People are saying that instead of giving more money to shareholders by stock-buy-backs, oil companis should invest more in growing their business, fine.

But on the other hand, Liberals opposed off-shore drilliing and drilling in ANWR.

What are they supposed to do then?

BTW, maybe if we had drilling in ANWR, Alaskand wouldn't feel the need to pick our pockets to build their bridges to nowehre, they could seel oil and use the tax revenue from that, radical idea!

This is just like WWII when all the companies who supplied materials that were vital to the war effort jacked up their prices and made a ton of dough.

Thank you, Liberals, for being so obnoxious about developing domestic energy.

Keep rehashing the same silly shit about Santa Barbara, Exxon Valdez, etc.

I am Big Oil: in the sense that I own oil stocks that continue to pay huge dividends, which I reinvest.

That's money you are stealing from children and poor people and working people, and giving to me. I didn't do the thievery, you did. Every time you buy gas for $4 a gallon, remember that some of it goes into my pocket.

I'm moving to Asia this week, to a place where I don't even need a car. So the money I put into the Honda is now more money to reinvest in your stupid theology.

Thank you for making me rich, Liberals. You're like my Jimmy Swaggert or James Dobson: your religion makes money for me

BTW, Liberals screwing around with labor laws, immigration laws and butt-fucking unions also makes money for me.

That foreign nurse who saves your life some day may be a person that I staffed.

Thanks again for making me rich

Consumerism is America's religion, not Christianity.

If people don't like something, they should take their money elsewhere.

Bye Fern, it's been nice knowing ya. Don't forget to write.

p.s. They have laws against beastiality so be careful.

BUSH/CHENEY selected by the Supreme Court to the Presidency in 2000, when gas was $1.80 a Gallon an a barrel of Oil was $25 a Barrel. Both BUSH/CHENEY are Oil men from Texas who own thier rise to power from the Oil Companies. An now the Republician Party would have the Country believe that it Senator Obama an the Democratic Party that is responsible for the Gas prices of today. GIMME A FUCKING BREAK.....

Now we have $140 Barrel of Oil an $4 Gallon of gas, an Exxon has a Quarter profit of nearly 12 Billion, Thank the Supreme Court and its REPUBLICIANS members for giving America the Government they deserve.

"""Thank you, Liberals, for being so obnoxious about developing domestic energy."""

Thanks to the obsolete bunch for wanting to pursue a soon to be obsolete source of energy.

PS: don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Vern...can't tell if you're a sore loser or a sore winner.

Not being an anti-corporation type o' fella, I have to say that this is obscene, especially considering that oil is at the moment an essential commodity like food. Blame the legislation that allowed giant mergers so that there is no market competition. Wait until this winter when the news will be stuffed with stories about elderly people freezing to death for lack of heating oil, and families asphyxiated by kerosene heaters, etc.

"How many yachts can you waterski behind?" -- Bud Fox

How can anyone (Vern!) still think this is somehow to be blamed on the Democrats and "libruuuuls"? Bush/Cheney had unfettered power for six years (and the Republican Congress longer), yet no offshore drilling (thank your Republican governors, thank you) and very little if anything done to reduce oil dependency (slashing CAFE?). Vern, you are a tool, bud.

Thank GOD.
I was really worried that the pricks woldnt be able to screw us to the point they set another record.

GOD bless all of the Repubs that kneel at the alter of free enterprise, thier one and only true GOD

Vern is just awfull. I'm learning here that even bothering to answer this guy is a waste of time.

But on the other hand, Liberals opposed off-shore drilliing and drilling in ANWR.

What are they supposed to do then?

They could start by drilling the land they already have the rights to drill.

When we refuse to allow drilling, build refineries, build coal and nuclear power plants and otherwise expand our supplies of energy, this is what happens.

Don't blame the oil companies. Blame the environmentalists and Democrats in congress who for 30 years have together blocked every attempt for us to expand our domestic supply of energy.

The Democrats WILL cave. Environmentalists will sue to stop us from expanding our supplies just like they've done for 30 odd years, but the American people are getting fed up.

Watch what happens.

I begrudge Big Oil's market manipulations. Buying and shutting down electric trains, cars and battery technology. Whether they play a direct role in the hoarding that is going on is less clear, thoug I wouldn't put it past them.

Should anyone be surprized that two Politicians with a lifetime stake in the oil industry have hit us big before they leave office? Political bribery pays big dividends. It has gotten to the point where it is the only way ANYTHING GETS DONE.

Big Government and Big Corporations operate EXACTLY like the mafia, killing, bribing, and stealing. The one big difference is they've made it legal for themselves. That's what power is all about.

When we refuse to allow drilling, build refineries, build coal and nuclear power plants and otherwise expand our supplies of energy, this is what happens.....

When the current president refuses to develop a coherent national solar power policy and move forward with developing alternative energy sources because he wants to "study the environmental impacts", this is what happens.

What the hell. Solar power does not have any impact, except for shade underneath the panels.

Nobody is keeping the oil companies from drilling the leases they already hold. Coal power plants are inherently polluting and coal mining just destroys the land.

Sean, I cant help but think you are a tool.

SEANR, you are woefully misinformed here, bud.

So, to address the "we need more refineries" question:

"Would the construction of new refineries help to lower fuel prices?

'It won't do a thing,' says geologist Ken Deffeyes, author of Beyond Oil: The View from Hubbert's Peak. The problem, he says, is not a lack of refining capabilities but a shortage of crude oil to be refined."

I own thousands of shares of XOM stock so I have made a fortune. Exxon Mobil's profits are good for people who work at Exxon Mobil, it's shareholders, customers and the country.

If obstructionist Nancy Pelosi would ever let the House vote on the drilling ban repeal, then Exxon could use some of those huge profits to drill in Anwar and in the Continental shelf. That would be good for America. God bless President George W. Bush and the U.S.A.

"...then Exxon could use some of those huge profits to drill in Anwar and in the Continental shelf."

What's preventing them, today, from drilling on all the land on which they already hold leases?

Crickets in Fort Worth?

Let's see, Danforth; record profits...hmmm...yeah, I am an oil company and I want things to...err...change? So that I can make less money and lower prices?

When will some of these people figure out that the oil companies are looking to lower prices, spend more on "exploration" (c'mon, you know it's just drilling) and refining?

Exxon needs to find another venue to spend money. Perhaps, take a cue from WWII (FDR had Japanese AMERICANS rounded up and put in camps).

Exxon could lobby Bushco to open camps and round up Arab AMERICANS. Think about the profits to be made from building these camps. FDR was so great for the country (and the civil liberties of AMERICANS).....Bush could be too!

Jabberwocky

"I can't help but think you're a tool."

Wow. That's brilliant. You must have been the captain of the debate team at the elementary school you graduated from.

As I said, watch what happens. When Democrats finally domestic drilling, and they WILL eventually cave, environmentalists will sue to stop it.

The place where I live is building a state of the art coal fired power plant and it was the environmentalists who sued to stop it. That was before the Democrats lost in their attempts to keep it from happening in the first place.

Democrats and environmentalists have worked together for 30 odd years to keep us from increasing our supplies of energy, but now the American people are getting fed up with them.

Sold 10,000 shares at $91. Thanks for running it up from $50.

A frequently repeated lie on this site is that "Democrats", "Liberals" and "Environmentalists" have made it impossible to increase our refining capacity. Not that anyone wants to live next to one.

