TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Exxon Posts Record Annual Profit
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »


Posted by R!CH on Feb-01-2007 21:29:

quote:
Originally posted by Ivand
its a product with a lot of demand, making its price high, i dont see the problem there


the problem is you clearly lack understanding on how the price of crude is set.


Posted by Marc Summers on Feb-01-2007 21:31:

quote:
Originally posted by montie
seriously though its pretty fucked up. Imagine if all that money that the oil companies made was reinvested into developing alternative energy. Hell it sounds counter productive, but the oil is going to run out sometime, so might as well use that money to make sure your company is ontop of whatever the new forms of energy are and also to use that money to help push out and kill rival oil companies so the new forms of earth friendly renewable energy would be the primary one used.
(I sound sorta like a utopian hippie )


They are. Why do you think it's taking so long for alternative fuels to develop? It's because the big oil companies are getting ready to create a lucrative market for it, just like oil. Monopolizing, my friend.


Posted by R!CH on Feb-01-2007 21:34:



i'll give you one guess as to why fuel economy standards in the united states have remained flat and the worst in the world throughout the past and into the forseeable future... rhymes with boil mindustry.


Posted by Sunsnail on Feb-01-2007 21:37:

quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc


i'll give you one guess as to why fuel economy standards in the united states have remained flat and the worst in the world throughout the past and into the forseeable future... rhymes with boil mindustry.

What exactly does "Auto Fuel Economy Standards" mean?


Posted by Marc Summers on Feb-01-2007 21:43:

quote:
Originally posted by Sunsnail
What exactly does "Auto Fuel Economy Standards" mean?


Average MPG. How much fuel you consume every mile.


Posted by R!CH on Feb-01-2007 21:44:

quote:
Originally posted by Sunsnail
What exactly does "Auto Fuel Economy Standards" mean?


minimum standards required by gov for automakers to make their passenger car fuel economy. things like the hummer h2 are exempt of course because they weigh 8000 pounds and are considered 'industrial equipment' so soccer moms and small-dick losers are allowed to drive them around with their 8mpg rating.


Posted by RJT on Feb-01-2007 21:45:

Not going to read whole thread right now because I have to get ripped/head to class - but honestly, no news could have possibly irritated me more.

Furthermore, CNN reported it today as if it was something we should all be celebrating.

Fuck the lot of them.


Posted by Sunsnail on Feb-01-2007 21:46:

quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc
minimum standards required by gov for automakers to make their passenger car fuel economy. things like the hummer h2 are exempt of course because they weigh 8000 pounds and are considered 'industrial equipment' so soccer moms and small-dick losers are allowed to drive them around with their 8mpg rating.


Ah ok.

quote:
Originally posted by Marc Summers
Average MPG. How much fuel you consume every mile.


WRONG.


Posted by l�cid on Feb-01-2007 21:46:

quote:
Originally posted by RJT
Not going to read whole thread right now because I have to get ripped/head to class - but honestly, no news could have possibly irritated me more.

Furthermore, CNN reported it today as if it was something we should all be celebrating.

Fuck the lot of them. I'm well brewin'!


fixed.


Posted by RJT on Feb-01-2007 21:48:

quote:
Originally posted by l�cid
fixed.


You have no idea. I wanted to use that phrase badly in that post - but I'm afraid if I co-opt brewin' for myself here on TA, the inevitable comparisons between myself and Michael will fly again.


Posted by Marc Summers on Feb-01-2007 21:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Sunsnail
WRONG.


It was a nice guess.


Posted by montie on Feb-01-2007 21:49:

quote:
Originally posted by Marc Summers
They are. Why do you think it's taking so long for alternative fuels to develop? It's because the big oil companies are getting ready to create a lucrative market for it, just like oil. Monopolizing, my friend.



Oh I know. Who do you think is lobbying the government to do nothing about global warming?
I was just trying to say the oil companies should invest their money into alternative fuels. Say if I owned an oil company, I'd invest a shitload of money developing a sustainable clean new energy system, then also use my money to squash the other oil companies who would still be pushing oil (which would also be running out)
Ah but thats just a pipe dream


Posted by Vlad on Feb-01-2007 21:51:

EU is also paying like $7 per gallon, and some countries (not sure if all) pay taxes on their cars, as well as taxes on just using them on a roadway.

*This might be really simplified from what it actually is, but this is how I understand it to be.


Posted by Marc Summers on Feb-01-2007 21:53:

quote:
Originally posted by montie
Oh I know. Who do you think is lobbying the government to do nothing about global warming?
I was just trying to say the oil companies should invest their money into alternative fuels. Say if I owned an oil company, I'd invest a shitload of money developing a sustainable clean new energy system, then also use my money to squash the other oil companies who would still be pushing oil (which would also be running out)
Ah but thats just a pipe dream


Yeah, I get ya. Alternative fuels will be nice. Hydrogen is really promising because it uses ion exchange, which is kick ass.


