11 Jul
2001
11 Jul
'01
3:13 a.m.
At 10:39 PM 7/10/01 -0400, you wrote:
Richard Erlacher wrote:
That's true but you miss the point. The US is still a major exporter
of oil, coal and other fuels. Please tell me why should we be exporting
it if we don't have enough to meet our own needs (if you buy the current
line from the GWB establishment).
Joe
What's more, they (the Oil interests) would
really hate it if they were
require
to sell all the production from the U.S. to the
U.S. and stop exporting.
You imply that Big Oil is purely American. Their domain is the whole planet. Eric
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "joe" <rigdonj(a)intellistar.net>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, July 09, 2001 7:25 AM
Subject: Re: OT oil shortage was: Celebration (Not intended to be
offensive,
possible humor)
> Sorry for continuing this thread but I couldn't let this one pass!
>
> At 03:00 PM 7/8/01 -0400, Chad wrote:
>
> >Joe,
> >
> >I originally meant to send this a few days ago. I wrote it off-line and
> >it has been sitting in my out-box, but here goes :-)
> >
> >I don't think "crisis" is quite accurate. The oil industry has
had
> >several refineries burn, and who knows, maybe some of them are old or
> >undersize.
>
> I think you need to do your home work. The oil companies have been
> shutting down refineries. They've shutdown almost 30% of the
refineries
in
> this country in the last ten years.
>
>
> > They may need to build more. or rebuild burned ones. The
> >electricity problems comes from growing and growing use, without
> >appropriate updates on the power system.
>
> That's very true but the problems with the electrical power industry
> are due to a shortage of generating stations (particularly in California)
> and has NOTHING to do with oil refinery capacity or any supposed oil
shortage.
>
>
> >Drilling in new locations isn't supposed to increase refinery capacity.
> >It is part of a longer range solution.
>
> Horseshit! They're closing down wells everyday and have been for
> years! Take a drive through Lousianna sometime! I was in Alaska a couple
> of years ago and toured nearly the full length of the Alaskan pipeline.
> Even it's only running at about 40% of it's capacity. The only
reason that
> they want to drill in ANWAR and GOM is
because the oil companies want a
> CHEAPER source of oil so they can increase their already record profits!
> That's the same reason that the US continues to import oil from the
middle
> east. Even with their price increases
it's still cheaper to buy their oil
> than it is to produce our own.
>
> If the government is serious about a "long range solutions" then they
> should mandate that ALL cars achive 30mpg by say 2006, then raise it to
> 35mpg by 2011, then 40 mpg by 2016, etc until we achive the best
practicle
> mileage. 50 mpg is very possible, a number
of standard production cars
> have already achived it. That's only one step, there are hundreds
if
not
> thousands of other practicle solutions.
Another solution would be to
> mandate solar hot water heaters in all homes. I have one in my home and
> it's been my only source of hot water for over 15 years and I've
never run
> out of hot water.
>
>
> > Drilling in new locations is
> >something a lot of countries are doing.
>
> Sure, because they all want to be independent of foreign sources and
> because it's a huge source of revenue.
>
>
> > Drilling in the North Sea is
> >being done now, or maybe deeper water than normal..... I don't recall.
> >I have seen a show on Discovery or TLC about the building of the
> >platform. It was a huge engineering feat the way they built it.
>
> Yes, the engineering is impressive but again that has nothing to
do with
> the "nessesicity" for drilling in
ANWAR or GOM.
>
>
> >Personally, I'd like to see a move away from oil, not totally, but maybe
> >a diversification. I'd like to see cars powered by grain alcohol,
> >although I admit, I don't really know any specifics.
>
> I know a good bit about alcohol powered vehicles, I've been
> experimenting with them since the late 60s. Alcohol is not nearly as
> powerfull, cost effective or as efficient as gasoline. Alcohol also has
> major incompatibilities with the components of automotive fuel
systems. A
> number of companies have tried selling
gasoline with alcohol added
> but AFIK they're all dropped it due to the cost, performance and other
> problems.
>
>
> > Something might
> >have to be done about people drinking the contents of ones gas tank :-)
>
>
> That would cure the population problem! Nearly all of the alcohol
> sold in this country, including that used in fuel, is either nearly pure
> methyl alcohol or has methyl alcohol, formaldahyde or other poisons added
> to it to "de-nature" it. "De-natured" is a polite way of saying
that
it's
> poisonous! The government requires that
expressly so that people
won't be
> able to drink it. Let's burn gasoline in
our cars (at least till
something
> > better comes along) and save the grain alcohol for drinking!
> >
> > Joe
> >
> >