£1 a litre/$3 a Gallon

[lesrae]

Just watching the morning news over here and they're comparing the US/UK petrol prices, the US is about to hit $3 a gallon and we're going to hit £1 a litre this year.

We had big protests here a couple of years ago when the price approached £1 a litre - is the same sort of thing being discussed in the US?

[Torplexed]

You can protest all you wish but at the end of the day we all need this product. About the most you can do personally is cut back. Less unnecessary trips. Drive a more fuel efficient car...etc. I don't think the upward price trend is ever gonna be reversed though. It'll just keep creeping up as worldwide demand does.

[DeepSix]

"Discussed" might not quite be the word for it. ;)

Unless I'm mistaken (and I might well be), in some places people are already paying more than $3/gallon. Little cheaper than that where I am, though.

[PeriscopeDepth]

What do you all think about this?

http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/18/news/economy/gas_price_investigation/index.htm?cnn=yes

[DeepSix]

I think you're bound to get some "discussion" out of it. :D

[Skybird]

Let Iran block the Hormuz strait in case of war (I think it has the military capacity to reach that goal even against American resistance, since tankers are both very tasty and very vulnerable), and this thread's money-numbers will be outdated very soon.

[Etienne]

Let Iran block the Hormuz strait in case of war (I think it has the military capacity to reach that goal even against American resistance, since tankers are both very tasty and very vulnerable), and this thread's money-numbers will be outdated very soon.

Screw that. Prices are already going up because oil companies are affraid it might possibly have a chance of perharp happening! When they actually block the strait (I'd love to see that), all it'll mean is that all those philipinos on those tankers will get war pay. (I wanna go! War pay is good!) It probably won't stop more than maybe, just maybe, a VLCC (A drop in a bucket)

And the government doesn't do **** because hey! Tax revenue!

Oil's a racket.

[jumpy]

To be absolutely honest petrol prices in the UK are ******* disgraceful. Hikes in fuel costs aside, if we didn't have nearly two thirds taxable duty added on the top of oil company prices it wouldn't be half so difficult to swallow... Oh, yeh, after fuel duty there comes VAT on what you buy (Value Added Tax, for those that want to know, is a tax on 'luxury goods' - like tampons! - lmao that must have been a bloke who decided that!), then there's the ever increasing road tax... oops Johnny-two-jags needs another motor, lets put a few more pence on the price of a litre of petrol- those suckers won't notice.

I drive a more fuel efficient car (diesel = 40% efficient compared to petrol) and guess what? it costs more than petrol (in some places up to almost 10 pence per litre more) I guess it's fortunate I don't have to drive to work if I so choose - but there's nothing worse than turning up to work in your suit, soaking wet and cold because you cycled there. Trouble is, successive governments have encouraged the use of the motor car in place of and at the expense of public transport and now we're being told to use busses and trains more to travel every day? Don't make me laugh, if I want to get somewhere on time, I'll use me damn car thankyou. My town used to have a decent tram system, but that was done away with years ago... and of course rebuilding the infrastructure for such a transport network is now so extraordinarily expensive that the chancellor can now tax the motorist even more to correct these 'oversights' in civil planning and transport; nice!

I'm not up with the latest, but at one point I'm sure the UK had a ****load of reserves of oil and gas, but it would appear that we have sold most of it and (from a report I heard the other day) are now facing a shortage of consumable fuel and are looking at the prospect of becoming reliant upon foreign imports to make our energy solutions meet. How's that for forward planning? Tell ya, there ain't nothing like the prospect of making vast sums of money to screw the future.

[TLAM Strike]

We just put $20 in the tank last night at $2.98 a gallon. Damn and just last week it was $2.62 a gallon. :roll: :damn:

[Kapitan]

The car i have a rover will drink a tank of fuel, in a few days a few weeks ago it was £53 to put in a full tank now its £68 holy cow !

[Konovalov]

I drive a diesel VW Golf and get pretty good economy figures. To fill up my tank it is about £42.00 and for that in my normal driving I fill up once every two weeks which is around 500 miles. I have a company fuel card so thankfully my blood pressure isn't subjected to the stress/anger associated with the price hikes.

[Konovalov]

The car i have a rover will drink a tank of fuel, in a few days a few weeks ago it was £53 to put in a full tank now its £68 holy cow !

If you mean that you own a range rover or 4wd then you are out of luck with the Government. Your road Tax will go up quite a bit thanks to Gordon poo poo Brown. Add that on top of the crazy fuel prices. :damn: :damn:

[JSLTIGER]

I think that I'm going to fill my tank up today before the prices get any higher...I'm driving a 1993 Toyota Corolla LE...the damn thing used to be full after $8. Now it's more like $25+...I know that that doesn't sound like a lot compared to £68, but remember that this is only a 13.2 gallon tank! Don't get me wrong, I love my car and wouldn't trade it for the world, but more and more, I seem to be trading it for an empty wallet...

:damn: :damn: :damn:

[Kapitan]

I well part own a rover 827SI 2.7 litre with sport injection (which eats fuel) the insurance is high enough and road tax is too, i dont want to pay anymore cause at this rate we will have to pay tax on our bikes next.

[Type XXIII]

You've got nothing to complain about!

In Norway, gas is at almost 12 NOK/litre, that's about $7/gallon, and it is expected to rise even further, maybe as high as 15.

Seems like I'm going to get some excercise this summer.

[August]

You've got nothing to complain about!

In Norway, gas is at almost 12 NOK/litre, that's about $7/gallon, and it is expected to rise even further, maybe as high as 15.

Seems like I'm going to get some excercise this summer.

How much of that is taxes levied by your government?

[Skybird]

Bikes and trains do the trick for me. No car. Even don't miss it. Glad that I live a bit outside the city, but not in such an isolated place where I would need a car.

[Kapitan]

they government emplores people to use public transport, take yesterday i used it this is what i found:

My bus the number 22 was more than 15 minets late, i had missed the connecting bus by 5 minets and so had to wait another 25 for the next one, in all i would have used about £2 or £3 in petrol driving or 2-3 lbs in cycling.

