New record high for oil, $86 a barrel.

I demand someone disover an awesome new energy source, such as radioactive pubic hairs :frown:
 
At least we can all shout 'wheee!' as we slide down the bell curve.
 
This leaves us with only one option.

We must blow up the moon.
 
People correlate the high price of oil with the high price of petrol...unfortunately it's much more sinister than that. Without tax, petrol would cost only 17p a litre...over 80% of the price is tax. It's extortion, pure and simple. For the time being, oil production is the least of our worries.

I could fill up my tank for under four quid if it wasn't for tax.
 
This was a big quick jump, but it sounds more political than a supply or tax issue:

msn money said:
Crude oil jumped on worries that Turkish forces might invade northern Iraq to combat attacks from the rebel Kurdistan Workers' Party. Many of Iraq's largest oil fields are located in the north, so an attack might disrupt oil shipments and lead to higher winter heating prices.
Click to expand...

abc.net.au said:
The Turkish Government is preparing a motion seeking parliamentary approval for a military incursion into northern Iraq.

The troops would take on rebels who want territory in eastern Turkey to be part of an independent Kurdish homeland.

There have been reports that Turkish forces have already shelled one Iraqi border village.

Dr Caton says the world will be watching what unfolds.

"If these tensions escalate and the oil price leaps another $5 or $10, then it could well become a serious issue for the world economy," he said.
Click to expand...
 
repiV said:
People correlate the high price of oil with the high price of petrol...unfortunately it's much more sinister than that. Without tax, petrol would cost only 17p a litre...over 80% of the price is tax. It's extortion, pure and simple. For the time being, oil production is the least of our worries.

I could fill up my tank for under four quid if it wasn't for tax.
Click to expand...

I was always told that it was exactly the opposite, that without government subsidy, petrol would be 7+ USD per gallon, and that in France, they're already paying some pretty outrageous sums for petrol, just because the government there doesn't subsidize their petrol.
 
The Monkey said:
Ethanol seems to be the best option at the moment.
Click to expand...

Where are you going to grow that much corn? And who's going to pay for it?

The best alternative will be electric cars with the power plants generating electricity from nunclear, hydroelectric, or other renewable sources. Oil companies are trying hard to make sure this doesn't happen. Someone recommended to me a documentary called "Who killed the electric car", I haven't seen it yet though.

But I wouldn't see this $90 a barrel price tag as a sign of peak oil. The reason they gave for this going up was that Turkey might invade northern Iraq. They are full off shit, its just another excuse to jack up prices since there were no big hurricanes or other natural disasters this season.
 
I think the mainstream media will give any reason other than peak oil as the reason behind high gas prices. I'd say the possibility of a turkish invasion is an excuse more than a reason.
 
MiccyNarc said:
I think the mainstream media will give any reason other than peak oil as the reason behind high gas prices. I'd say the possibility of a turkish invasion is an excuse more than a reason.
Click to expand...

But I stand by my statement it has nothing to do with peak oil. If it had to do with peak oil oil companies would not be making record profits right now. Its all about the money and we are all stupid enough to fall for it.
 
No Limit said:
Where are you going to grow that much corn? And who's going to pay for it?
Click to expand...
The Equatorial Regions seems to be best suited to grow sugar, which is most effective to turn inti ethanol.

What do you mean "who's going to pay for it"? The consumers, of couse, who else?
 
The Monkey said:
What do you mean "who's going to pay for it"? The consumers, of couse, who else?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I guess I should have asked who is going to afford it. If you can't afford oil at its current state you sure as hell aren't going to afford ethanol.

We need to be coming up with real solutions to this problem, ethanol is not one of them.
 
No Limit said:
Sorry, I guess I should have asked who is going to afford it. If you can't afford oil at its current state you sure as hell aren't going to afford ethanol.

We need to be coming up with real solutions to this problem, ethanol is not one of them.
Click to expand...
Ethanol is cheaper than gas in Sweden...

It will become much cheaper as the production is rationalized and rendered more effective. It's also important that we as consumers make sure that the workers at the sugar plantations have good working conditions.
 
The Monkey said:
Ethanol is cheaper than gas in Sweden...

It will become much cheaper as the production is rationalized and rendered more effective. It's also important that we as consumers make sure that the workers at the sugar plantations have good working conditions.
Click to expand...

It costs a lot more here and it is only used as an additive. Can you actually buy pure ethanol over there?

And you are talking about cutting down thousands of miles of forest to do this. Nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and other alternative energies will be much cheeper, more eviromentally friendly, and a lot more practical. Current battery techonology will allow you to travel around 200-300 miles and only require 4-8 hours to recharge. This is something we can implement today without much research and overhead cost.
 
Nuclear (fission or fusion) power is the only right way for short and mid term future. Anybody who says otherwise is a damn stupid idiot.

Of course we now need hydro and thermoelectric generators to cover those peaks in daily energy consumption. But with some investment in the nuclear reactors area probably should solve it.

Everything else is just wasteful.
 
jverne said:
Nuclear (fission or fusion) power is the only right way for short and mid term future. Anybody who says otherwise is a damn stupid idiot.

Of course we now need hydro and thermoelectric generators to cover those peaks in daily energy consumption. But with some investment in the nuclear reactors area probably should solve it.

Everything else is just wasteful.
Click to expand...

I really don't understand the people that are against nuclear power. Why is everyone so scared of this? Over the last decades there hasn't been any serious accidents. The only accident that did occur had only a couple deaths. I can't imagine how many people die each day from co2 emissions.
 
