Curse

Rahl · Sep 03, 2005, 02:02 AM // 02:02

Yea, my parents are cutting back on the pleasures now to save for gas

TGgold · Sep 03, 2005, 02:07 AM // 02:07

Price caps will fail as coist increases. Simple answer: conserve gas, carpool, and wait it out.

Hopefully prices will go down now that the EPA has reduced restrictions on how much refiners can make per day, and more crude oil has been tapped. We'll have to see.

Old Dood · Sep 03, 2005, 02:15 AM // 02:15

What I like about our Governor placing price caps during this "crisis" is it lets people breath and step back for a moment. It will stop any price gouging from the local gas stations. It is by no means any kind of a real fix. It is not perfect...but at least she did something!!

What annoys me about how fast prices goes up is what about the gas that is already paid for. The gas in the ground, on the trucks, etc. Why is that gas all of a sudden more expensive? Also what about all those people in the southern region that are NOT using any gas? That has to count for something.

Edge Martinez · Sep 03, 2005, 02:39 AM // 02:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by TGgold

Simple answer: conserve gas, carpool, and wait it out.

Man, easier said than done. Back home in NYC my mom had to force me to get my drivers license. I took the train everywhere. Now I'm in my 30's and living in NC, a place with the shoddiest public transportation system ever, and I have to drive 50 miles to work and from work.

I believe in saving the earth and all that goodly stuff. I accept the fact that my forefathers got the pleasure of burning rubber in a Barracuda or Chevelle. I accept the fact that they got to experience true luxury in an era when Cadillacs were bigger than Kias. I accept the fact that I have to save the atmosphere because the people before me screwed it up. I even accept taxes, firearms regulations and speed limits, all things that infringe upon our rights which technically is illegal.

I don't accept $48 to fill up a Suzuki Aerio. Holy shit! Look up that car on the internet... it's TINY! And now all my tree hugging friends are calling me irresponsible for getting the AWD model which gets 2 miles less per gallon. If I'm a gas hog for driving a Suzuki Aerio, I think the world has officially gone crazy. The next step down for me would be a donkey ... or a Buell Blast, but the donkey is more reliable.

Jeez... I remember in college when pocket change meant you could drive up and down the beach all day.

TGgold · Sep 03, 2005, 02:43 AM // 02:43

Well, find a friend. I live about 40 miles from my school, and I have no job during the school year. And RI doesn't have the best transport out where i live either : )

AtomicMew · Sep 03, 2005, 03:01 AM // 03:01

I really have no sympathy for those complaining about gas prices. Environmentalists have seen this coming for decades. But instead of heeding the warnings, people simply chose conveinence over forethought. Complacent to drive everywhere in their gas guzzlers, even when far more efficient means of transportation were available. Complacent on taxing our future for conveinence's sake. Really sad. Even if Katrina had not hit the coast, this crisis could still not have been averted. It just would have occured sometime in the future, instead. Only then, people would have found some OTHER scape-goat, again, for conveinence's sake.

Those of you who think that technology and alternative energy will be able to solve this world's reliance on fossil fuel - will never be able to truly understand why this problem came about in the first place. Even though it is really very, very simple: poor design. The entire infrastructure of the country, and much of the world is terribly inefficient. No, I don't have the answer - it is not my job to. It is the consumer's.

Ever since the industrial revolution, the consumer has allowed industries to externalize much of their production cost onto the rest of the world - in the form of pollution and resource raiding. The company that did this best was generally the most prosperous. Why? Because by externalzing their cost, they could provide the lowest dollar amount product per quality. And again, the consumer has almost always chosen the conveinent path. That is how inefficient infrastructure has come about. Because in the end, efficient infrastructure loses. That is why cars are so much more prolific than any form of mass transportation. "Why take the train when I can buy my OWN transportation device! $1 a gallon? Pfft, that's nothing!"

In the end, you reap what you sow. And that is the ultimate truth. This crisis is no one's fault but humanity's. At MOST, drilling ANWAR will only buy us time.

Galatea · Sep 03, 2005, 05:58 AM // 05:58

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168305,00.html

this isn't where i live, but i saw this on a news site..

