Bush to lift offshore drilling ban

[SlvrDragon50]

newsobserver.com | Bush lifts presidential ban on offshore drilling

8-10 years

As far as the Yukon:
The 2008 Chevrolet Tahoe Hybrid SUVs are reported to go as many as 21 miles per gallon of gas in the city driving conditions (for the 2WD model), []2008 Chevy Tahoe Hybrid mileage announced « Auto Review
Thats really not that amazing... considering car manufacturers almost always report higher MPG than realworld MPG

You're forgetting the MOST important requirement for these vehicles: a source of hydrogen (or whatever) on every corner, as abundant as the corner gas station. How are you going to drive a hydrogen powered car with NO HYDROGEN STATIONS?

Thats why its limited to CA for now since CA just happen to have.. guess what? HYDROGEN STATIONS!

Really? Where's your proof? Did you perform primary research by polling all 300 million + people in the US, or all 6 billion + humans on earth?

While your opinion is respected, without credible data to back it up it's still nothing more than an opinion.

So when we had fuel prices around 1.25/ gallon... we didn't exactly push for alternative fuel as much as we do now with 4.50/gallon. Its a safe assumption that higher fuel prices pushes the population to want an alternative fuel.

[aggie99]

Originally Posted by reservecops

Actually, since oil is a finite natural resource, some form of alternative energy will HAVE to "replace" oil ... but your talking point estimates about how much oil is left and how long it will last are about as far from the truth as Al Gore's 'global warming' hypocritial personal actions are from what he's telling US to do to save energy.

I have resisted bringing the topic of global warming to this discussion because it seems to currently rank up there with gay marriage and abortion for bi-polar opinions but I have to ask, do you believe the global temperature increases, loss of glaciers and polar ice, and increased hurricane activity are due to human impact or just the earths natural cycle?

[SlvrDragon50]

Actually there will be fewer hurricanes but more intense hurricanes.

[reservecops]

Originally Posted by aggie99

Due to the current gas prices we have started to see a much needed shift in our thinking on consumption. GM shut down 4 of it's truck and SUV plants, has decided to discontinue the Hummer brand and shift to more fuel efficient cars. There are waiting lists for smart cars and Hybrid vehicles. The all electric Tesla (although for a niche market) never expected the demand and has a one year waiting list and they now plan to develop a lower end sedan model. Public transit use has dramtically increased. Telecommuting is growing because of the increase in the cost of flying. Sure all of these will affect certain market sectors worse than others and sadly affect american jobs and families but drilling here to marginally reduce prices and not force us into greater action is a huge mistake. Companies react to market demand and I can guarantee there is more action being taken today to resolve our oil dependence then ever before. This country thrives on a challenge, why are we so scared this time? We need a cure, not a crutch.

All very excellent points, aggie99. I agree that these things must be done to reduce our dependency. In fact, I'm not disagreeing. I'm simply saying that, for the forseeable future, oil is here and nothing will come close to being as economically viable for EVERYBODY as the corner gas station.

THAT is why the comprehensive solution of adding to the oil supply while, simultaneously, developing and expanding new energy sources is the way to go.

I would like to comment on a few of your statements, though:

End of big cars/ramp up of smaller cars: That has to happen, and should. But as Americans, we have the freedom to choose what we want to drive. I like that.

Public transportation: This only works in big cities with huge populations. It will help a little bit, but not much. Besides, this is America, and people have the freedom to choose to drive over public transportation.

Telecommute: Only good for a very small portion of jobs. Doctors, nurses, waiters, dishwashers, cashiers -- most careers are not conducive to it. But ... every little bit helps.

Sure all of these will affect certain market sectors worse than others and sadly affect american jobs and families but drilling here to marginally reduce prices and not force us into greater action is a huge mistake.

Sorry, but oil is here for the foreseeable future (10-20 years easy, and probably the rest of our natural lives), and the only way to bring the price down is to increase supply. No matter how much WE reduce and conserve, China and India don't give a rat's butt -- they are in the throws of an industrial revolution, and they don't give a hoot about energy conservation or the environment. Remember, we don't live in an energy vacuum - the oil market is a WORLD market, and demand given up here will simply be taken up THERE.

[reservecops]

Originally Posted by aggie99

I have resisted bringing the topic of global warming to this discussion because it seems to currently rank up there with gay marriage and abortion for bi-polar opinions but I have to ask, do you believe the global temperature increases, loss of glaciers and polar ice, and increased hurricane activity are due to human impact or just the earths natural cycle?

I believe that, yes, humans do have some impact, but no where near what the global warming alarmists are claiming.

I'm tempted to elaborate, but it's probably not a good idea to hijack the thread.

If you want to talk GW claims, we should start another thread.

[reservecops]

Originally Posted by SlvrDragon50

Actually there will be fewer hurricanes but more intense hurricanes.

There is absolutey zero scientific proof of this, only unsubstantiated claims.

Again, if you want to talk GW, lets start a different thread and keep this one on the oil issue.

[aggie99]

Originally Posted by reservecops

No matter how much WE reduce and conserve, China and India don't give a rat's butt -- they are in the throws of an industrial revolution, and they don't give a hoot about energy conservation or the environment. Remember, we don't live in an energy vacuum - the oil market is a WORLD market, and demand given up here will simply be taken up THERE.

If you really want to see a visual of who "don't give a hoot" then this map shows global participation for the Kyoto Protocol in 2005, I see both India and China on there. We are the only one's (other than countires so undeveloped that they don't have a carbon footprint) that declined the protocol. The yellow is signed and ratification pending: (sorry for the huge pic)

[aggie99]

Originally Posted by reservecops

There is absolutey zero scientific proof of this, only unsubstantiated claims.

Again, if you want to talk GW, lets start a different thread and keep this one on the oil issue.

The only reason I ask is there is more reason than just lowering fuel costs to move away from carbon based fuels, if you believe Global Warming is in aprt caused by them. Now it is our existence, not just our economy at stake.

[reservecops]

Originally Posted by aggie99

If you really want to see a visual of who "don't give a hoot" then this map shows global participation for the Kyoto Protocol in 2005, I see both India and China on there.

Thanks for making my job easier, aggie.

The reason that most of the countries ratified (signed on) to the Kyoto Protocol is because they have no obligation to reduce emissions!

137 of the pretty colored countries in your picture ARE NOT REQUIRED TO REDUCE EMISSIONS under Kyoto.

China and India have NO obligation to reduce emissions under Kyoto, aggie. None. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Did you know that, right now, China puts one coal-fired power plant into operation EVERY WEEK ??

The Kyoto Protocol is nothing more than a giant ponzi scheme, designed to do nothing more than redistribute wealth. Carbon trading is nothing more than a pipe dream attempt to steal wealth from successful countries and give it to failing countries. Steal from the rich and give to the poor.

Kyoto is an absolute joke, and has little to nothing to do with environmental issues. It's all about dragging prosperous nations DOWN because the failing nations can't figure out how to pick themselves UP.

[reservecops]

Originally Posted by aggie99

The only reason I ask is there is more reason than just lowering fuel costs to move away from carbon based fuels, if you believe Global Warming is in aprt caused by them. Now it is our existence, not just our economy at stake.

Carbon-based fuels have very little to do with the global environment. Some, yes, but very little when compared to the real causes.

Again, a different thread.