CNN Headline News story

You reuse grey water to water your gardens and flushing toilets (which are low consumption duel flush units), capture rain water in large tanks for washing and drinking, install a dam for watering stock then you find your once drying well recovers because you no longer overtax the aquifer allowing you to rely on that to supply you when the other renewable water supplies are temporarily inadequate. When you have done this you no longer care about the price of water.

Alternatively you keep relying on your neighbour who gets an offer from another neighbour to buy his water for $4.00 per gallon because he has no contract with you to supply you then your family rebels, dogs bite your and stock die in the paddock.

Another thing you can do is drill more wells into the limited aquifer and drain it faster. Or drill into smaller aquifers which are much deeper and require expensive and power hungry pumps to extract the water placing an added financial burden on your family. Of course this deeper water has minerals in it which poison your soil killing your vegetable gardens. Then in 2 years time when the water is all gone and no water saving measures have been initiated so you go hat in hand to your neighbours ...

 

gas usage down 3.3% .... margin of error 7%

*yawn*

 

Denial is what got us into this problem in the first place.

Ignore the warning signs and do nothing is not a good strategy.

Of course, telling us we are addicted to oil then demanding that more be drilled doesn't make any sense either.

.

 

Wow

I guess there are a few people who think using logic and facts and not emotion.

 

Wow another thought out reply, NOT.
China and India's exponential increase in oil consumption is what got us here. Not denial. I do think we could have been working on other means of transportation but high prices usually drive that market. Europe and most of the rest of the world have had high prices for a long time and what have they contributed as an answer? Nothing!

Drilling here will keep the money here. Keeping the money here will boost our economy.
Drilling here will give us a cheap supply of oil. Which will boost our economy.
Drilling here will lower the price at the pump quickly as futures will drop. Which will boost our economy.
Drilling here will keep our money out of Muslim hands. No answer needed.
Drilling here will tap the worlds largest supply of crude. Which will boost our economy.
Drilling here will keep our pump price low as it enters the market. Which will boost our economy.

Please dont quote the 15 second Communist News Network sound bite again.

 

i think

1) we have reached peak oil EVERYWHERE andthe Saudi's know it

2) they are afraid to tell us, concerned over a armed confrontation, that they cannot significantly increase their production. that is the reason, they closely protect the true conditions of their fields.

3) they are the ones manipulating the price of oil...iow, having their agents posing as middlemen, bidding against each other, and funneling profits back to themselves in order to maximize their profits while the flow is still good.

4) and finally, we are fools to pursue oil here or anywhere else without immediately investing HEAVILY in alternative fuel options.

 

I was asked to disprove a series of statements related to offshore drilling by Sufferin' Prius Envy. I believe that my post above has addressed (and disproved) Sufferin' Prius Envy's statements on offshore drilling as a straightforward solution to reducing the price of gas. If anything, after looking at how little oil reserves are available in currently 'off limits' areas of the US coastline - our current situation becomes even more alarming. However, as suggested above, I would certainly agree that along with reducing demand, drilling off-shore or in ANWR should be part an intelligent and reasoned fact based debate regarding solving the looming transportation or tankable fuel crisis.

 

EXACTLY!!!!
That is why I wrote, "Bottom line . . . it IS cheaper and quicker to conserve, to upgrade and drill another well, AND invest in alternative energy."

With the mess we are in, it's disingenuous to insularly say doing any one thing won't solve the problem. Of course it won't. <_<
We need to do 'all the above' ~ we need to conserve ~ we need to drill more (not everywhere) ~ we need more solar ~ we need more wind ~ we need more nuclear ~ we need more of it all . . . and FAST!

 

It seems to me they're still pretty busy with Operation Iraqi Liberation. We can't have Saddam controlling the price of oil, now can we, up one week and down the next? Such an amateur. Good thing we showed him how it's done. :twitch:

 

One thing that will never be talked about in an election year is reducing the speed limits around the country. If we had a mandated 60 m.p.h. as the maximum speed on highways, we would reduce the consumption here in the United States considerably. We all know that 55 m.p.h. would be even better, but I doubt you could even get a hearing on that.

Governor Corzine of New Jersey had done a study to reinstitute the 55 m.p.h. speed limit to mimic the 1973 law, but was laughed at. It was an astounding amount of fuel that would have been saved if they had instituted that.

It would take a lot of courage for a leading politician to propose and promote this, but this is what we absolutely need.