Global Warming News

Status
Not open for further replies.
   / Global Warming News #151  
Eddie,

I just wanted to thank you for the well written, sensible responses you have posted.

Ken
 
   / Global Warming News #153  
When I was a Union Steward, I learned a little trick that worked very well for me. When the other sides starts name calling and making accusations, you learn two things. They are out of ideas, and they are exposing what they think about themselves.

Sorry to see it come to this.

Eddie

Yep, you hit the nail on the head that time, Eddie.:)
 
   / Global Warming News #154  
Eddie said windmill technology is not good enough to justify having them, I would have to call that a fib.
Dave.

I'd have to agree NY city sure loves our windmills in upstate. We have added the mills but most of the power goes down state.
 
   / Global Warming News #155  
When I was a Union Steward, I learned a little trick that worked very well for me. When the other sides starts name calling and making accusations, you learn two things. They are out of ideas, and they are exposing what they think about themselves.

Sorry to see it come to this.

Eddie

That goes both ways, sometimes the stewarts won't listen, and the only way to get their attention is to throw a wrench????

I don't believe any one has resorted to name calling. I believe they are trying to make a point. I have to agree windmills are not a conspiracy and they do work. I have a good friend in Texas that works on the mills he believes in them whole heartedly, he's out towards Elpaso. The mills I've checked out in my area are fine pieces of machinery. Maybe you've seen some that are worthless{??} does that make them all worthless?
 
   / Global Warming News #156  
The following was found by spending a few minutes on google.

Oil company profits (Oil Watchdog)
profits 2000 to 2007 in billions of dollars
Exxon 17 to 45
Shell 12 to 30
Chevron 11 to 18
BP 14 to 17
Philips 3 to 12

Many examples of record profits if you care to look.

Subsidies to big oil(Cleantech Group | Accelerating the next wave of innovation)
(this is a portion of it)

"Greenpeace believes Europeans spend about $10 billion or so (USD equivalent) annually to subsidize fossil fuels. By contrast, it thinks the American oil and gas industry might receive anywhere between $15 billion and $35 billion a year in subsidies from taxpayers.

Why such a large margin of error? The exact number is slippery and hard to quantify, given the myriad of programs that can be broadly characterized as subsidies when it comes to fossil fuels. For instance, the U.S. government has generally propped the industry up with:

Construction bonds at low interest rates or tax-free
Research-and-development programs at low or no cost
Assuming the legal risks of exploration and development in a company's stead
Below-cost loans with lenient repayment conditions
Income tax breaks, especially featuring obscure provisions in tax laws designed to receive little congressional oversight when they expire
Sales tax breaks - taxes on petroleum products are lower than average sales tax rates for other goods
Giving money to international financial institutions (the U.S. has given tens of billions of dollars to the World Bank and U.S. Export-Import Bank to encourage oil production internationally, according to Friends of the Earth)
The U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Construction and protection of the nation's highway system
Allowing the industry to pollute - what would oil cost if the industry had to pay to protect its shipments, and clean up its spills? If the environmental impact of burning petroleum were considered a cost? Or if it were held responsible for the particulate matter in people's lungs, in liability similar to that being asserted in the tobacco industry?
Relaxing the amount of royalties to be paid (more below)
While it's easy to get bent out of shape that the petroleum industry "probably has larger tax incentives relative to its size than any other industry in the country", according to Donald Lubick, the U.S. Department of Treasury's former Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy, remember that subsidies are important across all sectors of the energy industry. Even yours (I'll bet you work in cleantech/greentech!)

For instance, nuclear power wouldn't be viable without subsidies - most governments pay between 60 and 90 percent of the cost of construction of new plants. Solar wouldn't be what it's become without significant German, Californian, U.S. federal and other incentives. Ethanol and biodiesel in the U.S. enjoy large subsidies (details, if interested, here), but let's resist getting into the rat-hole of agricultural industry subsidies."

Many other sources but seems to range between 20 and 40 billion per year.


