| CrackHead_Fan |
Let's try something new.
Gas prices are out of control, as we all know. They represent a real threat to the average American family, maybe more so than terrorism or health care or whatever. They are effecting all of us, and especially me when my ticket to Hawaii got cancelled thanks to ATA Airlines going under (thanks, fuckers). We need a solution and we need it fast. And no, I don't drive an SUV so don't even ask.
Can we, without the usual rhetoric about the Bush Administration, agree on this? Because if you blame Bush and "his cronies" for wanting higher profits, then I'll blame the treehugging liberals for not allowing oil drilling or a new refinery to be built in this country. But in the end, that gets us nowhere.
Other than the usual green-friendly ideas (carpooling, hybrid autos, alternative fuels, etc), which I am all in favor of, we need to think about some dirtier (but more effective) solutions. I'm willing to risk an oil slick here and there if it means I don't have to pay $4 a gallon. And though I've never met a caribou (and I'm sure I'd like him if I did), I'm thinking he can find another Alaskan field to run around in. Fuck him...let's start drilling! As for Iraq, if this war was about stealing oil (and again, I'm fine with that), then start loading up the barrels. Our country was founded after a few courageous (and thrifty) New Englanders said "You want us to pay HOW MUCH for tea?!" and threw it into the harbor. This time, the Sons of Liberty can dress up in burqas. Who's with me? |
|
|
| zimmie |
GM Puts Electric-Car Testing
On Fast Track to 2010
By TERRY KOSDROSKY and JOHN D. STOLL
April 4, 2008 1:38 a.m.; Page B6
General Motors Corp. will road-test technology needed for its heavily promoted Chevrolet Volt electric car this month, but the company acknowledged it may not know for another two years whether its essential battery technology will be commercially viable.
The auto maker is rushing to bring the Volt to the U.S. market by November 2010 in the hope that a significant advance in fuel-efficient technology will lift GM's standing with consumers.
The vehicle is the "No. 1 priority project that we have at GM," said Frank Weber, the Volt program director.
In late April, GM's Volt project will enter an important phase as the company fits massive lithium-ion battery packs into a fleet of three-year-old Chevrolet Malibus, and engineers begin driving the test vehicles on test tracks and in other environments.
"We're talking about real vehicles on the road," said Micky Bly, a director of GM's hybrid development. He noted that several GM executives, including Chairman and Chief Executive Rick Wagoner and Vice Chairman Bob Lutz, have sent emails to him to ask to drive a version of the product. Mr. Bly has had to tell them "it's not ready," he said.
But even as the vehicles hit the road, GM is just beginning a two-year test of the critical battery system to see whether it will meet consumer demands. The auto maker is aiming to offer a car with a battery that can completely power the vehicle, without the aid of gasoline or other fuels, for a typical commute, and the battery should last 10 years and 150,000 miles.
The auto maker is speeding battery testing by raising the temperature in a chamber in which the battery is tested. By doing this, GM will artificially accelerate the aging process of the battery, letting the company evaluate a 10-year life cycle over the course of two years.
GM is testing battery systems from different suppliers for the Volt. One is from a U.S. subsidiary of South Korea's LG Chem Ltd., and the other is from Continental AG's Continental Automotive Systems unit, which is using cells developed by A123 Systems Inc.
The results of the test won't be fully known until March 2010, eight months before the vehicles are slated for sale. That is leading members of GM's team to be guarded when it comes to meeting the targets.
"It's not a done deal," said Roland Matthe, a battery engineer. "That's the unusual thing about this project...there's still a risk that we [will] stumble on something."
The Volt faces several other hurdles. They include the need to design a special fuel tank, creation of more capable high-voltage cables and a reduction of the power that the air conditioner will use. None of those issues have easy fixes, the company said.
"GM had the technology to do hybrids back when Toyota was launching the first Prius, but we opted not to ask the board to approve a product program that'd be destined to lose hundreds of millions of dollars," said Mr. Lutz, GM's product czar, in a blog post. "In the end, it cost us much more than that; it cost us our reputation for technology leadership and innovation."
"We made that mistake once," Mr. Lutz said. "We won't make it again."
GM's push to develop the Volt comes after it largely sat on the sidelines during the recent hybrid-vehicle boom in the U.S. Mr. Wagoner and top lieutenants initially shunned hybrids, allowing Japanese rivals to dominate the market for such cars, like the Toyota Prius, and burnishing their green image in the process.
-- |
|
|
| CrackHead_Fan |
Nobody? We'd rather argue about the candidates in this forum?
OK, I'll open it up a bit. What specifically is Obama, Clinton or McCain going to do? |
|
|
| Rush Has AIDS |
Quote: Originally posted by CrackHead_Fan
Let's try something new.
