Fuel Prices...

[Mark]

No, Mark, I aced it. Both semesters.

Now, how about logical reasoning? Like, you know, establishing that there is no competition before just assuming I'll take you at your word? Your premise is faulty, so your conclusion is faulty. I can point out a couple of ways competition enters the equation, but first, I'm curious how you'll explain that there isn't.

And there are other issues in play BESIDES competition, such as inventory costs. Remember those, Mr. Friedman?



No, but cracking a joke at your expense does. Tell me, Mark, how deep will I have to drill into your skull before I hit humor?

That was a joke? OK. Ha ha. I might have got it if you hadn't misquoted me so often in the past. Maybe if I drill in your skull deep enough I will hit personal responsibility.

Now, as far as competition...no conpsiracy is needed (nor did I imply one); I have been present in many board meetings at major corporations (not oil) where they discuss the pricing of their competitors and set their own price accordingly. All perfectly llegal. With the small number of oil producers in this country, such strategy meetings are not hard to picture at all. As I said, I know for a fact they do things that way in other businessess. Why not oil?

Still, once we see alternatives pick up (which will happen sooner or later) you will see competition return and prices will fall.

As an example, I point you to the railroad industry in the 19th century.

 

[Mark]

I have no opinion on either. Why must you ascribe opinions to everyone around you?

So what infrastructure WOULD you keep in Yosemite? Let's try to keep it on topic for once, shall we?

It's more what I would eliminate: pizza restaurants, auto repair, those sorts of things.

 

[BPSCG]

But I get the feeling that there are those who would not want to drill there if you could produce ten million gallons per day of light sweet by jabbing a straw into the ground and having the output magically teleport itself to a NJ oil refinery. They'd find some objection; look how hard they work at finding specious ones even now.

I doubt that this would be the case.

Well, there's your answer, Jocko and Beeps. You are willing to see anything disrupted in order to fill our oil addiction...

And, to answer your question, I do consider dotting pristine national treasures with oil derricks to be destruction.

Actually, I have been a great supporter of removing much (not all) of the development from the Yosemite Valley.

Okay, Tricky, do you still doubt?

 

[Mark]

Okay, Tricky, do you still doubt?

So you favor oil drilling, pizza restaurants, auto repair and whatever else in the Yosemite valley. Got it.

 

[Jocko]

That was a joke? OK. Ha ha. I might have got it if you hadn't misquoted me so often in the past. Maybe if I drill in your skull deep enough I will hit personal responsibility.

Now, as far as competition...no conpsiracy is needed (nor did I imply one); I have been present in many board meetings at major corporations (not oil) where they discuss the pricing of their competitors and set their own price accordingly. All perfectly llegal. With the small number of oil producers in this country, such strategy meetings are not hard to picture at all. As I said, I know for a fact they do things that way in other businessess. Why not oil?

Now you're scaring me. You don't realize that you just described how the market determines a price? Seriously?

Yes, a company looks at the competition (yes, the same thing you just told me doesn't have any impact w/oil). When you look at all of the competition, you're pricing the market. Not only is it legal, it's the foundation of the free goddamned market theory!

So your company prices a little lower if it wants to gain market share, dump inventory, or whatever; it prices a little higher if it wants to gain a bigger margin. That's capitalism, baby, and it's been going on a long time.

Still, once we see alternatives pick up (which will happen sooner or later) you will see competition return and prices will fall.

No, you're talking about the inevitable decline of the oil market, not competition within the market. Big difference, as any buggy whip manufacturer will tell you.

As an example, I point you to the railroad industry in the 19th century.

Which was run by about a THOUSAND DIFFERENT COMPANIES. So how can you claim there was no competition?

 

[Jocko]

It's more what I would eliminate: pizza restaurants, auto repair, those sorts of things.

No thanks, I want to know what you think should stay.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Enough with the petty bickering.

Doesn't anyone embrace the current high oil prices as a wonderful oppertunity to introduce the alternative energy forms which are so necessary?

 

[Jocko]

Enough with the petty bickering.

Doesn't anyone embrace the current high oil prices as a wonderful oppertunity to introduce the alternative energy forms which are so necessary?