I spent nearly £7 on that one journey !

Before the train price hike i could go to london for just £7 on the peak rush hour train now im paying £9.90 (return)

To go from my home to pitsea (about 5 mins or less away and less than a mile and half) i have to pay £2.60 return, in a car i could have used all of 50p petrol.

Its a flaming ripp off.

[XabbaRus]

But diesel is more expensive than petrol which I don't get as I thought petrol was more refined.

As for 4x4's being taxed. I think it only applies to ones produced after a certain date when they had to have a CO2 output as part of the paper work, so that means all new ones.

Personally I think the 4x4 tax is a joke. why doesn't Mr Brown tax the boy racers who go round and round town centres. I bet they pollute more than the 4x4s. The Chelsea tractor thing is another case of the tree huggers blowing things out of proportion.

On the other hand maybe it will spur on more efficient cars or, considering the growing number of fat bastards in the UK make them walk.

As for taxing bicycles, maybe not that but definately insurance should be made a requirement. The number of times I have been carfully driving along the road and a bloody cylclist has pulled out in front of me or they wiggle woggle along the road. I am so glad I only have to walk to work.

roll on the fusion car a la Back to the Future.

[Kapitan]

What would be the charge then xabbarus £3.50 per year for a bike i spose it would be double for a tandum.

I know how you feel not only that, you have these guys who insist on riding at night with no lights, and when they get hit they wonder why.

I almost had my hand crushed when some idiot reversed back into my car my dad was drivingand they guy hit the car, and then put a nice dent in the side of it.

He didnt even glance before the tosser reversed back and you cant miss a big green car thats right behind you.


http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/7982/115924gd.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
This is the car that i drive its a rover 820si but has the bigger 827si engine inside it.

2,724cc V6 2.7 litre with sports injection (can add turbo if wanted) with approx 210bhp (unsure) i know its between 190 and 210

[SUBMAN1]

I love it! Picking up a used Land Rover to haul stuff as a third car. I also want the 4 wheel drive for offroading, but most of the time it will be parked and since no one wants to buy a gas guzzling SUV these days, used SUV's are way cheap! I love it! :)

Of course, I plan to use the SUV for what it was designed for - off roading and hauling stuff I can't pack into a sedan. I would never drive it as a primary car because of the gas guzzling ability. I think it gets like 18 MPG Hwy (Ouch!). My SAAB gets like 30 MPG for comparrison.

Anyway, I plan to pick up the Land Rover tonight!

-S

[Kapitan]

Vauxhaul apparently does 48 or MPG i dont know how true it is can some on clarify please.

[Type XXIII]

You've got nothing to complain about!

In Norway, gas is at almost 12 NOK/litre, that's about $7/gallon, and it is expected to rise even further, maybe as high as 15.

Seems like I'm going to get some excercise this summer.

How much of that is taxes levied by your government?

About 80%. Heck, shouldn't really complain, we earn so much money that we can afford it more than people in other countries.

I'm still at school, but my part-time job earns me about 1,500$ this month. Granted, I worked most of the Easter, so it's higher than usual.

[DeepSix]

...
Don't get me wrong, I love my car and wouldn't trade it for the world, but more and more, I seem to be trading it for an empty wallet...

:damn: :damn: :damn:

Haha, mine's emptier than yours! :) I drive a Denali and it's usually around $50 to fill up. I love the truck but it's too much and I don't need it, especially with North Carolina's gasoline tax that I pay when I go home. I'd like to part with it and get one of the new Civic hybrids, but the Big D is paid for and at this point I wouldn't come out ahead on trade-in.

[DeepSix]

Bikes and trains do the trick for me. No car. Even don't miss it. Glad that I live a bit outside the city, but not in such an isolated place where I would need a car.

That's 'cause you are fortunate enough to live in a country that has excellent passenger rail transportation - something the U.S. unfortunately lacks.

[SUBMAN1]

...
Don't get me wrong, I love my car and wouldn't trade it for the world, but more and more, I seem to be trading it for an empty wallet...

:damn: :damn: :damn:

Haha, mine's emptier than yours! :) I drive a Denali and it's usually around $50 to fill up. I love the truck but it's too much and I don't need it, especially with North Carolina's gasoline tax that I pay when I go home. I'd like to part with it and get one of the new Civic hybrids, but the Big D is paid for and at this point I wouldn't come out ahead on trade-in.

At least you don't have to use Super at the pump. My SAAB costs almost as much to fill. I'm in the mid $40's.

-S

[lesrae]

So, do the US government tax fuel in the same way our bunch of wasters do?

I have no idea how up to date this is, but it pisses me off anyway (http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/05/business_petrol_pricing/html/1.stm)

[JSLTIGER]

...
Don't get me wrong, I love my car and wouldn't trade it for the world, but more and more, I seem to be trading it for an empty wallet...

:damn: :damn: :damn:

Haha, mine's emptier than yours! :) I drive a Denali and it's usually around $50 to fill up. I love the truck but it's too much and I don't need it, especially with North Carolina's gasoline tax that I pay when I go home. I'd like to part with it and get one of the new Civic hybrids, but the Big D is paid for and at this point I wouldn't come out ahead on trade-in.

My dad has/had a 2003 Chevy Suburban, so I know how you feel DeepSix. I've had to fill up that tank a few times, and the bill has not been pretty (anywhere from $60-$75). The "tank" is actually in the process of coming off lease, so he's finally getting rid of it, and has replaced it with an '07 Accord. He considered a Civic Hybrid when my mom's Toyota Sienna went off lease two years ago, but wound up getting an '04 Civic EX, as the extra maintanence and initial cost couldn't justify buying one.

We're also from NC (although the rest of the family is leaving it for an even warmer climate (FL)) so I know all about the annoying gasoline tax.

[DeepSix]

@SUBMAN - yeah, that's true about Super. I haven't bought Super in... probably close to ten years.