Gas prices are out of control, as we all know. They represent a real threat to the average American family, maybe more so than terrorism or health care or whatever. They are effecting all of us, and especially me when my ticket to Hawaii got cancelled thanks to ATA Airlines going under (thanks, fuckers). We need a solution and we need it fast. And no, I don't drive an SUV so don't even ask.
Can we, without the usual rhetoric about the Bush Administration, agree on this? Because if you blame Bush and "his cronies" for wanting higher profits, then I'll blame the treehugging liberals for not allowing oil drilling or a new refinery to be built in this country. But in the end, that gets us nowhere.
Other than the usual green-friendly ideas (carpooling, hybrid autos, alternative fuels, etc), which I am all in favor of, we need to think about some dirtier (but more effective) solutions. I'm willing to risk an oil slick here and there if it means I don't have to pay $4 a gallon. And though I've never met a caribou (and I'm sure I'd like him if I did), I'm thinking he can find another Alaskan field to run around in. Fuck him...let's start drilling! As for Iraq, if this war was about stealing oil (and again, I'm fine with that), then start loading up the barrels. Our country was founded after a few courageous (and thrifty) New Englanders said "You want us to pay HOW MUCH for tea?!" and threw it into the harbor. This time, the Sons of Liberty can dress up in burqas. Who's with me? |
Problem is Crackhead... you're mostly wrong.
I would blame environmentalists for holding up new drilling, sure.
But building new refineries? Hate to tell you this, blame Bush and his cronies.
It is a fact, that oil companies shut down a lot of the refineries themselves. Less refineries means less oil on the market, plus higher demands from the US, China and India, equals massive profits!
Think about it. You're an oil executive. Since Bush has taken office oil has gone from $30 per barrel to almost $110, with very little increase in overhead. Why in God's name would I want another refinery built? Hurts my bottom line.
And to take the heat off of me, I can just blame the environmentalists for it since they don't want refineries built either.
They're not the sole reason for it. But they are a large part of it. That's just how it is.
My compromise, if I were President Rush Has Aids :) , would be to allow new drilling in a couple of select areas, but we would be mandated to make alternative fuels part of the mainstream within 10-20 years. The technologies that energy companies have bought up, in order to keep them from the public, would have to be given back to the people free of charge, and allowed to be developed uninhibited.
The subsidies they have been receiving for years would end as well, and be required to pay back all taxes they have avoided.
I'm sure there are a couple of other stipulations, but that's a start.
Deal? |
|
|
| zimmie |
The oil itself is not in any kind of shortage, the lack of domestic refineries is the real problem. The reason prices jumped so high after Hurricane Katrina hit was because it damaged 30 oil platforms and destroyed 9 refineries. The increase in price after the storm was necessary at the time to insure that there would be a sufficient supply.
Oil companies now consider constructing new refineries as inefficient and too costly. In the last nine months the demand for gasoline has increased by two and a half refineries a year. Oil companies can not keep up with such a rate so they go overseas to import the gasoline.
The same environmentalist liberals, who fight against drilling in Alaska, are the ones who prevent new refineries from being built, and hypocritically call for a solution to the energy crisis. Liberal environmentalists create so much needless red tape for oil companies to build these much needed refineries, that they turn overseas to meet their demand.
For a new refinery to be built, the oil company would have to wade the stagnant pool of bureaucracy. It would take around twenty years for the company to create such a structure a huge expenditure and seeing zero profit. Not to mention the prolonged process of appeasing the environmentalists concerns and obtaining a permission to build from the local governments. |
|
|
| CrackHead_Fan |
Quote: Originally posted by Rush Has AIDS
Deal? |
OK, but I still like the idea of drilling through the center of the earth and sucking it out from under the middle east.
I guess I'll just invest in oil companies in the mean time. Where's the Walmart of oil production? Generic gasoline (do I really need a brand name)?
Zimmie, you and I are (of course) in complete agreement. But what can we do about it? |
|
|
| Rush Has AIDS |
Quote: Originally posted by CrackHead_Fan
OK, but I still like the idea of drilling through the center of the earth and sucking it out from under the middle east.
I guess I'll just invest in oil companies in the mean time. Where's the Walmart of oil production? Generic gasoline (do I really need a brand name)? |
Wow, you've got cash laying around? Lucky you.
If it were possible right now I'm sure we'd be doing it.
There's more oil in the world. It's either very deep that we can't reach it right now, or it's under mountainous areas, and it would be so expensive to get at it, but I thought there were means to make that easier.
I remember reading somewhere that there were some large deposits under the Rockies, in the US & Canada. But it would be really expensive, and the environmental concerns |
|
|
| CrackHead_Fan |
Quote: Originally posted by Rush Has AIDS
[B]Wow, you've got cash laying around? |
I invest in gallons of gas $4 at a time. I'm probably the "brokest" person on here! |
|
|
|