The record is clear. Decades ago, Big Oil identified refining capacity as their biggest obstacle to increased profits, particularly on the West Coast. And so they set about systematically reducing it, without losing their capitla investments. Emails to that effect came out of Congressional Hearings. That is the truth, not the lies Rethuglican Apologists spread with their disciplined talking point lies.

Isn't TV wonderful, with enough money you can manufacture opinion, on lead, nicotine, bovine growth hormone (Monsanto's contribution to our milk supply which is illegal in Canada and Europe)energy price cause and effect.

The list of manipulated facts are endless. People are uninformed, but the truth is available. Counterpunch, The Nation and Free Speech TV, a breath of fresh air.

When we refuse to allow drilling, build refineries, build coal and nuclear power plants and otherwise expand our supplies of energy, this is what happens.
posted by SEANR

You're so quick to point the finger at the Democrats and environmentalists. Sure politicians are partially to blame for this situation, don't forget the Republicans! Maybe you should point that finger at big oil who spends more money then you could ever hope to see in an effort to suppress alternative energy sources. Ask them why their refineries operate (the ones that are actually being used) at 75-80%. If we did let them drill off our shores ask them why they're opposed to selling our oil only on the domestic market.

You swallow lies and misinformation like it's a damn cheeseburger. Pull your head out of your ass and do some research for yourself.

DANFORTH,

The reason that Exxon doesn't drill on some of the leases it already holds is simple: there is either no oil there or it is of higher cost to extract than where they are already drilling.

I honestly don't care if you people believe me or not. Just remember what I've told you:

When we signal to the world our intent to increase the overall supplies of our energy (drilling, building refineries, building coal and nuclear plants as well as harnessing solar and wind) then the price of oil will plummet.

Just remember what I told you. It may take awhile longer, but when Democrats finally do relent, AND THEY WILL, watch what happens to the price of gas.

The reason that Exxon doesn't drill on some of the leases it already holds is simple: there is either no oil there or it is of higher cost to extract than where they are already drilling.

Posted by fwthom

Uh huh, sure. Businesses will always pay to lease a non performing asset. They just LOVE GIVING MONEY AWAY.

Everyone agrees that the answer is alternative engery yet when tried it is blocked by NIMBY.

Sold 10,000 shares at $91. Thanks for running it up from $50.

I highly doubt that

DANFORTH - Just a thought: How much time is left on the leases to justify drilling; also, maybe there's no oil under the land in question.

Vern is just awfull. I'm learning here that even bothering to answer this guy is a waste of time.

Posted by Shawn at 2008-07-31 09:55 AM | Reply

Translation: Vernon cuts my dick off with every post because he has facts and reason against my bullshit and whining. I want to go back to Kos, where everyone agrees with me and I don't hafta think.

there is either no oil there or it is of higher cost to extract than where they are already drilling.

Posted by fwthom

So you're saying that they are just leasing the land for...what???...laughs?

Investing some of those profits in more drilling would increase supply a bit, investing it in alternative energy sources would reduce our need for oil and would put us on the road to energy independence permanently. The huge profits can be invested or they could be taxed and then the government could do the investing. That is the only real way we will ever solve the energy problem. The calls for more drilling are really just attempts to lure voters towards the failed energy policies of Bush/Cheney. Funny how this need for additional drilling leases coincides with the change in policy in Iraq now that it is pretty clear our oil companies will not get the oil privatized and their 30 year PSA agreements. The war didn't work out like they planned so now it is plab B, drill here at home on every beach, every piece of pristine land, every park.

And Exxon is down 3% on the day, and down 15% from earlier in the year, because of falling oil prices and plunging refining margins.

What we need is a good dose of Obamanomics, with punitive taxation on whatever margins are left.

Profit margin of ExxonMobil: 10.8%
At Apple Computer: 14.94%
At RIMM: 21.7%

Of course, no talk about windfall profits taxes on tech companies from the Obama camp. Wonder if it's just coincidence that most of their contributions are going to Obama?

So you're saying that they are just leasing the land for...what???...laughs?

Posted by geezer1
* * * * *

There are exploratory leases, and there are recovery and drilling leases. Once you discover oil on a leased patch of federal land, you have to go through another process to drill on it.

The Dems have done a great job of confusing the public on this issue, so it's not really your fault. Of course, anyone with Google could have learned it himself, so maybe it is.

Nobody is keeping the oil companies from drilling the leases they already hold.

Posted by Jabberwocky at 2008-07-31 10:22 AM | Reply

Jabber (and Eva and Dan for that matter) --

Liberal Democrats have placed so many rules on drilling that it's impossible to move forward on current leases. Enviromental wackos filing lawsuits is just the beginning.

Once again, it's Democrats who make life hard for poor people and working people. By restricting domestic energy, they 'tax' the poor and give it to me.

Mad: I'm a winner. Every time a Liberal buys gas, I make money. I'm moving to a place with excellent mass transit so I don't need a car. That's just more money to reinvest.

Thanks Jabber, Danforth, Eva, Danni, and all the rest of you clowns. You give me money every day.

The huge profits can be invested or they could be taxed and then the government could do the investing.

Posted by danni at 2008-07-31 11:01 AM | Reply

Yes, Danni, let's ask the same people who oversee the Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, the Postal Service, VA Medical, No Child Left Behind, and No-Bid Contracts to Halliburton -- to now get billions more and allocate it to politically correct energy technology.

You have far more blind faith than any Christian would think of. Do you have your plane ticket yet for North Korea?

Vernon, are you saying all environmentalists are "wackos"? Is that how you view things?

I am not entirely discounting your statement, however, I would be grateful if you could provide a few examples of how the Democrats have impeded alternative energy and oil exploration. From what I've read, the Republicans are equal, if not more, culpable.

I suppose where we most differ is in that you seem to be someone who measure the value of one's self worth in terms of dollars. If you can make a buck, it must be good? I'm not condeming you for that, just want to clarify. There's a lot of money in crime, too, does that make it noble?

Nobody is keeping the oil companies from drilling the leases they already hold.

Posted by Jabberwocky at 2008-07-31 10:22 AM | Reply

Just the marketplace. Oil companies purchase (rent) a lease in the hopes that it will pan out. They then dump considerable cash into prospecting the leased land to see if they hit pay dirt. More times than not they come up short - small yields or problematic yields which prove to be unprofitable if mined. I guess you guys feel they should tap a paltry yield at a loss just to say they drilled on a leased site?

WHAT is WRONG WITH this PICTURE ????

Record Profits !!!!

Once again, it's Democrats who make life hard for poor people and working people. By restricting domestic energy, they 'tax' the poor and give it to me.

* * * *

That's exactly the way I feel. Funny how the enviros and the Dems--along with some boneheaded Republicans--have made such a mess of energy policy. Even food prices are 40% higher than they should be, courtesy of moronic ethanol mandates.

And they hurt poor people the most. The college professor crowd, the tech entrepreneurs, the wealthy trial lawyers--the big contributors to Obama--aren't even touched. Which I find a little amusing.

Well, I may as well make money too. And I hate traffic anyhow. Glad there's a lot less of it.

I suppose where we most differ is in that you seem to be someone who measure the value of one's self worth in terms of dollars.

Posted by evashogouki at 2008-07-31 11:22 AM | Reply

Gosh, Eva, that was actually sane, so I really should respond.

No, I do not measure anybody in terms of dollars. That's actually a Liberal attitude: they envy successful people who work hard, they envy business owners who create jobs. Liberals want to take money away from hard working people and give it away to those they think are deserving.

