The Oil Spill

[Lil Bit Special]

No way... I've seen pictures on this site and while he might be horny, he's got to be in his 40's.

[JohnnyHector]

You know how much money it takes to pay people to find and then drill for oil, convert it from crude to usable then to pass it to distributers for public consumption? It cost Millions EY.

If you were to invest that into the technology itself then you could cut the middle men and simply get your fuel from your kitchen. You dont need solar panels, electric cars. Everything could be hydrogen based, we surely have enough water on the planet. Think bro.

I'm sure GE can make a light bulb that will last for 50 years, but what fiscal sense does that make for them? Why would the oil companies that are spending millions (to in turn, make billions) fund technology research that would kill their golden goose?

I guess it's the NYC public school system's fault that you don't understand basic economics.

[StraightCash]

Lots of good points on both sides being made in this thread.. I really like this discussion.

I think EY hit the nail on the head with the fact that technology takes time. Great things are happening right now, but people refuse to acknowledge the major infrastructure that is transportation. Its not something that you can just switch over.

And whoever said big business is the player for inventing new technologies is completely wrong. The majority of technical breakthroughs happen in small business. They are just then bought out by big business. Thats why lots of local and state governments require major contractors like Boeing, Lockheed, etc. to contract with small businesses.

And hopefully we can just all agree that in the end, its all Max's and JN's fault

[villain_the_foe]

I'm sure GE can make a light bulb that will last for 50 years, but what fiscal sense does that make for them? Why would the oil companies that are spending millions (to in turn, make billions) fund technology research that would kill their golden goose?

I guess it's the NYC public school system's fault that you don't understand basic economics.

These are very valid questions. When you ask serious questions like this then you're able to see why certain things happen in this world, and its not by chance.

Its one thing for big oil to do whats best for business on an "honest" level. Its another thing to block other inventors from presenting new technology simply because you have a monopoly on the energy industry which is really the main pollutant of the planet. Wars are fought over this stuff etc. We all know the truth, some like to deny it more than others but we all know.

New technology will not be introduced until the current rulers of our energy source find a way to make a profit. This is how it works, plain and simple. We're still flying 747 airplanes yet we forget about Hitlers obsession with anti-gravity craft back in the late 30's- early 40's and after the war the U.S. bought many of the scientist to the states under "project paperclip", look it up. This means that for 70 years they've been working on this technology yet we're still running on oil. I know better.

The bottomline is that much of this technology would actually free us from the grips of the very big business companies that control our economies and send many kids off to war for bogus reasons.

Its like we'll get mad for an oil spill yet will be afraid to touch on the real solution for these things. When you unlock the power of hydrogen there's no other fuel on the planet like it....and its in abundance.

[ZachEY]

As usual, you dont realize the world you live in. Why dont you ask Boozer, he also knows about the patents being purchased from inventors so the technology wont flourish. Do you ever look into anything or do you just talk?

Also, the technology could be made, those figures are simply excuses that these companies use to continue drilling for oil. You know how much money it takes to pay people to find and then drill for oil, convert it from crude to usable then to pass it to distributers for public consumption? It cost Millions EY. If you were to invest that into the technology itself then you could cut the middle men and simply get your fuel from your kitchen. The middlemen are the problem here. You dont need solar panels, electric cars. Everything could be hydrogen based, we surely have enough water on the planet.

Also, you dont need "big corporations" in order to develop technology. There's plenty of people with great technology if you can find it, just like the video that I put up of the gentlemen with the hydrogen car. I recently purchased a Bio Photonic water filter for my kitchen. I didnt need "big corp" to advertise this to me, I found it by looking and seeing what the technology does and how it could benefit my health.

Research EY, you'd be surprised what you find out. Then I wont be such the conspiracy theory all the time with you.

Your simply not interested in grasping my point. First off, you attack the numbers by saying they come from the corporations, when that's actually completely untrue. You made that up, you have no basis to make that claim, but again, that's your style, so keep doing what you do.

Sure, it costs millions to get oil to gasoline, but there's infrastructure all over the country already that makes gasoline available to the public. They're called 'gas stations', they're readily available. We don't have the same infrastructure to support these alternative sources, and that takes time.

You also act like we can redirect all of that money being spent on oil to alternative sources. Do you propose we stop producing oil, or cut back now? What happens to everyone who still needs to drive their non hydrogen or non fully electric cars... those people, of course being, something like 99.9% of the driving population. You need to spend MORE money, and we are, but building an infrastructure takes time, and you're ignoring that. Are you proposing some kind of mandate where everyone is required to buy this new technology one day, because if you're going to reinvest the money oil companies are spending, you're going to need to have every single driver with a new car. Do you expect that every driver can afford a new car right now? Did you think this through at all?

Where you're right is that you don't need a 'big corporation' to develop the technology, and companies like Tesla are doing just that. Problem is, Tesla is simply not affordable yet. Their most stripped down car is $49,999. It's a great car, and if I could buy it, I would, but it's simply not feasible right now. After the initial cost, and this information comes from Tesla, not the oil companies, I can buy a new battery for 35K after my current one dies in 7 years, or I can pre-invest in a new battery for $12,000 today. Both of which are not really viable for anyone who's not wealthy.

You want to talk about the guy from your video, his tech looked nice in the short video. How much did it cost him produce? How much does it cost him to reproduce? How much would one car cost? How long did it take to produce?

All of these are questions that are tremendously important that your video does not address, and I'm guessing you don't have the answer either.

[villain_the_foe]

Your simply not interested in grasping my point. First off, you attack the numbers by saying they come from the corporations, when that's actually completely untrue. You made that up, you have no basis to make that claim, but again, that's your style, so keep doing what you do.

Sure, it costs millions to get oil to gasoline, but there's infrastructure all over the country already that makes gasoline available to the public. They're called 'gas stations', they're readily available. We don't have the same infrastructure to support these alternative sources, and that takes time.

You also act like we can redirect all of that money being spent on oil to alternative sources. Do you propose we stop producing oil, or cut back now? What happens to everyone who still needs to drive their non hydrogen or non fully electric cars... those people, of course being, something like 99.9% of the driving population. You need to spend MORE money, and we are, but building an infrastructure takes time, and you're ignoring that. Are you proposing some kind of mandate where everyone is required to buy this new technology one day, because if you're going to reinvest the money oil companies are spending, you're going to need to have every single driver with a new car. Do you expect that every driver can afford a new car right now? Did you think this through at all?

Where you're right is that you don't need a 'big corporation' to develop the technology, and companies like Tesla are doing just that. Problem is, Tesla is simply not affordable yet. Their most stripped down car is $49,999. It's a great car, and if I could buy it, I would, but it's simply not feasible right now. After the initial cost, and this information comes from Tesla, not the oil companies, I can buy a new battery for 35K after my current one dies in 7 years, or I can pre-invest in a new battery for $12,000 today. Both of which are not really viable for anyone who's not wealthy.

You want to talk about the guy from your video, his tech looked nice in the short video. How much did it cost him produce? How much does it cost him to reproduce? How much would one car cost? How long did it take to produce?

All of these are questions that are tremendously important that your video does not address, and I'm guessing you don't have the answer either.

Me going through things to then present to you is going to be more than 3 minutes. You'll actually would have to sit down and view it. You wont so I'll pass, you're right EY.

[ZachEY]

Me going through things to then present to you is going to be more than 3 minutes. You'll actually would have to sit down and view it. You wont so I'll pass, you're right EY.

As to what you bolded, the battery numbers come from Tesla, the solar numbers come from a solar panel company, and the honda clarity numbers come from honda...

I wouldn't take that long if anything you wanted to present was backed up by facts.

So, if you want to punt, that's fine, but see if you can answer one question and one question alone...

How much did the car in your video cost to produce?

This shouldn't be a long answer, it should simply be a dollar sign ($) followed by some numbers. Can you do that?

[JohnnyHector]

Its one thing for big oil to do whats best for business on an "honest" level.

Honesty and doing what's best for business are generally divergent paths.

We all know the truth, some like to deny it more than others but we all know.

Or, it could just be that some people are more pragmatic than others and choose not to live with their head in the clouds.

New technology will not be introduced until the current rulers of our energy source find a way to make a profit.

