Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Incorrigible1

Do You Favor Increased Fuel Prices?

32 posts in this topic

Do you favor increased fuel prices to spur/encourage further alternative fuel sources?

I ask because I've encountered (I believe) such thought, here on this forum.

Do you favor increasing gasoline prices to spur the necessity for alternative fuels?

Simple question, and your reasoning welcomed. No need for another dumb poll!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you favor increased fuel prices to spur/encourage further alternative fuel sources?

I ask because I've encountered (I believe) such thought, here on this forum.

Do you favor increasing gasoline prices to spur the necessity for alternative fuels?

Simple question, and your reasoning welcomed. No need for another dumb poll!

No. And Obama won't raise fuel prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. And Obama won't raise fuel prices.

Like he has a real choice in the matter. Directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Like he has a real choice in the matter. Directly.

Well, not directly, but I dun think he'll propose it. Do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Well, not directly, but I dun think he'll propose it. Do you?

Has any president? No.

Just what are your expectations? Geez, there's a president. You know, that person doesn't set fuel prices. Right?

Edit: Sometimes I can't help wonder younger generations expectations. We live in a free market. No one sets prices.

Edited by Incorrigible1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Has any president? No.

Just what are your expectations? Geez, there's a president. You know, that person doesn't set fuel prices. Right?

Edit: Sometimes I can't help wonder younger generations expectations. We live in a free market. No one sets prices.

Never ceases to amaze me how quickly older generations forget about the infamous "Bully Pulpit." :D

Guess I'm just a dumb young'in....

Like watchin' heartache on TV... :hmm:

Edited by IrishAidan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Never ceases to amaze me how quickly older generations forget about the infamous "Bully Pulpit." :D

Guess I'm just a dumb young'in....

Just sayin', if you believe somehow the next elected president has a direct handle on the price of fuel, that's not how it works.

They can sorta steer markets, but not much more.

Just as J. Carter didn't have a great deal of control over the rationing that became necessary during his term. Oh yeah, I remember purchasing fuel according to the odd/even number on my license plate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Just sayin', if you believe somehow the next elected president has a direct handle on the price of fuel, that's not how it works.

Guess a president has no right to PROPOSE anything. Similarly, even though popular, nobody will listen to he or she when they say this or that.

Although, it isn't "direct," as Incon said.

They can sorta steer markets, but not much more.

I can jive with that.

Just as J. Carter didn't have a great deal of control over the rationing that became necessary during his term. Oh yeah, I remember purchasing fuel according to the odd/even number on my license plate.

And Carter didn't decide that on his own. :D "Bully Pulpit" can be for the good -- or the bad.

Either way, I know what Incon meant. Smart guy. Can't help but to like him.

Edited by IrishAidan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, considering that the common people bear the brunt of such prices, and their role could be considered a "squeaky wheel" at best when alternative fuels are concerned, then no, I don't agree that higher fuel costs really help spur the need for alternative fuels very much. I think that lately it has become evident that we need to get away from oil as our main fuel, there are too many benefits to mention. JMO :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. They are a very effective way of getting to greatly increased fuel efficiency as well as increased use of more efficient methods of transit (including more trains), and certainly much simpler than trying to get to greater fuel efficiency via more complex standards like fuel efficiency standards and so forth. Plus, they help move the US towards a significantly less oil-dependent society, which is definitely a good thing; the greater mass of our convention reserves are gone, so we're going to import more and more over time unless we change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. And Obama won't raise fuel prices.

Why not? He's already on record saying he only wishes the increase had been slower, not that the increase didn't happen at all.

I don't understand the problem with higher gas prices anyway. For all my adult life I have heard some people lament "It's not fair! We pay soooooo much less for gas than in Europe. It's not fair!" So now that we are paying much more for gas they should be happy. But they aren't. Why not? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Take whatever steps are necessary to get the price lower while at the same time invest more resources in developing alternative fuels.

Ask the over-the-road independent truck drivers if they like prices kept high. If you support the idea you'd probably get a lug wrench beating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. And Obama won't raise fuel prices.

How do you figure? He has proposed a wind fall profits tax of oil corporations and increase federal gas taxes at the pump, so that will naturally be passed down to consumers in the form of higher gasoline prices. Economics 101.

Edited by Aztec Warrior

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't favor furthur increased fuel prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say take measures for more efficient consumption of Oil like discourage those mammoth SUV's and then drill.