I only mention my oil investments because it's a fun way to chap Liberals. They want to scream and complain about 'big oil' but ignore the fact that these are public companies owned by individual investors and pension funds.

If they want to obstruct domestic production the beneficiary is people like me. You gotta love the idea that every time Danni fills her tank, she's giving me money -- a lot of money because of her politics.

I have money is a wide variety of areas, from biotech to emerging markets; I recently took a stronger position in Malaysia -- English speaking and hard-working people. They will be the next Asian Tiger.

But the key to smart investing is recognizing trends and getting into it early.

But it's just money, which is nice because it allows you to do other things. I get much greater satisfaction from my businesses. My favorite is the foreign nurses. These are very dedicated, hard working people who want to accomplish 2 things:

1. They want to care for their patients, often in rural (and inner city) areas where there is a severe shortage.
2. They want to send money home to help their families with food, education, medical care

The only benafactor short term and long term to drilling is Exxon and gang!

Wait till the Fall comes and the debates begin, old albino dwarf McCain is going to be defending the poor fing oil companies while Obama gets those facts across: Pro Drilling is pro Exoon and 44 billion profits

Thank you for making me rich, Liberals. You're like my Jimmy Swaggert or James Dobson: your religion makes money for me

Posted by vernon

Hey moron: that will really get Indepent voters on your side

"Dems--along with some boneheaded Republicans--have made such a mess of energy policy"

Are you kidding??? No Dems were even allowed into the secret energy meetings. You guys just make it up as you go along.

that will really get Indepent voters on your side

Posted by AngelofTRUTH at 2008-07-31 11:55 AM | Reply

Hey moron! I'm not running for office and I don't give a flying fuck who Indepent voters go for.

BTW, Indepent? WTF? Is that old people wearing diapers? Or are you the product of public education, and therefore unable to communicate in English?

No Dems were even allowed into the secret energy meetings. You guys just make it up as you go along.

This country's energy problem predates this administration. Also, it's congress that passes all of these laws.

BTW - name for me one thing your beloved Dems have done, or even advocated, that would have resulted in lower energy costs.

True enough. And since Obama's meetings aren't secret, I can only conclude that he believes that the internal combustion engine can run on windmills and sunshine.

No complaints, though. If Obama's energy policies go through, it will be the same as the greatest long-term market call on oil futures in the history of the world. Four years of straight up, starting in about May of next year.

" a lot of money because of her politics."

At 35 mpg not really very much money comes from my gas purchases especially considering I drive less than 12,000 miles per year. This year I bet it's under 10,000.

Pro Drilling is pro Exoon and 44 billion profits

Posted by AngelofTRUTH at 2008-07-31 11:54 AM | Reply

Pro-drilling is lower costs for consumers and energy independence for America.

Why do you hate America? Why do you hate poor people in America?

Vernon you sound like my dad, in that you rely on a rigid stereotype of what a "liberal" is and ascribe negative bevaviours to all.

I don't think liberals act out of jealousy any more than I believe conservatives don't give to charity. I realize it makes it easier to form an argument by pigeonholing a group, but it's disengenuous.

I am glad you are doing well, but I doubt that is because of your political leanings. Me, I have done the money thing for the past 15 years, but it's not fulfilling. I am getting into law enforcement at about a third of what I make now, and spend my free time in the national guard. I guess I get more satisfaction by doing something for someone else...who knows... I do wish I had been smarter with my money, e.g., more investments, like you, but I did do okay in the CA real estate market between 2001 and 2005.

"Pro-drilling is lower costs for consumers and energy independence for America."

That is b.s. and you know it. This call for more drilling is the phoniest campaign crap and nothing else. If more drilling were required the Republicans ruled the Congress for six years with a Republican president, demand did not skyrocket since 2006. This is just a Republican attempt to find an issue they can convince Joe Six Pack that they are on the right side of.

Vernon I do not believe for an instant that increased domestic crude production will lower prices for consumers. They are going to have to pay for the exploration. Why would they even increase production if it's going to eat into their profits? Patriotism? Hardly!

I think the high gas prices are the only way America will enact alternative policies and reduce consumption. When we had cheaper gas, people just bought bigger and thirstier cars to eat it up. If prices come down, they'll do the same thing again.

not really very much money comes from my gas purchases

Posted by danni at 2008-07-31 12:17 PM | Reply

Every little bit helps, Danni. Specially coz there are millions of bipolar loons like you giving me a little money while they screech about their self-inflicted high prices.

I don't know which I like better. The money you give me or the bitching about the money you give me.

Or the Faux concern for the poor, who pay a greater portion of their income, and often drive older, less efficient vehicles.

Hmmmmmmm ........ on further thought, I like the money you give me, every time you turn the ignition key .... paborito

Obama the flop eared flip flopper WILL change his mind about DRILLING. He may have gotton where he is by affirmative action and playing the race card but he does know which way the political winds are blowing.

Pro-drilling is lower costs for consumers and energy independence for America.

Why do you hate America? Why do you hate poor people in America?

Why do you hate the working people of this nation?
You area liar anda bufoon!! Pro drilling will not lower SHIT. But tahts OK, you can be on te side of the 44 billion profit, i will be on th side of teh working man and women.

By the way ashhole, who would Jesus side with??? (cant wait to hear this)

Sold 10,000 shares at $91. Thanks for running it up from $50.

I highly doubt that

Posted by _2112

You can doubt whatever you want it is a free country.

"Every little bit helps, Danni. Specially coz there are millions of bipolar loons like you giving me a little money while they screech about their self-inflicted high prices."

No Vern, I didn't vote for the tax cuts that make that 44 billion in profits worth only 26.2 billion in year 2000 dollars. The folks that elected Bush, you would be one I am sure, are responsible for that. Let me give you some advice, trade your profit dollars in for Euros before the entire value evaporates.

Vernon, are you saying all environmentalists are "wackos"? Is that how you view things?

That's what Rush tells him.

"BTW - name for me one thing your beloved Dems have done, or even advocated, that would have resulted in lower energy costs."

Staying out of Iraq would have helped. Of course I don't believe the Dems ever had anything approaching a coherent, unified position on that. Some Dems definitely wanted to stay out of Iraq.

Republicans need to develop two campaigns. One for dumb folks which will use the drilling argument and freedom for Iraqis as reasons to vote Rethug and another seperate argument for smarter folks based on tax cuts, personal wealth and disregard for average Americans to gain their votes.
Don't use the wrong argument, figure out who you are talking to, using the wrong one will alert the dumber folks to your dishonesty or alert the smarter folks to your lack of logic in regards to economic matters.

"BTW - name for me one thing your beloved Dems have done, or even advocated, that would have resulted in lower energy costs."

Raising CAFE standards for cars and trucks. Lowering demand has already caused the price to go down some, if all cars were getting much higher mileage demand would never have risen so high.

"BTW - name for me one thing your beloved Dems have done, or even advocated, that would have resulted in lower energy costs."

Raising CAFE standards for cars and trucks. Lowering demand has already caused the price to go down some, if all cars were getting much higher mileage demand would never have risen so high.

Thanks Jabber, Danforth, Eva, Danni, and all the rest of you clowns. You give me money every day.

Posted by vernon at 2008-07-31 11:12 AM

sounds a whole lot like a parasite to me...

Danni,

A decent point regarding CAFE. However, it does little in addressing the costs of fuel itself.

