Boycott Arab Gas - Stop Funding Terroism

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 11:53 am

I found this quite interesting as I have been saying for a long time the best way to win the war on terror is to just stop buying gas from the countries that are supporting terrorism. I'm converting my cars and Motorcycle to LP in an effort to reduce my dependance on terror gas, and was able to find that there actually are stations in the US that do not sell Terror gas. Read on, and be sure to go to a non-terror gas station. I prefer Citgo myself. Here in WI, good clean fuel, not from a terror nation, and price wise, not bad either.

Do your part.

----

You might want to make a copy of this and keep it in your car. Looks
like we're subsidizing a bunch of murdering misfits by buying Mideast
oil/gas. Sticky wicket, whot?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

WHERE TO BUY YOUR GAS,

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT TO KNOW.

READ ON--

Why didn't George W. think of this?

Gas rationing in the 80's worked even though we grumbled about it.

It might even be good for us!

The Saudis are boycotting American goods.

We should return the favor.

An interesting thought it to boycott their GAS.

Every time you fill up the car, you can avoid putting more money into
the coffers of Saudi Arabia. Just buy from gas companies that don't import
their oil from the Saudis.

Nothing is more frustrating than the feeling that every time I fill-up
the tank, I am sending my money to people who are trying to kill me, my
family, and my friends.

I thought it might be interesting for you to know which oil compa!
nies are the best to buy gas from and which major companies import Middle
Eastern oil :
Shell............................. 205,742,000 barrels
Chevron/Texaco......... 144,332,000 barrels
Exxon /Mobil............... 130,082,000 barrels
Marathon/Speedway... 117,740,000 barrels
Amoco............................62,231,000 barrels

If you do the math at $30/barrel, these imports amount to over $18
BILLION!

Here are some large companies that do not import Middle Eastern oil:
ARC0..................0 barrels
Citgo......................0 barrels
Sunoco...................0 barrels
Conoco...................0 barrels
Sinclair.....................0 barrels
BP/Phillips..............0 barrels
Hess.......................0 barrels

All of this information is available from the Department of Energy and
each is required to state where they get their oil and how much they are
importing.

But to have an impact, we need to reach literally millions of gas
buyers.

It's really simple to do.

Now, don't wimp out at this point... keep reading and I'll explain how
simple it is to reach millions of people!!

I'm sending this note to about thirty people.

If each of you send it to at least ten more (30 x 10 = 300)... and
those 300 send it to at least ten more (300 x 10 = 3,000) ... and so on, by
the time the message reaches the sixth genera! tion of people, we will have
reached over THREE MILLION consumers!

If those three million get excited and pass this on to ten friends
each, then 30 million people will have been contacted!

If it goes one level further, you guessed it ..... THREE HUNDRED
MILLION
PEOPLE!!!

Again, all you have to do is send this to 10 people.

How long would all that take?

If each of us sends this e-mail out to ten more people within one day,
all 300 MILLION people could conceivably be contacted within the next eight
days!

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 1:19 pm

GREAT IDEA MIA.

BEST IDEA EVER.

How about starting a campaign that congress should pass a law that forbids import of oil from all middle eastern or Islamic countries?

I am 300% supporting you mia, start your campaign today.

carowan

Aug 24th 2005, 1:26 pm

Like the idea, but its a heck of a lot easier to drive a more efficient car (eg. non SUV)

yo-yo

Aug 24th 2005, 1:27 pm

nevetS

Aug 24th 2005, 1:28 pm

How about we just boycott the us government since they spend more money on oil from middle eastern sources than shell, chevron and exxon combined.

Your numbers are off too - crude is hitting $60/barrel right now - and a few thing that I find interesting :

California oil drilling typically ups itself to 100% capacity when oil hits $19/barrel. BP now is in charge of most of the SoCal wells and they aren't operating at full capacity right now.

The US has typically dumped oil from it's reserves into the market to deal with rising gas prices. Instead of rescuing the market right now, the US is filling its reserves - making the problem even worse and driving prices up.

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 1:39 pm

fryman

Aug 24th 2005, 1:42 pm

J.P

Aug 24th 2005, 1:54 pm

I can't actually remember the last time I got a chain letter, I think my sister sent one a few months back, send this to 10 people for your wish to come true... some crap like that anyway :)

starmonkey

Aug 24th 2005, 1:54 pm

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 1:58 pm

And for the record, I personally support this over war 100%

VERY GOOD MIA.

forget about email. start a movement, so the congress pass a law that forbids the import of oil from middle east and Islamic countries. HOW CAN I HELP YOU TO START THIS CAMPAIGN?

Guys don't try to discourage mia.

Mia, don't listen to anybody else here, GO FOR IT.

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 2:05 pm

GuyFromChicago

Aug 24th 2005, 2:10 pm

Do these things really work?

They used too...then gas stations stopped labeling their gas pumps as "arab" or "american" or "other":)

ServerUnion

Aug 24th 2005, 2:10 pm

And for the record, I personally support this over war 100%

So you admit (unlike our govt') that we are fighting for oil? I must turn the knife and point out that the polls are showing approval ratings dropping like a prom dress.

Efficient transportation is the best route, why not make insentives for not only consumers but producers of these products.

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 2:16 pm

debunked

Aug 24th 2005, 2:18 pm

Because I need a large vehicle I am trying to get a diesel van and then I can use bio-diesel or vegetable oils. I believe regular bio-diesel needs no mods, but I don't know for sure.

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 2:20 pm

the polls are showing approval ratings dropping like a prom dress

The approval ratings were what before sept 11? then after and have been on a constant slide since. People almost NEVER vote against their president/ leader in times of 'war'

There are only a few major arms manufacturing countries.

I see a pattern. Oil. War. New Weapons. Strong Government. (feel free to arrange these in any suitable order)

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 2:26 pm

The approval ratings were what before sept 11? then after and have been on a constant slide since. People almost NEVER vote against their president/ leader in times of 'war'

There are only a few major arms manufacturing countries.

I see a pattern. Oil. War. New Weapons. Strong Government. (feel free to arrange these in any suitable order)

You forgot the private interests in this war, seldom a war has been so profitable for few individuals.

If we compare the government with companies, did the CEO of world com, Enron,... did all the illegal transaction for their own benefit or the company's benefit? They did it to make themselves rich, so why should the people in government be any different?

ServerUnion

Aug 24th 2005, 2:28 pm

Funny thing I heard today is that Nixon had higher poll ratings when he was in the middle of watergate. Polls aren't the best judge, but they do show a pattern.

Our "current" govt' is to far in bed with the arab oil to let it go. The business alliances have been made, not in our, or the country's best interest though.

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 2:32 pm

So again the solution is to reduce dependency hence hydrogen and hybrids

For those that dont know there are mass floods in austria, switzerland, germany, romania and many other countries in europe TONIGHT. We all need to hurry up and you guys in the US are MAJOR contributers
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4179592.stm

stuw

Aug 24th 2005, 2:34 pm

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 2:35 pm

Getting off the gas altogether is the wisest option, go demand a Hybrid or a hydrogen car..

:) I'll have a site on this in a couple weeks. Hydrogen is the way to go, and once you've driven in a car that actually cleans the air while you drive, you'll never look at a dinosaur burner the same way again.

Congress should pass a law that forbids the import of oil from middle east and Islamic countries.

I could go off on so many tangents here, but I'll just say this:

1) Econ 101, Supply and Demand. Think gas prices suck now? Wait till you cut our supply of middle eastern oil.

2) The US government and the saudi family are "tight." It will take a drive outside our government (like entrepreneurs developing and implementing alternative energy production and a hydrogen infrastructure) to solve the problem.

Because I need a large vehicle I am trying to get a diesel van and then I can use bio-diesel or vegetable oils. I believe regular bio-diesel needs no mods, but I don't know for sure.

Hate to break the news, but aside from saving a few bucks if you know someone that owns a McDonalds, bio-diesel is a joke. It takes at least a gallon of gas to create a gallon of bio-diesel.

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 2:39 pm

Like the idea, but its a heck of a lot easier to drive a more efficient car (eg. non SUV)

True, which is why I do not own an SUV. I bought a Motorcycle to use even less for my work commute.

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 2:44 pm

:)

Congress should pass a law that forbids the import of oil from middle east and Islamic countries.

I could go off on so many tangents here, but I'll just say this:

1) Econ 101, Supply and Demand. Think gas prices suck now? Wait till you cut our supply of middle eastern oil.

Be quite, I know much more than you think.

I just like that mia succeed and congress pass the law.

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 2:44 pm

:) I'll have a site on this in a couple weeks. Hydrogen is the way to go, and once you've driven in a car that actually cleans the air while you drive, you'll never look at a dinosaur burner the same way again.

Yep, I have a couple of sites too they are not 100% done, but those reading this may see it in my sig in the near future ;)

I could go off on so many tangents here, but I'll just say this:

I know the feeling :rolleyes:

1) Econ 101, Supply and Demand. Think gas prices suck now? Wait till you cut our supply of middle eastern oil.

Add china buying up oil, India and africa.

2) The US government and the saudi family are "tight." It will take a drive outside our government (like entrepreneurs developing and implementing alternative energy production and a hydrogen infrastructure) to solve the problem.

It IS and it HAS - The Big Euro/ Japanese car manufacturers are all investing ALOT. In the UK we have adverts for Hydrogen cars on TV already. Let the US govt sit back, the american car market share will vanish if they dont compete - so they will.

Hate to break the news, but aside from saving a few bucks if you know someone that owns a McDonalds, bio-diesel is a joke. It takes at least a gallon of gas to create a gallon of bio-diesel.
Hydrogen and Hybrid is really the way forward from everything I have read.

Btw There are also forest fires in portugal right now (floods and fires:confused: ??)

CyberBryan maybe we can help each other..

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 2:45 pm

Sorry... but i've seen 100 variations of this chain letter already... NONE of them will ever work...

First it was "Don't buy gas for a day" and they'll all go bankrupt... RIGHT...

Then it was don't buy gas from these big companies, so they have to lower their prices and we get cheaper gas.... RIGHT....

Now it's this... give me a break. EVEN IF you could get any large volume of people to participate in this for any period of time long enough to make a small difference... the companies could simply lower they gas 10 cents a gallon and everyone would buy it.

IT'S NOT REALISTIC.

Sorry to be a party pooper... but lets get real.