Prices at a gas station in Stockbridge, Ga.

over where i'm at, it's $3.25/gallon

Ultimate_Gaara · Sep 03, 2005, 07:53 AM // 07:53

Ours was $1.07/L earlyer tonight.. so in gallons that is.. um a lot

Old Dood · Sep 03, 2005, 01:15 PM // 13:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Galatea

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,168305,00.html

this isn't where i live, but i saw this on a news site..

Prices at a gas station in Stockbridge, Ga.

over where i'm at, it's $3.25/gallon

That is a simple and total rip off. Michigan is at the "end" of the pipeline and we haven't had any of those yet. We have had some gougers but not that high. What that station owner is doing is just taking total advantage of the so called crisis. To me that is no different then the Looters in New Orleans.

I remember back in 1974 when we had our "Oil Crisis" prices went up, but not to this degree. We had problems finding gas stations that had gas. That was the bigger crisis.

I am real thankful we never bought a SUV or a Truck of any kind. (They are real popular here in Michigan) We own two Buicks with the 3.8 liter engines. They are six cylinders, however I get 30mpg/Hwy with them. Not bad. Better then under 20mpg.

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 03, 2005, 03:59 PM // 15:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by traversc

I really have no sympathy for those complaining about gas prices. Environmentalists have seen this coming for decades. But instead of heeding the warnings, people simply chose conveinence over forethought. Complacent to drive everywhere in their gas guzzlers, even when far more efficient means of transportation were available. Complacent on taxing our future for conveinence's sake. Really sad. Even if Katrina had not hit the coast, this crisis could still not have been averted. It just would have occured sometime in the future, instead. Only then, people would have found some OTHER scape-goat, again, for conveinence's sake.

Those of you who think that technology and alternative energy will be able to solve this world's reliance on fossil fuel - will never be able to truly understand why this problem came about in the first place. Even though it is really very, very simple: poor design. The entire infrastructure of the country, and much of the world is terribly inefficient. No, I don't have the answer - it is not my job to. It is the consumer's.

Ever since the industrial revolution, the consumer has allowed industries to externalize much of their production cost onto the rest of the world - in the form of pollution and resource raiding. The company that did this best was generally the most prosperous. Why? Because by externalzing their cost, they could provide the lowest dollar amount product per quality. And again, the consumer has almost always chosen the conveinent path. That is how inefficient infrastructure has come about. Because in the end, efficient infrastructure loses. That is why cars are so much more prolific than any form of mass transportation. "Why take the train when I can buy my OWN transportation device! $1 a gallon? Pfft, that's nothing!"

In the end, you reap what you sow. And that is the ultimate truth. This crisis is no one's fault but humanity's. At MOST, drilling ANWAR will only buy us time.

This is more a matter of economics than environmentalism. Higher prices hardly defines a fuel crisis.

As a matter of fact, so called, environmentalists are part of the problem. Using ill-science to exploit the public sentiment ("big bad corporations" versus the poor little spotted owl, for example), these organizations have confounded any effort to extract our native resources. They want to shut down the Alaskan Pipeline, ban offshore drilling and take away Nuclear Power. And people wonder why we depend so much on foreign imports.

Alternative sources? FYI - that's always been in development in parallel with our use of fossil fuels. Here in California we have the Altemont Pass - whole arrays of wind-generators across vast stretches of land. Even then they provide less than 1% of energy. Now there's a movement to shut them down from environmentalists who claim that many birds are being killed when they fly into these windmill blades!

All because of environmentalists California rushed into the use of MTBE as a fuel additive in order to support cleaner emissions. Lo and behold, MTBE is a carcinogen that has leached into the soil of water reserviors. South Lake Tahoe lost a third of its drinking water wells due to it.

Hey, give us back our nuclear power. The construction of new nuclear power facilities has been frozen for many years. It sounds un-PC, but do the research - modern nuclear power is clean, efficient and safe.

Environmentalists are good at pointing out obvious problems, running expensive ad-campaigns, for making class-action lawsuits and for making tax-free money as NPOs. That's all.

