Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

All plastics are made mostly from crude oil.

Look at what you're buying in the store. Nearly everything sold is made
from plastic, and/or wrapped in plastic. Nearly any liquid is sold in
plastic containers, such as detergents, beverages, and so much more.
And right before you leave the store, you get umpteen plastic bags which
have a life span of less than one day. Then you get into your car which
is made from at least half plastic, and drive home carrying your plastic
bags of plastic merchandise up your plastic stairs, grab your plastic
door next to your plastic siding, and trip over some of the kids plastic
toys on the plastic (vinyl) flooring. Then you put your groceries in
your mostly plastic refrigerator or on the shelves in your cabinets
which are likely made from parrticle board (saw dust and plastic
binders), covered with a thin layer of plastic (fake woodgrain) coating.
Finally you walk over to your plastic cabinet tv set, and sit on your
couch made of some or mostly plastic.

If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there. Your furnishings all contain at least some plastic is not
fully plastic. Are your curtains and fabric covered couch cushions made
of cotton, or a plastic derived plastic, just like much of your
clothing. Amd you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....

What ever happened to wood, paper bags, metals, clays, glass, etc.

Sure it takes oil to mold metal, but look at the lifespan of metal
objects compared to plastic. Heck, children's metal and wooden toys
from the 1950s and even older are still around. You wont be passing on
their plastic toys to their children, most dont last one year.

I'm not saying to eliminate all plastics, but at least half of them
could be eliminated. To begin, it's time to get rid of all disposible
plastics, no more plastic store bags, plastic soda /water/ beverage
bottles, cut back on plastic containers for household liquids, get rid
of many plastic toys, go back to decks made of real wood, and what ever
happened to all the other sidings that have been replaced by cheap
looking ugly plastic siding. And all that plastic packaging in the
stores should ALL go, particularly those clamshells. And what ever
happened to real metal bumbers on cars? The ones that could take a 5mph
hit and show no damage. I dont even understand the reasoning of the
cheap shattering plastic bumpers???? And why so much plastic fabric,
when cotton was always reliable.

Ok, pvc plumbing is a winner for drainage, plastic wire insulation is
superior to the old cloth covered wires, and plexiglass is safer on door
lites than standard glass. But why the plastic electrical boxes,
plastic light fixtures that often deform from the heat, and are those
plastic door knobs, plastic toilet seats, and plastic window frames
really necesaary, when the old ones lasted much longer.

We need to start re-thinking what we're doing with oil. As consumers,
we need to begin to pressure manufacturers to stop using plastics in
many things. Begin by refusing all plastic store bags, take your own
cloth or papers bags. We're constantly being told to cut back on
driving, and many people can. But what most people do not realize is
the amount of oil that used in everthing we buy, and how much of that
plastic is just worthless packaging that goes right in the trash.

In about a month we'll be celebrating Earth Day. While it's known that
most plastics will be in our environment for centuries, so it's a good
cause to work toward elimination of the plastic packaging. However,
it's not just a matter of saving our planet, it's a matter of saving our
oil, saving money, and cleaning up all the plastic pollution at the same
time. We've become a society which lives in a world composed of more
plastic than other materials, and one where nothing lasts anymore
because most plastics have a short lifespan.

What can YOU do to cut back on plastics, thus cutting back on oil usage?

Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was denying permits
to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

wrote in message
...
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!


What can YOU do to cut back on plastics, thus cutting back on oil usage?

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:49:58 -0600, wrote:

Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

All plastics are made mostly from crude oil.

snip

If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there.

And you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....
No, not exactly


Sure it takes oil to mold metal, but look at the lifespan of metal
objects compared to plastic. Heck, children's metal and wooden toys
from the 1950s and even older are still around. You wont be passing on
their plastic toys to their children, most dont last one year.

Metal or plastics, we toss too much stuff and make too much junk. More
of a consumer issue than a materials one.

I'm not saying to eliminate all plastics, but at least half of them
could be eliminated. To begin, it's time to get rid of all disposible
plastics, no more plastic store bags, plastic soda /water/ beverage
bottles, cut back on plastic containers for household liquids, get rid
of many plastic toys, go back to decks made of real wood, and what ever
happened to all the other sidings that have been replaced by cheap
looking ugly plastic siding.

You raise some good points, but much of what you say is not founded in
facts.

Take that lawn chair. No, it is not like 5 or 10 gallons of gas when
it burns, and burn it should. Most plastics contain about 18,000 Btu
per pound. If not recycled, it is a good fuel in trash to energy
plants. It serves a dual purpose that way, better than just taking
oil and burning it, with plastics you get an extra use along the way.

You mention Styrofoam insulation. The amount of oil used to produce
the insulation is miniscule compared to the amount of fuel it saves
over the life of the house it is in. Before condemning its use, I
want to see a study of energy used to produce other forms of
insulation, such a fiberglass and see what gives us the best deal.

We have to recycle more and what is not recycled should go into a
trash to energy plant that produces power while reducing the bulk for
landfills. We should optimize our use of crude and make the products
that ultimately are most beneficial, be it plastics from oil, or metal
that uses oil in the processing.

I also found this:
Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics

Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics:
Unit: 7-8 Value: percent

Details/Sources
4% for feedstock and 3-4% for manufacturing.

http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resour...s/Plastics.htm

On Mar 18, 5:00*am, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:49:58 -0600, wrote:
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

All plastics are made mostly from crude oil.

snip

If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. *Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. *The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there.
And you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? *Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....

No, not exactly

Sure it takes oil to mold metal, but look at the lifespan of metal
objects compared to plastic. *Heck, children's metal and wooden toys
from the 1950s and even older are still around. *You wont be passing on
their plastic toys to their children, most dont last one year.

