Posted on 11/28/2007 9:56:31 AM PST by cogitator
A guy I know formed a co-op which uses waste olive oil from a bottling plant, which has to drain hundreds of gallons of oil out of its pipes every time the bottling source changes, and were able to make a finished product for about 60 cents a gallon.
That would be too easy, and we have collectively "given up" on the obvious. Nuclear is clearly the easiest long-term solution to a political disaster, ongoing for 35 years now.
No sane person can argue that Japan, Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland and France are ecological wastelands... yet they are ranked* 15, 3, 7, 9, 2 in percentage of total energy production in the world. The U.S. is #19, in spite of producing by far, the most nuclear energy **.
What's wrong with this picture?
I was informed that one of the reasons we don’t drill in the US is the cost of drilling here is much greater ( labor costs) than overseas. It seems like it is the unions who are playing a negative role in this development.
On a domestic basis, a tariff on imported oil could fix that problem, (much as Europe does with agriculture imports). The problem would then be international competitiveness or the domestic energy intensive industries.
Close. It has slightly less energy content per gallon and starts to turn into unpumpable wax at 40 deg. F (per my crude experiments last winter - there could be minor viscosity differences at higher temps). There are some warranty issues that the manufacturers would have to address.
Actually the best way to have energy victory is to directly convert matter to energy.
Bingo. If you look at shale and tar sands, of which between Canada and the Green River Basin (Colorado) we have several times the rest of the worlds known oil reserves. Infrastructure to get to it is damned expensive. Oil produced from either will cost in the region in the $25 to $28 a barrel.
We should place a floor price on imported oil at $35 a barrel. It would not apply if Cost, Insurance and Freight per barrel in NOLA exceeded $35 bucks a barrel. Suppose Venezuelan landed oil were $30 a barrel, there would be a $5 tariff, guaranteeing local production makes a profit. This would crush Opec's power completely. Domestic production from these sources wont happen when Saudi has a cost at the well head less than $5 a barrel, and Venezuela somewhere around $17 at the well head, and the billions in sunk cost it would take to make the shale and tar sand viable.
I would require the tariff be directly applied dollar for dollar to reducing the tax on the refined gasoline, and other refined products. In this way, we avoid the steel tariff fiasco, and keep domestic energy costs down, and keep us economically competitive (Less market distortion).
-—no—it is idiotic environmental restrictions. This is one that can’t be blamed on unions-—
See my post #27. I have a plan to partially fix the market distortion of a floor price tariff.
;-) Need someone to run the math to see what my idea would mean at diff prices and domestic/import ratios.
(I would exempt Canadian oil from the tariff floor)
There is another common thread in those countries... little or no domestic coal deposites.
No way, I could never endorse such a gross violation of individual rights by telling producers what they can and cannot make.
Good idea. I kind of like that solution. I wonder if the numbers do work.
THat’s fine, but we still need to drill our own oil.
That’ll never happen. The stupid little tree huggers trying to play God will never let it. They really can’t think much past tree bark - oh, by the way, they really did a good job in CA - no touchie the forests - watchie CA burn. Smart like rocks.
How about let’s build a bunch of nuclear plants and also drill for our own oil? ANWR and 85% of our coastline is off-limits.We should be doing all these things, bio-fuels, windmills, solar power technology... all of it. But first and foremost is nuclear power and drilling the oil we already have. Not to do so is suicide.
but can you convert an older car to be flex fuel? Say a 1960’s era muscle car?
If that is the case then give a triple the cost tax credit for converting over OLDER cars. IF it is a matter of national security, then the states need to tighted their belts.
I have not read this book either but replacing a substantial portion of the world's petroleum-based liquid fuels with alcohol would require a correspondingly large redirection of resources including land, water, and labor. This would affect the price and availability of many critical goods including beverage alcohol and meat. It was not long ago that oil traded at $50/bbl. and the terrorists were plenty well-funded at the time. This article does not explain how much we would have to sacrifice to get back to that situation and it overstates how much of a hardship this would present to our enemies. I still say 1) drain Arabia first, 2) amass wealth and military strength as efficiently as possible, 3) remorselessly destroy all who threaten us, 4) party down like American rock stars. It's what brought us safe this far, and it will lead us on.
Whatever the reason, the point is that this alternative is viable and reasonable whether we feel forced to adopt it or simply choose to (while arguing other alternatives).
I suspect given the comparatively higher taxes on oil in most other countries, it works reasonably well as long as oil is over $20 bucks a barrel. I would apply the tax offset tariff to oil, coal liquification (like South Africa’s Sasol program) but not ethanol made from corn. Only non-corn based ethanol should be covered. Corn based ethanol is idiotic. It distorts markets.
Over half the active drill rigs in the world are operating in the US. They are just restricted from some of our most promising areas of new exploration/production.
WORLDWIDE RIG COUNT, BAKER HUGHES
http://www.bakerhughes.com/investor/rig/excel/Worldwide_10-07.xls
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.