Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-31-2004, 09:14 PM   #1
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Post Blog.. Decrease in production? Another Bush attack? I think so.

I filled my tank today for 1.64 a Gallon. Yum.

The media (even fox) is creating a facade of panic about this new gas crunch
for higher ratings. And yes, it's unfounded.

4% decrease from Opec? Bfd. Do you remember what a Gallon was last spring?


What the media is doing, is finding the highest priced pump around. Do they
find the lowest price? Not a chance. They only report gloom and dispair.

Just 2 miles from where I bought gas for $1.64, it was $1.82 per gallon. *GASP*
Imagine shopping for the best prices.
Welcome to America. HOO'RA
Psst, if you price shop for gas? The other stations will lower their prices. Thats a fact.

Some freeks have even voiced (On CBS radio news) that they wish fuel prices were higher
because that would create less environmental, ok, the save the world weirdos.

Fact is,
America has enough oil to last us 300-YEARS without Opec. And considering
that the Auto was just invented, thats not really a long time. Technology?
Well, how long has the computer been around? I used to program a TRS-80
for a week just to play a stupid game. And I saved it on a Cassette TAPE!
Now where are we? Radio shack has never been the same.

America has come a long way indeed. Should we stifle development of new
resources?, or just go back to the stone age. IMO the democrats want to go
the way of the tree-huggers. (We all know how honest them tree-huggers are huh)
And fight freedom for their own personal power.

Welcome to the information age, where we have more choices then ever to
find information. And we have more voices to give information. Global.


The fight for freedom of development, and freedom to develop new and better
ways for our world, is exactly what some people are fighting against.

If you are reading this post, you have freedom. You have a computer at home.
You have what immigrants can only dream of. And God bless them for dreaming.

Dreams are what life is all about. Forward your goals into action. Consider yourself
lucky that you are able to even read this post. Then later.,
Wonder how your grandparents managed to survive on wood fires and candles.

America is the greatest nation on earth for a reason. FREEDOM
God bless.



GOD BLESS AMERICA
GOD BLESS FREEDOM
GOD BLESS AMERICA'S PRESIDENT, GEORGE W. BUSH
Zolmaz Zo'Boto (Once a man tastes freedom, there is no other choice in life)
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:33 PM   #2
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
i think we need to foster new ways of making oil like substances, or cutting out the need all togeather (magnetic barriors to cause nothing but air friction<or use a vacum for no friction) and new ways of energy

the diamond companys want to make it illegal to manufacture diamonds(folks, its been done finally, last year, we will have motherboard size diamond plates in our PCs by 2010, and they are the real deal, chemically, structally, everything)

and some governments want to agree with them to protect the worth BUT think of the benefits(sorry to those that loose their fourtune but id rather help the many than let the few have real leather chairs)

1) they have proven it can provide a lighter and more heat resistance covering for space craft, they have shown that it is more heat resistant then silicon, and using it in computer chips will allow us to hit all new highs in computer power, and LESS power(less oil or coal or radiation being put out) and it wouldnt MELT, meaning we could conserve silver used in some heating gels and pastes.
2) better equipment, diamond drills that DONT cost a fortune, made so well that they can last years(since it will no longer be diamond studded, it will be pure diamond all the way thru) meaning costs to build would go down, things in general would be easyer to make, diamond saws and drills for house building, diamond mechines for car making.
3) diamonds have compairable strenght to metals, altho a large amount has not been tested in any form of contructions, diamonds can already take greater compression forces(holding weight) then most alloys used in buildings today, imagine if the 2 towers had diamond reinforcments, that jet fuel wouldnt have hurt it as much, heck, it wouldnt have much to be fueled off of

all this could be stopped so the debires people get to stay on top, wouldnt that be a waste?

did you know that there is a race held every once in awhile for the most fuel effecient cars? there was one that had 200 miles to the gallon with average air condition and lead-in-gas conditions.

i may be off on my numbers a bit with the 200 car, but it was fairly close to that, why havent we seen this in the consumer market? because it would devalue our mineral, metal, and meteral markets.