At the risk of blowing Mark's mind, I think there are several benefits to higher oil prices, and this is one of them. I've always said I'd be the first one to buy a hydrogen fuel cell car once it's economically viable. That means oil gets (and stays) too expensive, or hydrogen (or whatever) gets cheap enough.

What we have here is favorable conditions for both to occur. But a hamstrung economy is much less likely to produce the kind of technology that will carry us past the oil epoch, which is why I insist that it's an economically viable decision.

 

[Tricky]

Enough with the petty bickering.

Doesn't anyone embrace the current high oil prices as a wonderful opportunity to introduce the alternative energy forms which are so necessary?

Right now there really aren't alternative fuels in place to replace fossil fuels. However, I do see it as a wonderful opportunity for us to start seriously practicing conservation. For example I joined a carpool last month. It's a pain in the butt to have to rely on others and to lose the flexibility of driving myself, but we're going to have to sacrifice somewhere, and that seems minor compared to being without fuel.

 

[DanishDynamite]

At the risk of blowing Mark's mind, I think there are several benefits to higher oil prices, and this is one of them. I've always said I'd be the first one to buy a hydrogen fuel cell car once it's economically viable. That means oil gets (and stays) too expensive, or hydrogen (or whatever) gets cheap enough.

What we have here is favorable conditions for both to occur. But a hamstrung economy is much less likely to produce the kind of technology that will carry us past the oil epoch, which is why I insist that it's an economically viable decision.

Finally! A response based on the merits of the argument.

I don't quite understand your reference to Hydrogen fueled cars as some sort of alternative fuel source, as Hydrogen fuel cells are not sources of power, but just batteries. Powerful batteries, but batteries nevertheless.

What is important is that the high oil prices make alternative energy sources extremely viable.

 

[DanishDynamite]

Right now there really aren't alternative fuels in place to replace fossil fuels. However, I do see it as a wonderful opportunity for us to start seriously practicing conservation. For example I joined a carpool last month. It's a pain in the butt to have to rely on others and to lose the flexibility of driving myself, but we're going to have to sacrifice somewhere, and that seems minor compared to being without fuel.

If you see it as an oppertunity to practice conservation, that's great!

However, the oppertunity is much, much greater than that. The high crude price means that a load of other energy producing forms suddenly become very viable. And, as we all should know, oil will not last forever, perhaps not even 50 or 100 years. So we need to have alternatives ready and waiting when we run out of the easy fuel source.

 

[Jocko]

What is important is that the high oil prices make alternative energy sources extremely viable.

I would rather that more of the market pressure came from cheaper alternatives and less from inflated oil prices, but that's life in a free market.

 

[Tricky]

I don't quite understand your reference to Hydrogen fueled cars as some sort of alternative fuel source, as Hydrogen fuel cells are not sources of power, but just batteries. Powerful batteries, but batteries nevertheless.

LOL. Well, if it comes down to it, petroleum is just a solar battery. It transferred solar energy to chemical compounds which are (much) later burned to release that energy.

This is not just a useless nitpicking. It may be possible to release hydrogen from some pre-existing compounds via catalyzed reactions which do not require putting equal amounts of energy into creating the hydrogen. This may be especially practical with some of the heavier hydrocarbon compounds which are not suitable for refining. My company is running test projects of this right now. (Yes, the oil companies are the driving force behind alternative energy). We also are big investors in wind power, being a major partner of Green Mountain Energy, a local energy provider which has windmill farms in and around the panhandle of Texas.

I buy my electricity from Green Mountain Energy and in the past, it has been just a tad more expensive than from other providers, a price I gladly pay for being "green". It would be nice if I now got a break on the price because of the greater competitiveness of wind power, but I'm fairly sure that the way things work (companies generate energy and put it into the power grid, which everyone uses) the cost of wind power will also rise as fuel prices rise.

What is important is that the high oil prices make alternative energy sources extremely viable.

That is very important, but it is a long-term plan which will require major changes to our infrastructure. We're gonna have to wean ourselves off oil. It can't be cold turkey.

 

[Jimbo07]

LOL. No, I'm an exploration geologist. That's a real science, as opposed to environmental science.

You'll get no argument from me!

In the environmental area we have: biologists, agrologists, chemical engineers, geological engineers, environmental engineers, geologists, geophysics tech folks, etc. Me, I'm an engineering physics student intern.

