Alaskan Pipeline Corrosion

[Dargo]

Demand would drop if we had just 5% of our cars running diesel, but imagine if we had 40% of our vehicles running diesel!!!

Guess what!? I just received an "Inside Honda" email today that describes 3 new Honda cars that are diesel powered that reportedly will easily clear California's tough emission regulations. They didn't say what cars they will be in, but they did go into great detail as to how Honda considers itself primarily an 'engine' company that also makes lots of other things. Based on that, as well as Honda's past, I'd expect their diesel engines to be some of the finest in the world. I'd gladly give my wife my '06 Honda V6 Accord and buy an '08 diesel version that gets 40 something MPG. From what I read, Honda has delayed the introduction of their diesel vehicles not because of emission regulation, but because they didn't want to release a diesel car that was sluggish in any way. Sounds cool!!

 

[Bob_Skurka]

From what I read, Honda has delayed the introduction of their diesel vehicles not because of emission regulation, but because they didn't want to release a diesel car that was sluggish in any way. Sounds cool!!

Well that makes Honda unique. VW pulled its excellent V10 diesel Touareg because it could not meet emissions. They have some of the best diesel engines in the world. Mercedes/Chrysler is finally coming out with some diesel Jeeps, but Mercedes has only a couple diesel offerings here in the US, partly because of low demand and partly due to emissions. I just bought 3 Chrysler PT Cruisers and 2 left over Neons for sales vehicles, I actually looked for some small diesels but none exist that come close to meeting our needs. But I suspect that Honda may have my business next year!

 

[_RaT_]

Guess what!? I just received an "Inside Honda" email today that describes 3 new Honda cars that are diesel powered that reportedly will easily clear California's tough emission regulations. They didn't say what cars they will be in, but they did go into great detail as to how Honda considers itself primarily an 'engine' company that also makes lots of other things. Based on that, as well as Honda's past, I'd expect their diesel engines to be some of the finest in the world. I'd gladly give my wife my '06 Honda V6 Accord and buy an '08 diesel version that gets 40 something MPG. From what I read, Honda has delayed the introduction of their diesel vehicles not because of emission regulation, but because they didn't want to release a diesel car that was sluggish in any way. Sounds cool!!

Yes, sounds very cool. I want a diesel mini truck. Any news about that? It can have the same whimpy accelaration as my Ford IDI diesel but quiter and better economy, I'd be perfectly happy with that.

 

[Bird]

Yep, we had an '82 Isuzu I-mark diesel sedan, my dad had a Chevy Luv (Isuzu) diesel pickup, and some friends had the Isuzu diesel pickups. Even though they were naturally aspirated, the acceleration was adequate and they were fine little machines. So I'd be glad to go back to diesel powered car and pickup.

 

[Bob_Skurka]

Again they are price fixing; they control the market with fictitious market manipulation. . .
The Govt responsibility is to provide basic rights and protections from over zealous corporations anti-cartel and anti monopolies are against the law

It is interesting that the governement that you want to set the prices doesn't see things the same way you do. Both Federal and State Attorney Generals from liberal, moderate and conservative states have not been able to find the price manipulation you talk about.

I would like you to set the example and give up your prized possesions which you feel isnt that important as a whole. I honestly dont believe it....

Even after providing the example, I'm sorry, but I don't know what you are talking about or asking of me.

Oh yeah now this really makes sense – you are probably the only one to afford a wind tunnel or photo electric cells, hybrid cars, the skys the limit- in other words MOST FOLKS cant afford these little toys to help be self sufficient. So they don’t have that luxury of choice my friend like you do – HENCE the campaign and frustration regarding the control of Oil.

Please do a search here on TBN, you will see that people here have put up solar collectors, wind generators (not wind tunnels), etc. You don't have to be rich to buy a Honda Civic hybrid.

