies like superconductivity and clean atomic fusion.
In the short run, all we can do is use less of it and try to keep the cost increases within manageable, if not tolerable, limits. That's it. There ain't no other option for us. Presumably, the free market will eventually yield to the laws of supply and demand and the price might at least stabilze a bit. Even as we speak, it's literally running away!
Like it or not, the Age of Petroleum is clearly winding-down. When the Israelites encountered the iron swords of the Philistines, they had to accept that the Age of Bronze was over forever. We're in the same boat today - but if we fail to meet the #1 challenge of our time, the damage will be far worse than any wound an iron sword could inflict! The very future of our progeny is at stake.
Jack
|
|
|
YC 1
Yuba City Calif./ Auburndale Florida
Senior Member
Joined: 01/11/2005
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
Since we have nuclear ships why are we not building hundreds of them and placing them around the nation in remote areas ? I realize they need cooling water etc., but having many small plants would spread out our power system and the shut down of one or two would not be a major outage. When was the last time we had a nuclear ship issue. Placing one of those reactors deep under the ground would provide a great deal of protection.
H/R Endeavor 2008
2013 Ford Edge toad
Full Timers
|
eltejano1
Woodville, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 08/05/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
Let me add something else - only govt can fund the basic research needed at this point because industry cannot, and shouldn't be expected to, enter into risky R&D projects without a clear profit objective in the fairly short run.
Things like the space program (which I opposed as a waste of money and was SO wrong) or Columbus's voyage of discovery must be funded from the public coffers and industry can pick it up when it is profitable.
A good start would be for Congress to finish funding the partially-completed $5 billion super collider project at Waxahachie, Texas. All leading physicists agree that we can go no further with fusion - which would provide endless cheap and clean energy in any quantity - until they have that 5 mile circumference tunnel to observe and better understand the physics of atomic fusion, with the objective of duplicating the process on a large scale. The have a small collider at the Univ of Chicago with which they have confirmed that the concept is sound - but they are stuck in place until we fork over the dough to build them what they need.
Jack
|
eltejano1
Woodville, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 08/05/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
NOT A BAD IDEA, YC.!!
If the reactor got out of control, they could take the ship to sea in a timely fashion. Sounds wierd at first, but not a bad idea. That's what we need to be doing - exploring options. It's constructive and might, possibly, have a little effect somewhere.
Jack
|
YC 1
Yuba City Calif./ Auburndale Florida
Senior Member
Joined: 01/11/2005
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
eltejano1 wrote:NOT A BAD IDEA, YC.!!
If the reactor got out of control, they could take the ship to sea in a timely fashion. Sounds wierd at first, but not a bad idea. That's what we need to be doing - exploring options. It's constructive and might, possibly, have a little effect somewhere.
Jack
I really was suggesting the reactors be placed throughout the us on land and not at sea. Small reactors in remote places. Of course everyone says nimby.
|
eltejano1
Woodville, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 08/05/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
MR MODERATOR:
Thank you, Dick, for permitting us this thread. But I don't think the terms "rant" and "rave" accurately describe the users of this forum - or at least the vast majority. The reason I like this site is the fact that it's a polite and gentlemanly place and we don't rant and rave.
How about changing the title to something that more accuractely reflects the character of the forum.
Again, thanks for your patience. Let me know if I step out of line.
Jack
|
|
|
