Gas Price up 67% Since Obama Elected!!

AspenValley wrote:

neptunechimney wrote: There are only so many bright people capable of making the kind of progress that will make a difference.

Sometimes I think the "Frankenstein" movies had it right, the greatest risk to humanity are the brightest innovators. If everyone were "average" we wouldn't developed a civilization and technology that is too far ahead of itself to be sustainable. Some people talk about the danger of "overshoot", meaning the population explosion due to technology bringing higher standards of living. I'm more worried about "over-reach" of the kind we saw in the Gulf oil spill. We develop ways to do things that are at the very edge of our competence and when they fail, they bring horrific consequences. Might have been better if we had all stayed down on the farm.

Once again there are parallels in nature to draw upon. We are after all part of the animal kingdom even if we would like to think or ourselves as an entity of our own. Reefs are highly evolved communities similar to human communities. There is lots of specialization, intense competition for limited resources, etc. Keeping this community viable are episodic biologic or physical disturbances such as coral blights, powerful storms, etc. that wipe out reef communities completely in some parts of the world. Our civilization is not too far ahead of its time, it simply is as is all off nature. All our constructs, etc. are akin to the impact other organism have on one another. When coral communities "overshoot" or become stressed to the point of failure, they collapse. Our civilization or the US community or European community will also collapse from their height when they no longer remain sustainable. Their collapse is a local disturbance on a global scale. Such disturbances may reduce species diversity to zero, but on a global scale, they represent regions for opportunistic species to come in an thus increase diversity. So, I see the great US empire as crashing at some point and the resulting void becoming occupied by invaders from elsewhere around the globe.

kresspin wrote: But rather than deflect, why not address the fact that gas went up something like 300% under Bush?

Better yet, why not address the reasons why the price went up. Reasons like the lack of refining capacity due to overburdening EPA legislation to build new refineries that impact the ability to refine oil in the wake of hurricanes that hit the coasts where many refineries exist. The price of a gallon of gas the day Bush 43 was inaugurated was $1.62 a gallon. On his last day in office, the cost of a gallon of gas was $1.83. Now, I can see where it is useful to inflate the actual max increase over a short time period for political purposes, but the reality is that over an 8 year time frame, the rise in the cost of gasoline at the pump was very minimal. Yes, there was a huge spike during the height of the presidential campaign, but I also think that the spike was manufactured for a purpose given the timing of it. One more reason to vote against the current administration that wasn't running for reelection anyway is how I would classify it.

The difference between the Bush administration and the current one is that the major cause of the increase in a barrel of oil is the decline in value of the USD over the past couple of years as we have embarked upon Trillion dollar a year federal deficits and monetizing our own debt. Cost per barrel in USD has not gone up and down under the current administration like it did the last one, the cost has continued to rise because it takes more USD to purchase the same amount of goods due to the deflated value of the USD globally. That and the current administration is doing all that it can to reduce the amount of known reserves, which is one of the price points for commodities. One of the reasons that gold has doubled in value over the past couple of years is the amount of known reserves of it that are awaiting recovery. If the amount of known reserves fall, the price of the commodity will rise. That is the easiest way to increase the cost of our current energy to make other forms more price competitive with it, reduce the amount of known reserves that can supply the current and future demand.

I spose this is still kind of on topic. To Science Chic or anyone else, didn't I read a year ago or better that a guy had figured out how to split the H2O molecules using a specific sound frequency to extract the hydrogen? Didn't that guy fall off the map shortly after? TM, is there a conspiracy here? I'm not one for WAY outlandish stuff (I'll touch the X-Files once in awhile), but I think in these cases where people invent ways to CHEAPLY produce energy, that guys in black show up and strong arm you (or pay you a large sum) to shut up or just put you in the ground. Too outlandish?

Edit: Well no, it wasn't really on topic huh....

Quacks who come up with "solutions" could also "fall off the map" simply because their solution didn't really work and the hype had run its course. It doesn't mean the Men In Black came and got them.

