Gas prices are not encouraging hamfest attendance! How About Alternative Fuels?

[WA1GFZ]

lugging a battery around is a pita. Fuel cell is another on demand device that only uses fuel when you need power. Wait till you see your electric bill charging a 200 lb HO battery every night.

[The Slab Bacon]

And besides we are going to take a 50% rate hike hit on our electric bills here as of july 1st. So wall socket rechargables arent the answer either. The bottom line is if you dont want to sit home all of the time, you gotta dig deep!! Bend over buckwheat, this one's gonna hurt!!
And unfortunately there aint much we can do about it.

                                              The Slab Bacon

[W1RKW]

Arm and a Leg

[The Slab Bacon]

Yes, and they were able to run backwards. Put a heavy trailer on the back, be in a forward gear, kill the engine on an upward grade, let the rig roll backwards and pop the clutch. The smoke out of the intake is yer first clue...
Not recommended for too long since the oil pump ran backwards.

I've even seen them light of while cranking them over by hand adjusting the valves. You have to tie the fuel rack closed and close off the emergency shut off strangler choke if you are working on them. Been there, done that. But I still love them!! I still love the way a 12v sounds
"singing for its supper"!! The 92 series just didnt have the same sound.

                                                      The Slab bacon

[AF9J]

That's all?  Due to Wisconsin having the 5th highest gas tax in the nation, I paid over $3.40/gal to fill my Chevy Prizm (aka rebadged Toyota Corolla) this last Tuesday.  And, that was with Regular.  As of yesterday it was $3.50/gal.  It doesn't even matter that it was for the reformulated junk.  My mom & dad, who live about 85 miles north of me in Manitowoc, gripe about gas prices all of the time.  Their gas isn't reformulated (yet), and they still pay just as much per gallon as I do.  Premium is pushing $4/gallon.

73,
Ellen - AF9J

Arm and a Leg

[WQ9E]

Bill,

Thanks for the VW info, I though that the diesel VWs had temporarily disappeared; I will take a look to see what I can find next week.  My Olds Aurora does around 26 highway but it would be nice to gain since I use the car for commuting to work and I usually take the pickup on longer trips.

My pickup is a 2006 GMC with the 6.6 and the mileage for it is almost exactly the same as the 2001 6.6 I had previously.  I think the 6 speed auto in the 2006 with the 2'nd overdrive compensates for the mileage loss from the extra emission controls.  It is remaining stock at least until it gets out of warranty.  With the stock 360 HP/660 lb/ft of torque the only real change I would like to make is getting rid of the EGR system.  I am going to go to the deep pan for the Allison transmission with the next fluid change, the deep pan is actually the standard pan for Allison applications but the pickups get a slightly shallower pan for better off road clearance which is not of interest to me. The 7.3 you have is one to hang onto given its reliability and ease of repair, a lot of the local farmers have been less than thrilled with the 6.0 replacement.  I would imagine the requirement to remove the cab for anything but the most minor engine issues on the newer Ford pickups is going to be a real killer once it is out of warranty.

It will be interesting to see if a market develops for a higher mileage, lower power diesel pickup with the current cost of fuel.

73, Rodger WQ9E

[W1RKW]

Yeah, but is there any real conservation of energy when you're charging the batteries or elimination of pollution?  To me we're just moving the problem to another area.

I think as soon as practical, inexpensive, high power lithium-ion batteries are available, an electric car with an onboard generator (for long trips) would be the ultimate freedom from oil.    I think the GM Volt is something like it.    Charge the car up at night at home and have enough for most peoples commutes without using any gas, ethanol or diesel.    You see all the traffic jams, no one is moving but the engines are still burning up the fuel.  I wonder how much fuel is used in the U.S. while not moving.  The Tesla Motors car can go 200 miles on a charge.   It has no backup fuel burning engine.    If these types of cars become affordable, we can use our coal, uranium or whatever we use for electric generation to run our cars.    It's not free and there are other concerns, but it doesn't have to be based on oil.

[wa1knx]

while out in chicago, a friend there spoke of a sports car mfg who has a performance
car for 100k, using 6000 lithium laptop batteries that will do 0-60 in 3.9 seconds. has
a 250 mile range. about 60% of the car was bat cost. it can be done. I was impressed
someone pressed a commodity item laptop batt and did something like this with them.

[n3lrx]

while out in chicago, a friend there spoke of a sports car mfg who has a performance
car for 100k...

Sounds like he's refering to the Tesla.

[wa1knx]

bingo that was it. I looked it up on the internet. pretty impressive.
I would expect the battery system used on a less powerful motor
could get some pretty good range.  (wonder what happens in
an accident gulp)

[k4kyv]

A family of four travelling from Washington, D.C., to Boston considered range of options — air, train, bus and car — but which one is best?  Despite higher prices at the pump, gasoline is still a bargain.  Gas would have to reach $15 a gallon before the public transport options would compete economically.

Note the report takes into account only the cost of the fuel.  Add the cost of wear and tear and maintenance of the car (divide the cost of the car by the expected miles it would travel in its lifetime for the $$/mile it costs to own the car), public transport might make out slightly better, but still the cheapest way to travel long distances is by car.