Metal or plastics, we toss too much stuff and make too much junk. More
of a consumer issue than a materials one.



I'm not saying to eliminate all plastics, but at least half of them
could be eliminated. *To begin, it's time to get rid of all disposible
plastics, no more plastic store bags, plastic soda /water/ beverage
bottles, cut back on plastic containers for household liquids, get rid
of many plastic toys, go back to decks made of real wood, and what ever
happened to all the other sidings that have been replaced by cheap
looking ugly plastic siding.

You raise some good points, but much of what you say is not founded in
facts.

Take that lawn chair. *No, it is not like 5 or 10 gallons of gas when
it burns, and burn it should. *Most plastics contain about 18,000 Btu
per pound. If not recycled, it is a good fuel in trash to energy
plants. *It serves a dual purpose that way, better than just taking
oil and burning it, with plastics you get an extra use along the way.

You mention Styrofoam insulation. *The amount of oil used to produce
the insulation is miniscule compared to the amount of fuel it saves
over the life of the house it is in. *Before condemning its use, I
want to see a study of energy used to produce other forms of
insulation, such a fiberglass and see what gives us the best deal.

We have to recycle more and what is not recycled should go into a
trash to energy plant that produces power while reducing the bulk for
landfills. *We should optimize our use of crude and make the products
that ultimately are most beneficial, be it plastics from oil, or metal
that uses oil in the processing.

I also found this:
Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics

Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics:
*Unit: 7-8 Value: percent

Details/Sources
*4% for feedstock and 3-4% for manufacturing.

http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resour...s/Plastics.htm

http://woodgatesview.com/2011/08/31/...ate-interests/

On Mar 18, 8:00*am, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:49:58 -0600, wrote:
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

All plastics are made mostly from crude oil.

snip

If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. *Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. *The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there.
And you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? *Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....

No, not exactly

Sure it takes oil to mold metal, but look at the lifespan of metal
objects compared to plastic. *Heck, children's metal and wooden toys
from the 1950s and even older are still around. *You wont be passing on
their plastic toys to their children, most dont last one year.

Metal or plastics, we toss too much stuff and make too much junk. More
of a consumer issue than a materials one.



I'm not saying to eliminate all plastics, but at least half of them
could be eliminated. *To begin, it's time to get rid of all disposible
plastics, no more plastic store bags, plastic soda /water/ beverage
bottles, cut back on plastic containers for household liquids, get rid
of many plastic toys, go back to decks made of real wood, and what ever
happened to all the other sidings that have been replaced by cheap
looking ugly plastic siding.

You raise some good points, but much of what you say is not founded in
facts.

Take that lawn chair. *No, it is not like 5 or 10 gallons of gas when
it burns, and burn it should. *Most plastics contain about 18,000 Btu
per pound. If not recycled, it is a good fuel in trash to energy
plants. *It serves a dual purpose that way, better than just taking
oil and burning it, with plastics you get an extra use along the way.

You mention Styrofoam insulation. *The amount of oil used to produce
the insulation is miniscule compared to the amount of fuel it saves
over the life of the house it is in. *Before condemning its use, I
want to see a study of energy used to produce other forms of
insulation, such a fiberglass and see what gives us the best deal.

We have to recycle more and what is not recycled should go into a
trash to energy plant that produces power while reducing the bulk for
landfills. *We should optimize our use of crude and make the products
that ultimately are most beneficial, be it plastics from oil, or metal
that uses oil in the processing.

I also found this:
Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics

Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics:
*Unit: 7-8 Value: percent

Details/Sources
*4% for feedstock and 3-4% for manufacturing.

http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resour.../Plastics.htm- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

In many places a significant amount of plastic is being recycled
today. For example, here in NJ we recycle all plastic soda/water
bottles and similar. Most of those wind up being used to make
carpet. Some also wind up in outdoor furniture and similar.

As for the reason for using plastics in cars instead of steel, it's
because of the need to reduce weight to improve fuel economy.
Substitute steel and you'll wind up using more oil for fuel than
you save from the oil used to make the plastic.

I also think it's foolish to think getting rid of composite deck
materials,
siding, etc is going to get us anywhere. These have lifespans many
times their wood equivalent and you'd have to look at the full cycle
energy usage, labor costs, etc.

On 3/18/2012 8:00 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:49:58 -0600, wrote:

Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

All plastics are made mostly from crude oil.

snip

If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there.

And you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....
No, not exactly


Sure it takes oil to mold metal, but look at the lifespan of metal
objects compared to plastic. Heck, children's metal and wooden toys
from the 1950s and even older are still around. You wont be passing on
their plastic toys to their children, most dont last one year.

Metal or plastics, we toss too much stuff and make too much junk. More
of a consumer issue than a materials one.

I'm not saying to eliminate all plastics, but at least half of them
could be eliminated. To begin, it's time to get rid of all disposible
plastics, no more plastic store bags, plastic soda /water/ beverage
bottles, cut back on plastic containers for household liquids, get rid
of many plastic toys, go back to decks made of real wood, and what ever
happened to all the other sidings that have been replaced by cheap
looking ugly plastic siding.

You raise some good points, but much of what you say is not founded in
facts.

Take that lawn chair. No, it is not like 5 or 10 gallons of gas when
it burns, and burn it should. Most plastics contain about 18,000 Btu
per pound. If not recycled, it is a good fuel in trash to energy
plants. It serves a dual purpose that way, better than just taking
oil and burning it, with plastics you get an extra use along the way.