I have seen several variations myself. I had this discussion with my wife. The reason it never works and is not "realistc" is because no one ever does it. If we all did, it would have an impact. A huge impact.

Other things I think should be done in the US are halt all automotive production now until the auto makers make every vehicle they make get 40MPG minimum! It's pretty sad when that is the top end of a hybrid.

Did you realize every car since 1993 was built to be able to use LP. The dealers and automakers never tell you this. You can get them from the factory with LP setup, however it is insanely expensive and you have to custom order it. I have seen places in the US charging upwards of $8,000.00 for LP conversion. It is not that expensive. I am going to buy my parts from a company in the UK. It's about 500 pounds and installation is simple. There are only five parts.

All vehicles in the US should come with LP already installed. There is no excuse for not having that option standard. It's not like there aren't enough stations carrying LP. I found 5 within a 20 mile radius of my home, and I am in a small town (about 6,000) in South East Wisconsin.

I'm going to continue to do my part to stop using foreign oil.

debunked

Aug 24th 2005, 2:48 pm

Hate to break the news, but aside from saving a few bucks if you know someone that owns a McDonalds, bio-diesel is a joke. It takes at least a gallon of gas to create a gallon of bio-diesel.

Could you point me to some proof of that statement? Are you calculating the fuels used in harvest and transportation?

I would like to see some good info on that.

BTW, I know of local restaurants that I can get the oil from to go that route.

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 2:51 pm

How about we just boycott the us government since they spend more money on oil from middle eastern sources than shell, chevron and exxon combined.

How so?

Your numbers are off too - crude is hitting $60/barrel right now - and a few thing that I find interesting :

I did not write the thing, I found it on the intenet after watching a guy on the news last night list the gas stations that are listed as "terror free".

California oil drilling typically ups itself to 100% capacity when oil hits $19/barrel. BP now is in charge of most of the SoCal wells and they aren't operating at full capacity right now.

The US has typically dumped oil from it's reserves into the market to deal with rising gas prices. Instead of rescuing the market right now, the US is filling its reserves - making the problem even worse and driving prices up.

Yes, under the Clinton admin (while there was NO ENERGY POLICY the entire 8 years) we dumped into our reserves as a way to artificially deflate oil prices at the pump quickly. The trouble is it is artificial and does not last. Let's not forget that the 90's "living life on borrowed time and borrowed money" philosophy and SUV craze certainly did not help. I down sized from an IROC Z28 to a more sensible Dodge Spirt, then an Olds Intrigue.

Politics aside, I really do not care whose fault it is anymore, because it is all of our problem. There are solutions, and reducing dependance is the first step.

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 2:53 pm

Wow, I turn on all my filters in my email to avoid getting these chain letters and now I get them here...

Do these things really work? Do people really participate in these things? I remember getting an email once about turning my lights off for one hour to complain about the high cost of electricity... of course I just deleted it and enjoyed my daily simpsons episode :D

Typically they do not work because no one does it. However with proper organization I think it can work. Look at the "Smoke Out Day", or banning of smoking, that seems to have gone over pretty well in many places. What about "Earth Day"? All it takes is a lack of procrastination and a little motivation.

I guess I am tired about bitching about the problem and think it might be more productive to just do something about it.

What do you say?

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 2:53 pm

Mia, no offence but the chain mail wont work,

Lets say it goes to 50 mil people. 10 mil actually read it, 5 mil are out of its subject area (age, car ownership etc) 1 mil keep it, 500,000 print it and keep the list, 300,000 lose or forget the list, 200,000 cant get access to the 'good gas'c100,000 decide to do something, 20,000 are muslims and sympathetic towards their cause etc etc...

These figures are made up ofcourse but it just keeps dropping down + then when its not 'news' anymore its forgotten about.

Stop car dependency on oil.

A laptop battery could last you around 12-20 hours if it was made from hydrogen. - Maybe thats a better incentive ;)

debunked

Aug 24th 2005, 2:53 pm

I have found a number of CNG vans for sale on e-bay. Most were California city owed. The problem is getting CNG around here. I haven't looked yet, but then again, not enough power to do what I need some of the time. THe good thing is they ad the CNG to a gas engine and leave the gas setup.

There is one van that is only CNG, I think being sold in NY.

ServerUnion

Aug 24th 2005, 2:54 pm

I down sized from an IROC Z28 to a more sensible Dodge Spirt, then an Olds Intrigue.

Did you cut that nasty MULLET off also?

debunked

Aug 24th 2005, 2:57 pm

Did you cut that nasty MULLET off also?

OUch.

LOL

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 2:58 pm

I parked my car in May, didn't use it for 2 months, turned the plates in and cancelled the insurance in July. Don't buy gas period. Haven't even used my BBQ since May. I always try to buy local and ethical, although I could care less if something was tested on an animal or made out of an animal.

As for your pasted chain letter, it would never work. Americans are consumer w_o__s. But hey, they make the world go round and are my target market for demographics at work here. You could never get the big oil co's to stop buying Saudi oil, you could never get 300million Americans to boycott them, and even if you did, guess what? China would pick up the slack and they wouldn't even notice.

Then help us! Work with us. We are in this together. We are neighbors, we share a border, and we share a great deal of polution. The "American" attitude to this that you are talking about needs to change.

I hear you on the "China" thing. That is exactly what my dad said. What we don't buy, they will. Great, let them pay the high prices and polute their continent. In the mean time we can finally begin to impliment other forms of powering engines. Grassoline comes to mind. Ethenol production from cows down in Texas? There is already a company investing 120 million in building an ethenol refinery in Texas. They say they will get rid of the cow waste hazzard and at the same time reduce fuel consumption by 1000 barrels a day.

Aside from the chain letter there are a number of other things that have to be done for this to succeed. Stop using foreign oil, drill in Alaska, start building refineries again, and continue to actually IMPLIMENT alternative forms of powering engines.

Is anyone out there using Grassoline?

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 2:59 pm

US Department of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (http://www.fueleconomy.gov)
Useful for finding out lots of info

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 3:01 pm

Ok, maybe a petition website would be better than a chain mail... Ill help ;)

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:04 pm

Getting off the gas altogether is the wisest option, go demand a Hybrid or a hydrogen car.. You need a much smaller number of people to say they want a hydrogen car before manufacturers scale up the production of these vehicles. It wouldnt take more than a few years to massively reduce the dependancy on oil (the war wont be over before then, no matter what you do).

Trying to get millions to stop using oil is difficult.
Honda, Lexus, Nissan, BMW, theres even a Hydrogen Hummer on the way.
Honda (http://automobiles.honda.com/) have a range already
New Civic (http://automobiles.honda.com/models/model_overview.asp?ModelName=Civic+Hybrid&bhcp=1&BrowserDetected=True) - 650 miles on 1 tank
Lexus Hybrids (http://www.lexus.com/models/hybrid/)
H2H Pics (http://www.gmhummer.com/gallery/showgallery.php/cat/521)
H2H (http://www.gmhummer.com/hummerspecs/h2h/h2hdesign.htm)

There are even some fast ones around:
Honda Civic 2006 Si (http://automobiles.honda.com/civics/email.aspx)

The environment needs all the help it can get right now too.. Im sure theres noone here that disagrees with that ;)

Oil dependancy will get worse otherwise, the countries involved are irrelevent - Consumer power works THE fastest - Demand it and they will make it as fast as they can :)

How many requests for Hydrogen/ Hybrid Cars do you think it would take to get any model produced lets say a Nissan Skyline Hybrid or Audi S4 Hydrogen car ?

I agree, and I think the key to hydrogen powered cars is hydrogen stations, that which we lack. We do however have (like you in the UK) tons of LP stations. Every modern car in the US can run on LP. It's up to 70% cleaner and the equivelent gas powered mileage of 106 miles as compared to LP is 180 miles. It's less expensive to boot! There is no performance decrease, and there are only 5 parts to the system. As I understand it the UK is the largest LP powered nation in the world currently.

Ironcially my Grandfather converted his 1972 Plymouth back in the 70's to LP when he moved back to Italy. He ran on LP in that old 72' Duster for 20 years!

That is what is so disturbing about the lack of insistence on other alternatives to fuel. LP is not new, nor is hydrogen. LP powered engines have been around for a LONG TIME!

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 3:04 pm

I hear you on the "China" thing. That is exactly what my dad said. What we don't buy, they will.

May be you should listen to your elder, it seems your dad knows what he is talking about.

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 3:08 pm

I agree, and I think the key to hydrogen powered cars is hydrogen stations, that which we lack. We do however have (like you in the UK) tons of LP stations. Every modern car in the US can run on LP. It's up to 70% cleaner and the equivelent gas powered mileage of 106 miles as compared to LP is 180 miles. It's less expensive to boot! There is no performance decrease, and there are only 5 parts to the system. As I understand it the UK is the largest LP powered nation in the world currently.

Ironcially my Grandfather converted his 1972 Plymouth back in the 70's to LP when he moved back to Italy. He ran on LP in that old 72' Duster for 20 years!

That is what is so disturbing about the lack of insistence on other alternatives to fuel. LP is not new, nor is hydrogen. LP powered engines have been around for a LONG TIME!

So, demand it, build sites, rank them for example.

I am NOT targetting fuel efficiency kind of terms.. Im going for 'Cars' and its variations - there should be NO such thing as a Hybrid or Hydrogen car, they should be CARS.

* Ads below say "Gas Station Franchise" ;) now theres a good idea...

Imagine - I filled up at the local dp

HA

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:09 pm

So you admit (unlike our govt') that we are fighting for oil? I must turn the knife and point out that the polls are showing approval ratings dropping like a prom dress.

NO. I'm not sure how you read that into it. The war to me is on terror. It is not about oil. If it was we would have taken over Iraq and built the BUSH/IRAQ pipeline and brought the oil back to the US. If it was about oil we too (in the US) would have joined with the crooks at the UN and pocketed money and oil in the oil for food scam. If it was about oil gas prices would not be as high as they are now. They would be 80 cents/gal like it was when I started driving my Mustang in 86.

Of course approval ratings are dropping. They always do in the waining years of any President, with the exception of say Rosevelt of Reagan.

Still not sure what that has to do with getting off our reliance on foreign oil.

Efficient transportation is the best route, why not make insentives for not only consumers but producers of these products.

Because the incentives never work. People will still buy big ass vehicles if they can afford it, because after all that is the American thing to do.

There are however already several incentives many probably do not know about. Do you know you can get huge tax breaks by converting your car to use LP in many countries?