Countries with significant percent renewable

Google search provides lots of information- Spain and Germany are both approaching 25% - Germany has an interesting incentive for small scale solar voltaics.

My feelings - Big Business is made up of little guys but in the corporate world the individual liability is gone. Big Business through its lobbying is what corrupts government.

Loren
OH the EVIL oil co.
Price of oil per barrel(42 gal per barrel) $82.75=$1.97 Gal but wait we don't get 42 gals of gas out of 42 gal of crude but we will let that slide for now price of gas at pump right now is $2.69 thats a $.72 difference keep that in mind.
The birth of a gallon of gas.
Exploration cost whether the is oil or not.
construction cost,taxes and fees and profit and taxes on profits and labor.
Transportation cost, cost of ship ,labor fuel for ship oh again taxes and fee's and another EVIL insurance.
Refinery ,cost to buy land ,construct,labor maint and utilities and again taxes on land,wages utilities permits and fees local,state and feds don't forget Insurance

Transportation again,truck,driver, taxes on labor ,truck ,permits fee's and tolls almost forgot Insurance
Gas station land, building,labor, utilities Taxes on property, labor permit and fee's taxes on profit and the insurance again hold on we are almost there.
Tax at pump, fed. $.184 for gas Diesel is $.244 state tax in NH $.196 for a total of$.381 now take the original $.72-.38=$.34 Now how can we do all of the above for 34cents a gallon?
Because the oil co is making very little on each gallon they make it on quantity!
Who makes the most on this, your wonderful federal, state and local government!
Most of the people who point fingers at the EVIL OIL co take there 30mpg Subaru and drive 200 mi round trip with a bike on the roof loosing .5 mpg for the drag of the bike and the rack put on there little black spandex suits and rid the bike for 20 mi.Then they stop and get a 16 oz bottle of water for $1.25 (the bottle is made with some of that barrel) Lets see 16 0z @ $1.25 x4=$5Gal. lets see what this comes out to.
200 mi @30mi to the gal.=6.66 gal.
6.66gal of gas @ $2.69=$17.93.
lets say the Subaru could run on bottled water 6.66 gal @ $5.00 gal=$33.33.
Now I think it cost a lot less to produce water than gas I might be wrong would one of you spandex people enlighten me here. Smilies
 
   / Global Warming News #157  
My post was to support my claim of record profits by oil companies. I'm not concerned with price of bottled water as I don't buy any - it has nothing to do with excess profit after receiving large amounts of tax payers money. All of the honest costs of production along with salaries and bonuses (excess in my opinion at times) are business expenses which are subtracted from gross income to determine profit.

My question : "Who stands to gain most by maintaining the status quo in regards to the use of fossil fuels?" as they say - follow the money

I have tried to make a few points that can can be defended with facts. (I did use my opinion when I classified a few things as excessive) Also I don't wear spandex - I do ride bike - and my car gets 38 mile per gallon - also I have lived off the power grid for 26 years and use solar and wind for my electricity.

Loren
 
   / Global Warming News #158  
On the subject of windmills.

Yes, they do create energy. That is not the problem that I have with them. They only create energy under ideal conditions, which is part of the problem that I have with them. When you spend hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars to buy and install a windmill farm, you are not replacing a single power plant. The reason is part of the fundemental flaw with windmills and the power they create. It is impossible to store that energy. It can add to a power grid, but it cannot be relied upon to do so when that power is needed. You only get it when the wind is at ideal speeds. Since you cannont turn power plants on and off, you have to keep them running when the wind mills are generating power, or not. As a result, they don't really accomplish anything except make some people feel good.

My other issue with windmills is the expense of buying them, installing them and worst of all, maintaining them. With the cost of electricity factored in, they do not generate enough electricity to make money. They are completely and totaly dependent on government assistance to stay in operation. Everything else, from a coal fired plant to a hydro electric dam to a nuclear power plant will all generate enough electricty to pay for themselves over time. The windmill farms all lose money. The biggest challenge with just keeping them going is what it costs in maintenance. Wind is an environment that has allot of dust in it. Keeping dust out is very dificult, if not impossible. Lubricating those windmills is an ongoing job as well.