Also, CAFE is stupid. Their original proposal would have killed the auto industry, thus killing thousands of beloved manufacturing jobs. The Dems in congress have no fucking clue when it comes to the auto industry, sans 1 - Levin. Thank God he has enough clout within his own party to engineer a comprimise CAFE proposal.

Are you people truly that stupid? Record profits, NOT record profit margins. At 8.5% margin I couldn't make a living. At a 20% profit margin Starbucks is closing stores. At 15% I have to consult with my sales manager to make the deal. 8.5% is not "an obscene profit". When you have revenues higher than any other corporation on Earth, what do you expect? If Wal-Mart made profits of 11.7 billion, they'd have to do almost $400 BILLION to make their typical 3% margin. Yet if they did so, would it be "obscene"? 3%???

If you can't see the difference between profits and margin then you have no right to comment to the negative here. If YOU had to work at an 8.5% profit margin, that would equate to the government taking 91.5 cents of every dollar you earned. That's right- you'd earn 8.5 cents for every dollar you earned. Tell me how that's an "obscene" margin. Idiots.

UFM82

I love how libs use the word 'obscene' when characterizing profit.

UFM makes a great point, margin is the telling figure.

I also love how libs view profit as evil.

Jeff, American industry has always filled the voids left by obsolete/unsuccessful endeavors. Domestic automakers have no one to blame but themselves for their current state. The Japanese and Germans are way ahead on this because they think globally. Actually, GM and Ford have been global for a long time, but have eschewed bringing those superior products here. I know Ford will be bringing in several formerly Euro-only models, as will GM. I am rooting for GM, though.

The companies that survive and flourish will be the innovators. The status-quo gets you Expeditions and Suburbans. If, and I hope it doesn't happen, Chrysler fails, I would hope that jobs in the emerging alt. energy, etc., industries will fill the voids.

UFM82, No, that comparison is invalid. The true comparison would not be taxation, but what millions of American households are now dealing with: stagnant or diminishing wages versus rapidly rising inflation and energy costs. Many families likely have a 1 percent approximate "profit margin" between what they earn and the cost of living. It's not like a working person can just raise the value of his or her compensation at the workplace to make "record profits."

Oil is not a luxury item. Should an agricultural corporation be reaping record profits in the light of widespread starvation? (just hypothetical in a moralistic kind of way).

Will never buy anything from Exxon/Mobil, ever.

If YOU had to work at an 8.5% profit margin, that would equate to the government taking 91.5 cents of every dollar you earned. That's right- you'd earn 8.5 cents for every dollar you earned. Tell me how that's an "obscene" margin. Idiots.

UFM82

Well if I could write off all my "costs" as tax deductible expenses then an 8.5% net profit margin would be very acceptable.

If you were honest you would realize that fact. Does an individual get a tax deduction for their telephone, electric, gas, auto, groceries, labor, etc.?

No, but a business does.

Does an individual get a tax dedcution for depreciation on his/her residence? No, but a business does.

You are a corporate shill apologist.

P.S. Fucking good riddance, Vermin. May your next Filipina whore be infected with the Black Death.

Eva,

During the '90's I was screaming at Ford, GM and Chrysler. They were dumping all of their R&D into trucks and SUV's and were allowing their midsize sedans (which are the true lifeboat to any auto company) wallow in shitiness.

They have been playing catch-up ever since. It's gotten so bad that the Hyundai Sonata is superior to it's American counterparts. Hyundai!

726,

Why don't you address his point.

OK, so the comparison between business and person was a bad analogy. However, his point regarding profit margins still stands - and you haven't addressed it.

This is wonderful news for our resident oil men, Cheney & Bush. The secret meetings with their oil buds have paid off handsomely for everyone except for the American people. Why do you think they have given so much $$$ to McCain's campaign? They want that gravey train to keep on rollin.

But we still don't know why gas is so high.

What a crock.

"Also, CAFE is stupid. Their original proposal would have killed the auto industry, thus killing thousands of beloved manufacturing jobs."

Calling CAFE stupid seems pretty ridiculous when you consider that what the stupid American auto makers needed to do was design and build efficient cars that would have met or exceeded those CAFE standards. There would never have been a need for CAFE if the management of the big three automakers didn't have their heads so far up their butts that it was ridiculous. They could only build and sell trucks and SUVs because the CAFE standards hadn't changed since the 80's now they are paying the price for their own lack of foresight.
Had we continued to raise CAFE standards we would not now be in the mess we are in and Yes CAFE standards could have kept the price of gas down by reducing demand....

UFM82

They don't "earn" the money. They don't "work" for the money. They invest their money and sit on their ass around the pool drinking Mai Tais. The people who work and earn money in the oil business are the workers on the derricks and in the fields---comparitively speaking--they don't get shit.

How many corporate executives do you know Bob?

I know quite a few and they work their asses off - they are literally married to their work.

BUSH/CHENEY selected by the Supreme Court to the Presidency in 2000, when gas was $1.80 a Gallon an a barrel of Oil was $25 a Barrel. Both BUSH/CHENEY are Oil men from Texas who own thier rise to power from the Oil Companies. An now the Republician Party would have the Country believe that it Senator Obama an the Democratic Party that is responsible for the Gas prices of today. GIMME A FUCKING BREAK.....

Now we have $140 Barrel of Oil an $4 Gallon of gas, an Exxon has a Quarter profit of nearly 12 Billion, Thank the Supreme Court and its REPUBLICIANS members for giving America the Government they deserve.

Posted by celisary at 2008

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH
HHHHH

thanks for the good laugh,,,,,the only thing more moronic is what obama said today..or was it last week that the oil problem was all about the spectulators. so if they were the problem last week why arent they still the problem this week instead of exxon..............

and here we have liberal fucks who would just love to interject a little 'chavez; into our country,.

oh yeah and of course it was all started with the election of 00..........you pricks are pathetic

Will never buy anything from Exxon/Mobil, ever.

Posted by Jomama at 2008
good for you,
I dont care how much they make but I dont buy it either...
but do you buy from citgo.........thats the chavez oil company, you know.........at least in a round a bout way????

I know quite a few and they work their asses off - they are literally married to their work.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-07-31 01:14 PM |

So who are you? Their towel boy?

From: liberal fuck who would just love to interject a little 'chavez; into our country

Can't be any worse than the facist moron we have now. At least Chavez has a brain.

However, his point regarding profit margins still stands - and you haven't addressed it.

Posted by JeffJ

What do you want me to say? They made 8.5%. Fine. If you don't like it, don't buy their product.

But the best part is when the executives come out and talk about their r&d spending as a reason to justify the high profits. Their r&d has basically remained stagnant since the 80's and the profits are used to repurchase stock, not increase exploration.

I also love it when they say they are "just passing on their higher costs". Well no, they are passing along their higher costs plus a profit margin on those costs as well. If they were just passing along their costs and not profit on those costs their profit margin would decrease.

It is what it is. They spin.

We need to replace oil as our source of energy if we want to rid ourselves of our dependency on foreign oil and exxon mobil.

Does this make you feel better?

they are literally married to their work.

Posted by JeffJ

And for that they are worthy of their salaries, perks and golden parachutes?

So you know a few fortune 500 ceos? Good.

It is all an inbreeding circle jerk regarding these ceo's and boards of directors. They all serve on each other's boards and thus set the salary for their friends and their freinds set their salaries. It is by no means objective in any way. And has little to do with actual performance.

