luckyleftyme2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-07-07 07:05 AM
Original message |
| HOW MUCH LONGER WILL AMERICANS PUT UP WITH HIGH GAS PRICES |
|
How much longer will mainers put up with rising gas prices. Do you wonder what the market report will be for Mobile-exxon this quarter? Is the appeasement the built in increase in state gas taxes when prices rise? Yes I know that the natural product is in more demand and we eventually will need to go to other fuels than oil.BUT I ALSO KNOW THE PUBLIC IS GETTING RIPPED OFF! CORUPTION IS ALIVE AND WELL IN THE OIL INDUSTRY!
|
mainegreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-07-07 07:34 AM
Response to Original message |
| 1. People will accept the higher prices, and instead switch to more efficient and smaller cars. |
|
As a people, we are poorly trained to fight monopolistic pricing schemes. :shrug:
|
luckyleftyme2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-07-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 2. SOME ARE ALSO BRAINWASHED |
|
SOME are also brainwashed into following the status- quo! the time for alternative fuel was 1972,instead we've been led by big business and their stooges to be appeased with token attempts that were sure to fail. we are so far behind the curve thanks to leaders like regan,bush and bush that it has impoverished our country. by the time the average citizen wakes up our economy will be lost! the answer is not smaller cars;but alternative fuels!including energy,heat and transportation!
|
Shorebound
(276 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-07-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Doggone, Lucky, I'm agreeing with parts of this. :)
We absolutely should have started on alternatives back in the 1970s. We made some improvements in things like building codes and vehicle efficiency standards, but that was just conservation, not a true search for alternatives. It certainly wasn't out of ignorance -- King Hubbert was proven right in 1970.It was only a matter of time before global oil supplies followed the same trend as those in the United States.
But both OPEC and the oil companies realized that if their product (oil) was priced too high, then people would use less of it. Remember all those folks (like me) who were burning wood instead of fuel oil in the 1970s and 1980s? So they've been very careful over the years to keep the price of oil lower than the price of alternatives. It's only in the past year or so that they've started losing control because supplies have grown so tight.
And I'm certain there has been collusion with our leaders. It was no accident that Saudi Arabia pushed oil prices down after Ronald Reagan was elected in 1980, just like it was no accident that Reagan allowed the energy conservation tax credits to expire.
I disagree that the answer isn't smaller cars -- they're part of the answer, anyway. Transportation uses eat up the vast majority of oil consumed in the US. Another part is NO cars. Yes, I know how dependent Mainers are on their cars. I'm talking about the larger scale.
What alternatives are you thinking about, Lucky? Wind has potential, as does solar, but both have limitations. I notice that nuclear energy is enjoying a new surge in popularity among some commentators.
|
luckyleftyme2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-08-07 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
| 4. ah yes the rebuttal man |
|
Edited on Tue May-08-07 07:29 AM by luckyleftyme2
well since i've been on this kick since the seventies i've found not one but many alternatives will be needed.what we don't need is to kill the messenger to proceed with keeping our heads in the sand.as you noted we have wasted 36 years so that the status -quo could keep control of our energy. their is many examples world wide of nations working on this problem. france has moved forward on many fronts.but most notably is their tidal project. they also use solar,ethanol,wind and nuclear.and most of that in the last decade. Brazil has made great headway with sugar cane and now their is a new processing method to almost double the yield from the same amount of sugar cane. If your really interested you can find even china or many other countries moving toward alternative methods. I know your going to say but it takes more energy to produce the alternative. says who? Exxon -mobile,the texas mafia? then who? the auto industry that said they had no cars that ran on alternative fuel while they were selling them in brazil? we throw enough garbage away every day that could produce enough energy to run our power plants. As with any new process brought on line someone will find a way to make it bigger,faster,and cheaper. a prime example is the new process with sugar cane. we have the way and the ability,we don't have the leadership! heres a few ideas that maine could use raise=sugar beets wind-power tidal power solar nuclear trash to energy solar panels on all school bldg.(as an aide to heating and lighting energy)
|
mainegreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-10-07 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
| 5. I agree with all those alternative energy sources except food based energy. |
|
Growing food to turn into energy is detrimental to both the environment as well as having an extremely negative impact on the availability and price of foodstuffs. Maine should seriously be investing in tidal, as we experience powerful tides due to the lucky combination of current and shape of the gulf.
|
luckyleftyme2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri May-11-07 04:20 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
THEY NEED ANOTHER CROP AND THERE'S ACREAGE GALORE TO USE! THE SUGAR CONTENT IS HIGH IN IN SEVERAL CROPS THAT CAN BE GROWN THERE!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun Dec 21st 2025, 04:54 AM
Response to Original message |