@JSLTIGER - My dad's got a 'burb, too. The gas tank's huge on those things (something like 35-40 gallons). The extra maintenance on the hybrids is indeed an issue. For me, I was willing to consider it because I'm already accustomed to paying extra for maintenance on a full size 4WD automatic. As you know, even a basic oil change is more expensive.

What part of NC are you from? Salisbury for me (near Charlotte).

[JSLTIGER]

@DeepSix

I'm currently a student at Duke (no not a lacrosse player), so right now I'm up in Durham. My family was living in Charlotte, with my parents working up in your area at the VA Hospital there. I have to pass through Salisbury to get home (at least, I did before we moved).

[tycho102]

Back in the 1970's and early 1980's, oil companies could gouge prices.

The way they did it was to initiate "preventative maintenence" on refineries, pipelines, or ships. Things that did not necessarily have to be done right then, they'd just shut down and do it. If a pipe would eventually have to be replaced, they'd pick a spot when prices had dipped and do mainentence. This worked for them because it would be an acute price increase, and they could "justify" it to their investors' board. People wouldn't have enough time to find alternatives, and prices wouldn't jump enough for industries to spawn. They would, of course, buy out any patents or inventions that could change this business strategy.

Times have changed, and the oil companies no longer have that much control over supply and demand. 1970-1985 (excepting the embargo, of course), they could create supply, and they could create demand. These days, with all the environmental activists and regulations, they cannot alter the supply. Refineries are running at 95% capacity, with some (California) are running at 102% right now, and routinely during summer months.

The supply is limited by the ability of our refineries, not by our ability to import crude oil.

The demand is greater than their ability to actually supply refined products. Light, sweet crude (rich with the highly-volatile hydrocarbons, low sulfur) is easy to refine in comparison to heavy-sour crude; and HSC is the only "surplus" left in the supply chain, simply because no one has any extra refining ability to use it. This is due to the increased infrastructure necessary to refine and cleanse the refining-byproducts before venting them.

There is surplus heavy-sour crude (from various countries), but there are no refineries in America that can use this surplus; they are already refining the maximum amount of heavy-sour they can. Every plant is individual, and designed for a different type of crude and product.

So, here we are with the Chuckster and his Democrat buddies. Setup a committee, call in CEO's, make a "scene" on C-SPAN by chewing his/her ass for gouging. When the vote to license a new refinery comes up, they'll veto it. When the ANWAR vote comes up, they'll veto it. When a nuclear plant comes up for licensing, they'll veto it. A new coal mine? Veto. A space solar-collector? Veto. Tidal harness? Veto.


In the immortal words used by Dick Marcinko to describe the failed Iranian hostage-rescue attempt, "I do believe, good Sir, there is too much confusion amongst our modes of operation to allow victory in this endeavor." (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=complete+goat+****&btnG=Search)

[Ducimus]

My 2 cents worth:

US prices vs other countries.
Ill wager people in other countries don't have to drive near as much as we do in the US. My commute is 70 miles a day round trip because im forced to live out of town where rent is cheaper. There are others who live farther and hence drive further.

Big oil.
Price gouging, big time. I dont see how they can justify the prices when.
a.) All time record profits. (this by itself is enough)
b.) Apparently from all accounts ive read, they're not refining oil at maximum capacity, but rather spoonfeeding to ensure theres a constant demand.


BOHICA.
Theres really nothing the average citizien can do about it. The country is basically being bent over by the upper 1%. I saw on the news last night some of the oil company's CEO's, get paid 140,000 dollars EVERY WORKDAY. On top of the, it doesnt help when you have various govermental officals in the capital with ties to big oil.

Gas prices are infuriating, and the the reason behind those prices is even more infuriating.

[DeepSix]

@DeepSix

I'm currently a student at Duke (no not a lacrosse player), so right now I'm up in Durham
...

I didn't think you were :) ... if you were a lacrosse player I figured you wouldn't have much time for forums. :D I drive right past the VA on the way home.

Incidentally, I checked tonight and gas in Spartanburg is about $2.79/gallon depending on where you go. Prices always go up as we get closer to Memorial Day (May 29 this year), so I wouldn't be surprised at all if they top $4.00/gallon

[XabbaRus]

I must say though as I work in the oil industry for a company that makes accommodation, workshop and other modules for off-shore platforms, in some ways I want the price to stay reasonably decent as then the companies will spend more on prospecting. Therefore use more rigs, employ more people on the rigs and thus use my companies products.

So a double edged sword really.

[bradclark1]

BOHICA.
Theres really nothing the average citizien can do about it. The country is basically being bent over by the upper 1%. I saw on the news last night some of the oil company's CEO's, get paid 140,000 dollars EVERY WORKDAY. On top of the, it doesnt help when you have various govermental officals in the capital with ties to big oil.


I saw on the news the other night that Exxon/Mobile CEO earned something like $684,000,000 last year. That just blows my mind.

[The Avon Lady]

BOHICA.
Theres really nothing the average citizien can do about it. The country is basically being bent over by the upper 1%. I saw on the news last night some of the oil company's CEO's, get paid 140,000 dollars EVERY WORKDAY. On top of the, it doesnt help when you have various govermental officals in the capital with ties to big oil.


I saw on the news the other night that Exxon/Mobile CEO earned something like $684,000,000 last year. That just blows my mind.
Not quite (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-exxon13apr13,1,7536585.story?coll=la-headlines-business). Not that I would complain if we came across a small sum like that! :nope:

However, you're much closer if you were referring to the chairman of the board (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/13/business/13exxon.html?_r=1&ex=1145073600&en=b5d03ab08c595700&ei=5087%0A&oref=slogin). :doh:

[tycho102]

My 2 cents worth:

Big oil.
Price gouging, big time. I dont see how they can justify the prices when.
a.) All time record profits. (this by itself is enough)
b.) Apparently from all accounts ive read, they're not refining oil at maximum capacity, but rather spoonfeeding to ensure theres a constant demand.