simple thing is we need to stop trying to protect the interests of the few, i say this because i really think its stupid to hold back such bursting progress, things that could make life so much more interesting ya know?



i am proud of our contry for our ability to make inovations, i am ashamed of our scientists that discover something but stop after being payed off( not that i can resite anyone by name, but i bet that is what happend to that car)

knowing bush family oil ties tho, i wouldnt be all the shocked if he had done something, or signed something to allow a larger profit margin and maybe a "conservation" order to create a false shortage of pumped and processed oil

the oil at the 7/11 close to my place is charging 1.74 for 89 unleaded, the place down the road charges 1.69

makes me laugh, there are oil feilds full of the crap here in texas, but for some reason it remains untouched, thats something else i find interesting, 20 years ago if you bought a house you owned the land and what was under it, now if you want whats under it (water, oil, gemstone, precius metal) you have to allow a government survay team to check it out, and then they give you what the estimated value of your land mineral rights, and you have to buy it from the state(not the owner, owners can no longer sell them to others, they go right back to the state)

Last edited by Gerick; 03-31-2004 at 09:56 PM.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:54 PM   #3
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Gerick,
knowing bushs oil ties tho, i wouldnt be all the shocked if he had done
something, or signed something to allow a larger profit margin and maybe a
"conservation" order to create a false shortage of pumped and processed oil
Who do you think controls the oil? Who said they were cutting 4% of our oil?
It's not rocket science. But i'll give you a hint,

It certainly isn't Bush. If bush controlled all the oil in Iraq, would Opec starve
America like this? Nope. why? Because they would have lost money.

It's an election year and the Saudis hate freedom. It's a move by the saudis to
effect the polls here in America. Why? Maybe because Bush is a strong leader
and doesn't accept soft money. Ya think?



GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 09:57 PM   #4
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Gerick,
20 years ago if you bought a house you owned the land and what was under it, now if you want whats under it (water, oil, gemstone, precius metal) you have to allow a government survay team to check it out,
It's called mineral rights. You can own the land and the house, but without
the mineral rights, you have no rights to whats under your house.



Z..
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 10:04 PM   #5
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
zol im not saying its all bush, im not saying he is an oil baron, but even before 9/11 they were talking about going to fight iraq, and had already pretty much decided who would get the oil contracts, halaburton(sp?) is related to chaney, know friend of the bush's.

another contract holder is osama's brother(who is also head of the family, in charge of family affairs) and such a VIP that he was allowed to fly out of the USA with his friends and family when all flights were grounded for anyone but government personel(osama is pretty much disowned by his family these days)

all im saying is if you are in control of the supply, it doesnt matter how much there is or isnt, you can create false shortages which drive the price up, much like debires(sp? its the diamond company) has warehouses full of jewl level diamonds, this was exposed by PBS, they also showed how they have hired mercinarys to go and kill workers from other companys to drive them out so they may control the major source.

I am not saying the BUSH FAMILY(not just him, im also taking into consideration his family's ties) is the only guilty ones, many people in many places pull the same bull, its human nature and he is another human, and thats why there are checks and balances in our government

The reason i dont like mineral rights is why it has been changed in the last 20 years, i do not understand why it was needed eather, and why the government gets to take a look (dig up your flowers and all that nice stuff, an exaguration) at it before you do and make up a price out of thin air(and you USED to have a right to what was on and under your land, now you have to BUY the previlage of digging on your own land and selling anything nice you find)

i can not even dig a well if i wanted to, i HAVE to drink the crappy hard water around here even if i had a fresh water spring under my yard... i just dont see the point
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 03:29 AM   #6
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Originally Posted by Zolmaz
America has enough oil to last us 300-YEARS without Opec
Prove that please.