It is by no means objective in any way. And has little to do with actual performance.

You have no clue as to what you are talking about.

Raising CAFE standards for cars and trucks. Lowering demand has already caused the price to go down some, if all cars were getting much higher mileage demand would never have risen so high.

Posted by danni
* * * *

That's hysterical. In 2005, 67 Senators voted against raising CAFE standards, including Clinton and Kerry. And in the measure tha just passed, the final threshholds don't have to be met until 2020.

I hear all the time how silly it is to talk about ANWR or drilling offshore, because we won't see the benefits for up to five years. But I'm supposed to be glad about CAFE minimums being raised a decade away?

You libs are funny.

And by the way--are you saying NOW that it's supply and demand? NOT speculation? NOT energy companies manipulating prices?

LOL. When prices go up, it's all conspiracy theories and Bush oil men. When they come down, it's because people are driving more responsibly, cutting demand for fuels.

Citgo? Nope. Am/Pm BP for me. No Shell, no Mobil, no Exxon, not never.

You have no clue as to what you are talking about.

Posted by JeffJ at 2008-07-31 01:55 PM

You don't either. By the way, how's the hymen coming along? Healed yet?

But on the other hand, Liberals opposed off-shore drilliing and drilling in ANWR.

What are they supposed to do then?

Posted by member2586 at 2008-07-31 09:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

Those poor, poor oil copmanies. What are they to do?

How about they drill the hundreds of thousands of acres that are already set aside of oil exploration that have all the permits in place? No, they don't want that. Instead, they sit on the leases and won't let any other Oil Co's drill the land and then whine about Alaska and offshore. They sit on the leases to artificially inflate the prices and aren't made to 'use it or lose it' That's what needs to change.

Keep rehashing the same silly shit about Santa Barbara, Exxon Valdez, etc.

I am Big Oil: in the sense that I own oil stocks that continue to pay huge dividends, which I reinvest.

That's money you are stealing from children and poor people and working people, and giving to me. I didn't do the thievery, you did. Every time you buy gas for $4 a gallon, remember that some of it goes into my pocket.

I'm moving to Asia this week, to a place where I don't even need a car. So the money I put into the Honda is now more money to reinvest in your stupid theology.

Thank you for making me rich, Liberals. You're like my Jimmy Swaggert or James Dobson: your religion makes money for me

Posted by vernon at 2008-07-31 09:16 AM | Reply | Flag

This is actually a bitter, angry boy who is most likely lying about his situation.

It takes a real shit-stain to come on here and and 'Na Na, Na, Na, I'm making cash off the deaths of soldiers in Iraq'.

God for you Vernon. Good for you.

The place where I live is building a state of the art coal fired power plant and it was the environmentalists who sued to stop it. That was before the Democrats lost in their attempts to keep it from happening in the first place.

Democrats and environmentalists have worked together for 30 odd years to keep us from increasing our supplies of energy, but now the American people are getting fed up with them.

Posted by SeanR at 2008-07-31 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag

HA!

Good luck with that. Stand down wind of the plant when its in operation with a Geiger counter and watch the thing go crazy.

As for 'state of the art coal plant', there's no such thing. It takes 40% of the plants output just to collect the carbon that would otherwise be released, and there's the problem with storing it. Sounds brilliant!

"It takes a real shit-stain to come on here and and 'Na Na, Na, Na, I'm making cash off the deaths of soldiers in Iraq'."

Kinda like when obama said politics are more important then the troops?

"Thank you Exxon-Mobil"

signed:

The people who choose to own stock in the company instead of whine about it

"Democrats and environmentalists have worked together for 30 odd years to keep us from increasing our supplies of energy, but now the American people are getting fed up with them."

Yeah, you can tell they are getting fed up with Dems when you look at the 2006 election and the probably filibuster proof Democratic majority coming after November....hahahahaha!!!

Salmonella, you mean when Obama was asked by the Pentagon not to visit injured soldiers in Germany because of the inevitable press following? That what you are talking about?

I'd rather have a president who employed diplomacy that could hopefully allow a drawdown of troops so that there were fewer casualties than one who casually sends them to die for questionable reasons and uses them as press-op backdrops.

"Thank You American-Suckers"

signed:

The people who control your life and know you can do nothing about it

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 03:30 PM

snicker

The people who control your life and know you can do nothing about it

It must really suck to have people control your life and be impotent to do anything about it except

snicker

Glad I'm not you.

I like high gas prices. I used to have a roundtrip commute that was 5-6 hrs/day and now it is less than 4 hrs which has made a horrible commute much better. High gas prices have dramatically reduced commutes in Southern California. High gas prices are not only good for my commute but good for the environment, right libs?

So Goat what are you doing to avoid high energy costs? Not driving right?

How's that new Electric Car of yours doing?

Its not me friend has a lack of control. Though I'd sure rather have better choices and do do indeed wonder why there are not there...or you it seems... I manage fine even with my large family. But, I'm betting you are single which is, of course, cheating.

And I am glad I am not you... who cannot see that there are lot of folks out there in your country who are suffering while the OIL execs live it up on our Blood and Treasure and Future.

Unless you are stinking rich you understand exactly what I am talking about or you are a frickin blind "sheep" and then it doesn't really matter what I say does it?

Goat

I don't think you are a sheep for I have seen you think for yourself.

So, if you are Stinking Rich why are you even here?

If you are not Stinking Rich are you blind?

THERE IS A WAR on!

MAKE THAT TWO!

So, why should we think it is even remotely OK that the OIL companies (for WHOM we are basically going to WAR for in one of these WARS) should make these OUTRAGEOUS profits while our children die even if you and a few Americans do manage to get a "piece of the Blood Money action".

I just noticed I butchered this sentence...wow.

Its not me friend has a lack of control. Though I'd sure rather have better choices and do do indeed wonder why there are not there...or you it seems... I manage fine even with my large family. But, I'm betting you are single which is, of course, cheating.

should be

Its not me my friend that has a lack of control over my life...or you it seems... Though I'd sure rather have better choices and I do indeed wonder why there are not there sometimes.

I manage fine even with my large family. But, I'm betting you are single which is, of course, cheating.

there better!

You have no clue as to what you are talking about.

Posted by JeffJ

Why because you say so?

That is ripe.

Can you honestly say that Nardelli earned his money from Home Depot? Did he work his ass off?

Is that why he got the boot?

Sure, plenty of CEO's get fired for doing a superb job.

The people who choose to own stock in the company instead of whine about it

Posted by goatman

That's right. Been buying large blocks of it since the 1980's. I think when I started it was around $20 per share.

But the last five years have been the best!

JeffJ,

However my point regarding the profit margins still stands -- I noticed you have not addressed it.

JOMAMA - good idea not to buy, it those of us who bought many years ago who reap the benefit. Never buy when a company is riding high.

Of course, I know what you really mean, not to buy stock in successful [i.e., profitable] companies]; well, there are many companies not making a profit awaiting your astute investments:)

So Goat what are you doing to avoid high energy costs? Not driving right?

Well, since I don't commute, my driving is mainly to the beach. But to answer your question, no, I haven't given it up. But since I still use the product, I don't whine about it or the people who provide it to me. That was my point which was lost on you, I see.

How's that new Electric Car of yours doing?

You mean the electric car that uses electricity that is generated by burning fossil fuels? It is as ineffecient and non-economical as ever.

Unless you are stinking rich

I'm not, but I do admit I manage my money better than most people, so I live better with what I have than a lot of people.