Guess where those profits go. That's right: to the investors, in the form of dividends. And if you held stock in those same publicy traded oil companies, you'd be getting your dividends. I'm.......uh......getting my dividends, although I'm in a slightly different (but no less important!) area of the petroleum sector.

Private companies do not hold back profitable production, nor do they keep spare production capacity. The telephone companies don't install central offices capable of handling 100% of the population, simply because 25% of that capacity will go un-used except in the case of and emergency, and even then it doesn't make enough profit to cover the cost. You don't leave 45 minutes early to work every day just because you MIGHT have a flat tire.

But, regardless of all else, petroleum companies haven't been able to *make* spare production capacity, because the building licenses have been denied for as long as I have been alive.


Now, beyond all of that, on the specific topic of refineries:

We haven't built a new refinery in nearly 30 years. And the existing refineries haven't been expanded in nearly 20 years. All of the numbers you see for "total refining capacity" are based off the refinery design, not it's current working state. Just like your car, there are a thousand parts, and things fail at different rates. Your air conditioner might be unusable for awhile even though the car will still move, or your clutch might be going out but it's not completely gone out just yet.

For example, right now there's a huge deficit because of the switch-over from methyl tertiary butyl ether. You have to purge the system to rid it of any solute, and so the refineries storage tanks and pipes, as well as tanker trucks and gas stations, have to purge. Right now, that means sections of refineries (especially in California) have shut down 10-15% working capacity to do this purge. On top of that, you can't put as much ethanol into solution, so the total volume of "gasoline" production will be reduced from each refinery's MTBE production levels.

All of this pulls down the supply. And all of this is in the hands of engineer "tiger teams" working their asses off, 24/7 to get it done on all of our 130+ refineries. Why'd they wait until the last minute? Because gas was high anyway, and they wanted every last bit of production they could possibly output to cover the purge costs.




You can thank the environmentalists for the price of gas, right now. Windmills kill birds. Tidal harnessing disrupts fish breeding. Nuclear power contaminates the area for thousands of years. Orbital solar-collectors can go off-target with their terawatt beam. Geothermal rapes the planet core. Coal forces horrible conditions on the miners and even more horrible atmospheric conditions. Natural gas creates voids in the earth which will someday collapse.

And then, when they have been working hard all day at protesting all power production, they grab their iPod, jump on MSN Chat, and cooridinate tomorrow's protest.

[TLAM Strike]

Orbital solar-collectors can go off-target with their terawatt beam. Not if you transmit the power down an orbital tether. All the more reason to build a Space Elevator. :rock:

[jumpy]

And then, when they have been working hard all day at protesting all power production, they grab their iPod, jump on MSN Chat, and cooridinate tomorrow's protest.

So, you're not a cynic then? :rotfl:

[GunnersMate]

I think we know why Germany developed those fuel cell subs! :lol:

[August]

I think we know why Germany developed those fuel cell subs! :lol:

Score one for the Fatherland...

[SUBMAN1]

Anyway, so I picked up the Land Rover and man does it suck gas!!! And, it needs Premium fuel as well! This is a bad combo. I'll keep it parked except for work or play.

I must say, I already took it 4x'ing and it is way fun to drive off-road. This thing is not meant much for onroad and is designed to be driven off road. Land Rover's kick butt. Is this one of the last SUV's with a locking differential? I don't understand why they are turning other SUV's into just glorified mini-vans. They are going cheap.

-S

[Onkel Neal]

You can protest all you wish but at the end of the day we all need this product. About the most you can do personally is cut back. Less unnecessary trips. Drive a more fuel efficient car...etc. I don't think the upward price trend is ever gonna be reversed though. It'll just keep creeping up as worldwide demand does.

Yes, best way to counter it is drive less, and drive a more fuel-efficient vehicle :up:

[Type941]

still US pays like 30% less for fuel than we do in europe. So you guys just quit whining.

[STEED]

This black gold has peaked and is now on the slide. So what the heck is going to replace it, no one has a real solution to that question.

[JSLTIGER]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

[August]

still US pays like 30% less for fuel than we do in europe. So you guys just quit whining.

We only pay 30% less because our gas taxes aren't so high. Instead of telling us to stop whining, perhaps you guys ought to start...

[Type941]

still US pays like 30% less for fuel than we do in europe. So you guys just quit whining.

We only pay 30% less because our gas taxes aren't so high. Instead of telling us to stop whining, perhaps you guys ought to start...

nice try. Really - stop whining. You pay 30% less, per capita annual wage is quite high, so just get over your profiligate way of life and start paying for gas like the rest of us.

Wait till you get to 6 bucks a gallon, than you can whine, like we do now.

[August]

still US pays like 30% less for fuel than we do in europe. So you guys just quit whining.

We only pay 30% less because our gas taxes aren't so high. Instead of telling us to stop whining, perhaps you guys ought to start...

nice try. Really - stop whining. You pay 30% less, per capita annual wage is quite high, so just get over your profiligate way of life and start paying for gas like the rest of us.

Wait till you get to 6 bucks a gallon, than you can whine, like we do now.

30% less per capita still means the difference is your high tax rates. You have no one but your own government to blame...

[Type941]

do you actually know what you are talking about with respect to taxes or you simply talking? Because it's not quite like you say it is...

[August]

do you actually know what you are talking about with respect to taxes or you simply talking? Because it's not quite like you say it is...

On average, taxes (State and Federal combined) make up about 23% of the cost of a gallon of gas in the US. What percentage do you pay?

BTW where do you live anyways?

[TLAM Strike]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

[Kapitan]

Us stop whining we can whinge all we want at our own government, the USA is only in iraq for two reason's one is to set up democracy and one is to secure thier own countrys future oil supply simple as.

As for us its now about 96p a litre some of yours has hit $3 a gallon, and thats high, but your country has big powerful 4 5 and 6 litre cars, did it not occour to you that a 2.0litre car would be more cost effective?

heck why do you need a 6 litre V8 engine in your car, i can understand if you were in germany but come on america you dont need that, your fuel cost's would be alot lower if you toned down your engines.