Last I heard there wasn't enough oil in the whole planet to fuel America for the next 100 years.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 07:47 AM   #7
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
kerr the amount of oil we think we have avaible for use is catologed(sp? help me out here) and they release a book of new sites each year or so, the group that publishes it is russian and has close ties to the wealth of the oil companys, and they screwed the numbers on purpose to uphold a false shortage, but other groups(scientists, colleges<sp?>) that have been able to find more new oil fields in the last year then they have in the last 3 or so.

i think zolmaz is refering to the REAL numbers, not this padded book of lies that profitiers use as a defense for the price hikes, and yes it could run us for 200-300 years depending on population growth.

we have made new cars that are more fuel efficent than you can even comprehend, but the inventors get payed well to hush about it, i forget the event but there is a fuel efficent race every year held by some car tech group, and this is how they find these inventors before they sell the information or patent it.

excuse the spelling, ive been up all night playing EQ on some alts
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 08:08 AM   #8
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
This was in the editorial section of the paper this morning. Much link searching revealed the origin to be the LA Times, requiring registration (I had an account there already) so I'll not link it:

Say Bye-Bye to Cheap Oil
Surplus capacity is history. The jolts will start with $3 gas pump prices.

By Paul Roberts
For the tens of millions of American motorists patiently waiting for gas prices to come back to Earth, the news from the oil markets is not encouraging.

For the last year, government forecasters have reassured us that the unusually high oil prices we've seen since 2002 around $30 a barrel were temporary: As soon as global markets recovered from the mess in Iraq, oil prices would drop and gasoline prices would eventually follow.

Yet nearly 12 months after "victory" in Iraq, oil prices are at an eye-popping $38 a barrel, or about $15 above the two-decade average, and some forecasters are now offering a far less sanguine prognosis: Not only will oil stay high through 2005, but the days of cheap crude are history. These aren't exactly glad tidings for a global economy designed to run on low-priced oil, nor for a White House that gambled it could deliver low oil prices with a mix of diplomatic muscle and market liberalization.

What happened? In simplest terms, what we're seeing are the final months of a 25-year oil boom. That boom was sparked by the oil shocks of the 1970s, when sky-high prices touched off a feeding frenzy among oil producers. Eager to cash in on the good prices, oil companies and oil-rich states drilled thousands of new wells, built massive pipelines, developed fantastic exploration and production technologies and generally expanded their capacity to find and pump oil.

This surge in capacity eventually brought prices down and helped buffer consumers from subsequent oil crises. When a disruption occurred for example, when Saddam Hussein knocked out Kuwait's huge oil fields in 1990 the world's other oil producers, such as Saudi Arabia, simply tapped their own surplus capacity and filled in the shortfall. Surplus capacity helps explain why oil prices since 1982 have averaged just $22 a barrel.

Now, however, the world's surplus capacity is disappearing. Many Middle Eastern countries lack the cash to expand production. Private oil companies are struggling to discover oil fields. Worse, even as industry worries about supply, global demand is growing far faster than predicted largely because China's economy has outpaced even Beijing's expectations. And as everyone knows, when supply falls behind demand, prices head for the sky.

Oil-price anxieties are especially acute among big energy users like the U.S., which burns a quarter of the world's oil production and whose economy is extremely vulnerable to price spikes. Indeed, nearly every severe global recession of the last 50 years has been preceded by a jump in the price of oil.

That's why every U.S. president since Richard Nixon has sweated bullets to keep prices down mainly by bullying producers like Saudi Arabia but also by helping oil companies develop new production capacity outside the Middle East. Both George Bush the elder and Bill Clinton worked assiduously with Western oil firms to tap new oil fields in the Caspian region.

That also explains why the current administration has so aggressively courted new allies in oil-rich (if democracy-poor) West Africa and Russia. And why White House strategists saw Iraq and the much-awaited "flood" of Iraqi oil as key to lowering world oil prices, bolstering the U.S. economy and ending OPEC's 30-year stranglehold on the global oil market.

Sadly, Washington's cheap-oil strategy isn't working anymore. Hampered by terrorism and unrest, Iraqi oil production won't reach hoped-for levels for years. Political turmoil has also throttled oil booms in Russia and Africa. In short, the advertised wave of new oil that was to bring prices down hasn't materialized. Demand, meanwhile, shows every sign of increasing.

Barring the unexpected, oil prices have no place to go but up and the U.S. isn't well prepared for a high-cost oil future. The world's most technologically advanced nation has made only feeble efforts to develop alternatives to oil or to improve fuel efficiency, especially in cars. And though some of this reluctance is cultural Americans like big cars and hate being forced to conserve the main factor is economic: Oil has been so cheap for so long that most consumers simply don't worry about the risks of relying so heavily on a single fuel.