You mention Styrofoam insulation. The amount of oil used to produce
the insulation is miniscule compared to the amount of fuel it saves
over the life of the house it is in. Before condemning its use, I
want to see a study of energy used to produce other forms of
insulation, such a fiberglass and see what gives us the best deal.

We have to recycle more and what is not recycled should go into a
trash to energy plant that produces power while reducing the bulk for
landfills. We should optimize our use of crude and make the products
that ultimately are most beneficial, be it plastics from oil, or metal
that uses oil in the processing.

I also found this:
Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics

Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics:
Unit: 7-8 Value: percent

Details/Sources
4% for feedstock and 3-4% for manufacturing.

http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resour...s/Plastics.htm



Good site.

OP has his head where the sun don't shine.

Replacing these materials with those from natural sources, e.g. paper
bags, would probably consume much more energy from oil than the
manufacture of the plastic.

On Mar 18, 4:35*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was denying permits
to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

wrote in message

...
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

What can YOU do to cut back on plastics, thus cutting back on oil usage?

Gasoline prices are per demand of posting from parent companies.
outlets adhere at the risk of losing franchise license.

Why has NO one seriously pointed out that during the worst economic
downtown in years and what is reported as 'shrinking' supply, all
players in the oil industry posted the highest profits in corporate
history? Somehow that seems contradictory.

On Mar 18, 3:13*pm, Molly Brown wrote:
On Mar 18, 5:00*am, Ed Pawlowski wrote:





On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 04:49:58 -0600, wrote:
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

All plastics are made mostly from crude oil.

snip

If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. *Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. *The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there.
And you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? *Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....

No, not exactly

Sure it takes oil to mold metal, but look at the lifespan of metal
objects compared to plastic. *Heck, children's metal and wooden toys
from the 1950s and even older are still around. *You wont be passing on
their plastic toys to their children, most dont last one year.

Metal or plastics, we toss too much stuff and make too much junk. More
of a consumer issue than a materials one.

I'm not saying to eliminate all plastics, but at least half of them
could be eliminated. *To begin, it's time to get rid of all disposible
plastics, no more plastic store bags, plastic soda /water/ beverage
bottles, cut back on plastic containers for household liquids, get rid
of many plastic toys, go back to decks made of real wood, and what ever
happened to all the other sidings that have been replaced by cheap
looking ugly plastic siding.

You raise some good points, but much of what you say is not founded in
facts.

Take that lawn chair. *No, it is not like 5 or 10 gallons of gas when
it burns, and burn it should. *Most plastics contain about 18,000 Btu
per pound. If not recycled, it is a good fuel in trash to energy
plants. *It serves a dual purpose that way, better than just taking
oil and burning it, with plastics you get an extra use along the way.

You mention Styrofoam insulation. *The amount of oil used to produce
the insulation is miniscule compared to the amount of fuel it saves
over the life of the house it is in. *Before condemning its use, I
want to see a study of energy used to produce other forms of
insulation, such a fiberglass and see what gives us the best deal.

We have to recycle more and what is not recycled should go into a
trash to energy plant that produces power while reducing the bulk for
landfills. *We should optimize our use of crude and make the products
that ultimately are most beneficial, be it plastics from oil, or metal
that uses oil in the processing.

I also found this:
Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics

Percent of world oil consumption used for plastics:
*Unit: 7-8 Value: percent

Details/Sources
*4% for feedstock and 3-4% for manufacturing.

http://www.wasteonline.org.uk/resour...s/Plastics.htm

http://woodgatesview.com/2011/08/31/...n-to-benef...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Plastics are recycled in the UK too. But only a small percentage.
A major problem is composite packing, ie packaging made out of several
plastics bonded together making them hard to recycle.

Burning plastics (for heat recovery) poses major technical challenges.

The worst aspect of plastic is marine pollution. Billions of tons of
plastic are in the oceans, killing them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_...Plastic_debris

On Mar 18, 4:58*pm, Robert Macy wrote:
On Mar 18, 4:35*am, "Stormin Mormon"





wrote:
Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was denying permits
to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

wrote in message

.. .
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!

What can YOU do to cut back on plastics, thus cutting back on oil usage?

Gasoline prices are per demand of posting from parent companies.
outlets adhere at the risk of losing franchise license.

Why has NO one seriously pointed out that during the worst economic
downtown in years and what is reported as 'shrinking' supply, all
players in the oil industry posted the highest profits in corporate
history? *Somehow that seems contradictory.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Speculators are the main problem. Also the Iran affair doesn't help.
I believe the Iran affair was deliberately started to keep oil prices
up.

In article ,
"Charlie" wrote:


Consider China. Their economy is doing very well because American
manufacturing is going down the tubes.
Actually we make just as many things as we ever have, and even for
inflation it has increased steadily. What has happened is a very large
average increase in productivity over the last 20 years. We have lost
considerably more jobs to robots then Chinese especially the higher
paying ones.


Here's the problem. Every time there is a tanker of oil is on the market we
are bidding against our own money that now is in the hands of the Chinese.

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices put down
your copy of Playboy and start reading the business section of your
newspaper.
Of course the President has some control. To the extent that the
adminsitration's rules and regulations put obstacles in the path of
developing our own resources it impacts greatly. The dumbest thing a
president can say (and this has been said by people of both parties) is
that there is nothing they can do immediately. While that is true, if
someone had decided at the time of the last big surge to do something
about it, THIS surge might not have been as large.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:16:43 -0400, Kurt Ullman wrote:

In article ,
"Charlie" wrote:


Consider China. Their economy is doing very well because American
manufacturing is going down the tubes.
Actually we make just as many things as we ever have, and even for
inflation it has increased steadily. What has happened is a very large
average increase in productivity over the last 20 years. We have lost
considerably more jobs to robots then Chinese especially the higher
paying ones.


Here's the problem. Every time there is a tanker of oil is on the market we
are bidding against our own money that now is in the hands of the Chinese.

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices put down
your copy of Playboy and start reading the business section of your
newspaper.
Of course the President has some control. To the extent that the
adminsitration's rules and regulations put obstacles in the path of
developing our own resources it impacts greatly. The dumbest thing a
president can say (and this has been said by people of both parties) is
that there is nothing they can do immediately. While that is true, if
someone had decided at the time of the last big surge to do something
about it, THIS surge might not have been as large.

But it's *NOT* true. If there was a reasonable energy (and foreign) policy
there wouldn't be the worry in the market. If he had a plan - bring on the
pipeline, drill-baby-drill, and open federal lands, sure that oil wouldn't be
coming onto the market for five years, but very few speculators are going to
stick their neck out when the momentum is down.

On Mar 18, 7:20*pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:16:43 -0400, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"Charlie" wrote:

Consider China. Their economy is doing very well because American
manufacturing is going down the tubes.
* Actually we make just as many things as we ever have, and even for
inflation it has increased steadily. What has happened is a very large
average increase in productivity over the last 20 years. We have lost
considerably more jobs to robots then Chinese especially the higher
paying ones.

Here's the problem. Every time there is a tanker of oil is on the market we
are bidding against our own money that now is in the hands of the Chinese.

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices put down
your copy of Playboy and start reading the business section of your
newspaper.
* Of course the President has some control. To the extent that the
adminsitration's rules and regulations put obstacles in the path of
developing our own resources it impacts greatly. The dumbest thing a
president can say (and this has been said by people of both parties) is
that there is nothing they can do immediately. While that is true, if
someone had decided at the time of the last big surge to do something
about it, THIS surge might not have been as large.

But it's *NOT* true. *If there was a reasonable energy (and foreign) policy
there wouldn't be the worry in the market. *If he had a plan - bring on the
pipeline, drill-baby-drill, and open federal lands, sure that oil wouldn't be
coming onto the market for five years, but very few speculators are going to
stick their neck out when the momentum is down.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I remember hearing much the same stuff in 1980 when Carter's
failed policies had produced similar results. We were running
out of oil and there was no easy solution. We had to learn to
conserve, to do with less. With the election of Ronald Reagan,
those failed policies were replaced with sound ones and free
market economics. Oil headed straight down and was at $8 a
barrel within a few years.

Just suppose we drilled in ANWR and found an oil field equal
to Saudi Arabia? What do you think that would do to the price?
Until you get rid of the politicians who won't even let exploratory
drilling to find out what's there, no one will ever know.

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was
denying permits to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
snip


The President gas NOTHING to do with the price of gasoline. Don't
you remember back in the previous administration when gasprices were
going up, all the experts on FOX news stated that the Shrub as
president did NOT have the ability to affect the price of gasoline?


Denying permits? The curent well count is up 350%. In addition, oil
production is now HIGHER than it has been since 2000. The US ranks
number 3 in the world behind only Ruissia and Saudi Arabia in oil
production.

Do your research before echoing non-facts from the right. You must
be one of those people who, after hearing something over and over,
regardless of its veracity, believe it.

John Carter

"HeyBub" wrote in
:

Robert Macy wrote:

Why has NO one seriously pointed out that during the worst
economic downtown in years and what is reported as 'shrinking'
supply, all players in the oil industry posted the highest
profits in corporate history? Somehow that seems contradictory.

In absolute dollar terms, you are correct. Profit as a percentage
of revenue for oil companies is in the mid-range of profitable
companies. Many industries have a higher profit percentage than
oil companies, many have lower.

Were it not for the sale of beef jerky and such - which has a
higher profit margin than gasoline - I suspect many oil companies
would go broke.


Not when they are receiving all the welfare they do.

Kurt Ullman wrote in
:

In article ,
"Charlie" wrote:


Consider China. Their economy is doing very well because American
manufacturing is going down the tubes.
Actually we make just as many things as we ever have, and even
for
inflation it has increased steadily. What has happened is a very
large average increase in productivity over the last 20 years. We
have lost considerably more jobs to robots then Chinese especially
the higher paying ones.


Here's the problem. Every time there is a tanker of oil is on the
market we are bidding against our own money that now is in the
hands of the Chinese.

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices
put down your copy of Playboy and start reading the business
section of your newspaper.
Of course the President has some control. To the extent that
the
adminsitration's rules and regulations put obstacles in the path
of developing our own resources it impacts greatly. The dumbest
thing a president can say (and this has been said by people of
both parties) is that there is nothing they can do immediately.
While that is true, if someone had decided at the time of the last
big surge to do something about it, THIS surge might not have been
as large.

The president has control over gas prices? See the experts at FOX
disagree with you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzEnKdBAb_o


You can't have it both ways.

Oren wrote in
:

On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 19:48:12 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Charlie wrote:

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices
put down your copy of Playboy and start reading the business
section of your newspaper.


"My fellow Americans,

"In order to hasten the recovery of our economy and reduce
inflation, I, as President of the United States, am taking the
following actions:

"1. Tomorrow I will direct the Secretary of the Interior to open
bids for exploration and production in the Arctic National
Wildlife Reserve. Further, he will be directed to award winning
permits within the next three months.

"2. Also tomorrow, I am waving all objections to the proposed
Keystone Pipeline. I hope our Canadian brothers can get to work on
this project in the shortest time possible.

"3. In addition to the above, I am renewing all drilling permits
in the Gulf of Mexico, and here I am referring specifically to
those that were suspended due to the BP oil spill a year ago.
Further, all federal moratoriums on offshore exploration and
drilling, off any coast, are hereby repealed.


"3.a Roll back new EPA ( Employment Prevention Agency)
regulations for the past three years that cost companies 46
Billion to the Bush years that only cost 8 Billion.


He left more than just an economic mess to clean up. If the EPA- an
agency formed under a (real) Republican- was not around, we'd still
have Love Canal and all the other toxic cesspools that have a direct
effect on our drinking water and people's lives. Our water supply
is in the same boat as our domestic oil supply. When we run out of
gas, we walk or ride a bike, but what do you do when the water runs
out?


"Thank you and good night. "

If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.


Zactly.

On Mar 18, 11:20*pm, "
wrote:
On Sun, 18 Mar 2012 15:16:43 -0400, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"Charlie" wrote:

Consider China. Their economy is doing very well because American
manufacturing is going down the tubes.
* Actually we make just as many things as we ever have, and even for
inflation it has increased steadily. What has happened is a very large
average increase in productivity over the last 20 years. We have lost
considerably more jobs to robots then Chinese especially the higher
paying ones.

Here's the problem. Every time there is a tanker of oil is on the market we
are bidding against our own money that now is in the hands of the Chinese.

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices put down
your copy of Playboy and start reading the business section of your
newspaper.
* Of course the President has some control. To the extent that the
adminsitration's rules and regulations put obstacles in the path of
developing our own resources it impacts greatly. The dumbest thing a
president can say (and this has been said by people of both parties) is
that there is nothing they can do immediately. While that is true, if
someone had decided at the time of the last big surge to do something
about it, THIS surge might not have been as large.

But it's *NOT* true. *If there was a reasonable energy (and foreign) policy
there wouldn't be the worry in the market. *If he had a plan - bring on the
pipeline, drill-baby-drill, and open federal lands, sure that oil wouldn't be
coming onto the market for five years, but very few speculators are going to
stick their neck out when the momentum is down.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You are a bloody half wit. Oil is far too precious for scumbag Yanks
to burn in stupid inefficient cars. It is not an endlessly available
product. At some point it will all be gone.

On Mar 19, 4:57*am, John Carter wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote :

Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was
denying permits to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.
snip

The President gas NOTHING to do with the price of gasoline. *Don't
you remember back in the previous administration when gasprices were
going up, all the experts on FOX news stated that the Shrub as
president did NOT have the ability to affect the price of gasoline?

Denying permits? *The curent well count is up 350%. *In addition, oil
production is now HIGHER than it has been since 2000. *The US ranks
number 3 in the world behind only Ruissia and Saudi Arabia in oil
production.

Do your research before echoing non-facts from the right. *You must
be one of those people who, after hearing something over and over,
regardless of its veracity, believe it.

John Carter

There's a lot of people like that here.
They get most of their "facts" from Hollywood/Fox News/Teabag party
propaganda..
You can always tell them, they are the nasty abusive ones.

"Han" wrote in message

Oil prices are high because of geopolitical
circumstances. War in Syria, threats back and forth with Iran, sanctions
against Iran, none of which helps lower the price. Add "maintenance" of
refineries here and there in the US (as is usual before switching to
funny summer gas), troubles in Africa's oil countries, and SNAFU comes to
mind. Remember that acronym?

History buffs might recall how well our oil sanctions worked against Japan
just before WWII. Sanctions punish an entire country for the actions of a
few idiot leaders. Actually, as we see with gas prices the entire *world*
gets punished by sanctions. If we want to stop Iran from building a bomb, a
consortium of every country that feels threatened should pony up equal
amounts of money to just go in and obliterate the damn nuke facilities.
Though they don't say it, I don't think any of Iran's neighbors are happy
about them getting the bomb. It's just not politic to say so.

We seem to like pulling off Band-Aids as slowly as possible to prolong the
agony. We should say to Iran: "If you won't let UN inspectors in you DEMAND
a forced inspection - and possible obliteration of whatever it was you were
hiding." It's what should have happened in Iraq, but instead we decided to
engage in a decade of "nation building" for the Iraqis, all expenses paid.
This is simple stuff, made difficult by years of wars of choice that have
sapped our will and resources. Couple international war fatigue with the
belief that sanctions have the desired effects and you've got a recipe for
trouble.

--
Bobby G.

John Carter wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was
denying permits to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
snip


The President gas NOTHING to do with the price of gasoline. Don't
you remember back in the previous administration when gasprices were
going up, all the experts on FOX news stated that the Shrub as
president did NOT have the ability to affect the price of gasoline?

No, I don't remember that and am skeptical it ever happened. Can you provide
a link?



Denying permits? The curent well count is up 350%. In addition, oil
production is now HIGHER than it has been since 2000.

The figures you cite are for private lands. Oil production and exploration
are way down on lands controlled by the government, as is government
permitting for new refineries and pipelines. In fact, three large refineries
in the northeast will be shutting down this summer due to their inability to
obtain the right kind of crude at a reasonable price. This inability is the
result of insufficient pipelines to provide the right kind of crude.

Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.


Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. I think it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."


They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.

John Carter wrote:

He left more than just an economic mess to clean up. If the EPA- an
agency formed under a (real) Republican- was not around, we'd still
have Love Canal and all the other toxic cesspools that have a direct
effect on our drinking water and people's lives. Our water supply
is in the same boat as our domestic oil supply. When we run out of
gas, we walk or ride a bike, but what do you do when the water runs
out?