The rover i have eats fuel too 2.7 litres and i tell you something else it beets the ford mustan 4.6 litre hands down, so having all that under the bonet realy isnt nessasery.

[TteFAboB]

Lock all enviromentalists in the brig so they don't complain while the Ethanol production chain is vastly expanded, and you got yourself cheap fuel. Tough to start an Ethanol engine in the Winter, you'll also need a large crop area, but no more need for pricy gas at the pump.

Whine all you want, everytime you fill your tank with gas you're sponsoring tyrannical dictatorships here and there, everytime the fuel price is high you are sponsoring them even more. Why?! Set up Democracy at Oil extracting nations today, stop filling the tank with gas.

By the way, V8's run great on racing Ethanol. :up:

[tycho102]

I guess the President has relaxed the "environmental restrictions". So that does some good in places like Iowa, but doesn't mean squat for California (who has it's own state laws governing blends).

Didn't he "relax" them back when Hurrican Katrina went through?

[Torplexed]

Every politician here in the US whether Democrat or Republican is currently demagoguing this issue to death. Trying to come up with ways to blunt the spike in prices so as to curry favor with voters.

Wanna actually encourage conservation? Let the price continue to go up. Nothing impacts consumer behavior like taking it in the wallet. If the price goes too high people will change their driving habits and cut back on their use and eventually that'll result in a glut on the market causing the price to come back down.

But when the govenment steps in and starts monkeying with the system for a few short term gains...it usually creates more problems than it solves.

[SUBMAN1]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

[JSLTIGER]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

The problem is that on Earth, all of the hydrogen is bonded to oxygen, in the form of water. In order to retrieve the hydrogen, a large amount of energy must be put into the water. That energy has to come from somewhere.

[Type941]

the problem with hydrogen cars is mass produced they cost a LOT of money.


===
I reckon all technology is there, just waiting for the 'right' time to surface. I tell you, till there's oil to sell, there are petrol engines to burn it. Car companies and oil producers may be don't have much to gain from spening billions into R&D for alternative fuel when they can milk you for another 30-40 years on gas eating engine. ;)

[SUBMAN1]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

The problem is that on Earth, all of the hydrogen is bonded to oxygen, in the form of water. In order to retrieve the hydrogen, a large amount of energy must be put into the water. That energy has to come from somewhere.

Use a reactor. Its clean, efficient, and has plenty of power to do the job. Everyone is nuke scared which is why we don't build many, but it is the solution until self sufficient fusion comes online. Imagine a world of greater than 100% efficiency, or at least close to. That will happen some day.

One problem though - I think the research into seperating hydrogen hasn't been given the attention to detail that other technologies have. A lot has changed since the Hindenbergs where flying the world however. All it takes is $$$ and the worlds energy needs will forever be satisfied.

-S

[Type941]

On average, taxes (State and Federal combined) make up about 23% of the cost of a gallon of gas in the US. What percentage do you pay?



Now I will chat with a colleague who is dealing with commodities tomorrow may be and get more deep into this topic, as your explanation sounds completely ... well, too simple. I live in north eastern europe.

[tycho102]

The problem is that on Earth, all of the hydrogen is bonded to oxygen, in the form of water. In order to retrieve the hydrogen, a large amount of energy must be put into the water. That energy has to come from somewhere.

You hit the nail right on the head, sir.

Oil is an energy storage unit. Energon is an energy storage unit. Beer is an energy storage unit. Spinach is an energy storage unit.

The oil has been storing up energy for several million years. All I'm saying is use hydrogen to store the energy from man-made nuclear reactors. Coupled with core re-processing, we can buy all the uranium we need from Australia and Canada. Very soon, India is going to be using thorium breeders to power their country, and would likely be interested in a bit of trade.

We need to decentralize power production, such that the transmission losses are far less than what they are now; a superconductive transmission grid would help alleviate this particularly significant issue. We also have tons of radioactives left over from 30 years of plutonium production, quite a bit of which can be used in the medical industry as well as the power production industry. In fact, our airline industry can use some of the radioactives for non-destructive material integrity testing. The rest can be vitrified and for various localized purposes, such as de-icing the sidewalks; not that you would just roll the bloody barrel down the sidewalk, but designing a small system of thermal transfer is within the capability of even the most inexperienced civil engineer.

The problem has been, and continues to be even today, nuclear proliferation. Pakistan, China, Bill Clinton, and Iran have taken care of that issue for us, so there's really not much utility left in a non-proliferation agenda.


I think on-site hydrogen production, especially for the highly populized east and west coasts, is the viable energy transfer solution for America. It's even possible to pump ocean water into the central states instead of actual hydrogen, using the resultant salt for dietary and industrial purposes.

[TLAM Strike]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

But Jupiter is 317.8 times the mass of Earth (that should be sufficient to supply the current population of Earth till the Sun dies or close to it), it has 63 moons to colonize- the four Galilean Moons (Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto) are about equivalent to our moon, our Moon is about the size of the United States so how much industry could be built there and take advantage of the low gravity?

[SUBMAN1]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

But Jupiter is 317.8 times the mass of Earth (that should be sufficient to supply the current population of Earth till the Sun dies or close to it), it has 63 moons to colonize- the four Galilean Moons (Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto) are about equivalent to our moon, our Moon is about the size of the United States so how much industry could be built there and take advantage of the low gravity?

I'm thinking from a cost to gather perspective. When the technology to travel to Jupiter and back becomes economical, then by all means!

[TLAM Strike]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

But Jupiter is 317.8 times the mass of Earth (that should be sufficient to supply the current population of Earth till the Sun dies or close to it), it has 63 moons to colonize- the four Galilean Moons (Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto) are about equivalent to our moon, our Moon is about the size of the United States so how much industry could be built there and take advantage of the low gravity?