And if U.S. voters aren't worried about oil, U.S. politicians aren't either. However, such complacence will soon be untenable. Despite the recent minuscule drop in gasoline prices, some forecasters believe prices will soon head back up and could crest at $3 a gallon by Labor Day well past the point, experts say, when even oblivious Americans, and their elected representatives, start to pay attention. And though some of that increase stems from gasoline refinery bottlenecks inside the U.S., the price of gasoline is ultimately driven by the cost of crude, so attention must ultimately fall on the oil market.

Of course, few of us will take the market's hint willingly. Many motorists and some opportunistic politicians will reflexively point the finger at greedy oil companies and nefarious "foreigners." But eventually, all of us, from the man in the Oval Office on down, may be forced to concede that the days of cheap oil are over and that the U.S. really does need an entirely new approach to energy.
Interesting. If oil does rise to $3 a gallon, I think it's safe to say Bush would be toast. It really doesn't matter who is at fault, unless some extremely clever spin by Karl Rove managed to deflect the blame. In any case most voters would see Bush as the cause, rightly or not.

Does give food for thought, and consider the timing. Any oil flow from Iraq wouldn't mitigate the increase in prices, but people would see the Iraq occupation as a cause of high oil prices. The exact reverse could be true!
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 09:18 AM   #9
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
http://www.schoolscience.co.uk/petro....htm?last.html
http://www.theapplefarm.com/n24/021027.htm
http://home.earthlink.net/~mdmcnally...lsuppliesR.htm

The third site is the work of a student but she appears to have done her research well enough but as you'll see it highlights the difficulty in pinning down the true numbers.

They dont indicate 300 years though.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 10:43 AM   #10
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by AresProphet
Interesting. If oil does rise to $3 a gallon, I think it's safe to say Bush would be toast.
Anybody with any sense knows the President (any President) has very little control over gas prices short of getting nasty with Opec which wouldn't be in our best interest.
Don't complain. We found oil in Alaska and all you left wingers pitch a fit at the thought of drilling there. On the other hand, holding out isn't really a bad thing. When we use up all the oil of other countries, we'll still have our oil in Alaska.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 11:13 AM   #11
crimsonedge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 767
Just so you know Crude Oil for May delivery is now at 3427 about $3.75 cents below the 38 dollars quoted in the article. 38.00 was a max type price, not an average or even a price it stayed at very long. Second gasoline dropped over 6 cents a gallon today when the government announced they are seriously considering temporarily removing the low rvp requirements for California, New York and Conneticut.

This sharp drop shows you one of the true reasons gasoline is so high, upcoming strict requirements on emmissions. Im not saying that its wrong to have low emmissions gasoline, Im saying that the phasing in of these requirements is a big contributing factor to the price (its much more expensive to produce this type of fuel). And there is a lot of speculation about the refining industries ability to meet the demand for this fuel. That speculation also helped drive prices sharply higher.

In the end though, the article is correct, supply and demand are causing prices to move up and will continue to do so as we (the world) continues to advance and demand for fossil fuels grows ever larger while we are faced with a finite supply.

edited for typos/grammar
crimsonedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 11:59 AM   #12
Trech
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Shreveport, LA
Posts: 1,394
Send a message via MSN to Trech
Point 1: We have men, with guns, big guns, in one of the worlds top oil producing countries. Why are my pump prices going up again?

Point 2: Fossil fuels are a dead medium. The human race will never advance into our next era until our reliance on fossil fuels is all but squashed. They are too inefficient. They are too expensive to harvest. And lastly they are a finite medium.

Point 3: We will never see the next era of energy until the big oil lobby is ousted from washington or until public pressure forces the politicians to make a change. And this is on BOTH sides of the partisan fence

Saying things like "we have enough to last us 300 years" is ridiculous. You know they used to use buffalo manure in the wild west to build camp fires. How would I sound to you if I told you I had enough to last me another 300 years? Get my point?
__________________
Trech Maggotface
Eye of The Faceless
Team Evil
Trech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 11:59 AM   #13
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
The oil in ANWAR alone (if we can get the fuckstick hippies out of the way) is enough to last the US 60 years in oil and gas consumation alone.