You can create water by burning Hydrogen. Every other drop of water on the
planet is "used" water. That is, it passed through something else before it
got to you.

Read "Dune."

"HeyBub" wrote in
m:

John Carter wrote:

He left more than just an economic mess to clean up. If the EPA- an
agency formed under a (real) Republican- was not around, we'd still
have Love Canal and all the other toxic cesspools that have a direct
effect on our drinking water and people's lives. Our water supply
is in the same boat as our domestic oil supply. When we run out of
gas, we walk or ride a bike, but what do you do when the water runs
out?


You can create water by burning Hydrogen. Every other drop of water on
the planet is "used" water. That is, it passed through something else
before it got to you.

Read "Dune."

The problem of insufficient amounts of water, whether used or not, is a
real problem. On top of too much water (rain, flooding from rising
seawater levels) in other places. And neither problem is easy to solve.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 3/19/2012 7:19 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.


Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. I think it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."


They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.


Doesn't LA get most of its power from nuclear in Nevada?

I would add increased nuclear to your presidential proclamation list.

In addition, revamp the EPA eliminating CO2 as a pollutant and do away
with the ethanol mandate and boutique gasolines.

Balance the Federal budget to stop international devaluation of the dollar.

"HeyBub" wrote:

John Carter wrote:

-snip-

The President gas NOTHING to do with the price of gasoline. Don't
you remember back in the previous administration when gasprices were
going up, all the experts on FOX news stated that the Shrub as
president did NOT have the ability to affect the price of gasoline?

No, I don't remember that and am skeptical it ever happened. Can you provide
a link?


I can-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzEnKdBAb_o

5 1/2 minutes-- at least 8 hosts. I bailed after 2 minutes]

Jim

In article ,
John Carter wrote:

Kurt Ullman wrote in
:

In article ,
"Charlie" wrote:


Consider China. Their economy is doing very well because American
manufacturing is going down the tubes.
Actually we make just as many things as we ever have, and even
for
inflation it has increased steadily. What has happened is a very
large average increase in productivity over the last 20 years. We
have lost considerably more jobs to robots then Chinese especially
the higher paying ones.


Here's the problem. Every time there is a tanker of oil is on the
market we are bidding against our own money that now is in the
hands of the Chinese.

So if you think that the president has any control of oil prices
put down your copy of Playboy and start reading the business
section of your newspaper.
Of course the President has some control. To the extent that
the
adminsitration's rules and regulations put obstacles in the path
of developing our own resources it impacts greatly. The dumbest
thing a president can say (and this has been said by people of
both parties) is that there is nothing they can do immediately.
While that is true, if someone had decided at the time of the last
big surge to do something about it, THIS surge might not have been
as large.

The president has control over gas prices? See the experts at FOX
disagree with you:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzEnKdBAb_o


You can't have it both ways.

Don't want to, I disagreed with them then and I disagree with them now.
Pres can influence gas prices over the longer term. I mentioned when the
Bush thingy came about that while there was relatively little he could
do short term for his spike, there was quite a bit he could do to at
least lessen the next one.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

In article ,
John Carter wrote:


effect on our drinking water and people's lives. Our water supply
is in the same boat as our domestic oil supply. When we run out of
gas, we walk or ride a bike, but what do you do when the water runs

Actually our water supply is in the same boat as our oil supply
for a lot of the same reasons, mainly government screwing around with
it.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

wrote in message
...
Did you know that everytime you buy anything in a plastic package, buy
plastic trash bags, accept a plastic store bag, buy your kids plastic
toys, and the list goes on......
*YOU* are responsible for high gas prices!!!


If you think it's bad now, consider that new homes are becoming more
made of plastics every day. Plastic siding is the top sold siding,
plastic windows and doors, plastic plumbing (Pex and Pvc), plastic
coated wiring (romex), and it seems the wooden decks of the past few
decades are now made of plastic lumber, with plastic railings. The
houses are insulated with styrofoam (a type of plastic), and it dont
stop there. Your furnishings all contain at least some plastic is not
fully plastic. Are your curtains and fabric covered couch cushions made
of cotton, or a plastic derived plastic, just like much of your
clothing. Amd you know those plastic lawn chairs that rarely last one
summer..... did you ever see one of them burn? Compare the fire to
dumping a 5 or 10 gallon can of oil into a fire....


What can YOU do to cut back on plastics, thus cutting back on oil usage?

I live in a 200-year-old house made entirely of wood, glass, and stone. My
furniture is almost entirely antique (not a thing less than 75 years old
except for two desk chairs), made of wood and all upholstery and window
coverings are natural fiber. Our outdoor furniture is antique wicker sitting
on our wooden deck, under our wooden shade/rain cover. We compost and have
single stream recycling, so our "garbage" is minimal. All the plastic bags
we get from the grocery store are re-used to dispose of the scooped contents
of our cats' litter boxes or storage protection for any items kept in our
stacked-stone (damp) basement. All our clothing is natural fiber except for
my underwear (96% cotton, 4% lycra) and the lining of DH's suits (100%
polyester) but everything else is cotton, wool, or silk. I know, because I
make most of it myself.

And...since I drive less than 3,000 miles a year I'm doing my part to
decrease demand.

In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:



Kurt would insist it's just manufacturing that actually employs people and
used to provide middle class jobs. (-: China's time will come, and it may
be coming soon. They ramped up to meet what they thought was insatiable
world demand and now that demand has slackened. They just posted an
enormous trade deficit. The mighty rise and fall in ever-shorter spans of
time. You wouldn't want to be a life insurer for empires and superpowers.
The days of empires with lives measured in the centuries is long gone. The
EU will be lucky to see a 100th birthday.

