Honda Car Forum

As long as drivers will go to the station that had the lowest price, evn if
it a penny a gallon, alternates will not sell without government incentives.
Look at the hybrids, buyers prefer the conventionally powered twins, because
they cost thousands less to drive home even with incentives. Smart buyers
do not want to reduce the amount of oil we import by prepaying for three
years fuel consumption in the purchase price. The ultimate consumer product
is the one that suits your personal needs and costs less. When I was in
retail the most important question a buyer asked before signing on the
bottom line was 'How much is my monthly payment?' LOL


mike hunt


"ron" <really good@serviceu.com> wrote in message
news:gdB1g.4249$Lm5.3094@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
> thanks for the info Mike. I am like you pretty convinced that until
> gasoline is in the say 7-10 dollar/gallon range will we suddenly discover
> that we need to explore alternatives. Then there will be a 10-20 year lag
> to get anything on line. Long past my need for it.
>
> Ron

"The BEnevolent dbu" <Relaxand@smeltherose.comm> wrote in message
news:Relaxand-27DD36.16280119042006@news-rdr-03.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>,
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
> > The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>
> The first sentence turned me off right away. "people owned"? I hate
> those words because it reminds me of the old U.S.S,R.
>
> You must be a socialist.

What's wrong with that? No private industry will touch this and energy
turns out to be a strategic asset. Free markets are great for allocating
resources but do not do strategic planning. Building something as a nation
can make a lot of sense.

I noticed a guy at a store the other day. He was wearing a t-shirt
commemorating the Rutan project's ascent into space. The usual "Capitalism
1, NASA 0" sort of message.

Except - that's not the score. Getting 100km off the ground is a fairly
notable achievement. One that NASA managed in 1962 or so. I remember
watching it on a black-and-white TV.

And 100km off the ground and then straight back down is not near as
impressive - or dangerous - as re-entry from a 160km orbit at 30K km/sec.

Nor has Rutan made it to the Moon. A small matter of getting up out of TWO
gravity wells and completely escaping both.

The score is more like "Capitalism 0.1, NASA 32." Rutan took a baby-step
towards useful space travel.

Oh, and the capacity of SpaceShip 1 or whatever it's called is a pilot and
three passengers. No luggage. No supplies for a few days in space. The
Shuttle can lift tons into orbit and stay there for days. An EDO Shuttle
can stay up for a couple of weeks.

So, while I think a coal-to-liquid fuel conversion plant is a bad idea, I
don't think a project owned by the people for the people will necessarily be
a bad idea.

> --
> "[It's] time for the human race to enter the solar system."
>
> -- Vice President Al Gore

Hilarious. Say, did you watch "Great Presidential Speeches" on Letterman
last week?


*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
newsSadnXMgH7CpW9vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> That is a good idea, the only problem is it will not solve the problem.
> It will reduce the INCREASE in the amount of oil we import but not our
> need for the fast amounts of crude we use to fuel the various economies of
> the world. Gasoline is only a small part of why we need to import crude.

According the DOE, almost half of the crude oil is refined into gasoline,
hardly "only a small part."

http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/brochure/gas04/gasoline.htm


> The people in every other major industrial country in the world pays a
> lot more for gasoline than do we, and they are still using more every
> year.

In several European countries, they use half the energy, per capita, than we
do in the US.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_usa_per_per

> If every
> vehicle in the US miraculously got twice as many miles per gallon some day
> we would still need crude for it carbon stocks and the excess gasoline
> would simply be burned off at the refineries, as it was before it became a
> motor fuel.

Please give us evidence that excess gasoline would just be burned off.

I mean, before it became a motor fuel? That was when? In 1896?

Jeff

> mike hunt
>
>
>
>
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Cyx1g.9071$i41.2217@newsread1.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
>> Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
>> alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve
>> the efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet
>> to get around more.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
>

"Sharx35" <sharx35@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b0B1g.236$2c3.125@edtnps89...
> Jeff wrote:
>> Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
>> alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming,
>> improve the efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes
>> and our feet to get around more.
>>
>> Jeff
>
> What about YOU, Jeff?
>
> Do you live in a corner of your parents' basement, a block from school?
>
> Or, how much of YOUR transportation needs DON'T involve fossil fuels?

