So I'm thinking, who is really paying for the fuel prices. I mean not the oil companies they are making billions. Let's take a look.
First we pay at the pump. We know here in Ca. the price of gas is over $3.00 a gallon. But that's not all we are paying for.
Airlines have a fuel surcharge due to the high fuel prices. Now mind you they don't remove that as prices lower. Again we pay.
Hotels also have the same type of charge. Again we pay.
Wonder how long before prices for everyday food items have the same charge?
So we are paying for the oil companies greed.
I wish Bush would do something but the only answer I really heard from him so far is drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Preserve which won't change a thing.
7 comments:
Okay, let's see:
Left-wingers want every company in America to provide for their employees:
-Good "Living" wages
-Good health benefits
-Day Care
-Good Retirement benefits
Right-wingers want every company in America to:
-Provide nice dividends to their stockholders
-Provide lots of jobs
-Provide a large tax-paying base
Congratulations to the oil companies of America! They are the best example of how businesses should perform. They provide great service and lower prices than anywhere else in the world. Every other company should strive to be more like them.
Yet, they are reviled by the very people who benefit most from their success. It's disgusting.
Problem is Robert (mind you I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you) is there is really nothing that can be done. No offense though to what you are saying about other countries in the world but we don't live there, we live here. The Republicans are using this to their advantage by saying we need to drill in ANWR (something I know you have said you are against) and instead of any alternatives being offered by either party we are probably going to get that disaster waiting to happen.
There's plenty of talk about alternative fuels. You seem to think this needs to be spearheaded by the Federal Government. I don't. It's not their job.
When you realize how many millions of gallons of fuel are consumed each day, you realize more and more how complicated this really is.
To point out a couple of things about alternatives.
Hybrid Cars This isn't a bad start but their benefits are overrated. They only get the really good gas mileage if you do a lot of city driving. If you do a lot of city driving, you will need more frequent brake repairs and the cost-benefit goes down. Also, the batteries in these vehicles only last 3-5 years. This is going to become an issue as Prius and Insight owners, who bought their cars 3 years ago are going to have to deal with the dead battery issue. These batteries are very expensive ($2000 or so I hear) and they are incredibly toxic so disposing of them will be an environmental headache.
Ethanol This idea sounds great, doesn't it? Fuel from corn or soy products. The problem here that hardly anybody in the news wants to talk about, is that it would take many acres of prime farmland just to support just 1 vehicle in 1 year. Corn, especially, requires large amounts of re-conditioning of the soil per crop. The cost and energy required to convert to ethanol on a large-scale basis would be unbelievably astronomical.
Bio-Diesel See 'Ethanol' above.
Hydrogen Fuel Cels This is probably the most promising technology. The technology required is extremely difficult. The problem is that hydrogen can't be acquired very easily. Hydrogen is an element that you don't find by itself on Earth. It has to be derived from water, minerals, or of course, oil. In fact, the irony is that the best way to get hydrogen is from oil. Of course, there's enormous abundances of free hydrogen in space. Enough to last humankind until the universe collapses. Now if we can only keep our space program going.
And not only that but I hear countries like Brazil found a way to have Sugar Fuel I hear and in Europe they are converting flowers to fuel. The problem is Bush doesn't want it. The Sentate doesn't want it. Congress doesn't want it. (I'm talking both parties) so nothing will be done. The one thing Bush said in the State of the Union I agreed with saying we need to end our dependency on foreign oil his first act he did was fire scientists who were working on that.
In both Brazil and Europe, the per-capita vehicle usage is much, much less than in the United States. Even in those places, though, only a portion of their fuel is bio-fuel and that is because gasoline is $10 a gallon there. I don't think you're understanding me, Erik. Bio-fuels are not an overall solution unless the technology can be substantially advanced.
But again we need answers and solutions. I'm throwing things out there as are you but no one of consequence is offering anything but "we need to drill in the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve"
Robert a side question the car you got is it a hybrid? And if not why did you not get one?
And for the record I currently do not have a hybrid BUT when I get my next car I will get one.
No, it's not a hybrid. At this point, I don't trust their longevity. I don't like the idea of two motors in one car. That increases the likelihood of something going wrong by at least, a factor of 3. (Engine has problem, electric motor has problem, mechanics that link the two has problem).
As I stated in my post above, hybrids are overrated. They cause as much pollution as non-hybrids, their cost benefit is very questionable, and you'll have to deal with a large, very expensive dead battery sooner or later.
Post a Comment