Could you clarify what I am insisting?
I am not as sanguine about China as others. First of all with the
one-child mandate, they are about to see a retiree to worker ratio
shrink that will dwarf ours. Of course with a billion or so people they
probably have more give in the system, but still.
As the workforce shrinks, this will go a long way to (relatively
quickly) increasing the demand for scarce labor and much of the cheap
labor will go away. In fact, you already see that internally with some
of the mfr jobs going to the interior as wages are bid up in the cities
and coastal areas.
The other wild card that people seem to ignore (and what could be a
wild card on so many levels) is that the civilian government has largely
bought off the Army by letting them own businesses. Be interesting to
see how that works out internally (and externally) when there is the
inevitable really deep rescession and the Generals have to cut back on
their spending.


People have no choice. With stagnant wages, they have to stretch their
dollars and that means buying cheaper quality goods from abroad. It's the
perfect example of a vicious cycle.

Yet WalMart has been really really big for years before the
stagnating wages. We WANT cheaper goods and have for years. Many forget
that many of the things we are saying today we were saying about Japan
in the 60s and 70s.



I've always thought a current events and maybe even an IQ test might be in
order for voting. We test and license people to drive. I've read that a
lot of US citizens can't pass the naturalization test. That's scary.

You can't get the use of a photo ID past the Dems, how are you going to
get any kind of test?


Definitely yes to the first. But I have reservations about the second.

Way back when I used to photograph diplomatic functions for a living, there
was always food left over after a big catered event. If you knew where to
be and when, you could indeed dine at no cost.

That is probably one of the things it is hardest to get through to a
journalist. We know there IS such a thing as a free lunch since we
experience them 2-3 times a week (grin)

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

On 3/19/2012 6:19 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.


Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. I think it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."


They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.


I wonder if we could burn sun dried Liberals for fuel? I know there's
not much substance to them but there are cultures that burn excrement
for fuel. ^_^

TDD

On Mar 19, 5:47*am, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Han" wrote in message
Oil prices are high because of geopolitical
circumstances. *War in Syria, threats back and forth with Iran, sanctions
against Iran, none of which helps lower the price. *Add "maintenance" of
refineries here and there in the US (as is usual before switching to
funny summer gas), troubles in Africa's oil countries, and SNAFU comes to
mind. *Remember that acronym?

History buffs might recall how well our oil sanctions worked against Japan
just before WWII. *Sanctions punish an entire country for the actions of a
few idiot leaders.

Do, your liberal solution to dealing with Japanese aggression would
have
been what? To continue to supply them with material so that they
could
kill more people, conquer more territory?

And what exactly would your solution be with Iran and Syria today?
No trade sanctions, just send them a cake?


*Actually, as we see with gas prices the entire *world*
gets punished by sanctions.

What sanctions have had anything to do with oil prices? Iran
is still shipping as much oil as ever.


*If we want to stop Iran from building a bomb, a
consortium of every country that feels threatened should pony up equal
amounts of money to just go in and obliterate the damn nuke facilities.

Of course whenever we do that, libs like you show up bitching about
how wrong that is too.


Though they don't say it, I don't think any of Iran's neighbors are happy
about them getting the bomb. *It's just not politic to say so.

We seem to like pulling off Band-Aids as slowly as possible to prolong the
agony. *We should say to Iran: "If you won't let UN inspectors in you DEMAND
a forced inspection - and possible obliteration of whatever it was you were
hiding."

And how exactly does one do a "forced inspection"?



*It's what should have happened in Iraq,

It's pretty much what DID happen in Iraq, but you libs opposed it.



but instead we decided to
engage in a decade of "nation building" for the Iraqis, all expenses paid..

So, we should have done what exactly? Left the country in chaos?
How does that square with your above alleged concern for the poor
innocent civilians that suffer under mere sanctions?




This is simple stuff, made difficult by years of wars of choice that have
sapped our will and resources. *Couple international war fatigue with the
belief that sanctions have the desired effects and you've got a recipe for
trouble.

--
Bobby G.

Obviously it's too complex for you because you can't grasp the basics
or
form consistent positions. And of all the informed opinion in the
world, your
the only one that considers the problem of Iran simple.

I've been rather unimpressed by a certain Kenyan, who
prohibits drilling, shuts down wells, and then says it's the
American peoples fault for not inflating our tires. How
about if we drill for oil, and you can inflate your black
lips?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

wrote in message
...

Just suppose we drilled in ANWR and found an oil field equal
to Saudi Arabia? What do you think that would do to the price?
Until you get rid of the politicians who won't even let exploratory
drilling to find out what's there, no one will ever know.

On Mar 19, 7:54*am, Frank wrote:
On 3/19/2012 7:19 AM, HeyBub wrote:



Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.

Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. *I think *it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."

They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.

Doesn't LA get most of its power from nuclear in Nevada?

I would add increased nuclear to your presidential proclamation list.

In addition, revamp the EPA eliminating CO2 as a pollutant and do away
with the ethanol mandate and boutique gasolines.


The different formulations are a point few mention. They prevent an
efficient market because if you have excess of one formulation, it
may not be able to be sent to where it's needed.




Balance the Federal budget to stop international devaluation of the dollar.- Hide quoted text -


And again, a point few mention. The devaluation of the dollar has
been a
substantial contributor to the increase in price of oil.

John Carter wrote in
:

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

Gee, and all this time I thought it was cause B. Hussein was
denying permits to drill and process oil.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
snip


The President gas NOTHING to do with the price of gasoline.