Suggesting ethanol as the answer is ridiculous. There is no worse "solution". You're better off sticking with oil than going to ethanol.
 
No Limit said:
I really don't understand the people that are against nuclear power. Why is everyone so scared of this? Over the last decades there hasn't been any serious accidents. The only accident that did occur had only a couple deaths. I can't imagine how many people die each day from co2 emissions.
Click to expand...

There has been more than one incident with nuclear power.
 
Parrot of doom said:
There has been more than one incident with nuclear power.
Click to expand...

Such as...?

There has only been one that I know of that resulted in a fair amount of causulties and that was in russia I think 30 years ago.

Edit:

I stand corrected, the accident in Russia had more than a couple deaths, from Google it resulted in 31 deaths. Still wouldn't call that very alarming.
 
Cernybol is the only serious incident I can think of.
France has the vast majority of its power from Nuclear Plants, and they are doing fine, no accidents, they don't have to worry about switching from fossil fuels, etc.
Its time people excepted Nuclear power as a nessacary evil.
 
seriously those who think nuclear power is dangerous is an ignoramus.

a modern nuclear plant is safer than your alarm clock! but of course nothing is "stupid politician" proof.
 
Chernobyl, haha that was caused by a test that should not have been run (A previous test showed the reactor turbines could not power the pumps whilst the backup generators started up). The safety measures to shut down the reactor also had their own flaws. 18-20 seconds to fully insert the control rods. Faulty design also means coolant levels are reduced during the process. Hence the reaction rate increased.

Modern Nuclear plants do not have the problems Chernobyl Reactor 4 did.
 
The only benefit to Ethanol production becoming more prevalent is if it could somehow make rare the supply of high fructose corn syrup as a result.
 
Um, this isn't a record high price for Oil, that happened in 1979 with a price adjusted for inflation in January 2007 dollars at $100.28.

Inflation_Adj_Oil_Prices_Chart.jpg


Of, course now the price is reaching $90 dollars, but more inflation has occured, so maybe $80ish.
 
Atomic_Piggy said:
So around 4 a year at most? You have more chance of bieng killed on your way to school/work.
Click to expand...

I'm counting 4 per decade. Haven't been able to go through them all but I doubt all of those resulted in the loss of life, and any loss of life is probably minor.
 
Um, this isn't a record high price for Oil, that happened in 1979 with a price adjusted for inflation in January 2007 dollars at $100.28.
Click to expand...
Nitpicking. There was a clear reason for the high price of oil back in 1979. This time there is no real geopolitical reason for this high price. At current inflation, we will set a new all time inflation adjusted high when we cross $91 a barrel.
 
By the way, I love how people say "We haven't beat the old record due to inflation"....well we're almost to $89 a barrel right now. Another couple bucks and where will your excuses be?

This is the time of year when oil is plummeting. It's going the opposite direction.
The prospects of next summer's driving season scare the living shit out of me.

Usually oil drops around $30 a barrel over the winter and then makes it back over the summer. A $30 a barrel increase from where we are now puts us at $120 a barrel. That's almost $4 a gallon, not including tax which would add another $.30 at least.
That won't stop americans from driving however, it will only make life hell in the 3rd world nations that can still barely afford it.
 
lePobz said:
I've converted my car to run on gravity.
Click to expand...

I did too, partly. Tranded in my 2000 Jaguar S-Type that run on premium and got 18 miles per gallon to a 2008 Mitsubishi lancer with a manual transmission. So any time I'm going downhill now I just let gravity do its thing, getting around 30 miles per gallon on regular unleaded and saving about $20 a week on gas alone.

I figure I wont be buying another car until there is an electric option out there. Chevy should start rolling these out in 2011.
 
Parrot of doom said:
A modern engine doesn't use fuel while engine braking.
Click to expand...

My Jaguar automatic would run at high RPMs when going downhill at fairly high speed slowing the car down. So thats the point, you dont want engine breaking going downhill.
 
Oil is now >$89 a barrel. I had a wager going that we'd hit $90 before november. Seriously looking like it now.
 
No Limit said:
My Jaguar automatic would run at high RPMs when going downhill at fairly high speed slowing the car down. So thats the point, you dont want engine breaking going downhill.
Click to expand...

My Mercedes automatic does exactly the same. It doesn't change the fact that most modern engines use no fuel when engine braking.
 
Fuel economy is an odd thing...
I've just started commuting trans-London again, for the last few months I worked locally. Usually when I'm riding for pleasure I get about 167 miles before the reserve light comes on...when I do a long journey at high speed (due mostly to constant high revs I assume) that will drop to about 148 - as you might expect. Today, imagine my surprise when the reserve light came on at 144 miles - and I haven't used the bike for anything except travelling to work and back since Saturday.
So apparently stop-start city traffic is even less fuel efficient than holding the throttle wide open in sixth gear?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MFL
Fascinating look at the ongoing psychological evolution of flat hieirarchies.
Replies
2
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Pikminiman
Valve Extends Educational Support for iD Tech
Replies
6
Views
5K
Mididda
Mididda
B
Hostile Takeover, the lost Half-Life expansion pack
Replies
6
Views
16K
Ennui
Ennui
-smash-
Using Unity at Valve - Vision Summit 2016
Replies
5
Views
6K
Ennui
Ennui
Omnomnick
Examining The Files Of "SteamVR Performance Test" & "Aperture Robot Repair"
Replies
27
Views
91K
MFL
MFL
Back
Top