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 3:15 pm

Clean fuel tax deduction

The American government is allowing people to receive a clean fuel tax deduction up to two thousand dollars for purchasing certain hybrid cars. The hybrid cars that are eligible for the tax deduction are the 2005 Ford Escape Hybrid, the 2005 Honda Accord Hybrid, 2003-2005 Honda Civic Hybrid, 2000-2005 Honda Insight and the 2001-2005 Toyota Prius. If you want to take advantage of the tax deduction the hybrid car needs to be put in use by the end of 2005. You are eligible for five hundred dollars if the hybrid car is put in use during 2006.

I am proudly affiliated with this site :D

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:15 pm

Don't make this about cars or I get mad. :mad: :)

I like big American Muscle cars or V12 European sport cars. Just now I have a 455 engine (7.2 liter) in my daily transport.

Forgot about cars. Mia is right. Congress should pass a law that forbids the import of oil from middle east and Islamic countries.

Agreed. Personally I would like to have the big powerful sports car, and big SUV, and I suppose we all could if the auto makers would just make them get 40MPG minimum. Car engines have become like RAM and hard drives. Hang with me for a moment here. Remember when having 16K of RAM was the bomb? It was amazing how you could fit the entire Mac OS and programs on one 400k floppy. Back then there were limitations and as such programers took great pain in making software that took up very little space, had very efficient code, and used little RAM. They did this because there was no space to waste. They were forced to work within these limitations.

Now that RAM and HD space is almost limitless you have the NetScape Equivelents topping 80MB of space when they used to take up less than 1MB and actually were stable and fast (the net was slow of course). Anyway, I see the same with auto makers and engines. They figure Americans have little care about fuel costs (when they were low) and want the big powerful vehicles, so they give them to us without doing anything to work within tighter fuel consumption constraints like they did in the 70's during the oil crisis. Back then auto makers were forced to make smaller more fuel efficient cars. And they did!

It's time to do it again!

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:16 pm

Wow, I send a PM and a few bucks over PayPal and the thread gets away from me...

Be quite, I know much more than you think.

I'm not saying you don't. I haven't run the numbers myself, but they wouldn't be pretty I'm sure.

It IS and it HAS - The Big Euro/ Japanese car manufacturers are all investing ALOT. In the UK we have adverts for Hydrogen cars on TV already. Let the US govt sit back, the american car market share will vanish if they dont compete - so they will.

Mazda started things off when the hydrogen rotary back in the early 90's. BMW, Ford, GM, etc all have hydrogen cars in the works. BMW and Ford are the only ones that are working on H2ICE's though (hydrogen powered internal combustion engines). H2ICE's are the key to changing to a hydrogen economy because they can run on a gasoline or hydrogen or a combination thereof.

CyberBryan maybe we can help each other..

PM me with what you're thinking...

Could you point me to some proof of that statement? Are you calculating the fuels used in harvest and transportation?

I can dig through my bookmarks/books if you want. But, yes, you have to consider the fuel used in harvest, transportation, the (fossil fuel) energy used to create the bio-diesel, the fuel used transporting the bio-diesel. And, there is one other big one that most people don't think of. Crops are sprayed with petroleum based pesticides.

BTW, I know of local restaurants that I can get the oil from to go that route.

Sounds like a plan, could definatly save you some bucks. And, of course, there are plenty of resources on the net for do it yourself processing equipment (strainers etc).

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:16 pm

Did you cut that nasty MULLET off also?

I'm not really sure I ever had a mullet :)

I did have hair down to my ass though. All one length. Oddly enough if you ever make it down to the Kenosha area there is a club called the Kenosha Mullets. I think they even have a web site. Scarry stuff man!

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 3:20 pm

In the UK / Europe cars tend to be more fuel efficient. Petrol is near £1.00 a LITRE + the roads are narrow so we drive small pocket rockets generally ;) - much more fun too..

The UK is implementing all kinds of Efficiency drives - it is at last turning into big business, we are getting more and more vocal.

I dont want to drive some slow boring car, but I do want water to come out if its exhaust ;)

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:21 pm

So, we stop buying oil from countries with terrorist links, which we think will lead to destrying their economies?

So when these countries have effectively been ostrasized by the US and suffered a drop in their standard of living they will be greatful to the US or more against the US?

Will they form stronger links with developing countries, who in themselves with weaker economies could be influenced by investment in infrastructure. Picture countries in Africa and Asia that have chains of Halal Kebab shops rather than McD's.

Will a policy of ostrasizing non conforming countries lead the US down the road of isolationalism as in the 1920's?

Interesting take. It's a double edge sword I guess. Many of them will still hate Jews, yes. Many will still hate Christians. Yes, many will still hate anyone not a Muslim. But the means to cause death and destruction will be taken away.

So now it is a bad thing to reduce reliance on foreign oil and seek alternative forms of energy?

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:22 pm

I like big American Muscle cars or V12 European sport cars. Just now I have a 455 engine (7.2 liter) in my daily transport.

Convert them to hydrogen (rotary, turbine, and interal combustion engines can be converted to hydrogen). Plus, if done correctly they will produce MORE POWER than their gasoline counter parts while also cleaning the air while they drive.

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 3:22 pm

Who gives a crap?

Hereford, Texas does, that's who :D

Interesting this discussion comes up. This made it to fox news yesterday and was surprised to see a little town not far from where I live into headline news:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9040472/

The Panda Group of Dallas plans to fuel a $120 million ethanol plant set to open next year in Hereford with cow manure and other waste. The company said it will realize an energy savings equivalent to 1,000 barrels of oil per day turning manure and cotton gin waste into clean-burning fuel to power the plant.

Biomass is renewable organic matter, such as manure and crops like corn, grain sorghum and soybeans, all of which can be processed into ethanol.

“Anything that’s renewable and is at least competitive with other prices, it’s better for everybody,” said Donald L. Klass, director of Biomass Energy Research Association in Washington.

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:26 pm

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 3:27 pm

Yeah, go Gtech ;) we need a heavy debater like you convincing people..

Itll stop you getting stuck in all those terror threads (although the title of this one has it in :rolleyes: )

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 3:28 pm

Convert them to hydrogen (rotary, turbine, and interal combustion engines can be converted to hydrogen). Plus, if done correctly they will produce MORE POWER than their gasoline counter parts while also cleaning the air while they drive.

Does anyone actually see what that means ? It is better in every way.

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:31 pm

Who gives a crap?

Hereford, Texas does, that's who :D

Interesting this discussion comes up. This made it to fox news yesterday and was surprised to see a little town not far from where I live into headline news:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9040472/

Yep, saw it as well on Fox. I was glued to the boob tube last night. Things like this facinate me to no end. I'm just glad to see someone actually doing something about it!

How far is this from Dallas BTW? I'll be down there in October!

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:32 pm

This made it to fox news yesterday

This is where I stopped reading that post.

Sorry, couldn't help myself. ;)

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:34 pm

This is where I stopped reading that post.

Sorry, couldn't help myself. ;)

Not sure I understand. I saw it mentioned on CNN as well :)

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:35 pm

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 3:37 pm

Yeah, go Gtech ;) we need a heavy debater like you convincing people..

Itll stop you getting stuck in all those terror threads (although the title of this one has it in :rolleyes: )

Hah, I'm all for alternative fuels! This one being right in my backyard, maybe we can get some relief here in another year or so.

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:38 pm

Not sure I understand. I saw it mentioned on CNN as well

I know, I know, I just can't pass up a chance to mention my disdain for Fox News.

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 3:39 pm

I have gotten more red reps on this thread than I have ever gotten. Amazing. Post something positive, ie., ask people to conserve a bit, stop relying on foreign oil and seek alternatives, and get red repped. That must be a good thing.

There are a number of terrorist supporters here at DP. I suspect they don't like the idea of cutting off funding for their *buds*.

debunked

Aug 24th 2005, 3:40 pm

I have gotten more red reps on this thread than I have ever gotten. Amazing. Post something positive, ie., ask people to conserve a bit, stop relying on foreign oil and seek alternatives, and get red repped. That must be a good thing.
hypocracy at its best!

This can be very productive. It actually is an area I have been interested in since I was a kid. The problem I run into is finding truth in things. You have a person on one end saying hydrogen fuel is clean (and I do understand that it is) but a someone on the other end saying there are some things not being told about production etc.. of hydrogen.

I have personally seperated hydrogen from h2o and in order to do that using electrolysis you have to have an impurity in the water. That impurity can lead to a form of pollution.

I am totally for hydrogen and other fuels, we just need to do it right.

Not like electric cars that get their electricity through coal or fuel burning.

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 3:41 pm

This is where I stopped reading that post.

Sorry, couldn't help myself. ;)

I understand. I've encounted a number of people who prefer alternative versions of reality and thus choose not to watch Fox.

I guess that's why they are the highest rated cable news network :p

stuw

Aug 24th 2005, 3:43 pm

But the means to cause death and destruction will be taken away.
I don't think lots of money equates to lots of terror ability.

So now it is a bad thing to reduce reliance on foreign oil and seek alternative forms of energy?
No. Using less oil is the way to go. If societies can be become less car-centric as well it would be a huge bonus. I sold my car 5 years ago and either use public transport or walk. Now, when I'm walking along I just gaze at the long queues of four+ seater cars with only one person in side.....

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:46 pm

debunked,

The most important thing for keeping hydrogen power clean is the sources of the electricity used to create it. Alternative energy sources (solar, geothermal) must grow along with a hydrogen economy in order for it to be truely clean.

I guess that's why they are the highest rated cable news network

That just supports a theory about people I have. (they're dumb ;) ) Just kidding. I don't think people that watch Fox are inherently stupid. If you have an opinion that is different than mine, thats fine, I'm an adult and can deal with it. However, when you push your ideology on the ignorant masses through propoganda techniques I have a problem with it (unless I'm doing it for a campaign I'm working on ;) )

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:48 pm

I know, I know, I just can't pass up a chance to mention my disdain for Fox News.

News is news to me. I take it all with a grain of salt. I just find Fox tends to have better coverage, better stories, especially on the local level here. But I watch MSNBC, CNN, listen to NPR, RUSH, and even some Al Frankin once and a while. He's been on Sundance lately with some new show. Only trouble is every time I turn it on he is talking about the same thing. So I get a bit bored.

