In What Year Do You Think US Gas Prices Will Reach $8/Gallon

But you did say

didn't you?

Setting aside his personality disorder, can you dispute Bobcat's point? We aren't using oil for electricity to any significant extent, so more nuclear probably means less coal or natural gas, but won't really do much with oil. Unless somebody's ready to invest in my plant converting nuclear waste to "safe" plastic, that is.

"More nuclear power will not have a significant effect on our oil consumption" is entirely different from "Adding more nuke plants will have no effect becaust that is a drop in the bucket". Do you understand the difference in those two statements?

So? Why'd you say it then?

We're in a thread, talking about gas prices. If, by saying that increased nuclear power wouldn't have a significant effect on demand for oil, you weren't implying that it would have no effect on the price of gasoline, why'd mention it?

Was it just a random non-sequitor? If so, I guess you're even stupider than teh baba:

I didn't say "Adding more nuke plants will have no effect becaust that is a drop in the bucket" - You said it, when trying to put words in my mouth.

This is not complicated. More nuclear power will not have a significant effect on our oil consumption because less than 2% of our oil is used for electricity production, not because more nuclear power will only generate a small amount of energy.

And as far as the other statements you attempted to attribute to me (and subsequently ignored my objection to your false attributions), I didn't say them, either.

So in your expert economic opinion, a 2% increase in the oil supply will have no impact.

Well that's good to know. You will have to forgive if I find your predictions ridiculous, especially given your definition of a recession.

Do you not understand words in the English language? "no impact" is not the same as "not have a significant effect". The key word in the latter phrase being "significant". Do you understand the definitions of the words being used? You can't even understand simple English words, but somehow you have all the answers to worldwide energy policy.

I simply question anything you say regarding the economy given your definition of why we are currently in a recession.

Well, there is a silver lining here. When PotN disappeared, we lost one of the charter members of the WF Crack Debating Club. Without him, Muad's been awfully lonely at club meetings. So with this thread, it gives me great pleasure to officially declare Bobcat a Crack Debater!

2% of our oil, or 2% of our electrical generation comes from oil?

Big difference.


And 20% of our electrical generation comes from Natural Gas, which can easily power a conventional auto.

Well, there you go. Develop a conversion kit to sell to people and open a chain of service stations across the country. The world is your oyster!









(Actually some people are doing just that with biodiesel.)

Thank you for correcting me. The correct statement is that less than 2% of our electricity comes from oil.

However, I looked up the converse figures on the US EIA site. Only 1.3% of our oil is used for electricity generation.

I guess you're referring to the part about natural gas. So if we increase our nuclear-based generation of electricity, that would free-up natural gas for automobiles, which would reduce our dependence on oil.

That could be. But how much natural gas would be needed and how much oil would be saved? Would it be cost-effective? Maybe natural gas will cost more per mile than gasoline. As the demand for natural gas grows, the price will increase, the price of oil will decrease, and people will want to use gasoline instead of natural gas.

The bottom line is that the situation is a lot more complex than the "drill for oil now" people would have you believe.

The U.S. is 'The Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas.' We make a major push to convert vehicles to natural gas, and replace the NG we use for energy production with renewables and nukes, and we have a nice stopgap. Throw in cellulose ethanol and we've got a bigger stopgap.

Again, the only people who seem to think that the drill oil now is missing the complexity of the situation are knuckleheads who seem to believe drilling for oil isn't even a temporary solution. They also tend to be the people that believe we have new power technology on the shelves that we are purposely not using. They also think we are in a recession because their employer think they are not deserving of big raises and pay increases. Again why should anyone listen to your utter crap given your propensity for hyperbole and distortion on subjects like these?

OK, but what will that do to my heating bill? I'm already paying over $350 per month for gas in the winter.

Universe implosion imminent.

Well if it is only replacing NG that would be used for energy then it will have little effect. However if it leads to expanded use, then we have plenty of NG to keep things alright.

Much like more heroin is a temporary solution for a heroin addict.

That's an interesting comparison. It might be nice if you could go into further description as to how you feel heroin is comparable to the oil discussion taking place here.

http://www.eere.energy.gov/afdc/pdfs/afpr_apr_08.pdf

Well it happens......

No way the price of gas ever gets to $8. The Democrats who will be running the House, the Senate, and the Presidency are not that stupid.