View Poll Results: Is it time to double down on green energy that has never been more promising?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    17 50.00%
  • No

    15 44.12%
  • Other (Explain)

    2 5.88%
Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 105

Thread: Obama Green double down question

  1. #41
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    that is not true for two reasons:

    1. the cost of transportation, which spikes with peak piracy seasons (which we are currently in), and
    2. the increased volatility due to the larger percentage of supply subject to removal by a geopolitically fractured and unstable region.
    Well, you broke up my paragraph but it was all one piece. I wasn't commenting on anything coming from overseas - it was domestic production we were discussing.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  2. #42
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    that is incorrect, it was simply insufficient to maintain oil prices, as it is too little increase, both in raw and as a percentage.
    And this explanation is different from "it had no affect"?
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  3. #43
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    ah, well then to deal with it holistically: yes it does matter if you want to try to claim that the Obama administration has anything to do with increases in domestic production and it also matters if you want to try to move from there to claim that the relatively small increases in supply produce the same effects that a massive increase in domestic supply would.

  4. #44
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    And this explanation is different from "it had no affect"?
    yes. think budget baselines and movement from there.

    If supply is X, Demand is Y and that gives you a Price of Z

    Then when Demand goes to 2Y, if Supply stays at X then price (rough back of the napkin) moves to 2Z

    If Demand goes to 2Y, however, and Supply goes to 1.5X, then Price moves to 1.75Z

    Meaning that the .5 increase in supply has decreased the price of oil from where it would have otherwise been by .25.



    in the more complex terms, the increase in domestic production was insufficient in the above model, and insufficient as a percentage of total production to reduce volatility.

  5. #45
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    ah, well then to deal with it holistically: yes it does matter if you want to try to claim that the Obama administration has anything to do with increases in domestic production and it also matters if you want to try to move from there to claim that the relatively small increases in supply produce the same effects that a massive increase in domestic supply would.
    Or a massive decrease in domestic demand.

    But - how long would this "massive increase" (and exactly what do you mean in bbl/day??) take to actually hit the refinery if we started drilling tomorrow - and is there refinery capacity to handle it?


    And, yes, I'm aware that only about half our oil is burned in vehicles and that it has a ****load of other uses. It's one of the reasons I think burning it for fuel is wasteful and dangerous for our future. We can replace the fuel - except for planes - but what do we use for lubricants and plastics substitutes?? I don't know of any good alternatives to those as yet.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  6. #46
    Sage
    Born Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Sonny and Nice
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 04:21 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    6,396

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by Diogenes View Post
    I completely agree with your post except for this part. 10% ethanol fuel lowers my gas mileage by 10%, and E-85 lowers gas mileage by 25% over regular gasoline. IMO ethanol is another government subsidy that screws the consumer in favor of the special interests that produce the stuff.
    Ok, if 10% ethanol lowers your mileage by 10%, then 100% ethanol would lower your gas mileage to "0." Meaning if you fill your tank with 100% ethanol you go nowhere. I never knew that. Further meaning putting ethanol in your tank is no different than putting water in your tank, it's useless. I swear I never knew that.
    Liberals - Punish the Successful, Reward the Unsuccessful
    Liberals - Tax, Borrow, Spend, and Give Free Stuff
    Obama's legacy - President Donald Trump

  7. #47
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:03 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Or a massive decrease in domestic demand.
    based off of what?

    But - how long would this "massive increase" (and exactly what do you mean in bbl/day??) take to actually hit the refinery if we started drilling tomorrow - and is there refinery capacity to handle it?
    we haven't built a new refinery for 30 years - I agree we'd have to expand that, fortunately, the new oil industry in the Dakota's is sitting next to giant tracts of land that nobody is using.

    as for how much we are talking about? it's a good bit. there is more oil in the Rockies than there is in Saudi Arabia. Once we allow offshore drilling and the rigs are allowed to come in where it's easier, once fracking hits, once ANWR get's beefed up in production... I don't know if we would be completely self-sustaining, but I wouldn't be terrifically surprised, especially since we would also be exploiting natural gas.

    And, yes, I'm aware that only about half our oil is burned in vehicles and that it has a ****load of other uses. It's one of the reasons I think burning it for fuel is wasteful and dangerous for our future. We can replace the fuel - except for planes - but what do we use for lubricants and plastics substitutes?? I don't know of any good alternatives to those as yet.
    the use of oil for other things doesn't make it's use as fuel wasteful or dangerous - again, oil remains cheaper than the alternatives. and the answer is that nobody is even working on answers to those questions, so the notion of the US 'weaning itself off of fossil fuels" is ridiculous.

  8. #48
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    New York, New York
    Last Seen
    03-11-16 @ 11:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    551

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    The federal government should

    1) Cut subsidies to all oil companies
    2) Put in subsides for green energy

    They should NOT give out free money to any company, though. Also, the Department of Commerce needs to remove the tariff on Chinese solar panels. What the hell is up with that? Are we trying to move towards green energy or not? Making solar panels more expensive is exactly what we SHOULDN'T do.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    EUSSR
    Last Seen
    03-24-14 @ 01:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,851

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by Diogenes View Post
    And just how did government "investment" contribute to that? Or any other technological advance?
    Good point but I am not for that. Rather I am for some back up from the government to do research and experiment and may be some subsidies (why is it the oil industry can be subsidised and the green energy not?)
    What is wrong with every suburb having its own power plant, be it solar, biomass or natural gas turbines? Co-generation is still the best way to utilise energy because the power plant produces 1/3 electricity and 2/3 hot water which can be used for heating the neighbourhood.

  10. #50
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Obama Green double down question

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    based off of what?
    Off what was your "massive increase" in supply based?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    as for how much we are talking about? it's a good bit. there is more oil in the Rockies than there is in Saudi Arabia. Once we allow offshore drilling and the rigs are allowed to come in where it's easier, once fracking hits, once ANWR get's beefed up in production... I don't know if we would be completely self-sustaining, but I wouldn't be terrifically surprised, especially since we would also be exploiting natural gas.
    The Rockies, yeah. It's been there for a century. Where will we find all the water and electrical power required to extract oil from rocks? This stuff doesn't come bubbling up out of the ground like in a Hollywood movie. There's a reason it's been sitting down there for over a century, untouched. It's only because of the high price of oil that it's even worth thinking about - kind of like EVs and hybrids. Strange how that works, isn't it?

    To me the ANWR is our long-term investment. We're going to need that stuff some day for important things like lubricants, plastics, jet fuel, and other petro products that don't have a good substitute.

    Go after that NG! We should be shifting the larger trucking fleets over right now just like UPS has been doing for years on it's own. Is anyone crazy enough to think UPS doesn't know transportation and shipping?
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 04-22-12 at 05:34 AM.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •