L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Hi Lee,
There is an answer, kick the bleeding heart liberal, tree huggers
out of government, let our oil companies build new refineries, cross
drill into our lower states national reserves, open up Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge, it has the largest estimated oil reserves in the world,
and we'll have petroleum produces to cheap to meter, again.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> Yup, exactly. His suggestion isn't any different than the "Gas Out"
> chain e-mail that circulates from time to time, urging people to not buy
> gas next week and Then We'll Teach `Em A Lesson They Won't Forget and
> Bring the Bastards To Their Knees, Woo Hoo.
>
> So everyone doesn't buy gas next week, then everyone buys _twice_ as
> much the next week. Oh, yeah, _that'll_ teach `em. Woo. Hoo.
>
> The fact is that America is built for the automobile. Few people
> outside of a few habitable metropolitian areas live within walking
> distance of a food store, fewer still live within walking distance to
> their jobs. The few commuter rail systems that still exist serve only a
> few areas and are under constant pressure to reduce their budgets and to
> turn a profit -- which they will never be able to do. Middle class
> people won't take busses, and even if they did they don't have enough
> routes to serve but a tiny fraction of employers while their employees
> live 20, 50 or 100 miles away. Freight and parcels must be there
> tomorrow under the "just in time" system that most American companies
> work under, so all but bulk raw material travels directly from source to
> user by truck.
>
> The result is that we are locked into using cars, you can't live the
> current lifestyle of the majority without one. Conservation efforts
> such as hybrids won't really help in the short term because any drop in
> consumption will be off-set by growth in consumption. Higher prices
> won't reduce fuel consumption much except as a side effect of a
> depressed economy, as disposable income is diverted away from consumer
> goods and towards fuel costs.
>
> Do I have an answer? Nope. There's only so much fry oil to divert to
> "bio-diesel" and until someone comes up with a way to manufacture
> hydrogen or ethanol that doesn't take _more_ energy to produce than the
> fuel's eventual yield neither one is a viable solution. And I still
> drive my CJ and my Cherokee.
>
> Or, as someone on NPR recently opined: "We're gonna run out of
> atmosphere before we run out of fossil fuels."

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Amen!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

ambrin wrote:
>
> We don't have an oil, or gas shortage. We have a critical shortage of
> refineries. Thank the EPA for that...

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Amen!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

ambrin wrote:
>
> We don't have an oil, or gas shortage. We have a critical shortage of
> refineries. Thank the EPA for that...

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Amen!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

ambrin wrote:
>
> We don't have an oil, or gas shortage. We have a critical shortage of
> refineries. Thank the EPA for that...

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

Amen!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

ambrin wrote:
>
> We don't have an oil, or gas shortage. We have a critical shortage of
> refineries. Thank the EPA for that...

Rusted

You would think that having a Texas oilman in the whitehouse would be a good
start. At least he helped to undo some of the crazy wilderness land that
Clinton stuck is with that prevented us to have access to some old jeep
roads.

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42FD1C3F.953FFF2C@***.net...
> Hi Lee,
> There is an answer, kick the bleeding heart liberal, tree huggers
> out of government, let our oil companies build new refineries, cross
> drill into our lower states national reserves, open up Arctic National
> Wildlife Refuge, it has the largest estimated oil reserves in the world,
> and we'll have petroleum produces to cheap to meter, again.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>> Yup, exactly. His suggestion isn't any different than the "Gas Out"
>> chain e-mail that circulates from time to time, urging people to not buy
>> gas next week and Then We'll Teach `Em A Lesson They Won't Forget and
>> Bring the Bastards To Their Knees, Woo Hoo.
>>
>> So everyone doesn't buy gas next week, then everyone buys _twice_ as
>> much the next week. Oh, yeah, _that'll_ teach `em. Woo. Hoo.
>>
>> The fact is that America is built for the automobile. Few people
>> outside of a few habitable metropolitian areas live within walking
>> distance of a food store, fewer still live within walking distance to
>> their jobs. The few commuter rail systems that still exist serve only a
>> few areas and are under constant pressure to reduce their budgets and to
>> turn a profit -- which they will never be able to do. Middle class
>> people won't take busses, and even if they did they don't have enough
>> routes to serve but a tiny fraction of employers while their employees
>> live 20, 50 or 100 miles away. Freight and parcels must be there
>> tomorrow under the "just in time" system that most American companies
>> work under, so all but bulk raw material travels directly from source to
>> user by truck.
>>
>> The result is that we are locked into using cars, you can't live the
>> current lifestyle of the majority without one. Conservation efforts
>> such as hybrids won't really help in the short term because any drop in
>> consumption will be off-set by growth in consumption. Higher prices
>> won't reduce fuel consumption much except as a side effect of a
>> depressed economy, as disposable income is diverted away from consumer
>> goods and towards fuel costs.
>>
>> Do I have an answer? Nope. There's only so much fry oil to divert to
>> "bio-diesel" and until someone comes up with a way to manufacture
>> hydrogen or ethanol that doesn't take _more_ energy to produce than the
>> fuel's eventual yield neither one is a viable solution. And I still
>> drive my CJ and my Cherokee.
>>
>> Or, as someone on NPR recently opined: "We're gonna run out of
>> atmosphere before we run out of fossil fuels."