Funny been to the same places (and recently too) most likely Im sure when this great country first started things didn’t go smoothly either. I didn’t just happen for us, and they expected it to happen like magic – for which it did not. However Russia now has billionaires – never had them when under full communist control

I think you missed the point completely. Under communist control, there was price control and the standard of living was horrible. Visiting Ex-communist nations today and suggesting that is the same thing as communism is not even close to making a logical arguement.

You think the economy has been so rosey with GWB at the wheel

Well where did that come from? I have never been a fan of GWB, or for that matter GHWB. You seem to read all sorts of things into what people write, you seem to miss a lot too.

Sorry, but I have to add you to my ignore list now.

 

[ducati996]

Since you took it out of context - it reads just fine when you dont...
Sorry you want to put me on the ignore list - please dont make it sound like I was picking on you or insulting you - I was not but dont worry I rather not converse with you either EOM



Sorry Ducati or is it Larry or Carl, I gotta go with Bob on this.

Not sure what you meant but you guys can have the thread back -enjoy I said what I had to say, point was made feelings hurt etc....time to move on

My first name isnt Carl or Larry -

 

[livincountry]

Just think about how far my Hyundai could have traveled if I could have injected all the energy put into this thread

Last I heard BP postponed shutting down the pipeline for a little while.

Now that Lebanon and Isreal are taking a break & reloading we'll see what North Korea and Iran have up their sleeve. That should affect prices one way or another.

These are intersting times.

 

[_RaT_]

Not sure what you meant but you guys can have the thread back -enjoy I said what I had to say, point was made feelings hurt etc....time to move on

My first name isnt Carl or Larry -

Well, what is it? You have been a good asset to the thread. I do enjoy a reasonable explanation which I think you have attempted. While I may not agree, I do take in what you have said. You have certainly been civil about it. Mark

 

[scesnick]

The way I see this whole thread is that there are two types of people participating in this discussion. Those who have more money than they know what to do with and also have some kind of financial gain if oil stays at 70+ a barell.
Then there are those of us who do not see any financial gain by oil being this high. And we are the ones that the others are getting richer off of.

I don't see any reason why the Gov't can not seek some kind of relief from big oil. Heck , isn't it their job to look out for the American people? BUT, as soon as someone mentions gov't intervention they always want to bring up the communism card.
I dont' see it that way. It is looking out for the 99% of Americans that are struggling just to flippin' get to work !! It has been doen before. Dont' think so? what about when the President Reagan interviened in the air traffic controllers strike? I guess that was perfectly O.K. to some on this board considering that the planes he was trying to (and suceeded) get back in the air burns PLENTY of there stock owning oil !! It wasn't communism then. It is only communism when LESS money is being made it seems like..

Ducati,
I agree with almost everything you say and I am sure there are WAY more people who agree that something MUST be done or our future is pretty much in the can. I think is is short sightedness to think that everything is just fine. Look around , EVERYTHING is going up in price and it is all because the rich are getting richer in the oil business.
Sure I agree that when it hits a price that no one can no longer afford Then the price will fall. Well, It will be too late then because everyone will already be broke...
All I can say to the people who think everything is fine is rememeber this conversation when we re live the depression of the 1920's

 

[_RaT_]

The way I see this whole thread is that there are two types of people participating in this discussion. Those who have more money than they know what to do with and also have some kind of financial gain if oil stays at 70+ a barell.
Then there are those of us who do not see any financial gain by oil being this high. And we are the ones that the others are getting richer off of.

I don't see any reason why the Gov't can not seek some kind of relief from big oil. Heck , isn't it their job to look out for the American people? BUT, as soon as someone mentions gov't intervention they always want to bring up the communism card.
I dont' see it that way. It is looking out for the 99% of Americans that are struggling just to flippin' get to work !! It has been doen before. Dont' think so? what about when the President Reagan interviened in the air traffic controllers strike? I guess that was perfectly O.K. to some on this board considering that the planes he was trying to (and suceeded) get back in the air burns PLENTY of there stock owning oil !! It wasn't communism then. It is only communism when LESS money is being made it seems like..