No, I live about 30 km from school. I take a diesel-electric train to the
train terminal, then two electric subway trains. Most of my students either
walk, take a diesel bus or the subway there.

jeff

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:hXydnWk9Eqd_e9vZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> As long as drivers will go to the station that had the lowest price, evn
> if it a penny a gallon, alternates will not sell without government
> incentives. Look at the hybrids, buyers prefer the conventionally powered
> twins, because they cost thousands less to drive home even with
> incentives. Smart buyers do not want to reduce the amount of oil we
> import by prepaying for three years fuel consumption in the purchase
> price. The ultimate consumer product is the one that suits your personal
> needs and costs less. When I was in retail the most important question a
> buyer asked before signing on the bottom line was 'How much is my monthly
> payment?' LOL

But when one has selected a car, he might be able to get a lower monthly
payment at another dealer, but he won't get another car of the same model
that gets better gas milage.

Jeff

> mike hunt
>
>
> "ron" <really good@serviceu.com> wrote in message
> news:gdB1g.4249$Lm5.3094@newssvr12.news.prodigy.co m...
>> thanks for the info Mike. I am like you pretty convinced that until
>> gasoline is in the say 7-10 dollar/gallon range will we suddenly discover
>> that we need to explore alternatives. Then there will be a 10-20 year
>> lag to get anything on line. Long past my need for it.
>>
>> Ron
>
>

I think allot of states with the coal would Love to have it in their
backyard. Those states have been depressed for a long time now.

Gerald

So right Jeff. I live in No California and I know people on limited
incomes will drive 8 or 10 miles each way to by 6 gallons of gasoline
to save a couple of cents/gallon.

Until it really hurts to buy gasoline, no one will conserve nor will
anyone even consider proper alternatives.

Hurt level probably double today's price, IMHO. Till then we'll keep
sucking oil from non-home sources.

Ron

I'm with you on the mass transit idea, the only problem being is that
ours sucks! We are just to plain greedy to invest in a good idea. I was
born in New York City where they did have the brains to invest in it
and it works great! They did have their hard time in NYC but recovered
nicely and it's one of the best transit systems in the world.

Gerald

"Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@mailcity.com> wrote in message
news:MCqdnQD-CvwbXNvZUSdV9g@ptd.net...
> No need to wait, the President has already provided 100 million in federal
> money to do almost exactly that, as part of his plan to reduce our
> dependency on imported crude. It is not gasoline from coal but clean
> burning, low sulfur, diesel fuel.
>
> A plant is being built as we speak in Schuylkill County Pennsylvania that
> will convert coal calm (waste coal) into fuel to be used by the state of
> Pennsylvania. Eastern Pennsylvania has the world largest reserves of
> clean burning low sulfur anthracite coal. Using new coal would be more
> costly than using culm. Even producing diesel fuel from waste coal cost
> much more the conventional fuel oil and much more than it would coat to
> produce gasoline. The only thing that is making that plant cost effective
> is the Company has been given a ten year tax exemption, under
> Pennsylvania's Keystone development plan that is designed to return "brown
> fields," polluted areas, into tax producing lands. In addition the diesel
> fuel will not be taxed by the state of federal government. The current
> federal tax is .185c per gallon and the Pa state tax is .26C

That is like 0.1% of the price of gasoline. Gasoline is now around 300 c
($3.00), and the total taxes are 0.445c or less than 1/2 a cent. I would
have thought they would be more.

> The sad part is even at $70 a barrel gasoline is still so cheap as a
> motor fuel that crude will need to go over $100 a barrel before ANY of the
> alternate fuel will cost less and can be sold at a profit.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...usinessEthanol is made for less money than gasoline in Brasil. Quantities arelimited, of course.It took something like 20 years for Brasil to get to the point where it wasable to begin replace gasoline with ethanol. It will take a long time in theUS, too. One of the big problems is that corn and some other crops depletethe soil of nutrients and water.So ethanol is far from a perfect solution.> Search "The Bud Angst Report » Blog Archive » PA Leads With Coal-to-OilSolution To Address Energy Needs">>> mike hunt>>>> "Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote in messagenews:Xns97AAB7EE1F223pettyfogery@207.115.17 .102...>> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:>>>>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil>>> conversion plant>>>>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. >>> But you would still be an idiot!>> I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,>> no-sir!>>>> Life is so simple for the simple minded...>>>>>> -->> Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price>> you pay..DEAL with it!>>>

Nomen?

First off I'm not sure why you would not want your post archived... ?
Secondly I do think that People Owned had anything to do with the
U.S.S.R.
That was a dictatorship. The People owned nothing... My wife is from
Russia... She is wonderful...

Gerald