Gas Prices - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-07-2005, 10:51 AM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 10:44 AM
I'd vote for melon.

And Irvine, I agree with you 100%. My parents live in England now and pay something around $5 a gallon. Americans have some of the cheapest gas around.
__________________

__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 04-07-2005, 08:53 PM   #92
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 09:44 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by melon

My priorities are this:

1) Nuclear plants...
Melon, this may sound strange, but I, too, agree with much of your energy manifesto.

But I do think that any time you mention the "n word" (nuclear), you will quickly incite an activist army of hippies, environmentalists, community citizens, cattle ranchers, earthworm farmers, preachers, soccer moms, apple an dpeach growers, bass fishermen, Neil Young fans, professional water polo players, blacksmiths, little league coaches, and the former drummer for 80s-rock band Survivor who will all organize, assemble, picket, protest, block access, scream, shriek, spit, blow loud airhorns and speak through megaphones to make sure this doesn't happen in their community, simply because of the concept of NIMBY (not in my back yard). They will mention Chernobyl and show horrifying images and sing "Barrel of Pain (Half-Life)" by Graham Nash and do everything they can to stop a nuclear power facility from being built. Some local folk singer will write a song about it that seques into Bob Dylan's "Blowing In The Wind" the night that Ted Koppel is broadcasting live from their protest vigil at the community church. They may not be succesful, but there will always be this aura of fear associated with such a facility, and it will draw one fo the broadest coalitions of opposition you can imagine.

Again, I like most of your plan and I would definitely support it, but many of the same people who complain about high gas prices or about me having an SUV or about Bono riding in a GMC Yukon XL will also do everything they can to fight a nuclear power plant, not matter how modernized, safe, efficient and ecologically sound they may now be. These people will very much seek to be the squeaky wheel.

~U2Alabama
__________________

__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 04-07-2005, 09:20 PM   #93
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by babyman
as long as this war will go on there can be only fucking high prices. i bought a new car in june of last year, a turbodiesel 1.7.
the cost of diesel in italy was 0.93 eurocents/liter, today, neither a year after i bought my new car the diesel price is 1.08 euro/liter, how fucking nervous makes me this?!?!?!?!
it's all because of the iraq war
Yeah it's all the Iraq War's fault and it has nothing to do with the Russian government pushing hard to re-nationalise it's oil industry and the Chinese sucking in a lot more energy resources to fuel growth.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-07-2005, 09:59 PM   #94
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 01:44 AM
Quote:
1) Nuclear plants. There's no exception to this. It's the only mass form of electricity generation that doesn't require destroying the environment. Nuclear plant technology has come a long long way from the days of Three Mile Island and Chernobyl to the point that "meltdown" is virtually impossible. Plus, those large cooling towers aren't even necessary anymore. There has also been immense progress in waste disposal, along with promising technology in dramatically hastening the half-lives of nuclear waste, not to mention that technology exists to recycle spent uranium. Europe does this quite often; America does not.

2) Desalination facilities. Our water supply is limited, but 3/4 of the Earth is covered in salt water. This comes in handy for...

3) Hydrogen fuel. And created solely from the desalinated water. Maybe in time, but from any water nonetheless. The nuclear plants built in #1 will produce the energy necessary to create hydrogen fuel. The profit off of the hydrogen fuel sales should help make nuclear plants be profitable.

4) Mandatory hybrid/fuel cell automobiles. We've shown how hybrid technology can work to increase fuel efficiency in existing automobiles, but we shouldn't go about wasting hydrogen fuel. Who knows what the environmental impact will be of blowing all that water vapor in the atmosphere, so efficiency is important even in "zero-emission" vehicles.

5) High-speed national rail. I'm not talking about the embarrassment that is currently Amtrak. Amtrak is slow, because it doesn't actually own any of its own rails; it must rely on freight rails owned by private railroad companies. It is faster to drive than to take Amtrak, unfortunately. What we need to do is build a high-speed national rail system that can go at least 300 mph and connects, at least, to every major city in the U.S. Which leads to...

6) Subway systems. London is a great model for this. An expansive subway network that not only covers downtown, but also nearby suburbs. Some cities may lend themselves to the traditional "underground" method. Others may lend themselves to an above-ground "trolley" system.

All six above then lead to...