I guess I just never understood the Fox thing. Of all the shows I watch it is by far the most objective next to of all things MSNBC :)

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 3:49 pm

Yep, saw it as well on Fox. I was glued to the boob tube last night. Things like this facinate me to no end. I'm just glad to see someone actually doing something about it!

How far is this from Dallas BTW? I'll be down there in October!

In distance, it's about 375 miles to Hereford, from Dallas. However, most Texans measure distance with time. So it would be about a six hour drive.

If you were to come up this way from Dallas, I'd be more than happy to meet up. We have some mean Mexican food here :)

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:51 pm

I don't think lots of money equates to lots of terror ability.

Ah, 9/11. Took some money... Keeping the key guys on the run, fed, sheltered, and hidden? Takes money.

No. Using less oil is the way to go. If societies can be become less car-centric as well it would be a huge bonus. I sold my car 5 years ago and either use public transport or walk. Now, when I'm walking along I just gaze at the long queues of four+ seater cars with only one person in side.....

In the long run, yes. In the short term however, getting away from dependance is crucial to this goal.

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:52 pm

News is news to me. I take it all with a grain of salt. I just find Fox tends to have better coverage, better stories, especially on the local level here. But I watch MSNBC, CNN, listen to NPR, RUSH, and even some Al Frankin once and a while. He's been on Sundance lately with some new show. Only trouble is every time I turn it on he is talking about the same thing. So I get a bit bored.

I went cold turkey on cable news coverage, I try to stick to the wires/net. Occasionally I'll tune in to see images/video of something. Most of what I see from cable news is on the Daily Show, though :)

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 3:54 pm

However, when you push your ideology on the ignorant masses through propoganda techniques I have a problem with it (unless I'm doing it for a campaign I'm working on ;) )

Ah, like the New York Times (non coverage of Kerry's treason and Christmas in Cambodia), MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS (oh boy did we see CBS shine), the LA Times, etc. I see what you are saying ;)

Mia

Aug 24th 2005, 3:54 pm

In distance, it's about 375 miles to Hereford, from Dallas. However, most Texas measure distance with time. So it would be about a six hour drive.

If you were to come up this way from Dallas, I'd be more than happy to meet up. We have some mean Mexican food here :)

I'd be more than happy to if I every get that close :)

I've got a trade show coming up down in the Ft Worth area, schedules tight, so I wouldn't have time for a 6 hour drive.

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 3:55 pm

Ah, like the New York Times (non coverage of Kerry's treason and Christmas in Cambodia), MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS (oh boy did we see CBS shine), the LA Times, etc. I see what you are saying

Exactly, but don't try to get away with saying the media is liberal (or conservative for that matter). Its profit driven, whatever people want to read/watch is what they report on.

stuw

Aug 24th 2005, 3:58 pm

Ah, 9/11. Took some money... Keeping the key guys on the run, fed, sheltered, and hidden? Takes money.
But not millions, which is my point I think.

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 4:02 pm

Let's talk serious.

1- Oil is not only used in cars, applications are varied and different.

2- The world present situation is as follows

TOS= Total Oil Supply
TNS= Total Non-Muslim Supply
TMS= Total Muslim-Middle East supply
TOS= TNS+TMS

TOD= Total Oil Demand
TND= Total Non-American Demand
TAD= Total American Demand
TOD= TND+TAD

Supply up---> price down
Demand down ------> price down

Supply down ---> price up
Demand up----> price up

Price is decide when Demand=Supply or at present time:

Demand side:

TAD=TNS+TMS
TND=TNS+TMS

Supply side:

TNS=TAD+TND
TMS=TAD+TND

Now let's imagine that American decide not to buy the middle east oil, the supply and demand changes to following for Americans:

TAD=TNS
TNS=TAD+TND
TMS=TND

The supply side has gone done while the demand side is constant for non middle east oil, the price of oil goes up for Americans which causes inflation and slow down of economy in USA

On the other hand for non-American economy it changes as follows

TND=TNS+TMS
TMS= TND
TNS= TAD+ TND

The supply side is constant but demand for Non-middle east oil has gone down which causes a lower price of oil for Non-American companies, which results in economical expansion

This process while very beneficial for American oil companies (what a surprise) since they can demand even higher price without any extra cost of production (as they are doing now at $60 /barrel) will result in even faster economic destruction for USA's economy.

The lesson learned: What is good for American oil company and it's shareholders are not necessary good for USA as country.

CyberBrian

Aug 24th 2005, 4:08 pm

1- Oil is not only used in cars, applications are varied and different.

This is a good point. You can't make lip balm or plastic with refined hydrogen. ;)

Design Agent

Aug 24th 2005, 4:08 pm

Ok, and if you dont much like algebra, just buy a hybrid for now..

GTech

Aug 24th 2005, 4:38 pm

Let's talk serious.

Let me guess, bash the US and Israel?

gworld

Aug 24th 2005, 5:32 pm

Let me guess, bash the US and Israel?

Very intelligent, well thought, articulate and to the point, nothing less was expected of great Gtech. :rolleyes:

Now can you explain what this got to do with anything in my previous posting regarding the laws of supply and demand?

sachin410

Aug 24th 2005, 8:54 pm

Its nice to find patriotic people. :).

But I dont really think this idea can work.

First of all US is buying Crude because US needs it. Its not beer that you will stop drinking it and the beer shops will close down.

If you start buying gas only from companies that dont import oil, the surge in demand will force them to import too.

I think a better alternative will be to reduce the actual use of petrol (gas as the americans call it).

If US starts making more efficient cars and bikes (smaller and less powerful) it can reduce its demand by a large amount. Here in India many bikes give 150 miles to a gallon....yes thats right 150 miles to a gallon. I dont think any such bikes are found in developed countries.

Another thing that can be done is developing a better public transport system in US. Unlike Britain and other European countries, US lacks a proper public transport system consisting of buses and trains.

Today crude oil prices have touched a new all time high. Everyone knows as winter comes closer the demand for crude oil..especially heating oil is going to go up. I wouldnt be surprised crude breaches 90$ a barrel this december.

Oil may be sponsoring terrorism, but if not oil, terrorists will find an alternative way. Look at Afghanistan. It got no money. So terrorists found a source of funding in poppy fields. Narcotics has become a big business for them now.

US needs a mix of more tolerance and a planned economic development to move ahead, else it wont be too long (20-30 years) before countries like China will move ahead of it.

nevetS

Aug 24th 2005, 9:07 pm

I doubt the prices will exceed $75/barrel in the U.S. during this administration. Bush wants his friends to make money, but the economy will falter if gas prices reach more than $4/gallon so quickly - and it will be a rough sell to elect another president from the party that doubled our gas prices.

Lowering prices can be done with negotiation. If that does not work, we can increase production or flood the market with existing reserves. Gas prices could be lower, but they don't need to be lower right now.

Don't forget that we've also allowed for drilling in mass areas in Alaska that have previously been untouched. Sustaining high prices will insure profitability for those companies quicker - meaning more jobs, more money churning in the economy, and more happy americans. Albeit at an environmental sacrifice, but that decision has already passed.

Canadian oil "cleaning" has recently achieved new levels of efficiency as well, so there are plenty more players in the game besides the middle east. (They dig up big chunks of mud, saturate it with water, send it through a pipeline and then clean out the mud and water at a treatment plant) We typically buy more from outside the country than we produce, but that's just because it's cheaper and better for our environment - not because we don't have the resources.

If people really cared or wanted cleaner running cars, we would have them by now. I suspect we will in the next 50 or so years, but there's no hybrid that drives like a ferarri and the only SUV hybrid has poor cargo space and crappy mileage anyways.

Existing hybrids don't get nearly as good mileage as they are rated unless you drive like a grandma. In fact, for a lot of drivers they end up being the same as or worse than their old vehicles - except they are slower, more expensive, and more complicated.

Arnie

Aug 25th 2005, 6:24 am

Hah, I'm all for alternative fuels! This one being right in my backyard, maybe we can get some relief here in another year or so.
Oh yes, let them use the remains of Eden (oil) alone and let us build another one.:D :D :D

yfs1

Aug 25th 2005, 1:05 pm

I just finished wathcing "No Waste like Home" on BBC2. Basically they took a family that drives everywhere and had them choose alternatives. There were the obvious like bikes, bus's and walking but they had the one guys diesel camper van converted to run on cooking oil/ or diesel.

He collected the excess oil from the chipper and had free recycled fuel.

They also showed the hydrogen stations in Germany where you can easily fuel up. The car runs cleanly and dead quiet for 200 miles with a top speed of 80 miles an hour. It was plenty impressive.

The small family saved £90 a fortnight on petrol costs with no loss of convenience.

I don't own a car (sold my last car many years ago) but I would consider getting one if hydro power was available here.

Its a crime the government doesn't throw their full support behind it. Terror doesn't need to be the motivation when common sense will do

ServerUnion

Aug 25th 2005, 1:22 pm

Met some hippie once that used the fryer grease to run the VW love wagon. He said the only got turned down once.

Sorvoja

Aug 25th 2005, 5:58 pm

I didn't read the first post since it is blocked my ignorelist, but the idea from the title is very good. Boycot the Middle East oil, find alternative sources of energy or do some drilling in Alaska. It will significantly lower the gas prices in most of the world!

Mia

Aug 25th 2005, 7:28 pm

Mia

Aug 25th 2005, 7:46 pm

Here are some interesting stories about what others are doing to conserve fuel.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/08/24/pf/gas_gripes/index.htm

I especially like the "Van Pool" and bio-diesel idea.

yfs1

Aug 26th 2005, 1:29 am

I like this thread in regards to alternate fuels although interlinking it with terror seems to make people crazy. I realize they are linked in many ways but I believe it hurts the alternate fuels cause to link patriotism into it when they are so many real and tangible reasons to support it.

I also wanted to add the part that I was most impressed with in that special I watched. There was no loss of performance in either the hybrid (switched to electricity when stopped or in traffic), the hydro, or the cooking oil fueled van. In fact they all went plenty fast enough at 80 miles per hour plus.

The only funny thing was the converted van sometimes smelled a bit like fried chicken but thats still a lot better then diesel fumes. (The guys wife said she sometimes got hungry riding in the van)

fryman

Aug 26th 2005, 1:35 am

http://img366.imageshack.us/img366/4484/chickencar4bm.jpg

Hey, what did they expect it to smell like?? :D

yfs1

Aug 26th 2005, 1:40 am

Hey, what did they expect it to smell like?? :D

Lol, although that was pretty funny, it does remind me that one of the biggest issues with alternate fuels is a PR one. They are closely associated with hippies and Ed Begley Junior.