That will bring the price down.

We don't even have to push for alternative, it will just be there once there is a market for it. Research has been going on for the past 20 years on it, just that what is available does not have a market yet.

Edited by AROCES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. Take whatever steps are necessary to get the price lower while at the same time invest more resources in developing alternative fuels.

You want to keep prices artificially low and just hope that alternatives catch on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You want to keep prices artificially low and just hope that alternatives catch on?

The other side of the count is ever increasing prices w/o a realistic alternative?

Face it people: Just as some say drilling won't matter now because it will take 10 years to get the oil to market (if we had done this 10 years ago we'd have it now!) it's going to take 10 years at least to bring realistic alternative sources to market and make the switch on a national level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other side of the count is ever increasing prices w/o a realistic alternative?

Face it people: Just as some say drilling won't matter now because it will take 10 years to get the oil to market (if we had done this 10 years ago we'd have it now!) it's going to take 10 years at least to bring realistic alternative sources to market and make the switch on a national level.

I'll take 10+ years with a solution over 10 years of wishful thinking and delaying the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, not directly, but I dun think he'll propose it. Do you?

He already has been saying he will increase taxes on the oil companies to do the same thing. Raise taxes on a company prices go up to pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other side of the count is ever increasing prices w/o a realistic alternative?

Face it people: Just as some say drilling won't matter now because it will take 10 years to get the oil to market (if we had done this 10 years ago we'd have it now!) it's going to take 10 years at least to bring realistic alternative sources to market and make the switch on a national level.

I hope you realize that the 10 years to bring oil to market is a Democratic talking point and NOT a fact. Please, do a little research. I happen to own stock in several US small oil producting companies and I know for a fact is does not take 10 years. The longest portion probably involves the red tape, ie envirormental reports and leases. Once a geologist has determined a likely area for drilling, a rig is moved in and can begin producing a productive well in weeks or months.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-drilling.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush's own Department of Energy says:

The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher—2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.
Edited by Startraveler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope you realize that the 10 years to bring oil to market is a Democratic talking point and NOT a fact. Please, do a little research. I happen to own stock in several US small oil producting companies and I know for a fact is does not take 10 years. The longest portion probably involves the red tape, ie envirormental reports and leases. Once a geologist has determined a likely area for drilling, a rig is moved in and can begin producing a productive well in weeks or months.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-drilling.htm

Assuming, of course, that they have a rig to do so. You're arguing this from an "all other things being equal" perspective, when it's clearly not; assuming the Republicans get everything they want on this, you're going to have a delay while they try to scale up current offshore drilling to the larger possibilities that turn up after prospecting, caused by things such as moving around rigs, building new ones, and so forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope you realize that the 10 years to bring oil to market is a Democratic talking point and NOT a fact. Please, do a little research. I happen to own stock in several US small oil producting companies and I know for a fact is does not take 10 years. The longest portion probably involves the red tape, ie envirormental reports and leases. Once a geologist has determined a likely area for drilling, a rig is moved in and can begin producing a productive well in weeks or months.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-drilling.htm

Give me a break, don't act like the Republicans are free from political games and are fighting for this so hard because it's a legitimate solution. This whole issue is a Republican talking point to distract from other issues that they're severely lacking in.

What's the best way to fight a better alternative energy plan? Claim (lie) that we don't have to convert to alternative energy until later because we have a few oil reserves.

Edit: Owning stock isn't very impressive as a credential. But then again, that was coming from the guy who downplayed Obama's credentials here because he held an esteemed academic position at a university without a Ph.D.

Edited by Teej

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hope you realize that the 10 years to bring oil to market is a Democratic talking point and NOT a fact. Please, do a little research.

Yes I know that but the 10 year figure is what's being tossed around so may as well use that as the example because on one will believe it to be less (IMO we could probably have Alaska oil flowing to the pumps in 18-24 months or less).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I know that but the 10 year figure is what's being tossed around so may as well use that as the example because on one will believe it to be less (IMO we could probably have Alaska oil flowing to the pumps in 18-24 months or less).

Agreed entirely. Now with Gustaf hammering the off-shore rigs, oil futures are spiking. Ugh!

BTW, I asked a good Democrat (who sings the party line) in an earlier thread, just how much oil was leaked during Katrina. He chose not to respond.

The answer was zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.