Commuting to work and back is a different story, when daily traffic jams and parking costs are considered.  When I lived in the Boston area, I left my car parked at home and took the MTA to work.

Also, if just one person is travelling by car, the present-day cost will be in the ballpark of public transport.  Interestingly, train travel is more expensive than flying, and Greyhound bus torture travel is almost as expensive as flying.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=10451415

[n3lrx]

It all depends on how much your time is worth. A family of four could travel by train from Warshinton to Bawston round trip for just over $700. Driving costs for the average car round trip would cost around $250 for fuel and about $35 in tolls (It's been a few years since I've driven to Boston tolls may have increased.) Then add your time and frustrations of driving, and the ever annoying "Daddy, are we there yet?" "Daddy, I have to pee" "Daddy I'm hungry", and preventing the war of the siblings in the back seat. Drive your car and put up with the hassle or let someone else do the driving. Chances are the kids would be fully entertained on the train ride more so than being trapped in a small car. And least then when the kids have to pee you don't have to stop because there's privies and snack bars on the train. You can also take your own snacks as well as long as they are in a backpack or something that can be stored overhead. You'd also get there in about as much time as it takes to drive there! Since the Northeast Corridor is one of the fastest lines in the country, with speeds up to 135MPH if you include all the stops along the way it's still only about 9-1/2 hrs. one way. (It's about 8 hrs driving if you don't stop for breaks! Pay more and get on the Acella Express to Boston from Baltimore and they'll have you there in about half the time.


Fuel pricing based on a 15 Gal. tank, $3.50 per Gal. and 4 tanks of gas with an average of 25mpg. If you plan on taking your SUV then make that about $500 in fuel. Not including the qround town fuel while in Boston.

So, How much is your time worth?

[k4kyv]

I remember once, back in the 60's, travelling by Greyhound bus from Nashville to Boston.  It took two days, and by the time I got there I was stiff and exhausted.  Saddam's torture chambers couldn't have been much worse.

I did get a delightful break from the torture about 8 PM when an attractive young female passenger embarked from a small town bus station out in the middle of nowhere and took the vacant seat beside me.  We ended up having a heavy "make-out" session for about two hours, but unfortunately, she was only going to another little hole-in-the-wall town about 75 miles up the road, and disembarked before midnight.  I was in even more pain for the rest of the night.

[W3SLK]

This is the reply I got back from my Congressman Chris Carney regarding price gouging/fixing. Personally, it seemed to come off as a political ad campaign. Read for yourself.

May 24, 2007

 

 

 

Dear Michael,

 

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding oil prices.

 

I am proud to say that one of my first acts as your elected representative was to co-sponsor and vote for H.R. 6, the Clean Energy Act, I am as concerned as you are about the rising cost of gasoline at the pump. Supporting the development of clean energy technologies will help alleviate the problem of rising gasoline prices while simultaneously helping keep our environment clean.

 

Alternative fuels and advanced technology vehicles will help improve our air quality, decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and help ease the pinch at the pump. Clean Energy is a vital issue in our country and especially important to our district. Awarding tax incentives to individuals who take responsibility by making their homes and vehicles energy efficient is an important step toward ensuring that our country becomes energy independent. Although there is still a lot of work to be done, I am confident that we can reduce the price of gasoline at the pump, while pursuing clean alternatives.

 

I hear from working families all over my district that gas prices are too high, but at the same time we see the oil company executives taking home record breaking bonuses. The Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act, of which I was proud original sponsor of, would give the Federal Trade Commission the explicit authority to investigate and punish those who artificially inflate the price of energy.

 

The Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act would provide immediate relief to consumers by giving the FTC the explicit authority to investigate and punish those who artificially inflate the price of energy. The bill would impose tough criminal penalties of up to $150 million for corporations, and fines of up to $2 million plus jail sentences of up to 10 years for individuals.

 

Again, I want to thank you for contacting me regarding oil prices and I will work during the 110th Congress for a successful outcome to your valid concerns. As always, please do not hesitate to contact me with your concerns.

 


Sincerely,

Christopher P. Carney
Member of Congress

[W8EJO]

This is the reply I got back from my Congressman Chris Carney regarding price gouging/fixing. Personally, it seemed to come off as a political ad campaign. Read for yourself.

May 24, 2007

 

 
 
 

Dear Michael,

 

Alternative fuels and advanced technology vehicles will help improve our air quality, decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and help ease the pinch at the pump. Clean Energy is a vital issue in our country and especially important to our district. Awarding tax incentives to individuals who take responsibility by making their homes and vehicles energy efficient is an important step toward ensuring that our country becomes energy independent. Although there is still a lot of work to be done, I am confident that we can reduce the price of gasoline at the pump, while pursuing clean alternatives.
I hear from working families all over my district that gas prices are too high, but at the same time we see the oil company executives taking home record breaking bonuses. The Federal Price Gouging Prevention Act, of which I was proud original sponsor of, would give the Federal Trade Commission the explicit authority to investigate and punish those who artificially inflate the price of energy.