That's right. Been buying large blocks of it since the 1980's. I think when I started it was around $20 per share.

Either you or your financial broker is very smart. Good work. Wish I had been buying it that far back. (I was stuck on high tech at the time)

It must really suck to have people control your life and be impotent to do anything about it except

snicker

Glad I'm not you.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 04:48 PM

Glad I'm not your ex-wife.

Snicker.

So, why should we think it is even remotely OK that the OIL companies (for WHOM we are basically going to WAR for in one of these WARS) should make these OUTRAGEOUS profits while our children die even if you and a few Americans do manage to get a "piece of the Blood Money action".

I've no problem with corporations making a profit. Your allegation of blood money is off though. I challenge you to name one industry that is not profiting from the war. Airlines are from shuttling soldiers around. Telecom is for obvious reasons. Of course anyone who subcontracts to the DoD is getting rich.

What is a good non blood money investment, in your opinion?

Let me complete that sentence for you...

I've no problem with corporations making a profit... on War.

Let's leave aside the possible fact that other companies are also making a profit on war (you are deflecting).

The war in Iraq IS about the Oil.

The Oil companies are making more money than EVER in the HISTORY of making money and you are basically OK with this fact because, and let me get this straight,

YOU GOT YOURS.

Goat,

I have followed one rule in investing.... understand what they do and how they make money.

All those dotcom busts where hyping "revenue" as evidence of financial soundness, but if you lose $1 per item sold, selling more of them means losing more money.

I won't buy on the recommendation of anyone unless I can understand it as good as the people that work there.

Right now I think oil stocks are overvalued and that is why I have been taking profit in my holdings and rebalancing what I own.

AS for your contention that an electric car is ineffcient that is hogwash of course.

Let me give you an example.

Let say that Congress got off its ASS and pass the Clean Energy Stimulus Act thereby giving me a 30% rebate on my Solar Power system.

I install a 20,000 (approx) Solar system on my home.

I get 30% of that back at the end of the year.

I pay on the rest for 10-15 instead of an electric bill.

I now have FREE Electricity for my home for life.

I buy an Electric/gas Car with a 100 mile electricpowered range 400 gaspowered range (the Chevy Volt Next Generation comes to mind).

I now can commute for "free" for the life of the battery.

Yes, the battery will need to be replaced someday. But seriously that technology should have been in place years ago and we know who squashed that don't.

something got dropped...

We DO know who squashed that new Electric Car Battery Technology don't WE?

Donner,

Not to mention what you save in maintenance costs on the electric car. How many oil changes do you have to do on an electric motor? Coolant changes? How long has the electric motor on anyone refrigerator been running without service?

The entrenched industries that support our addiction to oil do not want to see new technologies put them out of business.

Let's leave aside the possible fact that other companies are also making a profit on war (you are deflecting).

It's not a deflection, it's the truth. To deny it is to deflect.

They sit on the leases to artificially inflate the prices and aren't made to 'use it or lose it' That's what needs to change.

Posted by COMMONSENSE
* * * *

I've got good news for you. It already IS "use it or lose it"--that's what a LEASE is. If I rent a house for a year, but don't move in until November . . .

Gotta say. The Dems have done a great job of disinformation here. And considering your username, you don't really live up to your own moniker. With oil prices at RECORD HIGHS, would they be drilling anywhere they can get to it?

Duh.

Right now I think oil stocks are overvalued

I agree that the oil companies themselves are, but I do not think the drilling companies are. But I'm no financial industry analyst, so I could be wrong.

Donnerboy,

That's exactly why I get so angry when people say we Americans are just selfish, use too much oil, and we complain too much when it's really big oil, the auto industries, and their big buck backers who squelch any finding of alternative means of energy which might get in the way of their oil profits.

How am I and other average Americans suppose to have the power to stop them? Yet we average Americans with no political power (or big political bribe bucks) are the ones always being blamed. It gets old, especially when they know who is behind stifling efforts for new means of alterantive energy and continue to use the American people as their scapegoat.

from your link about the movie about the electric car and who was responsible for making sure it never got to the marketplace. Sure enough, it's the usual players:

The film details the California Air Resources Board's reversal of the ["ZEM" - Zero Emissions Mandate] after suits from automobile manufacturers, the oil industry, and the George W. Bush administration. It points out that Bush's chief influences, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, and Andrew Card, are all former executives and board members of oil and auto companies...

By the way, it's true about California and the strict emissons controls we have out here. You can't believe what you have to do to pass a smog check in CA only in order to renew your car registration -- not to mention the added cost. I don't know if it's like that in other states but there are very tough emissions control laws here in CA -- tough smog checks on your car required every 2 years.

so lets try and do the numbers (a the risk of looking like a Vern)

I get a loan for approx $20,000

I get 30% back that equals 6,000 back.

So I now have a loan out for 14,000 on a $20,000 Solar System on my Home. (An immediate 6,000 profit should I sell my house right?)

If done correctly it will supply all my power needs and make my Electric bill go to zero (average)(the meter will probably go backwards a lot but the clever electric companies do not pay for the extra power...yet) This will make me want to buy more electric stuff cause running it will be "free".

So, now I make payments on a 14,000 loan. Since the life of the Solar systems are now rated up to 20-30 years I can get a 20 year loan easily and those payments would be about $140 bucks a month.

That is about 1/2 of my average monthly power bill.

I have also increased the equity in my home should I sell it.

I can use this power to charge my Electric Car for "Free".

And I can't even begin to calculate the effects on the economy, the electric grid, our national confidence, the price of oil, and our national security.

So again... how is this inefficient and non-economical?

Donnerboy: there already is a 30% federal rebate on solar. So you need to get busy on the installation. See? So you can stop bitching, and start doing!

Let me know how it goes. Regards.

So again... how is this inefficient and non-economical?

How does it feel to be one of the very few who is wise enough to see the economical advantages to owning an electric car?

Congratulations! I'm glad it works for you.

We DO know who squashed that new Electric Car Battery Technology don't WE

That story is so old, it has dust.

The conspiracy theories that the automakers bought out the patents on the necessary technologies was never proven, even before the patents expired. Now that they have expired, how do the conspiracists explain the lack of electric cars?

If your math is accurate, in terms of the price AND the efficiency--then it still works whether or not the Feds give you a 30% rebate. You're still saving money, every month, whether Uncle Sam pays you 30% to do it, or not.

So why don't you? Why don't you do it on the basis of good economics, instead of expecting Washington to give you a handout to make it happen?

re solar panels, free electricity, and cars:

I read once and saw the math that it would take ~ 1/5 of an acre of solar panels to run an average house AND charge an electric car enough to go 50 miles a day. Who has that kind of space? NOt many

I don't expect you to believe me, but later tonight I'll work up the math and prove it to you. (I love little exercises like this).

But right now I have to go to my pre-tour meeting. I'll get back with you. BUt if you want to google before I get back, it is easy to find and the math is easy to do and understandable even for the layman.

Donnerboy: there already is a 30% federal rebate on solar. So you need to get busy on the installation. See? So you can stop bitching, and start doing!

Let me know how it goes. Regards.

Posted by rightisright at 2008-07-31 06:26 PM

wrong... its capped at $2,000 and expires at the end of the year if Congress doesn't pass the Stimulus package.

That story is so old, it has dust.

very good observation... if we had developed those cars back then just imagine how far we would be now.