Rusted

You would think that having a Texas oilman in the whitehouse would be a good
start. At least he helped to undo some of the crazy wilderness land that
Clinton stuck is with that prevented us to have access to some old jeep
roads.

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42FD1C3F.953FFF2C@***.net...
> Hi Lee,
> There is an answer, kick the bleeding heart liberal, tree huggers
> out of government, let our oil companies build new refineries, cross
> drill into our lower states national reserves, open up Arctic National
> Wildlife Refuge, it has the largest estimated oil reserves in the world,
> and we'll have petroleum produces to cheap to meter, again.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>> Yup, exactly. His suggestion isn't any different than the "Gas Out"
>> chain e-mail that circulates from time to time, urging people to not buy
>> gas next week and Then We'll Teach `Em A Lesson They Won't Forget and
>> Bring the Bastards To Their Knees, Woo Hoo.
>>
>> So everyone doesn't buy gas next week, then everyone buys _twice_ as
>> much the next week. Oh, yeah, _that'll_ teach `em. Woo. Hoo.
>>
>> The fact is that America is built for the automobile. Few people
>> outside of a few habitable metropolitian areas live within walking
>> distance of a food store, fewer still live within walking distance to
>> their jobs. The few commuter rail systems that still exist serve only a
>> few areas and are under constant pressure to reduce their budgets and to
>> turn a profit -- which they will never be able to do. Middle class
>> people won't take busses, and even if they did they don't have enough
>> routes to serve but a tiny fraction of employers while their employees
>> live 20, 50 or 100 miles away. Freight and parcels must be there
>> tomorrow under the "just in time" system that most American companies
>> work under, so all but bulk raw material travels directly from source to
>> user by truck.
>>
>> The result is that we are locked into using cars, you can't live the
>> current lifestyle of the majority without one. Conservation efforts
>> such as hybrids won't really help in the short term because any drop in
>> consumption will be off-set by growth in consumption. Higher prices
>> won't reduce fuel consumption much except as a side effect of a
>> depressed economy, as disposable income is diverted away from consumer
>> goods and towards fuel costs.
>>
>> Do I have an answer? Nope. There's only so much fry oil to divert to
>> "bio-diesel" and until someone comes up with a way to manufacture
>> hydrogen or ethanol that doesn't take _more_ energy to produce than the
>> fuel's eventual yield neither one is a viable solution. And I still
>> drive my CJ and my Cherokee.
>>
>> Or, as someone on NPR recently opined: "We're gonna run out of
>> atmosphere before we run out of fossil fuels."

Rusted

You would think that having a Texas oilman in the whitehouse would be a good
start. At least he helped to undo some of the crazy wilderness land that
Clinton stuck is with that prevented us to have access to some old jeep
roads.

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42FD1C3F.953FFF2C@***.net...
> Hi Lee,
> There is an answer, kick the bleeding heart liberal, tree huggers
> out of government, let our oil companies build new refineries, cross
> drill into our lower states national reserves, open up Arctic National
> Wildlife Refuge, it has the largest estimated oil reserves in the world,
> and we'll have petroleum produces to cheap to meter, again.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>> Yup, exactly. His suggestion isn't any different than the "Gas Out"
>> chain e-mail that circulates from time to time, urging people to not buy
>> gas next week and Then We'll Teach `Em A Lesson They Won't Forget and
>> Bring the Bastards To Their Knees, Woo Hoo.
>>
>> So everyone doesn't buy gas next week, then everyone buys _twice_ as
>> much the next week. Oh, yeah, _that'll_ teach `em. Woo. Hoo.
>>
>> The fact is that America is built for the automobile. Few people
>> outside of a few habitable metropolitian areas live within walking
>> distance of a food store, fewer still live within walking distance to
>> their jobs. The few commuter rail systems that still exist serve only a
>> few areas and are under constant pressure to reduce their budgets and to
>> turn a profit -- which they will never be able to do. Middle class
>> people won't take busses, and even if they did they don't have enough
>> routes to serve but a tiny fraction of employers while their employees
>> live 20, 50 or 100 miles away. Freight and parcels must be there
>> tomorrow under the "just in time" system that most American companies
>> work under, so all but bulk raw material travels directly from source to
>> user by truck.
>>
>> The result is that we are locked into using cars, you can't live the
>> current lifestyle of the majority without one. Conservation efforts
>> such as hybrids won't really help in the short term because any drop in
>> consumption will be off-set by growth in consumption. Higher prices
>> won't reduce fuel consumption much except as a side effect of a
>> depressed economy, as disposable income is diverted away from consumer
>> goods and towards fuel costs.
>>
>> Do I have an answer? Nope. There's only so much fry oil to divert to
>> "bio-diesel" and until someone comes up with a way to manufacture
>> hydrogen or ethanol that doesn't take _more_ energy to produce than the
>> fuel's eventual yield neither one is a viable solution. And I still
>> drive my CJ and my Cherokee.
>>
>> Or, as someone on NPR recently opined: "We're gonna run out of
>> atmosphere before we run out of fossil fuels."