7) Tax restructuring. No, not the Bush model, which will accomplish one thing: shifting the burden to the poor. They already get their federal income taxes back, and a 25% sales tax will hurt these people the most, while giving Donald Trump a chance to buy a million ivory back scratchers.
A few points ~ firstly why would you be running desalinised (presumably) seawater for your hydrogen source, it seems like a significant waste of energy when there are plenty of sources of fresh water that could be used.

Secondly what technology would you be using for these desalination plants? The reason that I ask is because if a government funded a massive project like this with technology that it expensive and inneficient would the public be willing to go along and in the long term would it be desirable to keep them operating.

Would these power plants be privately or publicly owned? Would the electrolysis plants be public or private? What would make this a more desirable option than fossil fuels. Is there any guarantee that the price of fossil fuels will remain high > if they dropped be it through a breakthrough in abiotic synthesis of fuel what would prevent the public from going back to the cheaper option.

What about consumerism? sure it is great that there is a cheaper energy supply but all those cars will still be made with plastics, so will many things around the home or at work you may have greater consumption globally as a result of initiating a cheaper and cleaner energy source.

Nuclear fission power plants are a good medium term solution, but could you sell them to the public. People have been exposed to the nuclear nightmare scenarios for decades in spite of the facts, most of the mainstream green groups remain vehemently opposed to nuclear power even though it is a cleaner source of energy. When things change and groups capitalise on ignorance and technophobia it can establish political obstacles for such an endevour.

Personally I think that we should be looking furthur afield, to go for the next generation of energy sources rather than rolling out a LOT more of what we already have. Fusion would be a possible candidate, sono-fusion ~ if it could be proven and applied to energy production would be very neat indeed.

What will be the ramifications of cheap fuel, the west may enjoy having a hydrogen economy and paying more for it but that will not fly in developing countries, cheaper fuel will only mean that they will use more of it and even more environmental damage could be done. Then there are the geopolitical ramifications, not just the Middle East but all over the world there are countries that are dependent on oil revenues, Russia could be hit very hard and just cease to exist as a single nation, Central Asia could also suffer. The blowback from these changes could be disasterous for the world. I am not saying that nothing should change in the name of stability, I am saying that any ambitious plans must be fully drafted with contingencies and room to be changed and adapted as the situation changes. The problem with unforseen circumstances is that too often the plans are not capable of meeting and dealing with this.

What about all the petroleum exploration and those employed in that industry ~ think of the geologists!

The adoption of a new fuel and restructuring of energy supply in the world largest markets are no small feat, the changes would be drastic and would need a lot of time. There is little possibility that any single government could enact sweeping changes without suffering at the ballot box (for example making all news cars hybrid or subsidising hybrid cars with tax dollars). The change must be allowed to happen on it's own without drastic government intervention, when it becomes more profitable to use hybrid vehicles and the demand develops the companies will follow. Once you get more money running to hydrogen producers then that industry can roll out some. These things cannot be rushed through, they can be assisted but never forced.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-07-2005, 11:28 PM   #95
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
A few points ~ firstly why would you be running desalinised (presumably) seawater for your hydrogen source, it seems like a significant waste of energy when there are plenty of sources of fresh water that could be used.
Well, yes and no. Yes, we have lots of fresh water, but we also have lots of dry periods and using all our drinking water to produce fuel at our rates of consumption may lead to drinking water shortages.

But we do have oceans.

Quote:
Secondly what technology would you be using for these desalination plants? The reason that I ask is because if a government funded a massive project like this with technology that it expensive and inneficient would the public be willing to go along and in the long term would it be desirable to keep them operating.
Anything in small quantities will be expensive. Period. Would it be so expensive anymore if the technology was given serious consideration? If we put as much attention into desalination as we did creating HDTVs over the past decade, maybe the technology would be cheaper.

Quote:
Would these power plants be privately or publicly owned? Would the electrolysis plants be public or private? What would make this a more desirable option than fossil fuels. Is there any guarantee that the price of fossil fuels will remain high > if they dropped be it through a breakthrough in abiotic synthesis of fuel what would prevent the public from going back to the cheaper option.
Power plants are already privately owned, as far as I know. The prices, however, are state regulated. We invest hundreds of billions of dollars into the military each year without an afterthought. We try and invest even a fraction of that into the domestic infrastructure, and people whine.

Fossil fuels will remain high, as far as I'm concerned, and China and the rest of the developing world hasn't even hit its peak yet.