Ducati,
I agree with almost everything you say and I am sure there are WAY more people who agree that something MUST be done or our future is pretty much in the can. I think is is short sightedness to think that everything is just fine. Look around , EVERYTHING is going up in price and it is all because the rich are getting richer in the oil business.
Sure I agree that when it hits a price that no one can no longer afford Then the price will fall. Well, It will be too late then because everyone will already be broke...
All I can say to the people who think everything is fine is rememeber this conversation when we re live the depression of the 1920's

Talk about a confusing post! Reagan firing the air traffic controllers so fuel burning planes could burn plenty of there stock owning oil??? What are you talking about? The strike was illegal and thus they were fired. Its going to be a hard lesson for some folks, but the government CANNOT, absolutely CANNOT control the price of oil in this country. Opening the oil reserves would not do didly squat to change the price. Price controls might temporarily reduce the price, but it will cause a shortage guaranteed. This post has nothing to do about the haves and have nots. You have no clue about my or others financial position yet assume that since we are not mad as **** about the price of oil that somehow its because we care less about its cost. Your opinion is grounded in emotion. Be prepared, your cost for fuel will be more in the future then it is today and there is absoulutely nothing your government or mine can do about it, thats just the facts. Get a fuel efficient vehicle, drive less and feel fortunate you have a fairly reliable federal retirement plan, that puts you way ahead of many!

 

[ducati996]

Well, what is it? You have been a good asset to the thread. I do enjoy a reasonable explanation which I think you have attempted. While I may not agree, I do take in what you have said. You have certainly been civil about it. Mark

My first name is Joe (no Lie) and I have been around long enough for others to know my first name as well...
Im staying out of this thread and the debate. I have said all I could possibly say on the matter (well not exactly but you get the idea)

Thanks

 

[BillyP]

Someone answer me these questions. Let's take Exxon for instance.

1) What was their total sales for last quarter?

2) What was their net profit?

3) What was their net profit % of total sales?

 

[Bob_Skurka]

The way I see this whole thread is that there are two types of people participating in this discussion.

Seems simplistic, but I suppose that is easy.

Those who have more money than they know what to do with and also have some kind of financial gain if oil stays at 70+ a barell.

While some mistakenly lump me in here, I don't even know anyone who fits into this category.

Then there are those of us who do not see any financial gain by oil being this high. And we are the ones that the others are getting richer off of.

That is what I am, contrary to what some would have you believe. I still work hard for what I have, I have a lot, but not as much as some might presume. I make no money on high oil prices, and in fact the higher the oil prices the lower the profits my company earns. So high oil prices hurt me and my company.

I don't see any reason why the Gov't can not seek some kind of relief from big oil. Heck , isn't it their job to look out for the American people? BUT, as soon as someone mentions gov't intervention they always want to bring up the communism card.

The great thing about America is we have a thing called a Constitution and its associated Bill of Rights. What you propose, and what was previously proposed, in terms of price setting, generally is viewed as a violation of the property rights of all Americans. So consequently, if the government sets prices, it violates our Constitution/Bill of Rights, and those ARE what protects us citizens. If the government is here to look out for the people, it must do so with a level of equality. It cannot, therefore do what you propose withtout hurting a large number of people (stock holders, pension funds, mutual funds, retirees who own those funds, employees of oil companies, etc). Remember, the rights of the few cannot be trampled by the many. And in this case, those people who's rights would be illegally trampled would be a lot more than "a few" people as some might suggest.


BTW: I'm not sure what an illegal action by Air Traffic Controllers has to to with price fixing. It was clearly illegal for the strike to occur. The strikers were replaced, which was perfectly legal.

 

[ducati996]

. Be prepared, your cost for fuel will be more in the future then it is today and there is absoulutely nothing your government or mine can do about it, thats just the facts. Get a fuel efficient vehicle, drive less and feel fortunate you have a fairly reliable federal retirement plan, that puts you way ahead of many!