If there is an academic 'environmental science' program it's probably ad-hoc, eclectic and lacking depth in any one subject.



ETA: that last line was brought to you by the department of redundancy department

 

[Mark]

No thanks, I want to know what you think should stay.

OK, but first let me know if you have been there--and how recently---so I know how much I have to update you on specifics.

Btw, you utterly failed to "blow my mind" with your other post. Not even close.

 

[Mark]

Now you're scaring me. You don't realize that you just described how the market determines a price? Seriously?

Yes, a company looks at the competition (yes, the same thing you just told me doesn't have any impact w/oil). When you look at all of the competition, you're pricing the market. Not only is it legal, it's the foundation of the free goddamned market theory!

So your company prices a little lower if it wants to gain market share, dump inventory, or whatever; it prices a little higher if it wants to gain a bigger margin. That's capitalism, baby, and it's been going on a long time.



No, you're talking about the inevitable decline of the oil market, not competition within the market. Big difference, as any buggy whip manufacturer will tell you.



Which was run by about a THOUSAND DIFFERENT COMPANIES. So how can you claim there was no competition?

I disagree with your conclusions, but wanted to note that your "buggy whip" line was very clever.

 

[Tricky]

You'll get no argument from me!

In the environmental area we have: biologists, agrologists, chemical engineers, geological engineers, environmental engineers, geologists, geophysics tech folks, etc. Me, I'm an engineering physics student intern.

If there is an academic 'environmental science' program it's probably ad-hoc, eclectic and lacking depth in any one subject.

Actually, that was a joke. My first degree was in environmental biology, and believe me, between the organic chemistry and the microbiology, it was every bit as difficult as my subsequent degrees. The problem was, at the time I got out of school, nobody was hiring biologists for anything except medical work, so I couldn't find a job. So I sold my soul and went to work for an oil company, got a geology degree and have been happily making rationalizations ever since. One thing about my experience is that it really helps you see both sides of the issues.

Oh, and I work with engineers too, and they are dumb as posts.

ETA: that last line was brought to you by the department of redundancy department

Firesign fan?

 

[DanishDynamite]

LOL. Well, if it comes down to it, petroleum is just a solar battery. It transferred solar energy to chemical compounds which are (much) later burned to release that energy.

Sure, but the "solar battery" is fully charged. No such Hydrogen battery, TMK.

This is not just a useless nitpicking. It may be possible to release hydrogen from some pre-existing compounds via catalyzed reactions which do not require putting equal amounts of energy into creating the hydrogen. This may be especially practical with some of the heavier hydrocarbon compounds which are not suitable for refining. My company is running test projects of this right now. (Yes, the oil companies are the driving force behind alternative energy). We also are big investors in wind power, being a major partner of Green Mountain Energy, a local energy provider which has windmill farms in and around the panhandle of Texas.

Sounds great! That's the very first news I've had that the great Hydrogen Revolution may be more than a PR stunt. Could you provide a link?

I buy my electricity from Green Mountain Energy and in the past, it has been just a tad more expensive than from other providers, a price I gladly pay for being "green". It would be nice if I now got a break on the price because of the greater competitiveness of wind power, but I'm fairly sure that the way things work (companies generate energy and put it into the power grid, which everyone uses) the cost of wind power will also rise as fuel prices rise.

Only if the market can sustain it. I don't see a direct cost link between wind power and the price of crude.

That is very important, but it is a long-term plan which will require major changes to our infrastructure. We're gonna have to wean ourselves off oil. It can't be cold turkey.

Yes, that's what I said. My point was that now would be a good time to institute said infrastructural changes as the energy source is viable now.

 

[Jimbo07]

Oh, and I work with engineers too, and they are dumb as posts.

In E.P. we have to take a lot of both natural science classes and 'engineering science' classes. Guess which ones are harder?

I almost envy civil engineers. They're in demand, yet most of their science ends after 2nd year!

ducks as all the civils start throwing things

Firesign fan?

Does the fact that I had to Google it make me one?

 

[Jocko]

OK, but first let me know if you have been there--and how recently---so I know how much I have to update you on specifics.

I have not been there, and I don't see how that matters. If you HAVE, then you should have no problem telling me, right?

Come on, Mark.... quit stalling. What infrastructure should be in Yosemite?