Quote:
What about consumerism? sure it is great that there is a cheaper energy supply but all those cars will still be made with plastics, so will many things around the home or at work you may have greater consumption globally as a result of initiating a cheaper and cleaner energy source.
I don't expect America to reduce its consumption level, which is why I swung towards zero-emission technologies. If we're going to consume, the least we can do is have a clean energy technology, coupled with recycling of materials.

As for "plastic," nothing says that we can't use different building materials that don't involve petroleum products. We'll just have to work at it.

Quote:
Nuclear fission power plants are a good medium term solution, but could you sell them to the public. People have been exposed to the nuclear nightmare scenarios for decades in spite of the facts, most of the mainstream green groups remain vehemently opposed to nuclear power even though it is a cleaner source of energy. When things change and groups capitalise on ignorance and technophobia it can establish political obstacles for such an endevour.
I'm bored with all the fearmongering. It's downright retarded, and both the left and the right are guilty. People have kept their exposure to the nightmare scenarios, because of the fact that people aren't aware of the facts. They aren't aware of technological changes. They aren't aware of the waste disposal options or even the uranium recycling options. There are obstacles, yes, but obstacles that I believe can be overcome with persistence.

As for the Left, just bring up France and they'll be placated. The nation is pretty much exclusively run by nuclear power.

Quote:
Personally I think that we should be looking furthur afield, to go for the next generation of energy sources rather than rolling out a LOT more of what we already have. Fusion would be a possible candidate, sono-fusion ~ if it could be proven and applied to energy production would be very neat indeed.
Fusion would be great, except, as far as I know, it's a crap shoot. In fact, there seem to be a lot of scientists who think its impossible. We don't have the luxury of decades to wait for those scientists to be proven wrong.

Quote:
What will be the ramifications of cheap fuel, the west may enjoy having a hydrogen economy and paying more for it but that will not fly in developing countries, cheaper fuel will only mean that they will use more of it and even more environmental damage could be done. Then there are the geopolitical ramifications, not just the Middle East but all over the world there are countries that are dependent on oil revenues, Russia could be hit very hard and just cease to exist as a single nation, Central Asia could also suffer. The blowback from these changes could be disasterous for the world. I am not saying that nothing should change in the name of stability, I am saying that any ambitious plans must be fully drafted with contingencies and room to be changed and adapted as the situation changes. The problem with unforseen circumstances is that too often the plans are not capable of meeting and dealing with this.
These nations have been whining about American cultural imperialism for decades and resent us anyway. On one hand, they want us to go away. On the other, they want our money. Well, I'm willing to grant them their former wish once and for all. I'm not interested in hampering our development just to be a source of welfare for them.

Once it is perfected here, the technology can be exported to Europe and beyond.

Quote:
What about all the petroleum exploration and those employed in that industry ~ think of the geologists!
Should we have banned the telephone to preserve the telegraph industry?

Quote:
The adoption of a new fuel and restructuring of energy supply in the world largest markets are no small feat, the changes would be drastic and would need a lot of time. There is little possibility that any single government could enact sweeping changes without suffering at the ballot box (for example making all news cars hybrid or subsidising hybrid cars with tax dollars). The change must be allowed to happen on it's own without drastic government intervention, when it becomes more profitable to use hybrid vehicles and the demand develops the companies will follow. Once you get more money running to hydrogen producers then that industry can roll out some. These things cannot be rushed through, they can be assisted but never forced.
It won't happen on its own. That's the thing. The oil industry is loving this right now. Why would they even consider investigating alternative fuels, when they're making record profits? And the auto industry, for some odd reason, seems to be in bed with the oil industry, so they'll never betray them.

It'll happen once the oil runs out, but by then, are we willing to flounder for years, if not decades, waiting for the technology to catch up? Supply-side economics isn't coming to our rescue this time. It's too short-sighted of an economic system, and--let's face it--we haven't had real R&D in the U.S. since the 1970s. Even the internet is riding off the coattails of 1960s/70s R&D. That's probably why the space shuttle program is about to collapse, and we have no successor.

