$135 a barrel

[atrdriver]

In relation to a solar array, I say an energy show on discovery that said a 100 square mile solar array in the middle of the nevada desert would create enough electricity for the entire nation. Obviously, distribution from one location would be imposible with todays technology. But it does show the potential.

I actually think that it would take a far larger farm to power the US, but tell me. What do you do at night? Or on those pesky cloudy days? Solar is great, and it's a great idea. But it too has it's problems.

 

[Soverytired]

Typical liberal solution, tax the evil corporation. You do realize that a corporation NEVER pays tax don't you? All they do is add their tax into teh cost of the product, because to them a tax is part of the cost of goods sold. Nobody is holding hearings on banks, except those poor ones that need bailing out because of the real estate crash, but they were averaging 20% profit margins, while the average oil company is making less than 10% margin.

Sheesh. Relax skippy, I'm on your side. I love big oil, free markets, and environmentally responsible drilling in just about every possible place in the US. I'm also a big fan of a switch to alternatives the second they're economically viable, which is rapidly approaching.

"Reductio ad absurdum" . . . no corporation in the US ever pays any taxes, according to you. This is news to anyone who's ever run a business. Yes, you can pass on costs, but only to a certain point.

Taxes are the price you pay for government. While we can differ on "how much" or what they're spent on, no government worth it's name could exist without the power to tax.

Oil companies should pay no more, nor less, than any other business in America.

 

[atrdriver]

DING DING DING!! We have winner!!

Drilling for more oil is not the answer. That would just delay the inevitable. Finite resources will run out! Sure, we might delay the problem for us and out children. What about our grandchildren and great grandchildren. I sincerely hope that my grandchildren will know oil as a hazardous substance that you have to pay to get rid of.

Nuclear and solar power used to produce hydrogen and electricity really needs to come to the forefront. Sure there is the nuclear waste issues, but I am sure we can come up with a smart solution.

Drilling is the short term answer. No, it won't fix things long term, but getting those alternative sources on line and all the problems ironed out is a long term project. Long term as in maybe not in our lifetime. Sure, I hope someday there is no use for oil except lubrication. But that is a LONG way off. What do you propose we do in the meantime? I filled up my tank today and it was $85.

 

[atrdriver]

Sheesh. Relax skippy, I'm on your side. I love big oil, free markets, and environmentally responsible drilling in just about every possible place in the US. I'm also a big fan of a switch to alternatives the second they're economically viable, which is rapidly approaching.

"Reductio ad absurdum" . . . no corporation in the US ever pays any taxes, according to you. This is news to anyone who's ever run a business. Yes, you can pass on costs, but only to a certain point.

Taxes are the price you pay for government. While we can differ on "how much" or what they're spent on, no government worth it's name could exist without the power to tax.

Sorry, I thought about that after I posted... I guarantee that your airline passes it's tax burden onto the passengers, or it ends up being included in the "loss". Yes, obviously corporations write a check to the government, but that cost is passed as part of the COGS.

 

[RIDETHELIGHTING]

Coal to oil for the air force. With the Air force converting coal to fuel, wouldn't that crush oil prices to have all that Jet-A back on the market and Diesel.(Diesel a by product of the process)

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/06/airforce_coalfuel_070616/

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

It would take about 70x70 square miles of solar to power the US for electricity, which is about twice Rhode Island.

Drilling for oil won't help in the short term enough. Pickens said we need to go to natural gas for transportation fuel in the short term.

I would add nuclear power plants, and electric cars powered by coal, new nuclear, new wind, and new solar.

I think long-term straight electrical autos powered by renewable energy is the best choice.

Whatever, we've got to get on it.

The people who say oil will drop a lot soon are wrong. The MOST EXPENSIVE oil is for the 2016 contracts-well over $140/barrel-no dollar devaluation or terrorism premium built in there.

Could be topping out at $12-$15/gallon of gasoline before the renewables kick in at a high enough volume to reduce the use of oil far enough for it to matter.

cliff
YIP

 

[Soverytired]

The voters disagree with you. The voters of Florida and California have spoken with their votes repeatedly about not wanting anything to do with off-shore drilling. I lived in Florida for a while, and I remember it being a huge issue during a couple of state elections while I was there. The people just don't want those things off their coast. Period.

I would also point out, this is exactly the problem for the development of EVERY energy source in the US. Nuclear, coal, oil, natural gas, wind, shale oil, tar sands . . . with the possible exception of solar, every energy source is blocked and stopped by some fear mongering group. America is more willing to demote itself to a 3rd world status than it is to provide it's energy needs . . I hope this changes before it's too late.

Fear mongering? The people of FL don't take symbolic votes against oil development due to aesthetic reasons. They've been told to fear oil spills that might ruin their coasts. Every other energy source is similarly demonized.

No energy source is risk-free. But the risks have certainly outweighed the benefits for 99.999% of the US population .. . and the rest of the world. The luxury of cheap, imported energy may be over, but the need for energy isn't going to diminish.

There WILL be drilling off the coasts. And the party in power will lead the charge. I just hope they don't wait too long.

 

[NuGuy]

I would also point out, this is exactly the problem for the development of EVERY energy source in the US. Nuclear, coal, oil, natural gas, wind, shale oil, tar sands . . . with the possible exception of solar, every energy source is blocked and stopped by some fear mongering group.

Nope, add solar to the list. My homeowners association forbids them.

Nu

 

[G100driver]

Hi!

It would take about 70x70 square miles of solar to power the US for electricity, which is about twice Rhode Island.
YIP

Seem pretty reasonable if everyone puts these panals on the top of their homes.

My aunt paid the equivilant of one Chevy Tahoe to put these panals on her roof. With a swimming pool and hot tube, her highest electric bill was $.91. (she also has electric heat and A/C)

Now, imagine if everyone from LA-Florida had these panals on their homes.

If everyone makes there own power, the excess compacity can be used to create hydrogen or another form of alternative energy to power our cars.

Oil can then go back to powering mass movement of goods and people.

The world can and will change.

 

[Soverytired]

Nope, add solar to the list. My homeowners association forbids them.

Nu

Depending on where you live, it might actually be illegal for your homeowners association to do so. Many states want to encourage this, so they specifically ban HMA's from restricting it.

However, the fundamental problem is that they are still very expensive, even with tax credits and subsidizes. Most people would rather add value to their homes by spending the necessary $20-$60 thousand dollars on other improvements or larger houses.

As the investment in solar panels takes decades to recoup on a purely dollar basis, and most people rarely live in their homes for more than a few years, the financially smart play is to invest it in other things. Unfortunately.

Congress could underwrite long term tax credits to encourage this though. Not the 1-2 year, or even 5 year "farm" bill kind. 10-20 year credits would see a HUGE development of this kind of technology.

Neither party seems interested in pursing it though. Germany is an example of a country that gets this particular technology, for example.