Rusted

You would think that having a Texas oilman in the whitehouse would be a good
start. At least he helped to undo some of the crazy wilderness land that
Clinton stuck is with that prevented us to have access to some old jeep
roads.

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42FD1C3F.953FFF2C@***.net...
> Hi Lee,
> There is an answer, kick the bleeding heart liberal, tree huggers
> out of government, let our oil companies build new refineries, cross
> drill into our lower states national reserves, open up Arctic National
> Wildlife Refuge, it has the largest estimated oil reserves in the world,
> and we'll have petroleum produces to cheap to meter, again.
> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Lee Ayrton wrote:
>>
>> Yup, exactly. His suggestion isn't any different than the "Gas Out"
>> chain e-mail that circulates from time to time, urging people to not buy
>> gas next week and Then We'll Teach `Em A Lesson They Won't Forget and
>> Bring the Bastards To Their Knees, Woo Hoo.
>>
>> So everyone doesn't buy gas next week, then everyone buys _twice_ as
>> much the next week. Oh, yeah, _that'll_ teach `em. Woo. Hoo.
>>
>> The fact is that America is built for the automobile. Few people
>> outside of a few habitable metropolitian areas live within walking
>> distance of a food store, fewer still live within walking distance to
>> their jobs. The few commuter rail systems that still exist serve only a
>> few areas and are under constant pressure to reduce their budgets and to
>> turn a profit -- which they will never be able to do. Middle class
>> people won't take busses, and even if they did they don't have enough
>> routes to serve but a tiny fraction of employers while their employees
>> live 20, 50 or 100 miles away. Freight and parcels must be there
>> tomorrow under the "just in time" system that most American companies
>> work under, so all but bulk raw material travels directly from source to
>> user by truck.
>>
>> The result is that we are locked into using cars, you can't live the
>> current lifestyle of the majority without one. Conservation efforts
>> such as hybrids won't really help in the short term because any drop in
>> consumption will be off-set by growth in consumption. Higher prices
>> won't reduce fuel consumption much except as a side effect of a
>> depressed economy, as disposable income is diverted away from consumer
>> goods and towards fuel costs.
>>
>> Do I have an answer? Nope. There's only so much fry oil to divert to
>> "bio-diesel" and until someone comes up with a way to manufacture
>> hydrogen or ethanol that doesn't take _more_ energy to produce than the
>> fuel's eventual yield neither one is a viable solution. And I still
>> drive my CJ and my Cherokee.
>>
>> Or, as someone on NPR recently opined: "We're gonna run out of
>> atmosphere before we run out of fossil fuels."

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

You know sixty bucks a barrel, really isn't bad for American,
there's millions of wells already in place that have not been cost
efficient until now that'll come to life feeding Americans, stead of
Arabs.
And if our traitors would stop buying foreign products, nations
like China, Japan and Europe wouldn't need to bid against us at the well
head. They'd have to pay us to take, like before the Arabs nationalized
Chevron, Richfield, Texaco and Shell wells.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Lee Ayrton wrote:
>
> In-line responses.
>
> DougW wrote:
>
> > We also need some price controls on gasoline. Just wait till the oil companies
> > report profits this year. Prices now are simply pure greed.
>
> "Futures market." Absent a shortage, fuel prices are now being driven
> by speculation in the futures markets and now that they've learned that
> they can get more than $60/bbl it ain't never gonna come back down.
>
> >
> > As for me, I'm just rolling things into single trips. No more just driving
> > to a place to window shop. That and taking my lunch to work rather than going
> > out for lunch. Heck, eating lunch alone costs $7-$10 depending on where you
> > go around here.
> >
>
> Good idea, but that does have a ripple effect in the economy. Your
> bagged lunch will show up as a loss in the local restaurant district,
> which means some hash-slinger won't buy a new car this year, which means
> the dealer doesn't buy a new house, the builder doesn't by a new TV, the
> vendor doesn't sent his kid to Swanky U and on and on.