Oil companies continue to post record profits, so don't hold your breath.

The bottomline is that much of this technology would actually free us from the grips of the very big business companies that control our economies and send many kids off to war for bogus reasons.

Its like we'll get mad for an oil spill yet will be afraid to touch on the real solution for these things. When you unlock the power of hydrogen its no other fuel on the planet like it....and its in abundance.

And who is taking the lead on funding these new technologies? Maybe we can take up a collection on JN to drive the research to put the oil bastards out of business for good.

[Boozer76]

As to what you bolded, the battery numbers come from Tesla, the solar numbers come from a solar panel company, and the honda clarity numbers come from honda...

I wouldn't take that long if anything you wanted to present was backed up by facts.

So, if you want to punt, that's fine, but see if you can answer one question and one question alone...

How much did the car in your video cost to produce?

This shouldn't be a long answer, it should simply be a dollar sign ($) followed by some numbers. Can you do that?

EY, you're definitely right, it takes time to change over to new technologies. Especially with an infrastructure as embedded as ours is right now. But you have to admit the incentive for energy companies to keep things at status quo. Why would a company such as BP want to willfully divert all their efforts and funding to discovering new fuel technologies when all it will do is cost them a boatload of money to research and then mass produce on a cost effective, common sense level? They are making money hand over fist with things the way they are now, so why change? Oil companies have been seeing record profits over the past few years during a pretty darn rough recession. They have no reason to cooperate or change the way things are, and they certainly incent politicians who allow them to keep it that way.

[villain_the_foe]

As to what you bolded, the battery numbers come from Tesla, the solar numbers come from a solar panel company, and the honda clarity numbers come from honda...

I wouldn't take that long if anything you wanted to present was backed up by facts.

So, if you want to punt, that's fine, but see if you can answer one question and one question alone...

How much did the car in your video cost to produce?

This shouldn't be a long answer, it should simply be a dollar sign ($) followed by some numbers. Can you do that?

Your answer starts at 1:15. Its roughly $1,500. Next time do your own research. That took me lest than 3 minutes,...which is typically your timespan. You should watch the entire clip though....you'd learn something.

GDHT0hBgVOw

[villain_the_foe]

EY, you're definitely right, it takes time to change over to new technologies. Especially with an infrastructure as embedded as ours is right now. But you have to admit the incentive for energy companies to keep things at status quo. Why would a company such as BP want to willfully divert all their efforts and funding to discovering new fuel technologies when all it will do is cost them a boatload of money to research and then mass produce on a cost effective, common sense level? They are making money hand over fist with things the way they are now, so why change? Oil companies have been seeing record profits over the past few years during a pretty darn rough recession. They have no reason to cooperate or change the way things are, and they certainly incent politicians who allow them to keep it that way.

THANK YOU BOOZER!

[villain_the_foe]

Honesty and doing what's best for business are generally divergent paths.

Or, it could just be that some people are more pragmatic than others and choose not to live with their head in the clouds.

Oil companies continue to post record profits, so don't hold your breath.

And who is taking the lead on funding these new technologies? Maybe we can take up a collection on JN to drive the research to put the oil bastards out of business for good.

Then see it the way you want to see it then. I'd rather see it the way it is, which usually you'd need your head in the clouds to see the whole thing.

[ZachEY]

Your answer starts at 1:15. Its roughly $1,500. Next time do your own research. That took me lest than 3 minutes,...which is typically your timespan. You should watch the entire clip though....you'd learn something.

GDHT0hBgVOw

That's a dune buggy. Where's the final product?

[villain_the_foe]

That's a dune buggy. Where's the final product?

You're wrong (again). Just stop here okay.

[slats]

The oil is going to run out, and the sooner the USA gets off it's oil dependency, the better. Of course it's going to be hard. Tough decisions are rarely easy. This one should be.

The US currently subsidizes oil companies, and has one of the lowest petroleum taxes in the free world. If gas prices were as high here as in other places on the planet, then electric cars and solar panels would all of a sudden look a lot more affordable.