When it comes to finding and researching solutions - environmentalists are nowhere to be found.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

dansamy · Sep 03, 2005, 04:53 PM // 16:53

I just paid $3.099/gal. Over $0.60/gal higher than pre-storm prices. It's gouging. Plain and simple. It didn't jump to twice the price (that GA station charging $6/gal) overnight. The damaged pipelines and refineries will affect gas prices AFTER the current supply is depleted. We're still running on what's already been transported inland from the Gulf. There is no reason for it to be 2-3x the cost.

AtomicMew · Sep 03, 2005, 08:07 PM // 20:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

Environmentalists suck because they can't solve a problem that has largely been ignored by the rest of humanity for decades. But I think I'll scapegoat them anyway, because it's conveinent.

Prime example of the type of person I am talking about. Let me quote myself since the above poster obviously missed it the first time around.

Quote:

Those of you who think that technology and alternative energy will be able to solve this world's reliance on fossil fuel - will never be able to truly understand why this problem came about in the first place.

And in Xue Yi Liang's case, not only does he not address the issue, but he harps on a different issue which I just so happen to agree with him on: alternative energy (solar, wind and even nuclear) is very much needed in a world with depleted natural resources.

However, drilling more oil to fuel an inefficient and ultimately doomed infrastructure is not a solution. Don't kid yourself, this is a crisis of global proportions. It is very much a reason for the strife in the Middle East, which is home to the largest operational oil reserves in the world. I'll admit the crisis is very hard to see because it is the first of its kind in the history of not only humanity, but of the entire planet. All our lives we've had it easy: access to massive amounts of cheap energy. This will change within our lifetimes.

Also one last thing that people sometimes forget: Many vital chemicals are based on petroleum: plastics, fertilizers, pesticides and even some medical drugs. You'd be surprised how little would be left if you strolled down the pharmaceutical aisle and took off everything that was synthesized using petroleum. Why are we burning this stuff so freely when it obviously has better uses?

Xue Yi Liang · Sep 03, 2005, 08:34 PM // 20:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by traversc

Prime example of the type of person I am talking about. Let me quote myself since the above poster obviously missed it the first time around.
And in Xue Yi Liang's case, not only does he not address the issue, but he harps on a different issue which I just so happen to agree with him on: alternative energy (solar, wind and even nuclear) is very much needed in a world with depleted natural resources.

However, drilling more oil to fuel an inefficient and ultimately doomed infrastructure is not a solution. Don't kid yourself, this is a crisis of global proportions. It is very much a reason for the strife in the Middle East, which is home to the largest operational oil reserves in the world. I'll admit the crisis is very hard to see because it is the first of its kind in the history of not only humanity, but of the entire planet. All our lives we've had it easy: access to massive amounts of cheap energy. This will change within our lifetimes.

Also one last thing that people sometimes forget: Many vital chemicals are based on petroleum: plastics, fertilizers, pesticides and even some medical drugs. You'd be surprised how little would be left if you strolled down the pharmaceutical aisle and took off everything that was synthesized using petroleum. Why are we burning this stuff so freely when it obviously has better uses?

#1. When you misquote me in your response you're only demonstrating your inability to conduct a constructive discourse. I never said "Environmentalists suck because they can't solve a problem that has largely been ignored by the rest of humanity for decades. But I think I'll scapegoat them anyway, because it's conveinent.." That's entirely formed from your subjective inference. So please try to act like an adult if you're trying to make a point.

#2. My criticism of "environmentalists" is merely a response to your generalization that "Environmentalists have seen this coming for decades." Please spare us your "holier than thou" attitude. In truth the population of "environmentalists" is a heterogeneous population - some of whom have realistic and constructive contributions to their cause. I agree with them. My own generalized criticism of "them" is only a response to your use - but, I admit, the sarcasm is not immediately apparent.

#3. I am critical of, so called, environmentalists that confound our ability to develop Nuclear Power and even wind-power. All I'm saying is that "environmentalists" don't have the answers. Often they are part of the problem. Again this is in response to your statement that "Environmentalists have seen this coming for decades."