Congratulations! I'm glad it works for you.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 06:28 PM

thank you... and it will work...now it is just a matter of how long will it take for me to implement.

And yes RiR as the Problem is Bigger than me I DO expect the government to step up to the plate and lend a helping hand while I do the work and help me provide the funding to solve it. I did not create this mess but I am willing to do my part to help solve it.

Maybe we could tax some of those outrageous oil profits and put them towards this?

Donnerboy -- re solar panels, price, etc.

Here is a link that gives a price for a 1,000 watt system. It is over $4,000. chew on it until I get the actual numbers worked up for you.

I read once and saw the math that it would take ~ 1/5 of an acre of solar panels to run an average house AND charge an electric car enough to go 50 miles a day.

wrong again... it will fit on my roof. The requirement is, of course, a lot of direct Sunshine. And what will all the Global Warming we should be getting plenty of that!

Maybe we could tax some of those outrageous oil profits and put them towards this?

I do agree on a gasoline tax to go towards this. I do not agree with targeting oil companies for a tax. If you want to tax oil corporations for this purpose, you have to tax all corporations.

A gas tax is more fair and it will more tangible to the American people and will be an inducement for them to conserve, unlike corporate taxes.

Here is an unbiased link, donner, "how stuff works". They claim that it would cost about $32,000 for a solar energy system to run a house. That's in the ballpark with the numbers I gave you. It has links to the cons of solar power, but they pretty much say what I already did.

Goat - Jebus! only using half yer brain again?

remember that I said "approximately" but here are some BETTER numbers.

A "typical home" in America can use either electricity or gas to provide heat -- heat for the house, the hot water, the clothes dryer and the stove/oven. If you were to power a house with solar electricity, you would certainly use gas appliances because solar electricity is so expensive. This means that what you would be powering with solar electricity are things like the refrigerator, the lights, the computer, the TV, stereo equipment, motors in things like furnace fans and the washer, etc. Let's say that all of those things average out to 600 watts on average. Over the course of 24 hours, you need 600 watts * 24 hours = 14,400 watt-hours per day.

From our calculations and assumptions above, we know that a solar panel can generate 70 milliwatts per square inch * 5 hours = 350 milliwatt hours per day. Therefore you need about 41,000 square inches of solar panel for the house. That's a solar panel that measures about 285 square feet (about 26 square meters). That would cost around $16,000 right now. Then, because the sun only shines part of the time, you would need to purchase a battery bank, an inverter, etc., and that often doubles the cost of the installation.

And what will all the Global Warming we should be getting plenty of that!

???

Global warming will not make the sun shine brighter. In fact, it will make more clouds due to increased water evaporation, so if anything you will be getting less energy from a solar cell.

Right now, it simply can't compete with the utilities

Currently, an installed PV system will cost somewhere around $9 per peak Watt. To give you an idea of how much a house system would cost, let's consider the Solar House -- a model residential home in Raleigh, North Carolina, with a PV system set up by the North Carolina Solar Center to demonstrate the technology. It's a fairly small home, and it is estimated that its 3.6-kW PV system covers about half of the total electricity needs (this system doesn't use batteries -- it's connected to the grid). Even so, at $9 per Watt, this installed system would cost you around $32,000.

Vernon is full of himself and is probably a Wal-Mart greeter.
But if I'm wrong and he is really is some sort of a Big Oil tycoon, at least he is going to be over in Asia and not our problem anymore.

In summary: The NC small model home gets half its power needs from solar for a $32k system. So to power this house 100% solar, it would take $64k (or a little less for buying bulk, so to speak).

And to power your little wonder car? Keep on opening your wallet, babe.

(oops. sorry for runaway bold)

In summary: The NC small model home gets half its power needs from solar for a $32k system. So to power this house 100% solar, it would take $64k (or a little less for buying bulk, so to speak).

And to power your little wonder car? Keep on opening your wallet, babe.

Isn't it true most of those costs are because the systems aren't mass produced, Goatman? What were cars in 1905?

I understand fuel oil cost in new England averages $2000 per winter. How long before an all solar house recoups that?

My electric and gas bill is ~$150/mo, but I'll say $300/mo since I'm offshore half the time. To make my house 100% solar would cost me $64k. It would take me 213 months, or 18 years to recoup my investment. This of course does not consider maintenance costs.

I don't think it's a good investment.

Isn't it true most of those costs are because the systems aren't mass produced, Goatman?

That could be and I'm sure there is a government conspiracy about the oil companies buying up solar cell technology and preventing mass production.

What were cars in 1905?

I remember my grandmother telling me a long time ago that her dad bought their first car, a Model T, for $600. I have no idea what that relates to in today's dollars or percentage of salary.

I understand fuel oil cost in new England averages $2000 per winter. How long before an all solar house recoups that?

For a $64k system, 32 years, but that of course is considering the entire power consumption of the house, so probably 16 years if half of energy costs go towards heating.

The huge profits can be invested or they could be taxed and then the government could do the investing. That is the only real way we will ever solve the energy problem.

Let's see. Exxon's quarterly profit annualized would be about $48 Billion. Federal government's projected deficit is $48o Billion - and the feds don't pay taxes. In spite of the federal government's obvious inability to manage money, Danni thinks a money losing business can do better than a money making business.

I find myself reading Danni's posts for amusement. She has a solution for everything and it's almost always wrong. I don't think she cares about being rational. She just wants to rule the world.

Bottom line in this battle of links is: If it is such a great idea, why isn't everyone doing it? Money talks, bullshit walks.
A: Because it's not such a great idea.

I don't really have a problem with Exxon making $11 plus billion a quarter.
Today it's not all that much money. Oil is high, the need is great, so it would suprise me if Exxon were NOT making a good return on their money. I would start to wonder about its business acumen if it wasn't making a substantial profit. It sounds like a lot, but not in today's money.

Which is to say, Goatman, it can make sense as part of the solution. The SF project ties everything into the grid. Substantial economic help is provided, but when you balance out building another power plant against acres of solar panels, all on people's homes, all tied together - it has a certain elegance as a solution (IMHO).

Which is to say, Goatman, it can make sense as part of the solution. The SF project ties everything into the grid. Substantial economic help is provided, but when you balance out building another power plant against acres of solar panels, all on people's homes, all tied together - it has a certain elegance as a solution (IMHO).

It is MHO, too. But to get homeowners to cough up that kind of money is unrealistic. Shit, I'll bet that home in NC cost $64k -- the same it would take to make it energy self sufficient.

I saw a really cool plan for a commercial solar energy device. It was a giant inverted parabolic shaped black funnel on piers about 20 feet above the desert floor. The heat of the sun on the funnel caused a chimney effect turning a wind turbine at the top. The engineers estimated 200 MPH wind coming out of the top to turn the turbine. The intake of air at the bottom was minimal because of the large surface area of the opening. Barely a small breeze was noticed. (are you visualizing this?) It went on to speculate that a large enough one could house a small community underneath. This would be an added plus because the homes would be shaded and not use so much power.

Also, the shape of the funnel guarnteed it bot the maximum amount of sunlight, regardless of time of day or season.

Cool idea, I thought.

PS on funnel (I always remember something else after I hit publish)

It was also possible to increase power output by putting mirror arrays on the shadow side of the funnel to increase the heated air flow.

