PDA

View Full Version : Elections Barack Hussein's Response To Drilling Our Own Land?


Donger
07-30-2008, 04:23 PM
"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/142113.html

He's kidding, right?

patteeu
07-30-2008, 04:28 PM
LMAO He must be talking about bicycle tires.

markk
07-30-2008, 04:30 PM
"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/142113.html

He's kidding, right?

reminds me of the heating oil crisis in the 70s when Jimmy Carter told everyone to just put on a sweater.

let them eat cake

Donger
07-30-2008, 04:32 PM
Honestly, it's a good practice in general in order to maximize fuel efficiency, but surely he was kidding about how much it would save.

SBK
07-30-2008, 04:36 PM
reminds me of the heating oil crisis in the 70s when Jimmy Carter told everyone to just put on a sweater.

let them eat cake

If there's one President you should model......LMAO

irishjayhawk
07-30-2008, 04:37 PM
Honestly, it's a good practice in general in order to maximize fuel efficiency, but surely he was kidding about how much it would save.

Surely, no candidate has made a hyperbole.

markk
07-30-2008, 04:43 PM
it also kind of reminds me of Bush 1 going into the grocery store and being amazed by the scanner at the checkout. it's not like BO probably ever buys gas for himself or handles maintenance of any of his cars. maybe he really does think that inflating your tires a couple PSI will solve our oil problems?

PastorMikH
07-30-2008, 04:43 PM
I've read figures on this and you can save quite a bit if your car is really in need of the tuneup.

Under-inflated tires can decrease mileage by 5%, a tuneup can increase your mileage by as much as 30-35%.


That said, in modern tune-ups, air filters are the primary item. The newer cars are running platinum spark plugs that last 100k miles and have electronic ignition systems. By suggesting a tune up will help you get 1/3 better gas mileage, that's only going to happen if you're car is in need of a major tuneup.


The 2 biggest things I've found to make a difference are
1) Drive slower - 55 in my truck will get 18-20 mpg while 75 gets me 15-16 (But I wanna go fast!)

2) Stay away from Ethanol if at all possible - in town on regular gas I was getting 13 mpg, filled up before the station had stickers telling us they switched to ethanol and got 9-10 mpg in town. I'm currently paying aobut .05 more for non-ethanol and my mileage is coming back up.

Donger
07-30-2008, 04:50 PM
Surely, no candidate has made a hyperbole.

I actually hope that is what he was attempting to do. Surely he doesn't think that it would add up to the estimated 21 billion barrels.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 04:55 PM
"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/142113.html

He's kidding, right?

What do you think we would need to save to make up for the difference. My guess is as a %, not much.

Donger
07-30-2008, 04:57 PM
What do you think we would need to save to make up for the difference. My guess is as a %, not much.

See above. Estimates range from 18 to 21 billion of proven reserves, if memory serves.

We use ~20 million barrels per day.

Do the math.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 05:02 PM
See above. Estimates range from 18 to 21 billion of proven reserves, if memory serves.

We use ~20 million barrels per day.

Do the math.

You do it.

How many barrels per day, since we are talking usage. The figure I read (somewhere) was in the neighborhood of 5%, which wouldn't seem out of place.

Donger
07-30-2008, 05:10 PM
You do it.

How many barrels per day, since we are talking usage. The figure I read (somewhere) was in the neighborhood of 5%, which wouldn't seem out of place.

Well, 5% is probably on the high end, but let's use that. Of the 20 million barrels we use every day, approximately half is refined into gasoline and diesel.

So:

10,000,000 X .05 = 500,000 barrels/day saved.

21,000,000,000/500,000 = 42,000 days = 115 years.

Again, I'm all for being more fuel-efficient, but surely Barack Hussein has a better plan than this, right?

ChiefaRoo
07-30-2008, 05:12 PM
"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

http://www.breitbart.tv/html/142113.html

He's kidding, right?


Obama could very well end up being the black Jimmy Carter. Moronic statement.

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-30-2008, 05:30 PM
Well, 5% is probably on the high end, but let's use that. Of the 20 million barrels we use every day, approximately half is refined into gasoline and diesel.

So:

10,000,000 X .05 = 500,000 barrels/day saved.

21,000,000,000/500,000 = 42,000 days = 115 years.

Again, I'm all for being more fuel-efficient, but surely Barack Hussein has a better plan than this, right?