#4. When you say, "Don't kid yourself, this is a crisis of global proportions...... it is the first of its kind in the history of not only humanity, but of the entire planet." you're very wrong. We're not in a crisis. If you were around during Jimmy Carter's administration it was much worse then. The fact is, the sky is not falling. This is nothing. Anybody who's in a panic over the state of oil prices now really hasn't been around long enough to know that it's not a reflection of dwindling resources. The changing price is a function of world economics - not ecological imbalance.

#5. In case it isn't obvious, my initial post was a statement against your characterization of "environmentalists." In that respect your statement on how I've "failed to address the issue" is entirely irrelevant.

Edge Martinez · Sep 03, 2005, 08:45 PM // 20:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Warrior Dood

We own two Buicks with the 3.8 liter engines. They are six cylinders, however I get 30mpg/Hwy with them. Not bad. Better then under 20mpg.

Best cars ever made have those 3.8 liter engines in them and they all get awesome gas mileage and have good power. 200,000 miles means that they're broken in. Did GM expand on this great idea? No. Have they remained loyal to another relatively efficent engine in the 4.3 liter? No. What have they done? Made BIGGER trucks and SUV's and then offset the horribly inefficient bigger engines with the Aveo and the Cobalt.

My family has been a GM family for life, but since they ditched the Celebrity, a big car with an awesome 4 cylinder engine, and since they ditched the S-10 to make the BIGGER Colorado, we've all switched to economical Japanese cars. I don't understand why vehicles are getting bigger while the oil supply gets smaller.

AtomicMew · Sep 03, 2005, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xue Yi Liang

#1. When you misquote me in your response you're only demonstrating your inability to conduct a constructive discourse. I never said "Environmentalists suck because they can't solve a problem that has largely been ignored by the rest of humanity for decades. But I think I'll scapegoat them anyway, because it's conveinent.." That's entirely formed from your subjective inference. So please try to act like an adult if you're trying to make a point.

of course it is my interpretation of your response. Did I ever claim otherwise? If I wanted to misquote you, I wouldn't have done it in such a completely obvious way. Even though it was completely obvious, "I admit - the sarcasm is not immediately apparent."

#2
Frankly, attitude is irrelevant. If you're right, you're right, regardless of the amount of badassitude. And also frankly, most environmentalists are very nice people - they are just passionate about their cause.

#3.
As I have already said, I agree. Alternative energy is a must.
However, there is some confusion here. There are environmentalists and then there are environmentalists. I.e., there are environmentalists who care more for the aesthetics of nature, in seeing that large advertisements aren't placed on roadsides all over the place, or rioting against wind mills because they're "ugly", and other truly stupid issues like that.
Then there are environmentalists who see the bigger issue such as sustainability, clean water, deforestization, the excessiveness and waste of society, etc. It should have been immediately clear that my post was coming from the point of view of the second group.

Quote:

#4. When you say, "Don't kid yourself, this is a crisis of global proportions...... it is the first of its kind in the history of not only humanity, but of the entire planet." you're very wrong. We're not in a crisis. If you were around during Jimmy Carter's administration it was much worse then. The fact is, the sky is not falling. This is nothing. Anybody who's in a panic over the state of oil prices now really hasn't been around long enough to know that it's not a reflection of dwindling resources. The changing price is a function of world economics - not ecological imbalance.

You are right in a sense, but also very wrong. The change in prices is not a function of the fluctuations of world economics, because economics assumes sustained, infinite growth. The change in price is due to scarcity. It's true that if Katrina had not happened, the price of gas would not have spiked so drastically. But this is a point I had conceeded in my first post. And it is only perhaps a symptom of the larger problem. Even if the government somehow managed to cap the price of gas to the very last drop, it still would not change the fact that it would be gone. Petroleum reserves are dwindling. At the current rate, it will most likely be gone within our lifetimes. Nothing can change that.

Quote:

#5. In case it isn't obvious, my initial post was a statement against your characterization of "environmentalists." In that respect your statement on how I've "failed to address the issue" is entirely irrelevant.