Yes, he does. His foreign policies affect oil prices.
When Iran feels they can act up,threaten,and get away with it because of a
weak America,oil prices climb.When the MidEast is unstable,oil prices
climb,and that is due to Comrade Hussein's weak policies.

Don't
you remember back in the previous administration when gasprices were
going up, all the experts on FOX news stated that the Shrub as
president did NOT have the ability to affect the price of gasoline?


Denying permits? The curent well count is up 350%. In addition, oil
production is now HIGHER than it has been since 2000. The US ranks
number 3 in the world behind only Ruissia and Saudi Arabia in oil
production.

Do your research before echoing non-facts from the right. You must
be one of those people who, after hearing something over and over,
regardless of its veracity, believe it.

John Carter


US oil production is up DESPITE Comrade Hussein's best efforts.
it's all on PRIVATE and state lands,because Comrade Hussein has cut off
Federal lands.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in
:

I'd much rather see Newt elected. He's the "Contract with
America" guy. I think he's much more conservative than the
Massacussets liberal who pushed national health care in the
liberal state of Mass.

From your point of view (if I understand it), you're probably right. We'll
find out soon (by June) what the SCOTUS thinks. As far as the "Contract
with America" is concerned, politics when done right, should allow
compromise. Since that abomination of a contract is mostly used as a
straightjacket or as blackmail to stick to a far right of center point of
view, you're **** out of luck to get governance. Wouldn't it be better to
compromise and get the budget deficit under control?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On Mar 19, 8:57*am, The Daring Dufas
wrote:
On 3/19/2012 6:19 AM, HeyBub wrote:





Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.

Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. *I think *it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."

They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.

I wonder if we could burn sun dried Liberals for fuel? I know there's
not much substance to them but there are cultures that burn excrement
for fuel. ^_^

TDD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The smell would probably be the same as burning camel ****.

On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 07:57:33 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 3/19/2012 6:19 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.


Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. I think it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."


They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.


I wonder if we could burn sun dried Liberals for fuel? I know there's
not much substance to them but there are cultures that burn excrement
for fuel. ^_^

Nah, they're way too dim.

On Mar 19, 11:38*am, Han wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote m:

I'd much rather see Newt elected. He's the "Contract with
America" guy. I think he's much more conservative than the
Massacussets liberal who pushed national health care in the
liberal state of Mass.

From your point of view (if I understand it), you're probably right. *We'll
find out soon (by June) what the SCOTUS thinks. *As far as the "Contract
with America" is concerned, politics when done right, should allow
compromise. *Since that abomination of a contract is mostly used as a
straightjacket or as blackmail to stick to a far right of center point of
view, you're **** out of luck to get governance. *Wouldn't it be better to
compromise and get the budget deficit under control?

How well has "compromise" worked? That "compromise" where
the Republicans agree to some of the Democrats wasteful spending
in exchange for some of their own, is precisely what's gotten us
to where we were when Bush left office. Since then, spending has
exploded far worse, by 40%.

" wrote in
:

On Mar 19, 11:38*am, Han wrote:
"Stormin Mormon" wrote
innews:1OG9r.2
:

I'd much rather see Newt elected. He's the "Contract with
America" guy. I think he's much more conservative than the
Massacussets liberal who pushed national health care in the
liberal state of Mass.

From your point of view (if I understand it), you're probably right.
*W
e'll
find out soon (by June) what the SCOTUS thinks. *As far as the
"Contrac
t
with America" is concerned, politics when done right, should allow
compromise. *Since that abomination of a contract is mostly used as a
straightjacket or as blackmail to stick to a far right of center
point of view, you're **** out of luck to get governance. *Wouldn't
it be better
to
compromise and get the budget deficit under control?

How well has "compromise" worked? That "compromise" where
the Republicans agree to some of the Democrats wasteful spending
in exchange for some of their own, is precisely what's gotten us
to where we were when Bush left office. Since then, spending has
exploded far worse, by 40%.

Just keep harping on expenditures that started with Bush's TARP. See
where that gets you. Unemployed yet?

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

On 3/19/2012 11:45 AM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2012 07:57:33 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 3/19/2012 6:19 AM, HeyBub wrote:
Mark wrote:
If you don't think the price of gasoline would drop like a stone
after a speech such as that, you're nuts.

lets say there is a lot more oil in ANWAR and Canada and the Gulf.

Should we just burn through those as fast as we can now to keep the
price low now?

Yes. Definitely.


Or should we think of those as the reserve tank and save them for say
10 years from now when the rest of the world is really running low.

Solar and wind and other alternative energy is not going to ramp up as
fast as we all would want it too.. I think it might be a good idea
to keep some of the "good stuff" in reserve until the alternates are
workable.

As to "holding it in reserve," that's like the secretary who's in charge of
the supply cabinet saying "No, you can't have a pencil. There's only one
left. If I gave it to you, then I'd be out."


They physics of solar and wind do not and cannot supply our energy needs. It
would take a solar collector farm the size of the Los Angeles basin (~1200
sq miles) to supply the electrical needs of California. During the day. The
cost for materials and maintenance of such a contraption is almost
incalculable.

The good news is that the citizens of Los Angeles would be living in the
dark.

The only way to improve that situation is to move the orbit of the earth
closer to the sun. We cannot run this country off of sunbeams, or unicorns
on treadmills.


I wonder if we could burn sun dried Liberals for fuel? I know there's
not much substance to them but there are cultures that burn excrement
for fuel. ^_^

Nah, they're way too dim.

Sorry, I couldn't help it. ^_^

TDD