And how many barrels per day are you going to pull from this drilling, because it sure as shit isn't going to be 21 billion. If it's 500,000 or less, he's correct.

Nice attempt at obfuscation, though.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 05:30 PM
Well, 5% is probably on the high end, but let's use that. Of the 20 million barrels we use every day, approximately half is refined into gasoline and diesel.

So:

10,000,000 X .05 = 500,000 barrels/day saved.

21,000,000,000/500,000 = 42,000 days = 115 years.

Again, I'm all for being more fuel-efficient, but surely Barack Hussein has a better plan than this, right?

What makes you say that his entire plan is conservation?

jAZ
07-30-2008, 05:32 PM
And how many barrels per day are you going to pull from this drilling, because it sure as shit isn't going to be 21 billion. If it's 500,000 or less, he's correct.

Nice attempt at obfuscation, though.

And how many at what point in time?

Donger
07-30-2008, 05:37 PM
And how many barrels per day are you going to pull from this drilling, because it sure as shit isn't going to be 21 billion. If it's 500,000 or less, he's correct.

Nice attempt at obfuscation, though.

That depends on the recovery factor. It would probably be between 50 and 80% with today's techniques.

Donger
07-30-2008, 05:39 PM
What makes you say that his entire plan is conservation?

I don't. I was responding to this: "We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

'Hamas' Jenkins
07-30-2008, 05:39 PM
That depends on the recovery factor. It would probably be between 50 and 80% with today's techniques.

And for the second time, how many barrels per day would that be?

Do you enjoy painting yourself in these corners, or is making an ass out of yourself some kind of strange cyber tic you've developed?

jAZ
07-30-2008, 05:42 PM
That depends on the recovery factor. It would probably be between 50 and 80% with today's techniques.

Let's go with this just 'cause...

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/ogp/results.html

ANWR coastal plain oil production begins in 2013 and grows during most of the forecast. In the mean oil resource case, ANWR oil production peaks at 876,000 barrels per day in 2024. The low resource case production peaks at 639,000 barrels per day in 2024, while the high resource case production peaks at 1,595,000 barrels per day in 2023.

... With respect to the world oil price impact, ANWR coastal plain oil production in 2025 is projected to constitute between 0.5 to 1.3 percent of total world oil consumption. It is expected that the price impact of ANWR coastal plain production might reduce world oil prices by as much as 30 to 50 cents per barrel, relative to a projected 2025 world oil price of $27 per barrel (2002 dollars) in the AEO2004 reference case. Assuming that world oil markets continue to work as they do today, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries could countermand any potential price impact of ANWR coastal plain production by reducing its exports by an equal amount.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 05:45 PM
I don't. I was responding to this: "We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."

We'll, then it's best to stop conflating sounds bites with policy positions. Your "gotchas" are broaching stupidity.

There's a thoughtful discussion to be had, and you don't care to have it.

Donger
07-30-2008, 05:46 PM
And for the second time, how many barrels per day would that be?

Do you enjoy painting yourself in these corners, or is making an ass out of yourself some kind of strange cyber tic you've developed?

Our present production is ~7.5 million barrels/day. If we were to tap our proved reserves, I don't doubt that we could meet or exceed that.

Donger
07-30-2008, 05:47 PM
Let's go with this just 'cause...

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/ogp/results.html

ANWR coastal plain oil production begins in 2013 and grows during most of the forecast. In the mean oil resource case, ANWR oil production peaks at 876,000 barrels per day in 2024. The low resource case production peaks at 639,000 barrels per day in 2024, while the high resource case production peaks at 1,595,000 barrels per day in 2023.

... With respect to the world oil price impact, ANWR coastal plain oil production in 2025 is projected to constitute between 0.5 to 1.3 percent of total world oil consumption. It is expected that the price impact of ANWR coastal plain production might reduce world oil prices by as much as 30 to 50 cents per barrel, relative to a projected 2025 world oil price of $27 per barrel (2002 dollars) in the AEO2004 reference case. Assuming that world oil markets continue to work as they do today, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries could countermand any potential price impact of ANWR coastal plain production by reducing its exports by an equal amount.

Why are you bringing up ANWR?

jAZ
07-30-2008, 05:47 PM
Per this chart, it would seem that ANWR is/was projected to offset imports by between 3% and 6%. Very close to the 5% that the pastor was kicking around.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/ogp/images/fig_3large.jpg

Donger
07-30-2008, 05:49 PM
We'll, then it's best to stop conflating sounds bites with policy positions. Your "gotchas" are broaching stupidity.