The truth is they don't have to be tiny cars that go 4 miles an hour. I recently read an article on why they have not taken off and a lot of it has to do with their design. They tend to look like "future cars" and are designed to look different. It talked about how if the major car companies designed them as high performance, sleek vehicles there would be people lining up to buy them. Of course you need the support system like Germany has so that their is a hydro station always within 50-100 miles. That isn't as difficult as it seems.

Instead we have the Ed Begley "official hybrid car"

http://www.hemmings.com/images/editorial/2000-honda-insight.jpg

fryman

Aug 26th 2005, 1:43 am

With all the technology out there I am sure there is a way to build a car that doesn't use fossil fuel and can run faster and in a more efficient way than any car on the market... but the power of the fuel corporations is just too big to fight against.

yfs1

Aug 26th 2005, 1:48 am

With all the technology out there I am sure there is a way to build a car that doesn't use fossil fuel and can run faster and in a more efficient way than any car on the market...

It seems to already exist and be supported to some extent outside the US

but the power of the fuel corporations is just too big to fight against.
The problem with that is its not a republicans/democrats issue, its a politicians issue. Through their massive donations, fuel companies have stricken fear into all politicians and their re-election hopes. When a politician comes out to speak on the subject of alternate fuels, they get portrayed as a weirdo in the media, like they are talking about science fiction.

Even the term "alternate fuels" has a certain imagery to it.

They are more different than alternate.

Design Agent

Aug 26th 2005, 3:03 am

The truth is they don't have to be tiny cars that go 4 miles an hour. I recently read an article on why they have not taken off and a lot of it has to do with their design. They tend to look like "future cars" and are designed to look different. It talked about how if the major car companies designed them as high performance, sleek vehicles there would be people lining up to buy them. Of course you need the support system like Germany has so that their is a hydro station always within 50-100 miles. That isn't as difficult as it seems

Yeah, they used to have a quirky image (hence the prius photographed above - which is free in london for congestion charge)

But this is no longer true.
The new lexus LS600h is due for release and has a V8 (they reckon runs like a V12)
Honda VTech engines are very fast and efficient.

Ford Escape Full Hybrid "You won't have to sacrifice any of the power, room and capability"
http://www.fordvehicles.com/features/news/detail/index.asp?id=1457
It looks like a Ford Escape, It smells like a Ford Escape and drives like a Ford Escape (only better).

-----------------------------------
Our cars and SUVs combined are less efficient today than they were in the 1980s

"Saudis are as happy as kids in a sandbox over the fact that soaring oil prices are giving them a windfall budget surplus estimated at $26 billion or more for this year."

"Toyota uses its hybrid technology for its full-size SUV, the Highlander, and a Lexus luxury full-size SUV, only in part to increase the mileage - but also to increase the engine's power"
http://news.cincypost.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050825/EDIT/508250329/1003

-----------------------------------
I doubt people will think you smell like a vegan if you drive one of these:
http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosconsumer/0507/13/G03-245495.htm

-----------------------------------

$3400 tax credit for some Hybrids in 2006
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/12457622.htm

biofuel, alternative energy and terms like that do sound uncool, one day oil will be the 'bio fuel' and 'alternative energy' will be Gas and coal :D

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are a while away yet, so Hybrids will have to be used whilst the hydrogen stations are set up (gas stations can install a big machine that generates the hydrogen itself, so there is also no need for delivery trucks or anything like that either. Profit margins for these oil (soon to be renamed 'energy' companies) will be huge. Its just going to cost them investment now, demand will drive the change.

yfs1

Aug 26th 2005, 3:06 am

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosconsumer/0507/13/G03-245495.htm

Now that is a nice car!

markkk

Aug 26th 2005, 3:20 am

http://img382.imageshack.us/img382/5766/taxicab3pb.jpg

Well I guess this is the best solution for the over priced oil :D :D

yfs1

Aug 26th 2005, 10:46 am

gworld

Aug 26th 2005, 12:24 pm

Sure, when this thread was about terror and an email campaign, it got 70 replies in about an hour. Start talking about real ways to cut oil dependency and it dies.

Thanks for all the links DA, I really enjoyed reading all of them.

We can not have you unhappy :D , so here it is:

Overall U.S. Consumption

U.S. gasoline demand is approximately 44 percent of the United States' petroleum needs.
(Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration)

A big part of this 44% is also commercial transport. Who wants to fly with a plane that is using batteries?

palespyder

Aug 26th 2005, 12:31 pm

Sure, when this thread was about terror and an email campaign, it got 70 replies in about an hour. Start talking about real ways to cut oil dependency and it dies.

Thanks for all the links DA, I really enjoyed reading all of them.

Cut dependancy ARE YOU MAD! I am American!

I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadilac El Dorado Convertable
Hot pink!
With whale skin hub caps
An all leather cow interior
And big brown baby seal eyes for headlights
YEAH!
And I'm gonna drive around in that baby
At 115 miles per hour
Getting one mile per gallon
Sucking down Quarter Pounder cheeseburgers from McDonalds in the old-fashioned non-biodegradable Styrofoam containers
And when I'm done sucking down those grease-ball burgers
I'm gonna wipe my mouth with the American flag
And then I'm gonna toss the Styrofoam containers right out the side
And there ain't a Goddamn thing anybody can do about it
You know why?
'Cause we got the bombs, that's why!
Two words: Nuclear F***in' Weapons
Okay!?
Russia, Germany, Romania
They can have all the Democracy they want
They can have a big Democracy cake walk
Right through the middle of Tienemen Square
And it won't make a lick of difference
Because we got the bombs
Okay!?
John Wayne's not dead
He's frozen!
And as soon as we find a cure for cancer We're gonna thaw out "The Duke"
And he's gonna be pretty pissed off
You know why?
Have you ever taken a cold shower?
Well, multiply that by 15 million times
That's how pissed off "The Duke"'s gonna be
I'm gonna get "The Duke"
And John Cassavetes
And Lee Marvin
And Sam Peckinpah
And a case of whiskey
And drive down to Texas
And....

Little Friday afternoon Dennis Leary for you.

gworld

Aug 26th 2005, 1:09 pm

1976 Cadilac Elderado white on white with red leather interior looks much better than 1967 pink. :D

http://aymeric.vergnol.free.fr/Caisses/Cadillac/images/Cadillac6.jpg

Mia

Aug 26th 2005, 5:36 pm

Sure, when this thread was about terror and an email campaign, it got 70 replies in about an hour. Start talking about real ways to cut oil dependency and it dies.

Thanks for all the links DA, I really enjoyed reading all of them.

So lets not let it. I have been riding my motorcycle non-stop for months now. When we do things to entertain ourselves, my wife and son, we walk downtown instead of driving. It's a lot more fun, good excercise and uses NOT GAS!

Mia

Aug 26th 2005, 5:38 pm

That looks like boss hogs car.

zman

Aug 26th 2005, 6:04 pm

1976 Cadilac Elderado white on white with red leather interior looks much better than 1967 pink. :D

http://aymeric.vergnol.free.fr/Caisses/Cadillac/images/Cadillac6.jpg

G, that is the first post from you I actually liked. I would love to take that baby for a spin. :)

dilipsam

Aug 28th 2005, 1:30 am

Arnie

Aug 28th 2005, 6:01 am

http://english.people.com.cn/200507/26/eng20050726_198224.html

Interesting new way to stop these terrorists!!! I hope they develop it into a real big car though fuel efficiency (even if reduced to one-third of the mileage mentioned there) should be more than enough.

I was a news researcher before, hence wanted to give this thread a twist and this is good news for all of us.

Regards,
Dilip Samuel

As so often in the past, inventions like this were cut of by the big players (oil giants), car industries and so on. Some times they bought patents with huge sums and strungulated the projects.

Lets hope this time that the pressure comes from the people to go for it, without that its bound to fail again.

Great find, thanks

ferret77

Aug 28th 2005, 11:40 am

you guys know as long as our goverment is run by people from the oil industry very little progress is going to made

Sorvoja

Aug 28th 2005, 12:03 pm

Why not make them blow up their own oil?

http://hnn.us/articles/11858.html

Mia

Aug 29th 2005, 7:47 am

you guys know as long as our goverment is run by people from the oil industry very little progress is going to made

Ah, the optimism intrigues me. The point of this thread was to make an attempt to actually try to do something rather than blaming others and those in power. But I agree, on the liberal side of the isle, it is very hard to get anything done. These guys love their SUV's and private jets.

yfs1

Aug 29th 2005, 7:52 am

Why not make them blow up their own oil?

http://hnn.us/articles/11858.html

The best part of that article (or at least most interesting) is right at the end

If such a system is in place, two implications leap to mind. Should the Saudi monarchy retain its grip on power (which I consider likely), it has created for itself a unique deterrence against invasion. But, should the monarchy be replaced by an Islamic emirate in the spirit of Afghanistan's Taliban (its main challenger for power), this ferociously anti-Western government would have at its disposal a cataclysmic suicide-bomber capacity; with one push of a button, conceivably, it could shake the world order. And it would be highly inclined to do just that.

ServerUnion

Aug 29th 2005, 7:53 am

Ah, the optimism intrigues me. The point of this thread was to make an attempt to actually try to do something rather than blaming others and those in power. But I agree, on the liberal side of the isle, it is very hard to get anything done. These guys love their SUV's and private jets.

Thats funny as they don't not have the majority at this point and our president is an oil businessman

ferret77

Aug 29th 2005, 9:06 am

neither politcal party has done much to push fuel efficiency, hopefully as oil prices go up the free market will drive , non fuel efficient cars off the market. Of course if there had been a tax on gas before this point it would have stimulated it earlier.

but hey bush and crew have totaly control for over 4 years now, there is nothing stopping them from doing whatever they want

Of course I am total hypocrite, my boat gets let 5 miles to the gallon, but hey I don't drive to work

Thats funny as they don't not have the majority at this point and our president is an oil businessman

Not just the president , vice president, condi was on the exxon board of directors(it think)

President George W. Bush's family has been running oil companies since 1950. Vice President Dick Cheney spent the late '90s as CEO of Halliburton, the world's largest oil services company. National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice sat on the board of Chevron, which graced a tanker with her name. Commerce Secretary Donald Evans was the CEO of Tom Brown Inc. -- a natural gas company with fields in Texas, Colorado and Wyoming -- for more than a decade.