I know I said I would refrain from posting in this thread but i just wanted to add this part - and it will not be offensive or demaning to anybody, just an observation which will turn into prophecy soon enough.

The price of oil will decline as soon as the current adminsitrations era comes to a close. Who ever the new president will be most likely will be defined by his "pre office" stance on the rising energy costs, and what plan they defined to actually do something about energy as a whole. As we all know, and I would be surprised to get an arguement about this - is the current admin really never had a plan, no new ideas, and always seems to do too little too late regarding Energy (by design). Most of congess acts the same way, and their desire to go against powerful lobbyists is not there, or go against their best interests (not ours or course)...
Thats all I really have to say on this subject -

 

[_RaT_]

I know I said I would refrain from posting in this thread but i just wanted to add this part - and it will not be offensive or demaning to anybody, just an observation which will turn into prophecy soon enough.

The price of oil will decline as soon as the current adminsitrations era comes to a close. Who ever the new president will be most likely will be defined by his "pre office" stance on the rising energy costs, and what plan they defined to actually do something about energy as a whole. As we all know, and I would be surprised to get an arguement about this - is the current admin really never had a plan, no new ideas, and always seems to do too little too late regarding Energy (by design). Most of congess acts the same way, and their desire to go against powerful lobbyists is not there, or go against their best interests (not ours or course)...
Thats all I really have to say on this subject -

Add to that that no administation has developed any meaningful plan. The previous administration had nothing. Why the price of oil will magically decline with a new administration would be purely coincidental in my opinion. I think your giving Scesnick false hope. As mentioned, Exxon, our largest oil company is really tiny in the "Big Oil" picture. With so little of the worlds crude oil owned by them, they have very little influence on the per barrel cost but without a doubt like any other oil explorer is reaping tremendous profit from each barrel. The volatility of oil prices as witnessed by the daily economic reports points to our current issue, stability and reliability of the supplies. To lump this administration in as a conspirator to oil prices means one of two things, you hate him or your getting your information purely from the New York Times.

 

[ducati996]

Add to that that no administation has developed any meaningful plan. The previous administration had nothing. Why the price of oil will magically decline with a new administration would be purely coincidental in my opinion. I think your giving Scesnick false hope. As mentioned, Exxon, our largest oil company is really tiny in the "Big Oil" picture. With so little of the worlds crude oil owned by them, they have very little influence on the per barrel cost but without a doubt like any other oil explorer is reaping tremendous profit from each barrel. The volatility of oil prices as witnessed by the daily economic reports points to our current issue, stability and reliability of the supplies. To lump this administration in as a conspirator to oil prices means one of two things, you hate him or your getting your information purely from the New York Times.

Forced to come out of retirement again - ...
Its no secret that the administration is in real tight with the Oil Industry. In fact its too increstious, and Ironically Cheneys energy converstaions that were almost forced by the Courts to be public, would have been a real good thing to hear first hand. Anyway there are no coincidences, and it will happen as I mentioned as long as the next President disassociates himself from big oil. Besides who cares if I like or dislike the President, as long as they do they job they were elected to do. Just by coinicidence (no such thing) why is his approval ratings the lowest of any incumbant? I dont make up the national polls, and care less about newspapers.

 

[_RaT_]

Forced to come out of retirement again - ...
Its no secret that the administration is in real tight with the Oil Industry. In fact its too increstious, and Ironically Cheneys energy converstaions that were almost forced by the Courts to be public, would have been a real good thing to hear first hand. Anyway there are no coincidences, and it will happen as I mentioned as long as the next President disassociates himself from big oil. Besides who cares if I like or dislike the President, as long as they do they job they were elected to do. Just by coinicidence (no such thing) why is his approval ratings the lowest of any incumbant? I dont make up the national polls, and care less about newspapers.

Sorry Ducati, you've been sipping the Kool Aid, I think your wrong, but I must say, it has now become too political and thus violating the rules here. I must excuse myself. Bob, I'll PM ya with my thoughts I'm outta here!