Remember cold fusion?

Certainly Kresspin, but insinuating that the guy was a quack without the proof is questionable. I can't seem to find the original article that I read, so I'm having trouble coming up with reading material myself. Like I said though, I gotta agree with you to a point.

Jekyll wrote: but I think in these cases where people invent ways to CHEAPLY produce energy, that guys in black show up and strong arm you (or pay you a large sum) to shut up or just put you in the ground. Too outlandish?

Edit: Well no, it wasn't really on topic huh....

Why not show up and pay a large sum to own the process and become richer than King Midas?

neptunechimney wrote:

Jekyll wrote: but I think in these cases where people invent ways to CHEAPLY produce energy, that guys in black show up and strong arm you (or pay you a large sum) to shut up or just put you in the ground. Too outlandish?

Edit: Well no, it wasn't really on topic huh....

Why not show up and pay a large sum to own the process and become richer than King Midas?

Very true. My buddy that works in N.O.R.A.D said the same thing.

neptunechimney wrote:

Jekyll wrote: but I think in these cases where people invent ways to CHEAPLY produce energy, that guys in black show up and strong arm you (or pay you a large sum) to shut up or just put you in the ground. Too outlandish?

Edit: Well no, it wasn't really on topic huh....

Why not show up and pay a large sum to own the process and become richer than King Midas?

Because that wouldn't be nearly as fun as imagining there is a deep, dark conspiracy about it.

Just read Mr. Obama said at a White House news conference that domestic oil production in 2010 was the highest in seven years and that he was prepared to encourage new drilling on public lands and offshore. “So any notion that my administration has shut down oil production might make for a good political sound bite, but it doesn’t match up with reality,” he said.

How quickly we forget a 6 month drilling moratorium that sent rigs off to other parts of the world and thwarted exploration of the Gulf of Mexico. While the current fuel prices are not a cause and affect in regard to the administration's declaration of a drilling moratorium, his statements are pure BS. They DID shut down oil production for 6 months. The effect of that has an impact that lasts far beyond 6 months. If he truly believes otherwise, then he is as misinformed and ignorant as he was during the oil spill crisis. Surround yourself with idiots and that is what you get, uninformed diatribe. "Being prepared to encourage" as he puts it, is a LONG (minimum of 5 years) way from discovering fields, bringing them on line and getting that HC to refineries. His statements are very naive and we are supposed to swallow that sh**.

Sure global oil supplies are adequate, but that is not the same as saying that we are moving closer to meeting our fuel needs with oil we produce. While today's prices have their root in turmoil, tomorrows high fuel prices will reflect his decision over the past year.

I agree we need to drill more on the home front. I also agree that Obama is a complete tard. The latest (last month or so) crap with the middle east just goes to show that we shouldn't rely on rag heads for our oil cause they're bat sh** crazy. Plus, our president has the backbone of a jellyfish and couldn't stand up to a fifth grader. Also, we NEED to find other sources of energy. To bock at it and call it stupid is in fact stupidity at its best. We can not perpetually go on forever relying on oil. However, we can work on these solutions on the home front, and drill domestically while we research possibilities. I don't want to condone drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, because I grew up there, and I simply want my grand children to have something beautiful to look at and experience. There's plenty of places to drill as long as we can gag the liberal environmentalists. Backtrack...I also agree Obama has made nothing but a carnival out of our government, and we need new, fresh blood that actually cares about the citizens that make up the foundation of this great country. We need great innovation and ideas, and that'll only come if we stop bickering and solve this problem ourselves. I'm really sick and tired of joining the groups of blame layers. Hopefully someone worth while will come along, cause where I'm sitting, I won't be voting for candidate one next election. They all suck goats (said it before), bent on power and money. I think until the human race evolves, there will always be corruption and filth. I hope we evolve soon, cause my patience is wearing thin people, real thin. Perhaps mother nature DOES need to wipe us clean and start over. Why not? Cause it would suck? WAAAAAAA. So what.