There's a thoughtful discussion to be had, and you don't care to have it.

I know. I know. When Barack Hussein says something idiotic, it's a sound bite.

markk
07-30-2008, 06:04 PM
Personally I feel this Anwar debate is kind of silly.

We need to quit wasting money on ethanol and have a Manhattan project for personal electric transportation. And in the short term quit gouging consumers with fuel taxes.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 06:30 PM
Personally I feel this Anwar debate is kind of silly.

We need to quit wasting money on ethanol and have a Manhattan project for personal electric transportation.
Agreed.
And in the short term quit gouging consumers with fuel taxes.
That 18 cents a gallon isn't exactly gouging. And it's almost (if not) entirely spent on building or fixing bridges and roads. The gas tax is one of the great tax values in our entirely system.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 06:31 PM
I know. I know. When Barack Hussein says something idiotic, it's a sound bite.

I know, I know, Donger doesn't like it when the details get in the way like this.

jAZ
07-30-2008, 06:32 PM
Why are you bringing up ANWR?

Because that's what everyone is fighting over. There's no dispute about letting oil companies drill more, it's only that they want to do it in specific locations like ANWR.

But you knew that.

Donger
07-30-2008, 06:39 PM
Because that's what everyone is fighting over. There's no dispute about letting oil companies drill more, it's only that they want to do it in specific locations like ANWR.

But you knew that.

People are fighting about opening up the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). To the best of my knowledge, ANWR is not a part of that.

You didn't know that?

jAZ
07-30-2008, 06:48 PM
People are fighting about opening up the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). To the best of my knowledge, ANWR is not a part of that.

You didn't know that?

You didn't know people were fighting about ANWR?

Donger
07-30-2008, 06:52 PM
You didn't know people were fighting about ANWR?

Sure. But, to the best of my knowledge, neither McCain nor Barack Hussein support E&P in ANWR. But, if you want to through it into the mix, I think the estimates are another 10 billion barrels in ANWR, which makes Barack Hussein's suggestion even more idiotic.

Thanks.

Baby Lee
07-30-2008, 07:43 PM
Honestly, it's a good practice in general in order to maximize fuel efficiency, but surely he was kidding about how much it would save.

Forgot to inflate my tires last time back to KC - MPG 27.5, inflated them at my parents' to max press, MPG on return - 27.5.

And I'm talking 265/50ZR16 all the way around, and a couple were as low as 20-22 psi [should be around 35 psi].

SBK
07-30-2008, 10:25 PM
They're already drilling at ANWR. Only they're drilling to see what happens to ice when it heats up.

headsnap
07-31-2008, 07:21 AM
Forgot to inflate my tires last time back to KC - MPG 27.5, inflated them at my parents' to max press, MPG on return - 27.5.

And I'm talking 265/50ZR16 all the way around, and a couple were as low as 20-22 psi [should be around 35 psi].
that headwind is a bitch!!!

mlyonsd
07-31-2008, 07:40 AM
The dems are fighting very hard so Obama doesn't have to cast a public vote against more domestic drilling.

Come on Bush, call them in for a special session and bring this more into the public's eye.

***SPRAYER
07-31-2008, 07:45 AM
"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much."


I liked the way he said "much".

:o)

HonestChieffan
07-31-2008, 07:51 AM
This is a defining issue for the election and BO has shown that he is too inflexible on the things he needs to be flexible on while changing his social stands with every change in the political wind. The American people are being held hostage by Reid, Pelosi, and and are further empowered with BO unwilling to tell them they need to break fron the partisan Bullshit and pass the drilling bills.

Change? No, not one bit. BO is same same, sane old politics for party gain at the taxpayer and voters expence. Shameful behavior.

acesn8s
07-31-2008, 11:25 AM
I heard that Obama can turn water into oil.

HonestChieffan
07-31-2008, 06:34 PM
I heard that Obama can turn water into oil.

Baby Momma Obama said its so!!

mlyonsd
08-01-2008, 07:49 AM
This is a defining issue for the election and BO has shown that he is too inflexible on the things he needs to be flexible on while changing his social stands with every change in the political wind. The American people are being held hostage by Reid, Pelosi, and and are further empowered with BO unwilling to tell them they need to break fron the partisan Bullshit and pass the drilling bills.