I also have friends in the windmill industry. One has been had his cranes on Mythbusters several times. He got involved with the windmill farm on the Altemont Pass in California. At one time, the biggest farm in the world. Leading edge, high tech, state of the art. It's gone bankrupt so many times that they are now just letting them fall over. Nobody has the money any more to keep them working.

The spin off of global warming is the green industry. Windmills are part of it, but so are light bulbs full of mercury, cars full of lead batteries and landfills of perfectly fine autos that are being bought by tax payer dollars to put another car on the road that gets a mile per gallon more then the one it replaced, but used up an enormous amount of resourses just to get built. Good intentions gone bad? or greed taking advantage of the gulible?

Eddie
 
   / Global Warming News #159  
My post was to support my claim of record profits by oil companies. I'm not concerned with price of bottled water as I don't buy any - it has nothing to do with excess profit after receiving large amounts of tax payers money. All of the honest costs of production along with salaries and bonuses (excess in my opinion at times) are business expenses which are subtracted from gross income to determine profit.

My question : "Who stands to gain most by maintaining the status quo in regards to the use of fossil fuels?" as they say - follow the money

I have tried to make a few points that can can be defended with facts. (I did use my opinion when I classified a few things as excessive) Also I don't wear spandex - I do ride bike - and my car gets 38 mile per gallon - also I have lived off the power grid for 26 years and use solar and wind for my electricity.

Loren

If an oil company is making too much money in your opinion, what percentage of their income is acceptable to you?

Does this apply to just the oil companies? or should all business's be limited to that same percentage of profit?

Since the oil companies are owned by the public, and anyone can buy a share of those companies, who are the evil owners of those oil companies? Is it the job of those who run their companies to lose money? or to make a profit so that everyone who owns part of that company will also make money?

If they are to make less money, then you are implying that all of us with retirement plans, 401K's, IRA's and any number of other investments towards retirement, should make less because the companies that they are invested in are making too much profit?

What would happen if an oil company made less profit? Do you think they will continue to explore to find more sources of oil? Will they improve their refineries to keep the cost of fuel as low as possible? Will they work with governments to keep the flow of oil going? or will they just realize that there is no reason to stay in business if they can't make a proffit?

While there seems to be some people who think the oil companies are the problem, the world would be a whole lot worse if they didn't exist. The problem is the government and their mafia like control of the world energy markets. They limit the supply, tax the heck out of it and dictate how it should be refined. If you've ever been to California, you've heard about the additives that were required to the gasoline that was supposed to clean up the air. Whether it did or didn't, the price per gallon jumped to pay for that additive and what it takes to use it, and it's pretty much contaminated all the ground water, making well water undrinkable. Just one example of government gone bad with their feel good, knee jerk reaction to fix a problem that didn't exist. While cleaner air is always a good thing, this program didn't clean the air, but it did destroy the ground water.

The best thing that can happen is for the governemnt to get out of the way. Less government will solve more problems then any other solution.

Eddie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

2017 KINZE KNOTCHED SINGLE DISK FERTILIZER OPENER FOR 3000/3500 SERIES PLANTERS (6 ROWS) (A55301)
2017 KINZE...
2020 CHEVROLET Z71 TEXAS EDITION TRUCK (A51406)
2020 CHEVROLET Z71...
2021 JOHN DEERE 624P WHEEL LOADER (A52705)
2021 JOHN DEERE...
2009 Ford F750 Reel Loader Truck (A52377)
2009 Ford F750...
2024 JOHN DEERE 8R 280 LOT NUMBER 8 (A53084)
2024 JOHN DEERE 8R...
Electric Mobility Scooter (A54815)
Electric Mobility...
 
Top