..and that's just the ONE field they know is there...
Many geologists have speculated there could be as many as 5-10 ANWAR size oil fields left untapped in Alaska alone...not to mention the huge amount still in the Gulf of Mexico and North Louisana, East Texas, and Southern Arkansas. The only reason the wells here in Louisana don't flow anymore is because of politics and from the abundance of (previously undercutting prices) Arab oil. I've heard quite a bit of local grumblings about bringing many of the pumps back on line and going at it if the prices keep rising.
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 12:01 PM   #14
Martigan
Supporter
 
Martigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: San Juan Bautista, CA
Posts: 4,459
Send a message via AIM to Martigan
I have been paying over $2 a gallon (2.05 at Safeway gas station is the cheapest around) for about two months.

I say we start drilling in Alaska and let OPEC find another customer.
Martigan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 12:08 PM   #15
Vireil
Disturbing the force
 
Vireil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 2,711
Instead of acting like junkies looking for another fix we should invest in other sources of energy. They do exist after all.
__________________
Vireil
Coercer
<Recovering>
Vireil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 03:05 PM   #16
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by Trech
Point 2: Fossil fuels are a dead medium. The human race will never advance into our next era until our reliance on fossil fuels is all but squashed. They are too inefficient. They are too expensive to harvest. And lastly they are a finite medium.
That was one of my points. If we've come this far in the last 60-80 years,
just imagine how far we will go in the next 20-40. In our lifetime?, maybe.

What we must support is the future instead of the now.
And support the funding needed.



God Bless America
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2004, 04:01 PM   #17
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Another note,
Clinton released (from emergency reserves) about 30-mil barrels of oil during his administration
in an attempt to lower fuel prices and it worked. The extra oil actually
lowered our gas prices 1-penny. No biggie, but it shows that expecting
higher flows will not immediately decrease our pump prices. It took over
a month to convert that oil into usable fuel.

Crimsonedge,
gasoline dropped over 6 cents a gallon today when the
government announced they are seriously considering temporarily removing
the low rvp requirements for California, New York and Conneticut.
Just like news on any company in any stock market. In fact were not even
effected yet by the 4% and the prices are going up. Now you know how
the real market works. ouch huh?


The ideas of finding an alternative to gas is the best way to go.
Will it piss off the middle east? You bet it will, and might be considered
an act of war to those who profit from said oil. But then, does oil fund
terrorism? Who knows, but it does fund some Islam states. And we are at war
against Islam extremists.




God Bless America
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2004, 04:10 AM   #18
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
3 links above stating we have roughly 40 years or so. People still saying 100 years worth and 300 years worth.

If you look at how far we've come in the past 100 years it's absoloutley amazing I agree. But if you look at what we've acheived in the last 15 years you'll see that it's nowhere near as impressive.

Cars are running cheaper then they once did and the emissions are much lower, but we aren't getting the 80 miles to the gallon that was predicted 15 years ago. The average car on the road still gets less then 30 miles to the gallon, and that number is even less in America then the rest of the world because you favour larger cars.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2004, 04:24 AM   #19
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
we have found a new medium of power, hydrogen, but the big gas says that think of hindburges happening on the highway.

to them a say they are retards, the hindenburge happend because of the thermite coating on the blimp to make it that silvery shine, thermite burned hot enough to melt thru 3 inchs of steel using less then a pound, and its highly voilitile to static, fire, and sparks.

big oil is becoming just as bad as the tobaco people, i dont think its a good idea to spend the next 200 years on oil even if we could, i was just stating the estimated gas left in the world.

now, fuel/power aside, we do need a new lubricant but i havent done any research into that.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2004, 04:36 AM   #20
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Personally I use KY.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2004, 06:10 AM   #21
Gerick
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
LOL

i dont think a water based lub would work out, they need something that wont dry out quickly.
Gerick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:04 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.