Change? No, not one bit. BO is same same, sane old politics for party gain at the taxpayer and voters expence. Shameful behavior.
QFT, well except for the sane part.

SBK
08-01-2008, 07:54 AM
I've changed my avatar in support of this quote.

tiptap
08-01-2008, 08:33 AM
http://www.physorg.com/news136738014.html

In a revolutionary leap that could transform solar power from a marginal, boutique alternative into a mainstream energy source, MIT researchers have overcome a major barrier to large-scale solar power: storing energy for use when the sun doesn't shine.

Until now, solar power has been a daytime-only energy source, because storing extra solar energy for later use is prohibitively expensive and grossly inefficient. With today's announcement, MIT researchers have hit upon a simple, inexpensive, highly efficient process for storing solar energy.

Requiring nothing but abundant, non-toxic natural materials, this discovery could unlock the most potent, carbon-free energy source of all: the sun. "This is the nirvana of what we've been talking about for years," said MIT's Daniel Nocera, the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy at MIT and senior author of a paper describing the work in the July 31 issue of Science. "Solar power has always been a limited, far-off solution. Now we can seriously think about solar power as unlimited and soon."

Inspired by the photosynthesis performed by plants, Nocera and Matthew Kanan, a postdoctoral fellow in Nocera's lab, have developed an unprecedented process that will allow the sun's energy to be used to split water into hydrogen and oxygen gases. Later, the oxygen and hydrogen may be recombined inside a fuel cell, creating carbon-free electricity to power your house or your electric car, day or night.

The key component in Nocera and Kanan's new process is a new catalyst that produces oxygen gas from water; another catalyst produces valuable hydrogen gas. The new catalyst consists of cobalt metal, phosphate and an electrode, placed in water. When electricity whether from a photovoltaic cell, a wind turbine or any other source runs through the electrode, the cobalt and phosphate form a thin film on the electrode, and oxygen gas is produced.

Combined with another catalyst, such as platinum, that can produce hydrogen gas from water, the system can duplicate the water splitting reaction that occurs during photosynthesis.

The new catalyst works at room temperature, in neutral pH water, and it's easy to set up, Nocera said. "That's why I know this is going to work. It's so easy to implement," he said.

'GIANT LEAP' FOR CLEAN ENERGY

Sunlight has the greatest potential of any power source to solve the world's energy problems, said Nocera. In one hour, enough sunlight strikes the Earth to provide the entire planet's energy needs for one year.

James Barber, a leader in the study of photosynthesis who was not involved in this research, called the discovery by Nocera and Kanan a "giant leap" toward generating clean, carbon-free energy on a massive scale.

"This is a major discovery with enormous implications for the future prosperity of humankind," said Barber, the Ernst Chain Professor of Biochemistry at Imperial College London. "The importance of their discovery cannot be overstated since it opens up the door for developing new technologies for energy production thus reducing our dependence for fossil fuels and addressing the global climate change problem."

'JUST THE BEGINNING'

Currently available electrolyzers, which split water with electricity and are often used industrially, are not suited for artificial photosynthesis because they are very expensive and require a highly basic (non-benign) environment that has little to do with the conditions under which photosynthesis operates.

More engineering work needs to be done to integrate the new scientific discovery into existing photovoltaic systems, but Nocera said he is confident that such systems will become a reality.

"This is just the beginning," said Nocera, principal investigator for the Solar Revolution Project funded by the Chesonis Family Foundation and co-Director of the Eni-MIT Solar Frontiers Center. "The scientific community is really going to run with this."

Nocera hopes that within 10 years, homeowners will be able to power their homes in daylight through photovoltaic cells, while using excess solar energy to produce hydrogen and oxygen to power their own household fuel cell. Electricity-by-wire from a central source could be a thing of the past.

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology



As a chemist, this really does look promising. The oxygen producing part of the equation has always been the tricky part.

This kind of attack on energy independence IS an answer. Keep the oil as a material of production and lubrication and quit wasting it by burning it for energy.

SBK
08-01-2008, 08:35 AM
You know there's a few cars out now, and a few on the way that use solar panels on their roof. Not a bad idea at all.

tiptap
08-01-2008, 08:38 AM
This of course is a direct attack on Centralized Energy Models. Distributed energy production would be like linux in the software game. The Utility Central Model is the old dinosaur/cash cow for control of the game.