Jordanian pilot burned alive by terrorist - Page 3

tpunx99GSX · 02-09-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goat Blower

Alternative energy is a joke, as witnessed by Solyndra and other companies our government have poured billions into and then closed their doors. If something is economically feasible, it should be self-suffiicient, not dependent on constant taxpayer funding. Oil and nuclear are the answer, lift the stupid regulations on them trying to make silly ideas like solar and wind feasible. Both have some merit, but only in certain locations and situations.

This is what i was talking to, Vicious, not your comment.

jeremy1375 · 02-06-2015

^ The middle east will still be profitable selling their oil. They will continue to sell their oil and the market will increase as China and India continue to industrialize. The U.S. leads the way in technology. If we adopt alternative energy and make it work, others will follow.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-06-2015

OPEC and the Saudies can't keep their oil prices below $50 for the long term. They are just playing a power grab right now, that's the only reason they did it. You really think that if it weren't for the Keystone vote coming up weeks ago that the price of oil would have came down anyway?

jeremy1375 · 02-06-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

OPEC and the Saudies can't keep their oil prices below $50 for the long term. They are just playing a power grab right now, that's the only reason they did it. You really think that if it weren't for the Keystone vote coming up weeks ago that the price of oil would have came down anyway?

The major problem is that Saudi Arabia is the largest oil producer in the world and they can control the price because of that. If we produce more than them, supply will overwhelm demand and price will crash unless they cut production. They can always produce cheaper than us and middle east stays rich in oil money. No end ever to oil money for terrorists.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-06-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

The major problem is that Saudi Arabia is the largest oil producer in the world and they can control the price because of that. If we produce more than them, supply will overwhelm demand and price will crash unless they cut production. They can always produce cheaper than us and middle east stays rich in oil money. No end ever to oil money for terrorists.

We don't have to out produce them, all we have to do is become less dependent on foreign oil and the effect will be dramatic.

jeremy1375 · 02-06-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

We don't have to out produce them, all we have to do is become less dependent on foreign oil and the effect will be dramatic.

How does that scenario play out?

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-06-2015

We as a country do import a lot of oil, but we also produce a lot for our own use.

If OPEC and the Saudies have such a monopoly on low cost production, our ramping up production for our own use shouldn't really scare them, but it did. Just like politicians, don't pay attention to what they say, pay attention to what they do. They last thing they want is an oil independent USA.

jeremy1375 · 02-06-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

We as a country do import a lot of oil, but we also produce a lot for our own use.

If OPEC and the Saudies have such a monopoly on low cost production, our ramping up production for our own use shouldn't really scare them, but it did. Just like politicians, don't pay attention to what they say, pay attention to what they do. They last thing they want is an oil independent USA.

Who said that the Saudi's are scared? I don't see these as the actions of fear or weakness. We have been exporting our shale oil and taking away their market share. They are giving us a reality check.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-06-2015

That reality check goes both ways.

jeremy1375 · 02-06-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

That reality check goes both ways.

How? They are still making money off oil. Our shale operations are shedding jobs. They wait and starve our operations for long enough, then our production cuts and oil prices go back up. We lose, they win.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-06-2015

If we use our reserves and start producing our own oil for our own use, then it doesn't doesn't matter what they do. Sure, we may pay a little more at the pump for it, but we've been paying more at the pump since they started bumping it up while we sat on our thumbs anyway. So we could spend $3 a gallon with the money going to OPEC or we could spend $3 a gallon keeping the money here. I'm all for keeping it here.

jeremy1375 · 02-06-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

If we use our reserves and start producing our own oil for our own use, then it doesn't doesn't matter what they do. Sure, we may pay a little more at the pump for it, but we've been paying more at the pump since they started bumping it up while we sat on our thumbs anyway. So we could spend $3 a gallon with the money going to OPEC or we could spend $3 a gallon keeping the money here. I'm all for keeping it here.

It completely matters what they do. Oil trades on a world market. In our world market economy, the world market sets the oil price. Our own oil can't sell for more than the market price because that's not how it works.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-09-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

It completely matters what they do. Oil trades on a world market. In our world market economy, the world market sets the oil price. Our own oil can't sell for more than the market price because that's not how it works.