The links don't end with personnel. The bin Laden family and other members of Saudi Arabia's oil-wealthy elite have contributed mightily to several Bush family ventures, even as the American energy industry helped put Bush in office. Of the top 10 lifetime contributors to George W.'s war chests, six either come from the oil business or have ties to it, according the Center for Public Integrity.

I mean even if you arn't a conspiracy theory nut, it seems sort odd doesn't it.

Can you imagine GW going on TV and saying, ok everyone buy less gas. Or everyone get a car with better fule efficiency, has he ever done that?

acutally I guess he does http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/05/20050516.html

ServerUnion

Aug 29th 2005, 9:14 am

Cost me $160 to fill the boat and around $45 each for my car and SUV yesterday. OUCH! About $250 for gas!

Think I may have to find some hobies other than cars and boats. Maybe next week I will just take a bus to the marina and sit in my boat.

yfs1

Aug 29th 2005, 9:17 am

Can you imagine GW going on TV and saying, ok everyone buy less gas. Or everyone get a car with better fule efficiency, has he ever done that?

In all fairness, no politicians are really doing that as they all benefit from oil money. These corporations may have republicans in their pockets but they also donate a LOT of money to ALL political parties. They know what campaing funds get them.

On top of that, the general public only complains about gas when it is expensive, and they aren't about to give up their huge car---thats their right!!!

Despite the email being a pretty dumb idea, the power DOES rest in the people. If they demanded these things and showed it by cutting their petrol use, slowly many politicians would follow. Not because its right of course, but because they want the votes.

palespyder

Aug 29th 2005, 9:20 am

Politicians are Politicians whether they be Democrat, Republican, Independant, Labor Party, or National Peoples Republic for the Democration Rebuilding of the Federation of Galaxy 63654.64xyw. Politician's will serve their own agenda's to the end of their "reign" and will surround themselves with people who will help them to their goals. You wanna know how many politicians are there "for the people" make them civil servants who make what the middle class makes and see how many last in their position. Conspiracy or not, I find it hard to believe any of them would stay.

As far as boycotting Arab gas, you are more then welcome to try, but, I believe it would take a huge portion of the population boycotting for a week or more to get anyone's attention and even then they know they have you by the short and curlies, you have to have fuel to get to work to pay your rent, food bill, and all of the other lovely little ammenties that make like so very wonderful. just my $.02.

ferret77

Aug 29th 2005, 9:43 am

wonder what gas prices are going to be up to after this hurricane?

palespyder

Aug 29th 2005, 9:52 am

My guess is over $3.00 a gallon here anyway (it's currently $2.58 gal). I know on CNN yesterday they were forcasting between $.30 and $.60 increase per gallon and according to CNN money gas rose $5.00 a barrel to top out at $70 before falling back to +$3.60 a barrel. Sounds like it could be that way for awhile too.

Kinda makes me nostalgic for $1.75 a gallon ;)

**editted to make a bit more sense**

Mia

Aug 29th 2005, 9:54 am

Thats funny as they don't not have the majority at this point and our president is an oil businessman

No but they did for 40 years in congress, and 8 years in the "living on borrowed time greedy 90's" and look at the result. It's taken and will continue to take a long time to undo that damage.

"our president is an oil businessman" Think about that for a moment. He was also a baseball team owner. But think about that for a moment too. He owned about 2% of the team, but people still think he owned it. He owned a small piece of it. And yes, bush did have stock in Harken (oil) at one time.

This was back in the 80's when at the time Bush did not have a large fortune. He bought a two percent share of the Rangers in the 80's, financed with a $500,000 loan from a bank. Bush used the proceeds from his sale of Harken stock to repay this loan. The sale of Harken stock equated to about $850,000.

Now without going into a longer dissertation on how Bush made his millions, in short it was the sale of the Rangers years later that netted him close to 15 million bucks off his original $650,000 investment. Not oil. He is not an oil tycoon. Sometimes listening to liberals speak about things like this is like flipping through the new channels, or watching some washed up comedian on that Politically Incorrect show. It get's old. I'm glad I still live in a world where I am actually able to think for myself.

Ok, so now that the oil conspiracy has been put to bed perhaps we can continue to talk about how to stop using Arab oil, or oil in general.

debunked

Aug 29th 2005, 9:58 am

wonder what gas prices are going to be up to after this hurricane?
What I am getting sick of, is they use every excuse they can find to increase prices right now. The hurricane is making OIL prices go up already? Because the hurricane is hitting the oil? no.. I can see gas prices going up because of a refinery being shut down but not oil. arrrghh

We don't have much choice in driving a big vehicle, they won't let me tie my kids to the top of a honda!

Mia

Aug 29th 2005, 10:03 am

neither politcal party has done much to push fuel efficiency, hopefully as oil prices go up the free market will drive , non fuel efficient cars off the market. Of course if there had been a tax on gas before this point it would have stimulated it earlier.

I'm not certain where you live, but there is a tax on gas here, and there always has been. As a matter of fact, Wisconsin has the highest gas tax in the nation. Actaully I do not know of a single state in the USA that does not have a gas tax. Most of what you pay at the pump is tax! And we had a presidential canidate that wanted to slap another 50 cents on top of that (per gallon!)

You cannot tax people into submission. When will liberals get that through their mind? Our dismal economy thanx to 8 years of BC was revived and "stimulated" not through more tax, but less tax, and more incentive to earn money, your money, that YOU can keep and spend.

Look at other things that have been taxed to death and tell me that it has had a positive affect. Cigarettes comes to mind. That and the luxary tax on bigger vehicles.

My point? You are not going to reduce dependance by taxing people. You are going to reduce dependance by actually getting up and going out and buying a more fuel efficient car, or buy buying a hybrid, or converting your car to LP, or just not using some of these things for a while.

ferret77

Aug 29th 2005, 10:23 am

Look at other things that have been taxed to death and tell me that it has had a positive affect. Cigarettes comes to mind. That and the luxary tax on bigger vehicles

umm yeah both have had a good effect for me

Not oil. He is not an oil tycoon. Sometimes listening to liberals speak about things like this is like flipping through the new channels

You have got to freaking kidding, bushes whole family has been in the oil business, and they cater to the oil business, no matter what your political affilation you have to be blind not to see that, blind crazy , something.

Everyone bush surrounds himself with is in the oil business, it simple facts, you can look it up on the internets

ferret77

Aug 29th 2005, 10:43 am

daamsie

Aug 29th 2005, 9:26 pm

Read on, and be sure to go to a non-terror gas station.

Man, I haven't been on this site for a while. I didn't realise how xenophobic it has become! :eek: Talking about arabs and muslims like they're all terrorists is about as intelligent as saying all Americans are abortion clinic bombers. What bothers me the most is that it seems no one is even taking offense. Are there no intelligent, free-thinking people left on this site?

Not to mention that the idea is absolutely stupid in its entirety. If Americans were crazy enough to boycott Middle Eastern oil en masse, China (in particular) and the rest of the world would quite happily use that extra oil supply to their competitive advantage, leaving America's economy resembling that of Liberia (that's in Africa btw).

Less reliance on cars? That I can agree with :)

ps. hoping this thread was actually sarcastically intended, but sadly I seriously doubt it

Mia

Aug 29th 2005, 9:29 pm

umm yeah both have had a good effect for me

You have got to freaking kidding, bushes whole family has been in the oil business, and they cater to the oil business, no matter what your political affilation you have to be blind not to see that, blind crazy , something.

Everyone bush surrounds himself with is in the oil business, it simple facts, you can look it up on the internets

Yawn... It gets old...

Mia

Aug 29th 2005, 9:32 pm

maybe tax is a dirty word mia, perhaps you would perfer we stop subsiding oil companys, I mean its really the same thing isn't , the same thing happens price of gas goes up. Taxing or subsibsing the oil industry both interfer with the free market right?

Maybe if we didn't subsidise the oil industry the prices would have went up a long time ago, and the free market would have solved the consumption problem before it came to this.

Nope, simple economics from sophomore year high school economics class. The Law of Supply and Demand.

Little supply, large demand = high price
Large supply, little demond = low price

The free market does solve it's own problems without being asked (sorry not asked) without being forced to contribute additional money to the government.

I did not say tax was bad, nor did I say it was not necessary. What I did say was that you cannot tax people or problems into submission. It just does not work.

Mia

Aug 29th 2005, 9:50 pm

Man, I haven't been on this site for a while. I didn't realise how xenophobic it has become! :eek: Talking about arabs and muslims like they're all terrorists is about as intelligent as saying all Americans are abortion clinic bombers. What bothers me the most is that it seems no one is even taking offense. Are there no intelligent, free-thinking people left on this site?

Offended by what? Who said that all Arabs and muslims were terrorists? No one can deny that there are Muslim/Arab terrorists. No one said they all were. If it makes you feel better to assume the pain of being offended, then by all means, go ahead.

To answer your question, yes there are quite a few intelligent and free-thinking people on this forum. Read the entire thread and you will see that. This thread has evolved in several different directions not the least of which is an open discussion talking about ways to reduce dependance on oil in general. What is so offensive about that?

Not to mention that the idea is absolutely stupid in its entirety. If Americans were crazy enough to boycott Middle Eastern oil en masse, China (in particular) and the rest of the world would quite happily use that extra oil supply to their competitive advantage, leaving America's economy resembling that of Liberia (that's in Africa btw).

There's an intelligent and free-thinking thing to day. Yep, reducing reliance on foreign oil is a stupid idea. Brilliant. Talk about offensive. I fail to see how finding an alternative source of energy is going to cause problems for America's economy. Lest you forget China's economy survives because the US buys their goods. Without the US there is no China, nor is there any money for China to happily buy oil. I fail to see the logic.

Less reliance on cars? That I can agree with :)

Ah to do that it means less reliance on foreign oil, and new source of domestic forms of alternative energy.

ps. hoping this thread was actually sarcastically intended, but sadly I seriously doubt it

No, no sacrasim, but it did get your attention. That's the point.

sachin410

Aug 29th 2005, 10:31 pm

Nope, simple economics from sophomore year high school economics class. The Law of Supply and Demand.

Little supply, large demand = high price
Large supply, little demond = low price.

If only economics was so simple , we would get rid of poverty from the world :D .

There is something like "elasticity" of demand. Elasticty refers to the extent by which changes in prices can cause changes in demand or supply.