Posted by Vlad on Feb-01-2007 21:57:

Another thing, Im not against companies and corporations making money, but as long as its not at our expense to the point where purchasing such commodoty becomes a burden on the wallet in an economy that is struggling at it is.

This is quite a hyppocritical statement on my part because I want to go into the medical field where prices of services rendered tend to be enormous, but I dont set the rates - speaking for myself, Id give to charity & Id even travel to underpriveledged areas and work for charity to help people out. I just feel like if you have the ability to give back, you should.


Posted by Vlad on Feb-01-2007 21:58:

quote:
Originally posted by Marc Summers
Yeah, I get ya. Alternative fuels will be nice. Hydrogen is really promising because it uses ion exchange, which is kick ass.



The problem with that is the energy required to break the bonds to create more energy is so immense, that it reaches temperatures higher than that of the sun. (Discussed this topic in my G-Chem class )


Posted by montie on Feb-01-2007 21:59:

quote:
Originally posted by Marc Summers
Yeah, I get ya. Alternative fuels will be nice. Hydrogen is really promising because it uses ion exchange, which is kick ass.


Yeah and the "waste" is water. So that'd be pretty nice. One big problem though is it takes alot of energy to produce pure hydrogen. I read somewhere though that BMW is planning on rolling out a hyrdogen fuel cell hybrid around 2008-2009. Dunno how accurate that is though


Posted by montie on Feb-01-2007 22:00:

quote:
Originally posted by Vlad
The problem with that is the energy required to break the bonds to create more energy is so immense, that it reaches temperatures higher than that of the sun. (Discussed this topic in my G-Chem class )


Are you sure? I think your talking about fusion power.


Posted by Vlad on Feb-01-2007 22:06:

quote:
Originally posted by montie
Are you sure? I think your talking about fusion power.



Yea, I just went back and looked... it was fusion of Deuterium.


Posted by R!CH on Feb-01-2007 22:20:

fusion doesn't break bonds, that's fission. fusion 'fuses' them together if we're talking about power grids, we already have the technology to run the entire country on carbon-free sources. a solar photovoltaic grid 10,000 sq mi in the arizona desert can run the power requirements of the entire united states yearround. so can a wind turbine farm across all of north and south dakota. yet in texas they are still building coal-burning power plants today. most people don't realize just how little sunlight is required to run solar power. the most successful solar power program in the world is in germany... a country that receives less sunlight every year than seattle. and the united states is the most wind-rich nation in the world.


Posted by Omega_M on Feb-01-2007 22:29:

This thread belongs to teh PDD.


Posted by Sunsnail on Feb-01-2007 22:34:

quote:
Originally posted by montie
Are you sure? I think your talking about fusion power.


Fusion means to put things together, so I don't it would describe a process of breaking atoms apart.


quote:
Originally posted by Vlad
EU is also paying like $7 per gallon, and some countries (not sure if all) pay taxes on their cars, as well as taxes on just using them on a roadway.

*This might be really simplified from what it actually is, but this is how I understand it to be.


Gas is that expensive because it is taxed that much. Gas taxes pay for welfare.


Posted by Omega_M on Feb-01-2007 22:37:

quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc
the ceo of exxon even looks like a bloated fatcat who draws champagne baths...





That's not Rex Tillerson.


Posted by montie on Feb-01-2007 22:50:

quote:
Originally posted by lex400sc
fusion doesn't break bonds, that's fission. fusion 'fuses' them together if we're talking about power grids, we already have the technology to run the entire country on carbon-free sources. a solar photovoltaic grid 10,000 sq mi in the arizona desert can run the power requirements of the entire united states yearround. so can a wind turbine farm across all of north and south dakota. yet in texas they are still building coal-burning power plants today. most people don't realize just how little sunlight is required to run solar power. the most successful solar power program in the world is in germany... a country that receives less sunlight every year than seattle. and the united states is the most wind-rich nation in the world.


Yeah it pisses me off so much how we are so dependant on coal power. Its an antiquated power source and it puts massive amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere which contributes to global warming. It would be great if we could use solar power and wind power, and I would prefer that, but I would be alot happier if we could atleast use more nuclear power over coal power. Its much cleaner and provides more energy. People are just scared, although it is perfectly safe when properly maintained. But we have soooooooooo much coal and the coal companies (and railroad companies) are blocking anything from happening. Also I think the economy of states like west virginia, oregon and wyoming are completly dependant on coal (I could be wrong though).


Posted by montie on Feb-01-2007 22:52:

quote:
Originally posted by Sunsnail
Fusion means to put things together, so I don't it would describe a process of breaking atoms apart.


Yeah I know that, but he mentioned using temps "hotter" than the sun and thats why I thought he was talking about fusion power.
(actually you just need temps as hot as the sun because the sun is a huge fusion "power plant")


Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.