You missed the point of my post. I'm not talking about selling it on the open market. I'm talking about producing it for our own use exclusively. Just like Japan refuses to export/sell their rice on the open market.

jeremy1375 · 02-09-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

You missed the point of my post. I'm not talking about selling it on the open market. I'm talking about producing it for our own use exclusively. Just like Japan refuses to export/sell their rice on the open market.

I didn't miss the point. You talk about government over regulation being a bad thing. Yet, you are suggesting a government regulation that is so monumental, it dwarfs anything to date. I assumed you didn't understand how things worked because you want things both ways.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-09-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

I didn't miss the point. You talk about government over regulation being a bad thing. Yet, you are suggesting a government regulation that is so monumental, it dwarfs anything to date. I assumed you didn't understand how things worked because you want things both ways.

That has nothing to do with government regulation, it's just smart. We have access to more oil here than we could ever use in the long term, so why keep playing the open market "shell" game? Because too much money is tied to it at a higher market value, that's why.

Nothing will ever dwarf Obamacare and socialized medicine, they own you now.

tpunx99GSX · 02-09-2015

my main point is that its completely naive and unintelligent to call Solar and alternative energies a joke and that Oil is the way of the future based on one company folding.

**1ViciousGSX** · 02-09-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by tpunx99GSX

my main point is that its completely naive and unintelligent to call Solar and alternative energies a joke and that Oil is the way of the future based on one company folding.

I've never thought solar and other alternatives as a joke, but the reality of it is as you said, still a good ways off.

I like solar and hydro electric the most for on the grid uses. I like thermal electric also. Any or all of those three combined could make a major shift in the right direction.

**Goat Blower** · 02-09-2015

Joke as in those technologies are not anywhere near being ready to replace any existing technologies right now, like oil and nuclear. You can't just turn on most alternative energy sources when you need them, so then you need essentially large batteries or capacitors to store that unused energy, which is expensive. They don't have anywhere near the efficiency of existing solutions, and until they can compete in that respect, they remain largely a waste of time. The free market will always define the better solution.

I don't disagree that they have their place, and as technology increases, they might be worth something on the world market. But to try and say solar is the future? You do realize that we have cloud cover here in MN for about half the year, right? How well are those panels working here? Do they work in places like AZ or NV? Places that have sunlight 350 days a year? Absolutely, as long as you have the infrastructure to harness that energy and distribute it. Certain things make sense in certain areas.

Wind power has been around a long time and besides being ugly, has some merit. Have you ever driven through the windmill farms just east of Los Angeles? Ugly and more expensive, but that's Kalifornia for ya.

Hydro power. I wouldn't really consider it alternative energy, but it's renewable and constant, this might be my favorite of all, but limited in some ways by geographic placement.

tpunx99GSX · 02-09-2015

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goat Blower

Joke as in those technologies are not anywhere near being ready to replace any existing technologies right now, like oil and nuclear. You can't just turn on most alternative energy sources when you need them, so then you need essentially large batteries or capacitors to store that unused energy, which is expensive. They don't have anywhere near the efficiency of existing solutions, and until they can compete in that respect, they remain largely a waste of time. The free market will always define the better solution.

I don't disagree that they have their place, and as technology increases, they might be worth something on the world market. But to try and say solar is the future? You do realize that we have cloud cover here in MN for about half the year, right? How well are those panels working here? Do they work in places like AZ or NV? Places that have sunlight 350 days a year? Absolutely, as long as you have the infrastructure to harness that energy and distribute it. Certain things make sense in certain areas.

Wind power has been around a long time and besides being ugly, has some merit. Have you ever driven through the windmill farms just east of Los Angeles? Ugly and more expensive, but that's Kalifornia for ya.

Hydro power. I wouldn't really consider it alternative energy, but it's renewable and constant, this might be my favorite of all, but limited in some ways by geographic placement.

You do realize they have clouds in AZ, NV and CA right? To completely write off and R&D for alternative renewable resources is just stupid. You dont seems to grasp the concepts of Alternative energy such as not relying on one source of energy for everything. I.e. you wouldnt just go based solely on solar or wind but have a combination of many sources of energy that is clean and not dependent on foreign affairs.
And yes i have driven through the wind farms east of los angeles and honestly The smog cloud i flew into on the trip into los angeles was much more ugly, and dangerous.

**Halon** · 02-09-2015

My reply above was typed awhile ago before I hit send and a lot of replies rolled in. Tom sounds like you kinda said the same thing, so we sort of agree. Everything has it's roll, no one method is perfect. Carry on!