I'm thinking from a cost to gather perspective. When the technology to travel to Jupiter and back becomes economical, then by all means!The thing is we basically have the technology we just don’t have the will or the infrastructure to use it.

[SUBMAN1]

The simple solution is hydrogen. The hard part is figuring out how to get the hydrogen.

Jupiter is ~86% Hydrogen. :rock: Voyager I took only 2 years to reach Jupiter so a mining operation in two decades isn't really out of the picture if it was a priority. :up:

Whats the problem? most of the Earths surface is also Hydrogen so why would you want to go to Jupiter? Might be a cool place to visit, but doubt I want to get my gas from there when we have more than we know what to do with right here, and it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to refine it here than send spacecrafts for it.

-S

But Jupiter is 317.8 times the mass of Earth (that should be sufficient to supply the current population of Earth till the Sun dies or close to it), it has 63 moons to colonize- the four Galilean Moons (Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto) are about equivalent to our moon, our Moon is about the size of the United States so how much industry could be built there and take advantage of the low gravity?

I'm thinking from a cost to gather perspective. When the technology to travel to Jupiter and back becomes economical, then by all means!The thing is we basically have the technology we just don’t have the will or the infrastructure to use it.

Thats exactly what I said. Problem is, that technology is expensive!

[TLAM Strike]

But once the Infrastructure is in place the cost drops a lot. Take space elevators and mass drivers for example one expensive piece of equipment makes everything down the line a lot cheaper (dollars and cents cheaper). The days of the rocket are over I just wish NASA and the ESA would realize that.

Making hydrogen fuel on Earth will fuel humanity for what a century or two? Going out and getting it will fuel it forever. Someone was complaining about the short sightedness of energy policy well this is about as long term as you can get without quoting Prof. Dyson.

[JSLTIGER]

But once the Infrastructure is in place the cost drops a lot. Take space elevators and mass drivers for example one expensive piece of equipment makes everything down the line a lot cheaper (dollars and cents cheaper). The days of the rocket are over I just wish NASA and the ESA would realize that.

Making hydrogen fuel on Earth will fuel humanity for what a century or two? Going out and getting it will fuel it forever. Someone was complaining about the short sightedness of energy policy well this is about as long term as you can get without quoting Prof. Dyson.


Earth's supply of hydrogen would technically last indefinitely. How so, you ask? When you burn hydrogen, it bonds to oxygen and reverts to the water that it was originally taken from (except that it is in the form of water vapor). This water vapor will eventually condense in the atmosphere and rain back down upon the Earth, where it can be recollected and re-separated into pure hydrogen and oxygen, to be reused for energy. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the only problem is getting the energy to re-split the hydrogen from the oxygen.

The problem is that on Earth, all of the hydrogen is bonded to oxygen, in the form of water. In order to retrieve the hydrogen, a large amount of energy must be put into the water. That energy has to come from somewhere.

P.S. Isn't chemistry wonderful?

[TLAM Strike]

But once the Infrastructure is in place the cost drops a lot. Take space elevators and mass drivers for example one expensive piece of equipment makes everything down the line a lot cheaper (dollars and cents cheaper). The days of the rocket are over I just wish NASA and the ESA would realize that.

Making hydrogen fuel on Earth will fuel humanity for what a century or two? Going out and getting it will fuel it forever. Someone was complaining about the short sightedness of energy policy well this is about as long term as you can get without quoting Prof. Dyson.


Earth's supply of hydrogen would technically last indefinitely. How so, you ask? When you burn hydrogen, it bonds to oxygen and reverts to the water that it was originally taken from (except that it is in the form of water vapor). This water vapor will eventually condense in the atmosphere and rain back down upon the Earth, where it can be recollected and re-separated into pure hydrogen and oxygen, to be reused for energy. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the only problem is getting the energy to re-split the hydrogen from the oxygen. That’s true. The possibility of large amounts of He 3 on our Moon and in Gas Giants makes the possibility of mining out there cost effective if it could be put to use in fusion.

Besides we will need a lot of extra Hydrogen if we ever want to seed Mars with water. ;)

[I-25]

Funny Dow here in mexico we havent ever relyed on persian gulf oil (we have our own reservers) but sice the US cranked up the prices i shot up in mexico too! :down: All a money making scam ohh well thats mexico jaja :rotfl: any ways i got (well my dad) a 83 diesel VW rabbit and get 50 miles to the gallon! :rock: thats 700 Miles to a tank!

[Type941]

August, yup, it's about the tax, you were correct. Turns out we just have this taxation that's slightly different. In a nutshell, in europe consumption is taxed, so everyone is hit with it at the pump, while in US tax is dfferent and in a nutshell, those who use most get taxed through their income indirectly. Which makes much more sense.

I don't know whethere US is entering a stage where they start using their own reserves, as past WW2 they decided to keep them untouched for a while. But yes, we should be whining now, I want my cheap gas. But we are forced on another hand to drive more efficient cars, better for environment.

[August]

August, yup, it's about the tax, you were correct. Turns out we just have this taxation that's slightly different. In a nutshell, in europe consumption is taxed, so everyone is hit with it at the pump, while in US tax is dfferent and in a nutshell, those who use most get taxed through their income indirectly. Which makes much more sense.

I don't know whethere US is entering a stage where they start using their own reserves, as past WW2 they decided to keep them untouched for a while. But yes, we should be whining now, I want my cheap gas. But we are forced on another hand to drive more efficient cars, better for environment.

We may be entering that stage. A lot depends on who is in control of Congress come 2009-10. The other thing is whether we're going to continue to prevent refineries (and nuke power plants) from being built.

All that aside, one big thing that has retarded the acceptability of small gas-saving vehicles here in the US is the distances we commonly have to travel both for work and play. It's bad enough to drive 2-3 hours a day but to do it in a small, cramped car can rapidly become intolerable.

[DeepSix]

...
All that aside, one big thing that has retarded the acceptability of small gas-saving vehicles here in the US is the distances we commonly have to travel both for work and play. It's bad enough to drive 2-3 hours a day but to do it in a small, cramped car can rapidly become intolerable.