Our pursuit of the all-mighty quarterly profit will be our ruin. In the meantime, I hope you all enjoy your expensive fuel for the next decade or more, thanks to our short-sighted economic system.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 06:42 AM   #96
Acrobat
 
Ft. Worth Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 390
Local Time: 10:44 AM
Melon, have you considered writing a more in depth piece that fully fleshes out your ideas? Maybe you could submit it to a local newspaper or some other media outlet. The energy issue is, as you say, a bi-partisan issue, and I think (maybe I am being naive here) that the majority of Americans would at least listen to some of your ideas. It does not seem to be liberal or conservative and the lack of partisan rhetoric would tend to open up people's minds. Just a thought.
__________________
Ft. Worth Frog is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 07:57 AM   #97
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 10:44 AM
I have yet another take on this. I am convinced there is pump rigging going on. I travel a round trip of 150 miles every day, and I use a lot of gas. At some stations, 5 bucks will get me all the way one way and then some, while other stations' gas only gets me a little more than halfway. After all this driving and pumping and paying out the ass, I have noticed and can name which stations' gas holds up better. This is not just a question of quality of gas, since I have had both good and bad luck with both big names like Exxon and small stores like Southern Food Store. Sheetz is the gas that holds out the longest. It can't be my car if it varies like this. I am convinced some stores are setting their pumps to less than a gallon. I heard this happened in the 70s oil crisis too.

And speaking of that, someone mentioned in the paper yesterday that in those days Jimmy Carter announced that there was enough oil in Alaska to last the world 200 years, prices would drop and stay down, and the US would one day be free of foreign oil. Well, that was over 25 years ago, and it didn't come true. Maybe it never was true, it was just to calm everyone's fears. I don't remember this speech, I was just a kid, but I do remember people bitching and blaming Carter when gas soared way over a dollar for the first time ever.
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 08:12 AM   #98
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 11:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
Sheetz is the gas that holds out the longest. It can't be my car if it varies like this.
Not only does Sheetz always have the cheapest gas, but they make good sandwiches, too.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 08:21 AM   #99
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by pax


Not only does Sheetz always have the cheapest gas, but they make good sandwiches, too.
And always the best non flat bladder buster sodas!

oh and the cheapest cigs by far (my husband smokes KOOLs, they charge $2.15, most other places are close to $4 )
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 11:25 AM   #100
War Child
 
Vorsprung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 976
Local Time: 04:44 PM
How about the deeper impact of an oil crash?
__________________
Vorsprung is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 11:25 AM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
babyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: On an open cluster called Pleiades
Posts: 6,246
Local Time: 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Yeah it's all the Iraq War's fault and it has nothing to do with the Russian government pushing hard to re-nationalise it's oil industry and the Chinese sucking in a lot more energy resources to fuel growth.

yes, these too. but before the iraq war i payed 0.93eurocent.
this afternoon i payed 1.12eurocent.......................it rises constantly, the russian and the chinese did their shit even before the war, but the price never reached this guinness highness
__________________
babyman is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 12:00 PM   #102
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
ILuvLarryMullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in the sunshine
Posts: 6,904
Local Time: 07:44 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
I have yet another take on this. I am convinced there is pump rigging going on. I travel a round trip of 150 miles every day, and I use a lot of gas. At some stations, 5 bucks will get me all the way one way and then some, while other stations' gas only gets me a little more than halfway. After all this driving and pumping and paying out the ass, I have noticed and can name which stations' gas holds up better. This is not just a question of quality of gas, since I have had both good and bad luck with both big names like Exxon and small stores like Southern Food Store. Sheetz is the gas that holds out the longest. It can't be my car if it varies like this. I am convinced some stores are setting their pumps to less than a gallon. I heard this happened in the 70s oil crisis too.

If you think this is happening there should be a sticker somewhere on the pump about it being regulated by the state for accuracy in its measures and a number that you can call if you suspect that something is amiss.
__________________
ILuvLarryMullen is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 05:56 PM   #103
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,435
Local Time: 03:44 PM
WOW.

Just makes me proud to live in a place like Albany, NY. It'a a little like Dublin, actually: a big village. It shares some of the deficiencies of the America that Henry (History is Bunk) Ford built( he was the one who basically dismantled what used to be the WORLD'S BEST public trandport system..railroads to suburbs? Heck, we outdid even the Brits on that one)..

such as: a miniature portion of shoddy downtown caused by White Flight, a bus system that doesn't run past 11:30 PM-midnight )Albany has a lot of colleges, so maybe the buses run a little later here than other cities), the newest technolgical jobs opening up in Clifton Park, the local "Edge City"; and the damnable lack of a shuttle train running 40 miles north to Saratoga so we can be better conencted to the Horse Racing Season in July-August, but other things are great here.