They could be more affordable right now if the US taxed oil products and put that money into renewable energy. The country has a highly educated, un(der)employed workforce. The nation as a whole needs high quality manfacturing jobs, and we need to get off oil. Why the hell isn't the government investing in green energy, then? The US should be be the world leader in the field. Instead, we're well behind China. That's inexcusable.

Going green -investing in green technology and energy- is good for the environment, the economy, and national security.

So who's it not good for? The Oil Companies and their investors.

Big business owns this country. Don't lose sight of that.

Obama says he's pursuing criminal charges against BP. Good. We'll see what comes of that, though.

[JohnnyHector]

Then see it the way you want to see it then. I'd rather see it the way it is, which usually you'd need your head in the clouds to see the whole thing.

I see it as an unfortunate reality that is not going to change, because it would be "nice" or "right" or because I lament about it on a message board.

I have an idea... maybe you should take all of the money that you don't pay in taxes and use it to fund alternative energy research.

Let me know if there's any occupancy in Utopia... sounds like a rad place. What I don't get is why would you even need to worry about fuel when you can ride around on unicorns instead.

[Boozer76]

That's a dune buggy. Where's the final product?

So the conversion cost him $1500 to make on his own, not including labor. It's really not a terrible stretch to think that mass production lines could be customized to produce the parts necessary to retrofit vehicles with it. Mass production lines are restructured everyday for little things like plastic packaging for toys all the way up to huge engine blocks. It's done all the time. Yes, there would be an up front cost, but as the production becomes more available, the cost eventually comes down. Relatively speaking, it's the same as the recent modernizations of televisions. Plasma's/LCD's were expensive just a few years ago. Now they're cheap and the norm. That up front expense was built in to cover the production line enhancement cost until demand started covering and easing the cost of production.

There is no coincidence that technology in all other areas has been moving at a light speed pace of advancements, while advancements that alter our consumption of fossil fuels have been at a standstill.

[ZachEY]

EY, you're definitely right, it takes time to change over to new technologies. Especially with an infrastructure as embedded as ours is right now. But you have to admit the incentive for energy companies to keep things at status quo. Why would a company such as BP want to willfully divert all their efforts and funding to discovering new fuel technologies when all it will do is cost them a boatload of money to research and then mass produce on a cost effective, common sense level? They are making money hand over fist with things the way they are now, so why change? Oil companies have been seeing record profits over the past few years during a pretty darn rough recession. They have no reason to cooperate or change the way things are, and they certainly incent politicians who allow them to keep it that way.

Of course there is an incentive for them to keep things status quo, in fact, I never argued to the contrary. Everyone is on the same page there.

However, my point is that there are plenty of companies out there doing big things, and as Brett4ward points out, it's these small business that eventually get bought up, or reach a more national stage, like Tesla, when they produce a viable product.

A dune buggy running on water is not a viable mass product right now. Of course BP/Exxon/etc are not going to get behind this technology, but just like the inventors of Tesla, if it were viable right now, there'd be companies producing them and you'd have the option to buy it easily. Why wouldn't someone do this?

Fact is, you need to be able to achieve the power that an internal combustion engine can, at the cost an internal combustion engine can do it at, before it's a product that's truly ready for the mass market. A dune buggy running on water is not ready for the mass market.

[Vicious89x]

I see it as an unfortunate reality that is not going to change, because it would be "nice" or "right" or because I lament about it on a message board.

I have an idea... maybe you should take all of the money that you don't pay in taxes and use it to fund alternative energy research.

Let me know if there's any occupancy in Utopia... sounds like a rad place. What I don't get is why would you even need to worry about fuel when you can ride around on unicorns instead.

FTW

[villain_the_foe]

So the conversion cost him $1500 to make on his own, not including labor. It's really not a terrible stretch to think that mass production lines could be customized to produce the parts necessary to retrofit vehicles with it. Mass production lines are restructured everyday for little things like plastic packaging for toys all the way up to huge engine blocks. It's done all the time. Yes, there would be an up front cost, but as the production becomes more available, the cost eventually comes down. Relatively speaking, it's the same as the recent modernizations of televisions. Plasma's/LCD's were expensive just a few years ago. Now they're cheap and the norm. That up front expense was built in to cover the production line enhancement cost until demand started covering and easing the cost of production.

