Record profits and soaring gas prices, I dont get it

[Lusiphur]

Originally Posted by Cathan

I like the ideas of the solar panels but that's a lot of land to give up. It's not a big deal right now but in the future all the land we use for solar panel fields is going to be a big deal. I think if we could just put those on the roofs of every house it would be more practical than fields of those things. I think everyone's house being on a power grid and being a source of energy to meet our energy needs sounds pretty cool.

Actually one of the reasons for the current global food shortage issues is the amount of arable land that has been cleared for developement into housing. More people = less land available to grow food (or crops to turn into ethanol).

Let me try this another way. Shops in the US have introduced rationing on rice. It's not just happening in the third world slums. It's affecting everyone.

When our 'glorious leader' (Gordon Brown) comes out and flat out tells Shell and BP they need to invest in more exploration and fuel alternatives then you know things are getting bad. The man practically has corporate sponsorship.

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

Hence the need to sustainable housing developments that utilize vertical living instead of horizontal living. The same can be said eventually about growing food - hopefully we'll develop a way to grow food in much the same manner.

Regardless, this issue is about gas companies raising their prices to keep their profits in line with inflation, yet the wages in America not keeping pace, thereby causing "prices to go up" and impact the average American (and apparently, people all over the world.)

[Cathan]

Originally Posted by TOOL

Do you know which other Fascist thought that thoughts could get trapped in your head like a bottle?

Hitler did.



That goddless hippie son of a bitch also designed the Volkswagen that you spineless tree huggers want MY AMERICAN government to buy for every nigger sucking on Uncle Sam's welfare tit.

Wow, even by NC standards that's pretty racist... Hell even people I know that are racist would blush at that statement.

[spronk]

fwiw Brazil (and India and others) ethanol is based on sugar cane, which has a much, much higher efficiency rating than corn ethanol, which the US uses. Corn ethanol must first be converted to sugar and then alcohol, whereas obviously sugarcane goes straight to alcohol. It costs about 30% more to convert corn to ethanol than sugarcane. Its also much cheaper to farm sugarcane than corn, since its a more efficient plant wrt to sunlight and water.

The US has a 54 cent sugarcane tariff, lobbied by the sugar industry in the USA because they do not want any competition for the high fructose corn syrup which enriches our children. So none of the ethanol you can buy is from Brazil.

Good capitalist system we got, right - the shittier product is what we subsidize, meanwhile the cheaper fuel we block from import. Some people found a loophole, they blend a tiny amount of corn ethanol with massive amounts of sugarcane ethanol at US ports, but its immediately shipped off to Europe or Japan since its worth more there (by doing the blending they get the ethanol tax subsidy that the ethanol farmers insisted upon). Go free market!

The US is not really a free market anymore in most of our basic commodoties, the lobbies with the most money dictate our government policies to the detriment of the people.

[Cathan]

Originally Posted by GrobbeeTrull2.0

Hence the need to sustainable housing developments that utilize vertical living instead of horizontal living. The same can be said eventually about growing food - hopefully we'll develop a way to grow food in much the same manner.

Regardless, this issue is about gas companies raising their prices to keep their profits in line with inflation, yet the wages in America not keeping pace, thereby causing "prices to go up" and impact the average American (and apparently, people all over the world.)

I'm gonna go on record and say fuck vertical living. My goal is to own a hundred acres or so all to myself with a huge house that I design/build myself and keep all of it in my family for hundreds of years.

I hate living adjacent to other people because I hate when I hear them and I can't stand hearing turn down your radio. I want to live in a house or nothing.

I like having space around my house so I can mow my yard for a few hours when I retire each week, have a field I grow my own vegetables in, some fruit trees, dogwoods all over the place...

Maybe in a few hundred years we'll run out of land to put houses on but for now I want my dream place to grow old in and die happy some day on my own land in my own house.

[Phelps McManus]

Originally Posted by Tea on tuesday

American automotives have dramatically increased in efficiency throughout the years. Most of that efficiency has gone towards gadgets and performance though. It's not that we can't; it's that the American consumer does not want it---or more correctly does want it but not at the sacrifice of the aforementioned performance gains.

Bah! You beat me to the punch. For further ridicule of Salacious's comparison:

The Model T had a whopping 20 HP engine that got 13-21 MPG (not 25 mpg). It also ran on a 10 gallon tank, giving it an effective range of under 200 miles.

So, you want to compare that to cars today, which have ranges of 300-400miles, 5-20xthe horsepower, A/C, various electronics, etc? Not to mention how the US thrives on big SUVs, minivans, and pick-ups. Engine efficiency has come a long way since the Model T.

Similarly, if you want to compare our MPG efficiency with the rest of the modern world, look at car and engine sizes. Europeans have historically been taxed directly on engine size. More recently, this has changed to CO2 emission levels. Either way, they have more incentive than Americans to buy smaller, more efficient cars. Hence, the MPG disparity.