Demand for petroleum is highly inelastic. This comes from the fact that petroleum is an essential commodity and that it doesnt have any substitutes.

http://www.ecoteacher.asn.au/Demand/elastsli/e11.htm

D'' is more inelastic than D'. Demand curve for petrol is nearly vertical.

US cannot wish away its demands by saying lets stop using oil from middle east.

Even taxing wont work to reduce demand. In fact over taxing would lead to the cost being passed out to other products in the economy leading to uncontrolled inflation.... a sure shot way to an ecomnomic disaster. US and other countries with high demand for petroleum have just option,.... EFFICIENT USE OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS.

Finding an alternative fuel is easier said than done. So many people say use hydrogen ... but they dont realise the fact that combustion of hydrogen is not easy to control as combustion of petrol is. A slight manufacturing defect, misuse or a small accident can make a hydrogen power vehicle a moving bomb.

Other alternative sources have their drawbacks too. Someone will find a good alternative someday, but as on today nothing comes close to Petrol .

Arnie

Aug 29th 2005, 10:46 pm

I'm not a techy but my brother in law is. Actually he's in car construction engineering in a high position for a german car maker.
I remember when we had a discuss many years ago. He told me that trechnically everything is possible.
I think it was GM, which gave an order (ordering a patent) to his engineering unit to create an engine with lowest fuel consumption and approx. 70 horse power.

The result was a 70 horse power engine using only 1,5 litres /60miles

Everything already exists. It's a numbers game of the big players in control, nothing else then that, they don't give a sh*t as long as people buying more and more cars every year. So why bother to change to new assembling techniques and risk losing on shares of the oil industry that would cost them trillions of $$$.

daamsie

Aug 29th 2005, 11:08 pm

Offended by what? Who said that all Arabs and muslims were terrorists? No one can deny that there are Muslim/Arab terrorists. No one said they all were. .

You may not have said it, but it was strongly enough implied that ALL middle eastern countries support terrorism and you are quite happy to banish them and their people to poverty for it. Presumably this assumption that they all support terrorists is based on US 'intelligence', the same intelligence that figured Iraq had stockpiles of nuclear bombs and would be attacking America at any moment. I cannot deny there are muslim terrorists, just like you cannot deny there have been American terrorrists, British terrorists and terrorists from pretty much any nationality/religion you can think of. But I have no intention of penalizing innocent bystanders for the wrongs of some of their citizens.

To answer your question, yes there are quite a few intelligent and free-thinking people on this forum. Read the entire thread and you will see that. This thread has evolved in several different directions not the least of which is an open discussion talking about ways to reduce dependance on oil in general. What is so offensive about that?

Nothing, and that's why I made a point of saying that driving cars less is a good idea. But your original statement (which made no mention of the environment) seemed to go largely unchallenged.

There's an intelligent and free-thinking thing to day. Yep, reducing reliance on foreign oil is a stupid idea. Brilliant. Talk about offensive. I fail to see how finding an alternative source of energy is going to cause problems for America's economy.
That's not offensive at all. And nor did I say it was. The original post referred to a ban on middle eastern oil, because of Arab support for terrorists. Don't you stop to consider that the Arabs in the oil industry might consider terrorism 'bad for business', before labelling them the bad guy?

Lest you forget China's economy survives because the US buys their goods. Without the US there is no China, nor is there any money for China to happily buy oil. I fail to see the logic.

I think you underestimate the purchasing power of a billion citizens. To think they are only wealthy because of the US is deluding yourself. If the US can find enough clean energy supply to not rely on oil imports, then maybe they don't need to compete with China for oil supply and then maybe they can afford to be self sufficient. But do you really expect the world's largest polluters (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/env_pol_car_dio_fro_fos_fue_200_cap) to make such a drastic change? But your environmental standpoint is not what I care about. In fact, I admire your seeming dedication to cleaner, greener energy.

If you wanted to talk environmental issues, you should have used a chain letter about saving the planet, not about Arab terrorists. I don't take any offense with your noble intentions for a greener planet and haven't in any way indicated that I do. What I do take offense with is the lumping together of a whole region as terrorists and the simplistic view that not buying their oil will somehow reduce their hatred of the US.

yfs1

Aug 29th 2005, 11:50 pm

daamsie

Aug 30th 2005, 12:39 am

You might want to read the entire thread before condeming all of DP. There were quite a few of use that said specifically:
Drop your dependance on oil because of one of many reasons including cost savings and environmental, not terrorism.

Please don't lump everyone in with one statement which showed you obviously stopped reading around page 2

Admittedly I did skim over a lot of the thread, while looking for others' responses. I didn't find any, but now that you mentioned it, I decided to have another look and there were a few people discussing the terror question.

page 2. stuw makes a valid point against the idea of boycotting the middle east. The first one I saw.

page 3

500,000 print it and keep the list, 300,000 lose or forget the list, 200,000 cant get access to the 'good gas'c100,000 decide to do something, 20,000 are muslims and sympathetic towards their cause etc etc...
Indicating a belief that all muslims are sympathetic to the terrorist's causes. Kind of follows the general underlying feeling behind most posts in the thread.

page 6, another sensible response from stuw - so far the only person to really try and debate the original topic.

page 9,
I like this thread in regards to alternate fuels although interlinking it with terror seems to make people crazy. I realize they are linked in many ways but I believe it hurts the alternate fuels cause to link patriotism into it when they are so many real and tangible reasons to support it. So you're right, after nine pages, someone finally said what needed to be said. Is it normal for it to take 85 responses to get to that point? Admittedly I didn't see your response when I read the thread the first time.

page 10,
Interesting new way to stop these terrorists!! And so we're back to where we began.

So, after all that, I could only find 2 people who responded that terrorism should not have something to do with this (though neither seemed to particularly care that all of the middle east was being labelled as terrorists). Can you point me to the 'quite a few' that said specifically:
"Drop your dependance on oil because of one of many reasons including cost savings and environmental, not terrorism". I could only find your response.

But thanks for pointing out that there are at least some who disagree with the general view. And apologies for lumping you in.. that was unfair of me.

yfs1

Aug 30th 2005, 2:04 am

My respect for going back through the thread. I can only speak for myself to say that I usually don't even view political threads. The only reason I got involved in this one is that like dct and a few others, I support and recognize the viability of hybrid and hydro cars. I certianly don't think that boycotting fuel for a few days or trying to pick "non-terrorist" petrol stations will do absolutely anything in the fight againt Terrorism.

I do believe the western world leaves itself open to attack by having such a dependancy. I base that on the fact that Saudi Arabia has publicly stated they installed a fail safe system where if they were attacked they could decimate their own oil system. There is some debate as to whether they actually did that or just said they did as it would have the same effect. Detterence.

That is only linked to Terror because if terrorists were able to gain control of that system, they could bring down the economies of the Western world. That is a side issue though and isn't affected by whether or not we buy gasoline.

For the most part, although Jeremey is a bit over the top for me at times, he does make his point most times in a civil way (and many times makes good points that make me think about things). This forum has had some great debates and it is only through this atmosphere that people can see all sides and maybe change their thinking, even to just understand.

I have only one person on my ignore list but it is not because of their viewpoint, it is because they took to attacking a new member in their intro thread. This person was just a web designer who happened to be from a country that is part of the so called "axis of evil". The attacked person had no agenda to discuss terrorism nor did they even post in any of the debate threads. The member I now ignore choose to attack them and label them evil just for being born where they were. I was a bit dissapointed that Jeremey and GTech didn't give them a hard time for this as it was out of order but other then that things stay to debate.

Mia

Aug 30th 2005, 7:58 am

You may not have said it, but it was strongly enough implied that ALL middle eastern countries support terrorism and you are quite happy to banish them and their people to poverty for it. Presumably this assumption that they all support terrorists is based on US 'intelligence', the same intelligence that figured Iraq had stockpiles of nuclear bombs and would be attacking America at any moment. I cannot deny there are muslim terrorists, just like you cannot deny there have been American terrorrists, British terrorists and terrorists from pretty much any nationality/religion you can think of. But I have no intention of penalizing innocent bystanders for the wrongs of some of their citizens.

Nothing was said nor implied. Someone just does not like the US apparently. I guess it is bash the US time and reward terrorists time again on the forum. It's been a few days, but I guess that much is expected.

I do not remember any US Intelligence saying anything about stock piles of nuclear bombs. You made that up. No one every said they would be attacking America at any moment. You made that up too. You know what the truth is, you are just angry for some reason, so you resort to making things up.

You may say you have no intention of "penalizing innocent bystanders", but it is your country that is kicking them out, not the US. Think about that for a moment.

Nothing, and that's why I made a point of saying that driving cars less is a good idea. But your original statement (which made no mention of the environment) seemed to go largely unchallenged.

Perhaps that is because there was nothing to challenge.

That's not offensive at all. And nor did I say it was. The original post referred to a ban on middle eastern oil, because of Arab support for terrorists. Don't you stop to consider that the Arabs in the oil industry might consider terrorism 'bad for business', before labelling them the bad guy?

But you said "all" Arabs. I did not say "all" Arabs. There you go making things up in your mind again. I did not label anyone. I said what I said, I meant what I meant, so take it for what it is worth. Only a terrorist would take offense IMHO. If they get offended that is.

I think you underestimate the purchasing power of a billion citizens. To think they are only wealthy because of the US is deluding yourself. If the US can find enough clean energy supply to not rely on oil imports, then maybe they don't need to compete with China for oil supply and then maybe they can afford to be self sufficient. But do you really expect the world's largest polluters to make such a drastic change? But your environmental standpoint is not what I care about. In fact, I admire your seeming dedication to cleaner, greener energy.

Wealthy? Most of their citizens live in absolute squaller. That's wealth? Child labor laws? Nope. The worlds largest polluters? Excuse me? Look at China. At least we do something about it. China has no regulations what so ever because they are considered a developing country.

In any event no one in the US decided to pollute the environment. We did not set out to do anything of the kind. We just happen to have a LARGE country with A LOT of people, and a great many of those people spread out all across the US. Look at your neck of the woods. There are how many people there? 16 million? Most centered around two major cities? When you get as many people as the US and China centered on same land mass, I guess we can call you polluters too.

If you wanted to talk environmental issues, you should have used a chain letter about saving the planet, not about Arab terrorists. I don't take any offense with your noble intentions for a greener planet and haven't in any way indicated that I do. What I do take offense with is the lumping together of a whole region as terrorists and the simplistic view that not buying their oil will somehow reduce their hatred of the US.