There is no coincidence that technology in all other areas has been moving at a light speed pace of advancements, while advancements that alter our consumption of fossil fuels have been at a standstill.

You're better than me bro, I wasnt going to explain it.

[ZachEY]

You're wrong (again). Just stop here okay.

So, the video I just watched was not, in fact, of a dune buggy?

[Boozer76]

The oil is going to run out, and the sooner the USA gets off it's oil dependency, the better. Of course it's going to be hard. Tough decisions are rarely easy. This one should be.

The US currently subsidizes oil companies, and has one of the lowest petroleum taxes in the free world. If gas prices were as high here as in other places on the planet, then electric cars and solar panels would all of a sudden look a lot more affordable.

They could be more affordable right now if the US taxed oil products and put that money into renewable energy. The country has a highly educated, un(der)employed workforce. The nation as a whole needs high quality manfacturing jobs, and we need to get off oil. Why the hell isn't the government investing in green energy, then? The US should be be the world leader in the field. Instead, we're well behind China. That's inexcusable.

Going green -investing in green technology and energy- is good for the environment, the economy, and national security.

So who's it not good for? The Oil Companies and their investors.

Big business owns this country. Don't lose sight of that.

Obama says he's pursuing criminal charges against BP. Good. We'll see what comes of that, though.

The bolded statements are probably the smartest things that have been said in this thread.

Love him or hate him, JFK stood before all Americans and basically guaranteed that we will have a man on the moon in 10 years, and we did it. That type of will and determination is lost on this country today. Obama has put his eggs in the Healthcare arena, and whether you agree or not with it (I don't FTR), he has at least tried to do something bold. I just wished he focused that effort on taking a stand that in 10 years we will no longer depend on gasoline/oil for fuel. Government needs to stop subsidizing oil and start being bold.

[Boozer76]

Of course there is an incentive for them to keep things status quo, in fact, I never argued to the contrary. Everyone is on the same page there.

However, my point is that there are plenty of companies out there doing big things, and as Brett4ward points out, it's these small business that eventually get bought up, or reach a more national stage, like Tesla, when they produce a viable product.

A dune buggy running on water is not a viable mass product right now. Of course BP/Exxon/etc are not going to get behind this technology, but just like the inventors of Tesla, if it were viable right now, there'd be companies producing them and you'd have the option to buy it easily. Why wouldn't someone do this?

Fact is, you need to be able to achieve the power that an internal combustion engine can, at the cost an internal combustion engine can do it at, before it's a product that's truly ready for the mass market. A dune buggy running on water is not ready for the mass market.

Just an fyi, when you strip them down most cars today are dune buggies with a nice dress on it.

[villain_the_foe]

I see it as an unfortunate reality that is not going to change, because it would be "nice" or "right" or because I lament about it on a message board.

I have an idea... maybe you should take all of the money that you don't pay in taxes and use it to fund alternative energy research.

Let me know if there's any occupancy in Utopia... sounds like a rad place. What I don't get is why would you even need to worry about fuel when you can ride around on unicorns instead.

That would be a good idea, however, I dont have the experience to do so, so instead what I do is actually purchase the technology for myself....with my money that I dont pay taxes with.

And it feels good to "know better".

[villain_the_foe]

Just an fyi, when you strip them down most cars today are dune buggies with a nice dress on it.

THANK YOU BOOZER! (dude is a f'ing clown).

[ZachEY]

So the conversion cost him $1500 to make on his own, not including labor. It's really not a terrible stretch to think that mass production lines could be customized to produce the parts necessary to retrofit vehicles with it. Mass production lines are restructured everyday for little things like plastic packaging for toys all the way up to huge engine blocks. It's done all the time. Yes, there would be an up front cost, but as the production becomes more available, the cost eventually comes down. Relatively speaking, it's the same as the recent modernizations of televisions. Plasma's/LCD's were expensive just a few years ago. Now they're cheap and the norm. That up front expense was built in to cover the production line enhancement cost until demand started covering and easing the cost of production.

There is no coincidence that technology in all other areas has been moving at a light speed pace of advancements, while advancements that alter our consumption of fossil fuels have been at a standstill.

