Without national speed limit, Driving and Fuel usage down over last year in the US

[NCC1701]

Some of the comments here are strongly political in nature. I thought that was bad form in this forum~

And, right on cosmart. We Concur.

[ramborocc]

Originally Posted by vwW12

Spot on!

This is why it is matter of national security for Congress to
-stop prohibiting drilling in most U.S. seas
-stop prohibiting oil production in ANWR
-stop prohibiting shale oil production in the massive deposits of Utah and Colorado

The U.S. has abundant oil, if only politicians will stop blocking access to it.

The question is can we, as a nation, trust big oil to pump out the oil in a responsible nanner?

The usa seas oil drilling ban was due to in part of oil spills and slicks in California that occured about a generation ago. Prince Willian sound in AK is still soaking in oil. Our country is dotted with environmental superfund sites. Before we go drilling away, we should clean up the messes and superfund sites that we alrady have dotting out country. why should we, as taxpayers, pay to clean up those environmental messes and give em cart banc permission to create more.

[ramborocc]

Originally Posted by BimmerDob

This from the news:

- MSNBC.com

And this:




Seems a free market w/o nanny laws (like national maximum speed limits) can accomplish good things. Less congestion, less CO2, safer travels, increased public transit usage, decrease in miles per capita, freedom to decide for oneself what is best for one's own needs and values, the real American way.

And I am sure all of us smart owners and smart drivers are contributing our fair share and then some to the lower oil usage portion (800,000 bpd less) at least and still driving at a reasonable speeds on interstate highways.

The difficulty is what happens when your "freedom" conflict or reduces my "freedom". Generally speaking "nanny laws" for intended for this problem.

Not to mention how can the localities make up the lost revenue from speed enforcement. The governer of IL admitted to a hope that tough speed limit enforcement will bring in additional revenue to pay for additional state polices officers.

[ramborocc]

Originally Posted by NCC1701

Some of the comments here are strongly political in nature. I thought that was bad form in this forum~

And, right on cosmart. We Concur.

bad or good form, i dont know. If one member is going to post up an issue, it only natural for others to react.

[mmmeat]

Originally Posted by cosmart

By your logic, we should have stopped adding safety improvements to cars after safety glass.

That's an odd comment, since no one said anything at all about safety improvements and the thread was started only to report on some news.

Guess some people just want to push an untenable position anywhere they can in the mistaken believe that if you throw enough against the wall something will stick.

Your pal,
Meat.

[MsJoanne]

Not sure what is untenable but it was already nixed that big oil should drill on the 68 million acres they already have leases on but aren't drilling on. There is a 14 year wait for offshore oil rigs which are already under lease until then, big oil has no restriction to sell oil produced here only here so it goes on the world market to the highest bidder. How do we win with this? Big oil wins! Nationalize oil drilled in the US and I'll buy into it. Where ExxonMobil makes, I forget the exact number but it's around 20 BILLION in one quarter PROFIT, sorry, I am not for giving away American land for pennies to be held until they can maximize their profit to all of our detriments.

[vwW12]

Originally Posted by ramborocc

Prince Willian sound in AK is still soaking in oil

That is a myth. Here is what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has to say:

How much oil from the Exxon Valdez spill remains on the shorelines of Prince William Sound? Considering that nearly 11 million gallons escaped from the tanker, and that large quantities eventually fouled shorelines in the sound and elsewhere, very little remains (as reflected in the graph below):

Furthermore, here is what NOAA says about the long-term impact of the accident:

Resiliency of the Sound

Recolonization at Herring Bay

What we have found is that, despite the gloomy outlook in 1989, the intertidal habitats of Prince William Sound have proved to be surprisingly resilient. Many shorelines that were heavily oiled and then intensively cleaned now appear much as they did before the spill. Most gravel beaches where the sediments were excavated and pushed into the surf zone for cleansing have returned to their normal shape and sediment distribution patterns. Beaches that had been denuded of plants and animals by the toxic effects of oil and by the intense cleanup efforts show extensive recolonization and are similar in appearance to areas that were unoiled.

I would not worry about a 20-year old accident which today could not happen because tankers are now double-hulled. But if you don't like super oil tankers:

All imported oil comes to the U.S. by boat. These boats arrive to our shores whether you like it or not. On the other hand, much of our own U.S. oil is transported by pipeline, including much of the oil extracted from the bottom of the sea.

Want to avoid big scary oil supertankers? Drill for U.S. oil under U.S. seas.

[cosmart]

Every time someone mentions oil shale, I'm chiming in. Every time.

Oil shale is a dead end. It takes MORE electricity to produce than it is worth. Just put it directly in electric cars and be done with it. It will burn electricity, natural gas, and water that can be better used directly.

Do some research before suggesting this AGAIN.

Read the RAND report, which was commissioned by oil companies under the guise of the US government.

To replace 3 million barrels a day, which is the current use of the US Military in Iraq, it would take THIRTY nuclear power plants and the entire flow of the Colorado River to produce oil from shale.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf

[mmmeat]

Originally Posted by MsJoanne

Not sure what is untenable but

I've always found things like that entertaining. "I don't know what the argument is, but I'm willing to jump in..."

If ya don't know, then there's no "but" that will in anyway add to depth of knowledge.

Originally Posted by MsJoanne

Big oil wins!

"big oil" ...

People don't even know what that means.

And, if 'big oil' - as you call them - "win" does that mean that they get to keep more than .08% of the money they make? 'cause that's all they keep now. If I only had a net income of that amount, I'd be on welfare.

Originally Posted by MsJoanne

Nationalize oil drilled in the US and I'll buy into it.

Nationalize oil and it will cost so much that no one will be able to drive or fly anywhere. Duh.

Privatization is what works.

Originally Posted by MsJoanne

Where ExxonMobil makes, I forget the exact number but it's around 20 BILLION in one quarter PROFIT,

err... so you don't know the numbers ($400B in revenue, $40B in net profit), but you're still willing to continue?

How's about you figure out how much 'big oil' actually makes, and remember that the companies involved are corporations, not individuals and they'd BETTER make money.

Originally Posted by MsJoanne

sorry, I am not for giving away American land for pennies to be held until they can maximize their profit to all of our detriments.

How the heck do you figure that?

Good lord...

Your pal,
Meat.

[vwW12]

Originally Posted by cosmart

Oil shale is a dead end

Cool!

Since it is a dead end, surely no oil company will be dumb enough to waste money pursuing a dead end.

Therefore, there should be no fear to lift the current government prohibition on extracting oil from the enormous shale oil deposits of Utah and Colorado, which hold as much oil as 10 Saudi Arabias put together.