Who said I wanted to talk environmental issues? I wanted to talk about eliminating terror and dependance on foreign oil. You know that. How on earth can you be offended by that? If you think that I lumped an entire region together you must be saying that the entire region is all the same. I did not say that, you did. I guess you are pretty offensive in that regard.

You are also saying that the "good guy" Arabs, also hate the US? Where is that coming from? I would think they love us. We give them the ability to water sand buy buying their oil. We're not doing them a favor, we're continuing to make them rich, and in many cases, yes supporting terrorists in the process. No, not all, like you said, but a great many.

daamsie

Aug 30th 2005, 5:14 pm

Nothing was said nor implied. Someone just does not like the US apparently. I guess it is bash the US time and reward terrorists time again on the forum. It's been a few days, but I guess that much is expected.

Why do you assume that just because I don't like US policies (or your statements), I would somehow like terrorists? I've never understood rationale like that. Oh well.

I do not remember any US Intelligence saying anything about stock piles of nuclear bombs. You made that up. No one every said they would be attacking America at any moment. You made that up too. You know what the truth is, you are just angry for some reason, so you resort to making things up. Nuclear bombs, the ability to build nuclear bombs, WMDs, whatever it was, they tried to scare the public into thinking that Iraq would use it against them if they didn't attack them right away.

You may say you have no intention of "penalizing innocent bystanders", but it is your country that is kicking them out, not the US. Think about that for a moment. my country? what are you referring to? Detention centres? Our immigration policy? Both are despicable in my opinion. But I am not speaking on behalf of my country, I am speaking as an individual, as are you. I'm sure the current Australian government would agree with you - I find them generally to be willing to go along with whatever comes out of the American right.

I said what I said, I meant what I meant, so take it for what it is worth. Only a terrorist would take offense IMHO. If they get offended that is. yawn, "if you're not for us, you're against us". That's a tired old line, intended only to silence anyone with a different viewpoint.

Wealthy? Most of their citizens live in absolute squaller. That's wealth? Child labor laws? Nope. The worlds largest polluters? Excuse me? Look at China. At least we do something about it. China has no regulations what so ever because they are considered a developing country.
I did not say chinese people are wealthy. I just said there are a lot of them. They do have one of the fastest growing GDPs Per Capita on the planet. And their GDP PPP is second only to the US (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/eco_gdp_ppp).

Re: polution, did you not read the link? Americans (per person, as that is the fair measure) are the world's largest polluters.

In any event no one in the US decided to pollute the environment. We did not set out to do anything of the kind. We just happen to have a LARGE country with A LOT of people, and a great many of those people spread out all across the US. Look at your neck of the woods. There are how many people there? 16 million? Most centered around two major cities? When you get as many people as the US and China centered on same land mass, I guess we can call you polluters too. As I said, the stats were per person. Regardless of population size, the Americans are the worst (at least according to those stats). Mind you, Australians come in a close second, which is bad news as well.. but we weren't discussing Australians.

Who said I wanted to talk environmental issues? I wanted to talk about eliminating terror and dependance on foreign oil. You know that. How on earth can you be offended by that? If you think that I lumped an entire region together you must be saying that the entire region is all the same. I did not say that, you did. I guess you are pretty offensive in that regard.

I am not offended by the thought of eliminating terror, nor your aims to reduce dependence on foreign oil. What I find offensive is the implication that all of the middle east supports the terrorists and deserves your punishment.

You lumped the entire region together by using that email, which stated plainly
I thought it might be interesting for you to know which oil companies are the best to buy gas from and which major companies import Middle
Eastern oil :

Not "oil that funds terrorists" or "oil from Saudi Arabia" even, just "Middle Eastern Oil".. presumably including Kuwait, the Emirates, Israel and so on.

You are also saying that the "good guy" Arabs, also hate the US? Where is that coming from? Where did I say that? here?: "What I do take offense with is the lumping together of a whole region as terrorists and the simplistic view that not buying their oil will somehow reduce their hatred of the US." Read it again.. if you consider the whole region terrorists (as you seem to do by being willing to ban all their oil), I find it simplistic that you would think that starving them would make them (the terrorists, the people you are trying to starve supposedly) hate you less.

I would think they love us. We give them the ability to water sand buy buying their oil.We're not doing them a favor, we're continuing to make them rich, and in many cases, yes supporting terrorists in the process. No, not all, like you said, but a great many. So you think they love you? But you also think they support terrorists? I don't get it. What do you actually base this assumption that oil companies are supporting terrorists on in the first place? It must be some pretty solid evidence if you're willing to banish all of the middle east to poverty for it (that is what the email is intending when it says not to buy middle eastern oil right?).

daamsie

Aug 30th 2005, 5:29 pm

For the most part, although Jeremey is a bit over the top for me at times, he does make his point most times in a civil way (and many times makes good points that make me think about things). This forum has had some great debates and it is only through this atmosphere that people can see all sides and maybe change their thinking, even to just understand.

Fair enough. I think I was a little bit harsh in my language initially. I'll try to stick to purely discussing the topic at hand from now on, as I do find it an important one.

CyberBrian

Aug 30th 2005, 6:59 pm

But I agree, on the liberal side of the isle, it is very hard to get anything done. These guys love their SUV's and private jets.

This is one area where I surprise my liberal friends, we shouldn’t have to turn our lights off when we leave a room, keep engines under a certain power/weight ratio, stop from watering the lawn (unless you decided to build a community without an infrastructure to match like you morons out west ;) ).

We (Americans) all love SUV’s and private jets. And there is no reason we should not be able to consume consume consume, we just need to do it more responsibly.

Politicians don’t push different options because people are afraid of change and assume they will be losing something if we do convert to more responsible energy sources.

I mean even if you arn't a conspiracy theory nut, it seems sort odd doesn't it.

Can you imagine GW going on TV and saying, ok everyone buy less gas. Or everyone get a car with better fule efficiency, has he ever done that?

Of course people in the White House have worked in the oil industry. It’s a profitable industry and we’re capitalists. Those who have money are the ones that make it to the White House. When it comes time for alternative energy to take over Exxon and friends will hop on the bandwagon because their only responsibility is to increase shareholder wealth

What I am getting sick of, is they use every excuse they can find to increase prices right now

Prices are going up, but so are the oil industry’s profits. Its not just supply problems etc causing high prices.

As a matter of fact, Wisconsin has the highest gas tax in the nation

Yes, I discovered that on my way home from Dodgeville a few weeks ago. I filled up <10 miles from the IL border… grr…

You are not going to reduce dependance by taxing people

Nope, but you’ll get some nice tax revenue. Mmmmm, tax revenue.

Nope, simple economics from sophomore year high school economics class. The Law of Supply and Demand.

Little supply, large demand = high price
Large supply, little demond = low price

This is nice and good and everything, but people forget the emotional attachment we have to cars. Replacing oil (or even just our SUVs) is also not as easy as say, buying RC Cola if Coke got too expensive. Oil will never reach a point (IMO) where it becomes so expensive that the masses rise up and demand an alternative. Look at what is happening now, economic data/polling say that people are putting the same amount of gas in their cars and spending less on other things.

In order for supply/demand to have an affect (again, IMO) an alternative needs to exist and be less expensive.

Everything already exists. It's a numbers game of the big players in control, nothing else then that, they don't give a sh*t as long as people buying more and more cars every year. So why bother to change to new assembling techniques and risk losing on shares of the oil industry that would cost them trillions of $$$.

And this is why automakers have a back up plan. They are all developing some alternative energy vehicles just so they can crush any competition that may arise in the future. Either way, alternative fuel vehicles will make their way to the market. Capitalism, ahhh.

Re: polution, did you not read the link? Americans (per person, as that is the fair measure) are the world's largest polluters.

Just wait till 90% of China gets a refrigerator….

I think thats enough for one post.

Now, back to what I suppose to be doing... ;)

daamsie

Aug 31st 2005, 10:07 pm

Just wait till 90% of China gets a refrigerator….

But, each family will only have one refrigerator. The stats are 'per person', not as a country on the whole.

Added: If all the world polluted like the average American (or Australian), I doubt there would be any icecaps left at all. :?

Mia

Aug 31st 2005, 10:21 pm

But, each family will only have one refrigerator. The stats are 'per person', not as a country on the whole.

Added: If all the world polluted like the average American (or Australian), I doubt there would be any icecaps left at all. :?

Sorry, that is just not true. During the industrial revolution more pollutants were released into the atomosphere in Europe than the last 100 years in the US alone. Let's just including the Chernoble disaster in this equation. Kinda blows away anything any American or Australian has ever done. Coulpe that with the fact that the reactor is still a ticking time bomb they do not fix because of lack of money.

I consider myself an average American and find the accusation that the "average American" is out polluting. It's kinda hard to compare advanced developed countries like the US and Australia with underdeveloped third world nations where there is about one car per 100 people. It's just not apples to apples.

daamsie

Aug 31st 2005, 11:46 pm

Sorry, that is just not true. During the industrial revolution more pollutants were released into the atomosphere in Europe than the last 100 years in the US alone. Let's just including the Chernoble disaster in this equation. Kinda blows away anything any American or Australian has ever done. Coulpe that with the fact that the reactor is still a ticking time bomb they do not fix because of lack of money.

I consider myself an average American and find the accusation that the "average American" is out polluting. It's kinda hard to compare advanced developed countries like the US and Australia with underdeveloped third world nations where there is about one car per 100 people. It's just not apples to apples.

Hey, I'm just quoting the current (well, slightly out of date) statistics. If you don't believe it to be accurate, I would like to know what information you are basing it on. What is so hard about accepting that on average Americans and Australians pollute more than other countries (at the moment, not 100 years ago when no-one really understood what damage they were doing)? I'm not 'accusing' the average American of anything, just stating that it would be hard to imagine them being able to cut back on pollution anytime soon. Though of course, I would love to see it happen and I commend anyone who makes that personal effort.

I personally try to catch public transport as much as possible, buy only 100% green electricity and make sure I use premium unleaded petrol in my car to be as clean as possible (without converting to LPG that is). But I don't do it because I somehow think that I might be supporting terrorists if I use oil (heck, for all I know, there might be some terrorists with shares in the windmill sector). I do it because I want to breath clean air and I want my children to enjoy the same clean air.