Plus we have not supported (either in terms of money or in our individual choices) passenger/commuter rail as Europe has. We are too automobile-dependent; we'd rather be "packed like lemmings into shiny metal boxes" because it gives the false impression of freedom (even though we spend a lot of that freedom sitting in highway logjams). There's a social stigma in this country when it comes to using public transportation - the unspoken sentiment is that only people who can't afford the "normal" mode of transportation - cars - use buses and trains.

It is far too difficult to "survive" in the U.S. if you don't or can't drive yourself; it restricts your access to jobs, housing, grocery stores, places of worship, education, recreation - everything. Can't afford to live inside the beltway? Better have a car so you can drive the 20 or 30 miles (c. 30-50 km) out to cheaper housing.

I'm just as guilty as the next guy. I drive a gas-guzzler; it's paid for, but it's not worth a whole lot in terms of selling it or trading it in for a more economical vehicle. So I'm stuck with it until I can afford to buy a new car outright - which hopefully won't take too much longer. But IMO it's not just a question of developing and using economical cars, but also of developing and using alternative forms of travel.

[scandium]

Wanna actually encourage conservation? Let the price continue to go up. Nothing impacts consumer behavior like taking it in the wallet. If the price goes too high people will change their driving habits and cut back on their use and eventually that'll result in a glut on the market causing the price to come back down.

But when the govenment steps in and starts monkeying with the system for a few short term gains...it usually creates more problems than it solves.

I agree with this completely. Part of the problem is derived from the meddling of gas prices in the past with the result that alternative sources of energy and of transportation have remained comparatively expensive and thus either undeveloped or barely utilized. Now consumers are taking it in the wallet and any more meddling will only further America's dependence on fossil fuels and postpone the day of reckoning. But it will come all the same, and likely be even more severe.

Will that stop politicians from meddling to keep gas prices artificially low? Doubtful. They're in for a short term of office and then the problem becomes someone else's. While the voters possess an unusual sense of entitlement for cheap gasoline, which is unreasonable given the US hit peak oil in the 70s, and will lay the blame for high prices on the doorstep of whoever happens to be elected. Though that's not to say that they are entirely blameless either.

I cited the US though some of this is somewhat true in Canada as well. Although I would say we don't have quite the same sense of entitlement toward cheap gasoline, have better developed and more extensive mass transportation, and are subject to more extreme weather that provides a rationale for a more widespread use of more fuel intensive automobiles.

[tycho102]

And the rest of our economy will slow down along with those high gas prices. Meaning that the cost of goods will up. As well as less tax revenue for the politicians to spend, and it generally makes it more difficult for them to pander to the lobbists (larger sums of cash).

[Torplexed]

I cited the US though some of this is somewhat true in Canada as well. Although I would say we don't have quite the same sense of entitlement toward cheap gasoline, have better developed and more extensive mass transportation, and are subject to more extreme weather that provides a rationale for a more widespread use of more fuel intensive automobiles.

Yeah we do have this strange and misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline here in the US. However, even the prices we pay now are artifically low. You're not seeing how much it's costing to defend the pipeline (both land and sea). That comes out of taxes. There is the ironic part. Through withholding and sales taxes the government can take more of your money each year and people barely notice. The same people show up at the pump and see the price jump 20 cents and they're up in arms.

However, I drive a wimpy Honda Civic. Maybe I'm just in smug mode. :smug:

[bradclark1]

Yeah we do have this strange and misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline here in the US.
Thats because of the way of life. America is still wide open. You have to have a car unless you live in a city. In europe you can get away without owning a vehicle. Public transportation is right there.
How do you mean we have a misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline?

[Torplexed]

How do you mean we have a misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline?

Basically here in America we tend to be strong believers in market forces and the immutable laws of supply and demand. We do have this odd blind spot when it comes to gasoline prices tho. They have to be keep low...even artificially low. I've never quite understood why.

[Takeda Shingen]

However, I drive a wimpy Honda Civic. Maybe I'm just in smug mode. :smug:

I also drive a wimpy Civic, spending approximately $20 per week on gas. I do make sure to send a grin and wink to the SUV driver at the next pump who is passing the $70 mark.

[scandium]

Yeah we do have this strange and misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline here in the US.
Thats because of the way of life. America is still wide open. You have to have a car unless you live in a city. In europe you can get away without owning a vehicle. Public transportation is right there.
How do you mean we have a misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline?

This was once the way of life everywhere if you substitute horses for automobiles ;) To elaborate on what Torp said, I would also say its misguided because its irrational. Having hit Peak Oil in the 70s, the US ever since has had to import ever greater stocks of petroleum from a world supply that is itself dwindling, and from countries which are located in some of the most unstable parts of the world.

I would argue that a rational approach would be to develop instead alternative forms of energy and promote and increase the availability of mass transit to lessen dependence on something that we've known, for 30 years now, is not only difficult to secure (think OPEC), but also running out. But this has never been done as the band-aid fix has always been preferable. We'll have to see what happens when they run out of band-aids.

[August]

Yeah we do have this strange and misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline here in the US.
Thats because of the way of life. America is still wide open. You have to have a car unless you live in a city. In europe you can get away without owning a vehicle. Public transportation is right there.

I agree. I'd even go so far to say that the very size of the country prohibits a national public transportation system that would eliminate the need for personal vehicles.

It's doable in the cities to some extent but it'd never reach out to every community.

[JSLTIGER]

Yeah we do have this strange and misguided sense of entitlement to cheap gasoline here in the US.
Thats because of the way of life. America is still wide open. You have to have a car unless you live in a city. In europe you can get away without owning a vehicle. Public transportation is right there.

I agree. I'd even go so far to say that the very size of the country prohibits a national public transportation system that would eliminate the need for personal vehicles.

It's doable in the cities to some extent but it'd never reach out to every community.