[Phelps McManus]

Originally Posted by Cathan

Some of those poor countries overseas are calling our use of ethanol an outrage and crime against humanity because the price of grain is skyrocketing so we can put fuel in our cars made with more ethanol and they aren't eating anymore.

I wonder what ethanol tastes like...

I like the ideas of the solar panels but that's a lot of land to give up. It's not a big deal right now but in the future all the land we use for solar panel fields is going to be a big deal. I think if we could just put those on the roofs of every house it would be more practical than fields of those things. I think everyone's house being on a power grid and being a source of energy to meet our energy needs sounds pretty cool.

How are solar panels going to get me to work and/or the beach?

[dak]

I wonder what ethanol tastes like...

Everclear

How are solar panels going to get me to work and/or the beach?

Same way someone on the grid would charge an electric car except your supply isn't coming from a power plant.

[Soriak]

From the EPA: Emission Facts: Average Carbon Dioxide Emissions Resulting from Gasoline and Diesel Fuel | US EPA

CO2 emissions from a gallon of gasoline = 2,421 grams x 0.99 x (44/12) = 8,788 grams = 8.8 kg/gallon = 19.4 pounds/gallon

CO2 emissions from a gallon of diesel = 2,778 grams x 0.99 x (44/12) = 10,084 grams = 10.1 kg/gallon = 22.2 pounds/gallon

Googling "offset CO2" leads me to this "known emissions" calculator: Known Emissions | Carbon Dioxide Emission Calculators | Carbon Offsetting | co2balance

They don't have pricing in Dollars available yet, so I just picked the UK site and convert the rate using today's exchange rate. (about 1:2)

For 1 gallon of gasoline, the tax would have to be: 14c
For 1 gallon of diesel, you'd be paying: 16c

That's the cost every driver today unloads onto everyone else, without paying for it as the current tax isn't used to offset the emissions. (I'm actually surprised how low this is... I figured it'd be much more. I guess it adds up.)

The cost of offsetting could double once the "cheap" opportunities are used up, but that'll take a while. It'll also be a gradual increase, which is much better than a one-time jump. Offsetting where it's cheapest makes sense, but if the goal is to boost the domestic economy you could probably fund offset projects within the US at a slightly higher cost.

Add that tax globally, earmark it for offset projects and I don't care how much anyone drives around with their SUV. The goal can't be to dictate what others can do, but to fix market failures where they lead to bad outcomes.

[rinthea]

the day someone makes global taxes is the day i go to war

[Phelps McManus]

Originally Posted by dak

Same way someone on the grid would charge an electric car except your supply isn't coming from a power plant.

Good point! So I unplug my car in the morning, drive it to work, where I spend the better part of the day, and then charge it over night with the power of teh sun.

Oh wait...

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by rinthea

the day someone makes global taxes is the day i go to war

The UN membership fee is, I believe, based on GDP - there's a global tax. It can still be raised and spent by the national governments, that's not the issue. The problem is that millions of Chinese and Indians buying inefficient cars causes problems in London and places New York and Florida in danger. That's just from an expected rise in sea level. If the effects are global, the solution needs to be as well.

Originally Posted by Phelps McManus

Good point! So I unplug my car in the morning, drive it to work, where I spend the better part of the day, and then charge it over night with the power of teh sun.

Oh wait...

Plug it in at work?

[dak]

Good point! So I unplug my car in the morning, drive it to work, where I spend the better part of the day, and then charge it over night with the power of teh sun.

Oh wait...

There are these things called batteries. May have heard of them, maybe not! But anyways these strange devices can store a charge for later use. Really quite amazing.

[Sunder]

Originally Posted by Phelps McManus

Good point! So I unplug my car in the morning, drive it to work, where I spend the better part of the day, and then charge it over night with the power of teh sun.

Oh wait...

Ever heard of a supercapacitor, you idiot? The capacitor would charge while you're at work all day. You come home, plug your car into the capacitor over night and when you wake up in the morning, little elves come out and move the electricity from the capacitor to your car. I know, elves. They need a full time job now because the North Pole isn't paying what it used to.

Shut your mouth now before you embarrass yourself even more.

[Phelps McManus]

Originally Posted by Soriak

Plug it in at work?

Man I was going to bring up the amount of solar panels I would need to charge up an electric car at home, but I didn't care enough to find the numbers. But to charge them up at work? Come on.

Or are we still using a grid to connect everyone's house to their office? Even then, solar power has a 20% capacity factor. You better get your shit charged in less than 5 hours, while charging batteries to keep the copiers and laptops in the office going the rest of the day.

Anyway, I don't mean to paint electric cars and solar power as bad ideas. They definitely lead to lower carbon emissions. They just don't play that well together. One way or another, something is getting blown the fuck up so that my car gets from point A to point B.