Well, considering he never brought a car to market, he's either the smartest man on the planet, and since he's now deceased, no other independent inventor has been able to reproduce this and created a car powerful enough to meet the demands of the everyday driver, or the technology is not there to make a cost effective car that runs on water can can meet the demands of the everyday consumer.

Plasma and LCD TVs still plug into the same cable outlet. Yes, things have changed, but at the end of the day, the advent of this technology did not require wholesale changes at every level of the television industry. I've jumped from working on HD to non HD shows with some regularity, and just about everything is still exactly the same.

[Lil Bit Special]

I'm surprised there hasn't been a thread yet. (has there?)

Does anyone care?

see what you started?

You sir are a rabble-rouser.

[ZachEY]

Just an fyi, when you strip them down most cars today are dune buggies with a nice dress on it.

Oh, so they weigh the same? Because that's fairly important to speed and torque, no?

[JohnnyHector]

The oil is going to run out, and the sooner the USA gets off it's oil dependency, the better. Of course it's going to be hard. Tough decisions are rarely easy. This one should be.

The US currently subsidizes oil companies, and has one of the lowest petroleum taxes in the free world. If gas prices were as high here as in other places on the planet, then electric cars and solar panels would all of a sudden look a lot more affordable.

While that sounds like an easy enough solution, given the current economic climate, I don't think the masses would be warm to the idea of a considerable increase in the cost of heating fuel and gasoline.

Consumer spending has been up and reports show that salaries have been increasing. A measure like this would quickly erode consumer confidence right now, even if done gradually.

They could be more affordable right now if the US taxed oil products and put that money into renewable energy. The country has a highly educated, un(der)employed workforce.

While it may be true for the workforce as a whole, the minds that would be driving the research into alternative energy sources aren't currently working in the electrical department at Home Depot.

The best place for the government to fund research would be through University grants, like they have being doing for years through DARPA. The ultimate issue is that with this technology, unlike defense projects that have little to no consumer impact, someone will stand to make considerable profits. How will that work? Will the government license the technology to auto manufacturers? In that case, will they be able to find a pricepoint where it is profitable, but still affordable to the consumer?

Personally, I think we're a very long way off...

[villain_the_foe]

Oh, so they weigh the same? Because that's fairly important to speed and torque, no?

Speed and Torque is your rebuttal?

Boozer, I say dont even respond. He was proven wrong. I say leave it at that because dude is obviously a clown and he cant admit when he's been proven wrong.

[ZachEY]

While it may be true for the workforce as a whole, the minds that would be driving the research into alternative energy sources aren't currently working in the electrical department at Home Depot.

Haven't you heard, everyone can be an astronaut if they just believe.

[villain_the_foe]

Haven't you heard, everyone can be an astronaut if they just believe.

Thats actually true.

[ZachEY]

Speed and Torque is your rebuttal?

Boozer, I say dont even respond. He was proven wrong. I say leave it at that because dude is obviously a clown and he cant admit when he's been proven wrong.

I guess I missed the example of the working passenger car that runs on water that proves it can be done and then proves me wrong. All I saw was a one man dune buggy.

And, weight and torque are basic physics. If they're irrelevant, then I guess you should be able to run your 5 passenger sedan on the same Double AA batteries that you can run a remote control car on.

Again, these simple things are apparently lost on you.

[Vicious89x]

I guess I missed the example of the working passenger car that runs on water that proves it can be done and then proves me wrong. All I saw was a one man dune buggy.

And, weight and torque are basic physics. If they're irrelevant, then I guess you should be able to run your 5 passenger sedan on the same Double AA batteries that you can run a remote control car on.

Again, these simple things are apparently lost on you.

You know nothing. All we need is some freshmakers and some coke.

i-hXcRtbj1Y&feature

[JohnnyHector]

I guess I missed the example of the working passenger car that runs on water that proves it can be done and then proves me wrong. All I saw was a one man dune buggy.

And, weight and torque are basic physics. If they're irrelevant, then I guess you should be able to run your 5 passenger sedan on the same Double AA batteries that you can run a remote control car on.

Again, these simple things are apparently lost on you.

http://www.tutor4physics.com/