Global warming will not make the sun shine brighter. In fact, it will make more clouds due to increased water evaporation, so if anything you will be getting less energy from a solar cell.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 07:36 PM

wrong again wise guy!

because I chose to live in a cooler climate that normally does not get as much annual sunshine but because of global warming the fog burns back much faster now and we have much more average sunshine per year. In fact I am wishing I had already moved on this project as I am a wasting money as we speak the Sun is out! Normally we are under a Marine Layer this time of year)

Global Warming been berry berry good too us!

The effects are are very different depending where you are...can be very bad some places and very good in others...I chose to live "here" for the "very good" reasons.

Bottom line in this battle of links is: If it is such a great idea, why isn't everyone doing it? Money talks, bullshit walks.

A: Because it's not such a great idea.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 07:40 PM

ummm people ARE doing it and I will too!

I will let you know...

But the point is...meanwhile the Government CAN help and can speed this process up can't they?

Wouldn't it help solve the "Problem"?

I like the funnel, plus it's using lower frequencies of the spectrum. I'd love to see the efficiency numbers.

To be honest, I get quite excited about what happens when Americans turn loose and start inventing.

wrong again wise guy!

Sorry, I'm right on this one. Warmer atmosphere means more water evaporates. What do you think happens to this water, donner? It remains invisible in the atmosphere? No, that is impossible.

In fact that is one aspect of global warming that both sides agree on. There is a debate, however what effect the extra cloud cover means. If they are high cirrus clouds, they tend to trap heat. However the other side argues that there is a negative feedback in that the clouds reflect more solar energy, causing a cool down.

Google "global warming" "cloud cover" for dozens, if not hundreds of related stories. Here is a snippet from one of them

What will happen to the atmosphere itself during global warming is unclear. Cloud cover should increase with the higher rates of evaporation,

because I chose to live in a cooler climate that normally does not get as much annual sunshine but because of global warming the fog burns back much faster now and we have much more average sunshine per year

Micrometeorology is insignificant when considering global changes. Yes, it gets real hot or real cloudy in this part of Florida or real cold and clear in that part of Kansas, but you have to look at the big picture.

I like the funnel, plus it's using lower frequencies of the spectrum. I'd love to see the efficiency numbers.

I've been looking and found the funnel itself, but no numbers. Still hunting.

To be honest, I get quite excited about what happens when Americans turn loose and start inventing.

Ditto that. Especially in the universities. I love these competitions they have to build a machine that does X. Young minds can be quite creative.

If you have a link to a story that says cloud cover will decrease due to global warming, I would be glad to read it.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 09:25 PM

dude listen closely... there is more average sunshine where I live now. It appears to be INCREASING as our fog layer appears to be burning off earlier and more often. This appears to be due to Global Warming!

Hence more sunshine.

I don't care what the "studies" say. I am telling you what is happening. If I do see a local story about our great abundance of sunshine lately I will get it right over to ya!

Meanwhile, you will have to take my word for it.

I don't care what the "studies" say.

Then don't cite any.

But the point is...meanwhile the Government CAN help and can speed this process up can't they?

OK. Think about this. The government gives every taxpayer who installs alternative energy system a $6,000 credit. Where does this money come from?

The taxpayer.

there is more average sunshine where I live now....I don't care what the "studies" say. I am telling you what is happening.

Yes, I believe you. But you are telling me what is happening where you live. That is not indicative of the big picture, donner.

If you have a link that indicates that cloud cover global wide will decrease due to global warming, present it. Otherwise, I'll go with the links I posted.

But the point is...meanwhile the Government CAN help and can speed this process up can't they?

Wouldn't it help solve the "Problem"?

I would like to think so but I am not hopeful. In any case, this absurd idea of individuals doing this is....well....absurd.

That is cool, Yav. It didn't say when it will be completed, but when it is, I think it would be worth a special trip to Chicago to see it. I can't wait.

I don't care what the "studies" say.

Then don't cite any.

Posted by eberly at 2008-07-31 09:33 PM

umm don't take me out of context plz Eb... I don't care about the "studies" in this case only because I can tell you what is actually happening... I am there.

OK. Think about this. The government gives every taxpayer who installs alternative energy system a $6,000 credit. Where does this money come from?

The taxpayer.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 09:35 PM

really? where did all the money come from that fell off that truck in Iraq?

Micrometeorology is insignificant when considering global changes.

while this is actually a true statement... I in fact don't really care in this case about global changes... I care about the local changes that affect my average sunshine rates.

Which, have I mentioned lately, ARE INCREASING?!

IN fact, I see dollar signs every time the sun comes out. Can't hardly wait to get my very own Solar Power system installed.

I can tell you what is actually happening... I am there.

In one very, very small section of the globe.

Want to see the relationship of excessive heat and cloud cover?

Google "venus" images

LOL

I don't care about the "studies" in this case only because I can tell you what is actually happening

...where you live. As Goat pointed out, that is irrelevant in the big picture.

really? where did all the money come from that fell off that truck in Iraq?

LOL! I KNEW IT!

When I put my original post up, I ended it with "now here comes the 'what about the billion dollars a day spent in Iraq' crowd", but before I hit publish, I deleted it since I did not want to make this about the war or politics and I figured no other poster would either.

I was wrong.

Shit Goat!!! I'm shocked it went this long.

Anytime a leftie gets backed into a corner, they reach up their ass and after they sort through the dildos and gerbils, all they can find is Iraq.

Steely Dan is a dildo in William Boroughs novel "Naked Lunch"

Te band is hotter than ever, twelve strong, rocking on and jazz infused. Fucking Geniuses.

Donnerboy, Yav, Goat, Eberly and anyone else who might be interested --

Just for your own info -

I was wrong.

Posted by goatman at 2008-07-31 10:05 PM

MARK YOUR CALENDARS! GOAT FESSES UP!

And of course that is so true...glad to see you can finally face reality!

Everything is related friend... without all that wasted money being sunk into the desert sands of the ME just think how much stronger we could be here at home...

iI'm moving to Asia this week, to a place where I don't even need a car . . . Thank you for making me rich, Liberals.
Posted by vernon at 2008-07-31 09:16 AM

"Just remember to be very, very afraid......."

- The GOP

GoatPussy is wrong again?

Gee, go check out his Flag thread.

"I did not want to make this about the war or politics..."

What in the name of all common sense to you credit for those record profits? herm

I've got good news for you. It already IS "use it or lose it"--that's what a LEASE is. If I rent a house for a year, but don't move in until November . . .

Gotta say. The Dems have done a great job of disinformation here. And considering your username, you don't really live up to your own moniker. With oil prices at RECORD HIGHS, would they be drilling anywhere they can get to it?

Duh.

Posted by rightisright at 2008-07-31 06:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't live up to my username?

Get over yourself, Mr 'RIGHT'. Aren't you the same one that accused the dems of passing the min wage bill in a different thread. You've been shown how wrong you were and you ignored all posts showing you so.

As for 'use it or lose it'....let's hope the leases aren't the same as in Iraq (100 years). Hardly 'use or lose it' as you try and make it out to be.

"With oil prices at RECORD HIGHS, would they be drilling anywhere they can get to it?"

Why bother? They're making record profits just doing it the 'same old way'. Are you really that naive that you think the Oil Co's want the price low? Yes, they love you and want to see it soooo very low, because they care.

I'm moving to Asia this week, to a place where I don't even need a car
. . . Thank you for making me rich, Liberals.

Posted by vernon

So you'll be doing all your traveling by rickshaw from now on?

"So you'll [Vermin] be doing all your traveling by rickshaw from now on?"

As usual, on the backs of others.
It's the GOPiggie way.