This is true. The US is of a scale far too large for any type of public transportation to be effective in this country. The automobile also gives Americans a sense of freedom that is unavailable with other modes of transportation. With a car, you can go where you want, when you want, and to a certain extent at what speed you want.


However, I drive a wimpy Honda Civic. Maybe I'm just in smug mode.


I also drive a wimpy Civic, spending approximately $20 per week on gas. I do make sure to send a grin and wink to the SUV driver at the next pump who is passing the $70 mark.

As I've mentioned earlier in this thread, I drive a 1993 Toyota Corolla, which is the direct competitor to the Civic. It's not the $20/week in gasoline that bothers me so much (who am I kidding, of course it does!) as the fact that I remember a time only a few years ago that it used to run on $8 a week.

[August]

It's not the $20/week in gasoline that bothers me so much (who am I kidding, of course it does!) as the fact that I remember a time only a few years ago that it used to run on $8 a week.

Whats worse is that salaries have not gone up to compensate. And its not just gas, it's housing costs and utilities and more.

[scandium]

It's not the $20/week in gasoline that bothers me so much (who am I kidding, of course it does!) as the fact that I remember a time only a few years ago that it used to run on $8 a week.

Whats worse is that salaries have not gone up to compensate. And its not just gas, it's housing costs and utilities and more.

And they won't. This is the essence of inflation which rising oil prices, being the backbone of a modern economy, is a great predictor of.

[DeepSix]

I agree. I'd even go so far to say that the very size of the country prohibits a national public transportation system that would eliminate the need for personal vehicles.

It's doable in the cities to some extent but it'd never reach out to every community.

This is true. The US is of a scale far too large for any type of public transportation to be effective in this country. The automobile also gives Americans a sense of freedom that is unavailable with other modes of transportation. With a car, you can go where you want, when you want, and to a certain extent at what speed you want.


I sort of agree and sort of disagree. I don't think it's possible to eliminate personal vehicles altogether, nor do I think that's particularly desirable. But on the other hand, the existing highway network is totally congested. The sense of freedom that the automobile gives is there, yes, but it is also artificial. It's hard to feel that freedom when you're sitting at a dead stop on the interstate because traffic is backed up for five miles ahead (or more).

I'm guessing nobody wants to hear the whole thesis, but basically there's no centralized traffic control on American roads, and the smallest of delays (e.g., just tapping your brakes) creates a ripple effect that moves backwards and tends to get larger. 20 years ago, it took 45 minutes to an hour to drive from my hometown to the nearest large city on the interstate. Today, there are six lanes (in most places) instead of four, the speed limit is 10-15 mph higher, and it still takes at least an hour to make the same trip. There are more cars on the road, and there is exponentially more roadside development. More cars getting on and off = more alternating between acceleration and braking. Highways are more or less saturated.

I don't think a good public transportation system needs to touch every single community, because the boundaries of communities and regions have changed. Traffic congestion does not recognize county lines or city limits or geographic fall lines. In North Carolina, for instance, you have three major urban areas: the Charlotte area, the Winston-Salem/Greensboro/High Point area, and the Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill area. These are huge urban areas that basically function as economic and political entities even though they are spread over multiple counties and comprise multiple jurisdictions and are - officially - made up of numerous individual communities. Alternative forms of transportation (particularly rail) could be extremely effective just by serving those three major "centers" without even trying to reach each individual city or town within them - particularly if coordinated with local public transportation.

I'm not saying it's possible to do away with high gas prices or to solve traffic problems overnight, but I do think the alternatives to being automobile-dependent are viable as *part* of the national transportation network.

[August]

Alternative forms of transportation (particularly rail) could be extremely effective just by serving those three major "centers" without even trying to reach each individual city or town within them - particularly if coordinated with local public transportation.

I'm not saying it's possible to do away with high gas prices or to solve traffic problems overnight, but I do think the alternatives to being automobile-dependent are viable as *part* of the national transportation network.

This is all provided you work in a city and live along the spokes of the public transportation links. Urban centers and the communities that surround them already tend to have decent public transportation, at least up here in New England, although their schedules thin out unacceptably (imo) at night. What doesn't (mostly) exist are the town to town links and access to the rural areas away from the cities.

Speaking of rural areas in particular, most are already economically depressed and the high cost of fuel is going to really hurt those people to whom a pickup or SUV is more necessity than luxury a lot more than city dwellers. Unfortunately it just isn't economically feasable to provide public transportation to these areas beyond maybe the daily bus which country folk will still have to drive 20 or more miles to meet.

[The Avon Lady]

http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/1011/02jj.gif

[TteFAboB]

In europe you can get away without owning a vehicle. Public transportation is right there.

Plus we have not supported (either in terms of money or in our individual choices) passenger/commuter rail as Europe has.

Obviously, some people NEVER tried the public transportation system in Italy.

Next time you comment about it, try "in Europe minus Italy...".

[tycho102]

Europe has a village every 5km. That's why mass-transit works pretty well on the east and west coasts here in the US; there's a village about every 5km.

[DeepSix]

In europe you can get away without owning a vehicle. Public transportation is right there.

Plus we have not supported (either in terms of money or in our individual choices) passenger/commuter rail as Europe has.

Obviously, some people NEVER tried the public transportation system in Italy.

Next time you comment about it, try "in Europe minus Italy...".

Obviously, some people don't know whether I've tried it or not. ;)

[TteFAboB]

Obviously, if you typed that yourself, you are still physically capable, even if you typed with a pencil attached to your tongue, but if you were tied to a hospital bed one step away from certain death, you are still mentally healthy to be able to formulate and dictate that sentence to a voice-recognition computer or somebody else. You do not seem mentally insane or physically crippled.

So obviously, you haven't tried hard enough or long enough.

Neither did I, I also value my health.

[Sailor Steve]

I live in Utah, a state the size of Great Britain, but with only two million people. I have lost out on several jobs for the simple reason that public transportation doesn't go there.

It's not easy not having a car. Hope soon to get my motorcycle running again.