 Christopher P. Carney
Member of Congress

This is sad. Our nation faces a serious problem that could compromise our economy & security & all we get is this kind of Bravo Sierra from our elected officials.

1) Alernative fuels are decades away from providing any kind of practical everyday alternative to the miracles of oil & gasoline. Most of us will be dead before they ever significantly replace oil as the world's economic life blood. The efficiency/technical/cost/distribution issues are daunting.

2) This so-called Anti-gouging legislation is pure Huey Long style populism designed to do nothing except placate the economically ignorant.

3) The enormous federal barriers to oil & gasoline production that this "representative" could actually work to remove are not even mentioned. 

Lord have mercy on us.

Terry

[W3SLK]

Terry said:

This is sad. Our nation faces a serious problem that could compromise our economy & security & all we get is this kind of Bravo Sierra from our elected officials.

Spoken like a true "military man!"

He also said:

Lord have mercy on us.

Amen, brother!

[W8EJO]

Amen, brother!

Bow your heads.

Kyrie eleison; Christe eleison; Kyrie eleison.

Amen

[WA1GFZ]

I didn't vote for those two oil crooks... who couldn't conduct a war if it was in their back yards.

[Bill, KD0HG]

Please avoid the politics. It causes toxic reactions.
Tnx!

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

Gas prices dropped over the weekend in this area.

Funny stuff on the oil crooks. Hypocritical too, since most of you probably have oil and/or oil related stocks in your pension fund(s), 401K(s), mutual fund(s), etc. Please give that money back, if you are to be taken seriously.

[WA1GFZ]

I would gladly give it back but my kids want the $5T back also.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

$5T? Give it back. Always with the excuses. All talk, no action.

I would gladly give it back but my kids want the $5T back also.

[W8EJO]

Now let's be serious.

If there was a business venture out there where
you could easily make money hand over fist, become the next billionaire and
live on easy street, there would be thousands of folks flocking to get into
that business. It's every businessman's dream.

Which begs the question: Why don't we see thousands of
new business men rushing into some part of the oil & gas business?

For example the refinery end of the business. The country is in desparate need of refinery capacity. This recent spike in gasoline prices is a direct result of the shortage in refinery capacity. Why aren't thousands of folks rushing out to build refineries & get rich in the process?

It happens in just about every other business (think computers, CD players, TV sets, etc.).
 
As the these new businesses enter the market, they come up with newer, better, faster, cheaper ways to do the job & cut there price so that they can get a bigger piece of the pie. That's competition (Adam Smith's "invisible hand"). That's why prices come down.

Why not oil & gas? 

The reasons are several.

1) Government restrictions. (EPA, state & local, etc.). These restrictions are costly,
cause delays, and in some cases preclude construction (e.g. no new U.S. refineries
since 1976 - see -  http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12227 & no nuclear plants on-line since 1996).

2) Government policy. The federal government is actively pushing & subsidizing(through legislation) ethanol even though it's an inefficient fuel. Why invest in a big oil refinery if your government is
actively pushing a policy that will put you out of business?

3) It's not that profitable. For example, Holly Corporation, a publicly traded refining company had Net Profit of only 5.5% of Revenue in 2005 and 6.6% of Revenue in 2006. You can do a whole lot better than that in most other industries. The average net profit % for the S&P 500 over the last 5 years is 10.29%.
 
So as in most instances of price catastophes (a la health care) the culprit is our
goverment. If they would open up the energy markets to new producers,
the prices would come down just as they do in all
other free & open markets.

We need to do this & soon.

With demand continuing to rise prices will soar without new product on the market.

Terry
W8EJO
 
 

[AF9J]

Ummm Terry, don't you mean 1986 for the last nuke plants brought on-line?  I remember Three Mile Island.  We discussed this in my Nuclear Engineering classes in the 80s.  TMI occurred in 1979.  After that period, no new construction was initiated on nuke plants.  But the ones that construction were started on before Three Mile Island, were finished in the mid 80s.  No new plants have been built since then.  All they keep on doing is trying to extend the lifespan of the present nuke plants.  There has been talk of building a few new ones in the past couple of years or so, but everybody has a case of "not in my backyard" syndrome.  It's too bad.  I grew up about 17 miles south of 2 nuke plants (Kewaunee, and Point Beach) in Manitowoc, WI.  Both plants are only about a mile from each other, and are still in service.  Nobody really gets wound up about them.  They've been around since the late 60s & early 70s.

73,
Ellen - AF9J

1) Government restrictions. (EPA, state & local, etc.). These restrictions are costly,
cause delays, and in some cases preclude construction (e.g. no new U.S. refineries
since 1976 - see -  http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12227 & no nuclear plants on-line since 1996).

Terry
W8EJO
 
 

[W8EJO]

Ummm Terry, don't you mean 1986 for the last nuke plants brought on-line. 

73,
Ellen - AF9J

The last reactor to come on line in the United States was the Watt’s Bar reactor in Tennessee, owned and operated by the Tennessee Valley Authority. It began commercial service in May 1996.

Terry
W8EJO