The three main "Cities" of the Capital District-=-Albany, Schenectady, Troy, are closely linked together by spiderweb pockets of suburbs between them that have largely sprung up sice WWII. Instead of a single city-suburb structure that runs inward to outwars, the geogrpahical position of the 3 "townships" makes for a great public transport situation. The buses run between the three areas, and the farthest point, Schenctady is no more than 45 minutes (in heavy traffic)from Albany and Hudson River. There are great parks in the middl f touwn and a walkway besdie the river. The whole place is small, maybe 25 miles square. The main tri-city area. Albany has also preserved much of its ancient (for America, about 240 yrs is ancient) architecture. Many great period Hollywood films are made here. IN the are'as shopping malls, there is a real diversity of people....you never go to any inddor mall and think, "OKay, this is the suburban mall" or this is the 'gehtto mall." I live along a street that used to be cobblestonesa cnetury ago. In some places today, where the road is getting in need of repair, you can even see glimpses of cobblestones a few inches down among the potholes in the road.

It's far to small to be considered an ideal, but in the Capital city area, anyway, alot of people live and shop clse to where they work. The commute is generally a 20-minte dash north to Clifton Park (which is the real gas-guzzling suburb), and a half-hour to Saratoga. For me, thebest part is, as a gfrad student with an campus ID card, I can travel most of the city's buses for free. Even if I was no loger a student, if I had the ID, I could still get on..they don't check. I see lots of bikers too, evenv by the airport, which is a one-minute drive from the largest shopping mall.

There are a lot fo flaws, but Rolling Stone had a great article on this. We can't change the structure of the way we live now, but in the future, we willhave to build cities smaller, like the Albany area. We willhave to beocme localized.

Last: I will say that Europeans and others just canot understand the unique mythos the automobile holds in American culture. It is much more than a means of teansportation, or a feature of daily life. It stmbolizes freedom, independence, and even democracy (the treasured privacy of having your own personal space to say to others exactly what you please, without fear of being overheard. Which is of course impossible in a public conveyance like a train or subway. There is also, I suspect, an unfortunate, latent undercurrent of power, of imperialism...of havi "tamed" the American wastes, the vastness of the landscape, and bringing it under your control. It perpetuates to the average individual the sense of havng conquered the frontier..on a daily basis.

Lastly: GREAT article there, buddy. Nothing like that to cheer me up! We forget one thing: last time there was a Depression, FDR got us out of it with an impressive job-creation program, whcih consisted mainly of developing America's then-vast natural rescources. Building dams, roads, highways. Mining, factories, oil. What would any American Presient do now to create jobs in a country where most of the natural rescources are gone (in a mining, developing, oil producing, or road building or dam building way)?
__________________
Teta040 is offline  
Old 04-08-2005, 06:03 PM   #104
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,435
Local Time: 03:44 PM
PS It isn't Bono's SUV, LOL.

And for those advicting nuclear power..I have 2 words: SIAN EVANS.

Edge said sometimes around the mid-90's that he would not want to live near a nuclear power plant, it wouild freak him out, he;d be worried about he or his kids getting cancer. The fact of the matter is, read Flanagan's book..evedn int he days hewre there was just one Sellafield Plant, familes living aorund it had a very high rate of cancer. Some of the residents even slapped the faces of the band memebers and burst into tears talking to them. Soon after ZOo TV< BOno was criicized for building an expensive swimming pool in front of his beachfront property. Well, I would too, if I could afford it, b/c I wouldn't want my kids swimming in the polluted Irish Sea.

I don't know about you, but I look at those humerous little pics of the band on the Sellafield trip ("F-O-A-D!") now, and it makes my blood run cold.

If it turns out that Edge didn't, and the child is sick from years of contact with it, or equal pollution in Malibu (crazt as this sounds)...
__________________
Teta040 is offline  
Old 04-09-2005, 01:31 AM   #105
War Child
 
elysithea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ....where the wind calls your name...
Posts: 768
Local Time: 11:44 AM
Rising gas prices. I hate it, but I have to deal with it. And I am also one of many people in this country that can't do the walk/take the bus/bike strategy. I live in a rural town, and I work/go to school about 40 miles away. I need my car, but it's getting ridiculous. I don't have a gas guzzler, but I'm spending $60-80 a week on gas.
__________________

__________________
elysithea is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com