It was very obvious. Somehow, you think that because there are discrepencies in the belief between environmentalists, that it is justification to hate them, or to ignore a very simple, logical message. But let me tell you, there are disagreements in any given group: republicans, liberals, family, and even monkeys. It is preposterous to assume perfection or unanimity of anyone. Also see point 3 and 2.

Old Dood · Sep 04, 2005, 02:26 AM // 02:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge Martinez

Best cars ever made have those 3.8 liter engines in them and they all get awesome gas mileage and have good power. 200,000 miles means that they're broken in.

Yes the 3.8 liter engine has been around since the 1960's. (I can't remember the cubic inch though) My 1994 Lesabre Limited has 186000 miles on it and is still running pretty good. My 2000 Park Avenue has 59000 miles on it and it is still a very nice ride. If you take care of an engine by faithfully changing the oil and other fluids it will last a long time. I love the "Big Boat Feel" in a car. I want to float over railroad tracks and the like. Buicks also have a Romulan Cloaking Device installed in them...I never get pulled over by a police officer.

Many times I have blown right by a Trooper and he will pull over the guy near me.

You are correct in saying about the power. When I need to pass someone I have the horse power to do it. We owned one little 4 cylinder Datsun 210 once. Great gas milage, but I can not stand the Buzz Bomb sound coming from those little engines. Also 4 cylinders do not last as long as bigger block engines.

UberRusty · Sep 04, 2005, 02:38 AM // 02:38

Good thing my bicycle is human-gas powered.

Spartan2 · Sep 04, 2005, 05:03 AM // 05:03

I'd have to side with Xue Yi Liang on this one. Traversc, you pretty much come out of left field with a "holier than thou" viewpoint to talk down to us "whiners" about how we shouldn't complain about how we shouldn't complain about gas prices.

The reality is that most people cannot afford alternatively fueled vehicles and their fuel source; we just simply cannot drop $30,000+ to get the more environmentally friendly mode of transportation.

Middle-class people will go with what is readibly available, proven to work, and will get them to where they need to go. Oil-based gas and vehicles that run on this are what we will buy because they are currently much cheaper than the alternative.

I know that we are diminishing our supply of oil because any fixed amount of a resource will decrease as it is used, but prices should not spike when the gas that has already been delivered has been payed for by the gas station. They are gouging a resource all in the name of profit. Yes, the oil companies lost product in Louisianna. Yes, the supply will diminish forthright after Katrina came through because of the product turn-out rate diminishing immensely, but the gas stations have already filled up their huge gas tanks and payed for their shipments; they shouldn't raise prices on a commodity they have payed for.

Environmentally friendly is the way to go but not at the whim of fools. We will not be running out of oil anytime soon; this is many decades away. The thing that we should be worried about is running out of easily accessable oil. When the world runs out of this, oil prices will shoot through the roof as the demand far exceeds the supply, and by supply, I mean product turn-out rate.

It actually isn't very obvious, Traversc. I find "doomsday soothesayers" to be a very easy goup to irritate because they threaten everyone with ther "End of the World" ramblings in hope of changing things to favor their views. I may just even irritate one to the point of flameworthiness.

Well, at least I have my
.
I think I am well prepared.

Eh, left out the White +20%. Too tired to fix now. I'll just leave it as is. Paintshop is boring.

dansamy · Sep 04, 2005, 05:18 AM // 05:18

Spartan, I don't think that's enough damage. You need that extra 2% to kill off those REALLY pesky trolls. Also, the extra 20% from customization would be helpful too. That would be 40% extra damage! Argh! I just noticed your Trollslayer is not even max dmg. Surely you won't be able to kill a troll with only a 6-27?!?!? I think you need to buy a better Troll slaying weapon. I have some nice pieces for sale...............

Arturo02 · Sep 04, 2005, 05:30 AM // 05:30

there won't be a day when there is no oil. By that I don't mean I think the current level of supply will continue, just that every fuel source we have used as humans still exists and is in use in some way.

People still use wood, coal, and heck even things like peet. Just that oil won't be so widely used, it won't be so popular. But people will still be using it and pumping it from the ground.