Ron, I have some news for you. Oil companies don’t set the price of gas. If they did, we would have been paying $3.50 for a gallon of gas 15 years ago and we would be paying $5 per gallon now. Free markets set the price of gas based on supply and demand. The reason you pay $3.50 a gallon is that demand has increased and supply has not kept up with demand. Inflation, or the devaluation of the dollar in other words, has also led to higher gas prices. Ending tax cuts for oil companies won’t bring gas prices down, but it won’t make them higher either, and it is the right thing to do.
Fuel economy standards and ethanol use are independent goals. Yes, you get fewer miles per gallon from E-85 than gas, and ethanol production has made inflation worse, but that doesn’t make those two goals an oxymoron. Bush’s “Clear Skies Initiative” is an oxymoron because it didn’t make the skies clear or the air clean. Bush’s “Healthy Forests Initiative” is an oxymoron because it doesn’t make forests healthy. “Operation Iraqi Freedom” is an oxymoron because Iraqis don’t have any more freedom now than they had before Bush invaded. With all of the dead Iraqi civilians, it should be called “Operation Iraqi Death.” Now do you understand what “oxymoron” means?
The price of petroleum should stimulate interest in the Fischer-Tropsch process. That was used by the Germans during WW2 to make fuel from coal for their war machines. The US has plenty of coal.
Craig, if I caught the news correctly, the Bush government is going to “temporarily” roll back fuel taxes to help consumers during these difficult economic times. That with the $600 handouts is supposed to help the economy.
It looks lkie we are heading for the perfect economic storm; inflation, fewer jobs, a collapsing housing market, high energy and food prices, and no ability to do anything about global warming, or oil import substitution.
The ethanol and bio-diesel subsidies are now being renounced worldwide, and the UN Secretary General, faced with famine in many countries, has not breathed a word about Kyoto and Global Warming lately.
Clinton and McCain are now both advocating a suspension of the 18 cents per gallon federal fuel tax this summer. Unfortunately, that will only lead to an increase in demand that will make the price increase by at least 18 cents, if not more. The only answer to the fuel crisis is the same answer we found in the 1970s, decreased demand. Using less fuel is the only answer.
It strikes me as funny that people act as though they have a right to cheap fuel. Cheap fuel has given us freedom that our founding fathers never even pondered, and now that it isn’t so cheap, some of us are acting like spoiled children.
One gallon of fuel will move a 3,000 pound car at least 30 miles. That is a lot of energy. Even if it cost $5 a gallon, it is one heck of a bargain.
This is an a good deal for corn growers and ethanol manufacturers only. The growers get higher prices and still retain all subsidies. Corn has the highest government subsidies of all food stocks. Politicians anxious to please the home crowd where corn and now ethanol distillation are money-makers are all for it. I can’t say I blame them. It is their job to push their constituencies. But everyone else should know better.
Without a doubt. Do we really expect EVs to replace diesel powered trucks and heavy duty equipment. In our dreams. We are stuck with oil for transportation for the forseeable future. The EVs take a little of the pressure off if we can convince commuters of alternatives.
As a former truck driver, I will say that using trucks to deliver goods is often lazy. Train transport is much more efficient, but it takes a little longer and requires more planning. Shipping non-perishable freight from trucks to train could use a lot less oil. Do you know how many unnecessary miles I was asked to drive as a company driver? I was sent to pick up a damaged trailer, only to discover that it had a broken frame and was unsafe for the road. Another time, I was sent to pick up an order that had been cancelled. I hauled many loads, like giant rolls of paper, that I delivered earlier than they were needed. Canned goods and Gatorade won’t spoil if they are delivered by rail. Hire truck drivers to haul goods to the rail yard. Hire other drivers to pick them up at another rail yard. Winn Dixie does this and they are able to make it work. Yet other companies don’t bother. You can do this with any non-perishable goods. Shipping goods by truck is expensive and wasteful, unless they are perishable. Only air freight is more expensive. Do we need non-perishable goods to be shipped that quickly? Not if we plan ahead like we should. I don’t expect EVs to replace diesel power trucks. I expect us to make reasonable accomodations to conserve fuel, and that isn’t that hard.
It depends on how well the batteries are taken care of. With Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries, they should be charged after each use. If you take proper care of them, they have a cycle life of up to 2000 cycles. The price of lithium batteries keeps coming down and the price of lead batteries keeps going up. Hopefully lithium batteries will eventually become equal in price or even cheaper then SLA batteries. If you factor in the cycle life of LFP batteries it can be argued that LFP batteries are already cheaper per use than SLA batteries.*
I think it’s very viable solution. There hasn’t been much technology put into this in decades. I believe we can find a GREEN solution to converting coal to gas or diesel AND have cars the can burn it cleanly too. It may not be next year…but I believe it can be done before I die.
It’s probably feasible, but not at anyplace near $120/barrel. These technologies have been around for decades (coal gasification was the flavor of the month for a while in the late 80s), but they are simply not cost effective at current prices. Maybe when the price of crude doubles they will become more attractive. Understand that this is an economic/political problem, not a technical problem; we use oil because it is a cheap, high density, portable energy source.