Gasprices

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

Fu. Svedberg

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
1,413
16
0
Sweden
Ok, who edited my Thread title? Bunch of Nazi's the lot of you! :mad:

Not me i only lock (I'm just observing and waiting for this thread)


On gas prizes read the last fiscal report of the oil companies they have never made this much profit ever as they did last year. ^^
 

Hirmuinen

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 24, 2005
513
20
0
Finland
In fifty years all fossil fuels will be GONE, for good, no way of getting them back and the "Oil Age" has ended.
Let's use Uranium instead? No chance, a very limited resource again.

EU's plan is to get by the year 2020 20% of their energy usage from renewable energy, but I just can't see it happening. I haven't seen any government really pushing for this or doing what they agreed to do. Everyone is going to use nuclear power and think it will be the answer to all of the problems. Then of course China and India are growing fast and that's 2 billion people more that are going to need energy aswell.

Maybe we just don't care enough? And I doubt we(industrial country people) are going to hurt too much from this. People in countries who are already dieing are going to suffer the loss, so population dicrease is going to be cut from there.
 

Switchblade

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 21, 2005
2,033
377
0
58
Holland
might be, every country has it's milionairs donating huge amounts, but the average figure per income speaks for itself I guess, USA is on the bottom of the list.
furthermore mr Gonzo claims that if th US in all its wisdom stops aid the world will fall apart so I guess that he was talking about foreign aid and not local cahrity
 
Last edited:

Lt_Kettch

FNG / Fresh Meat
People should keep in mind that the western countries don't give things away for free nothing at all. The so called "aid" for the development countries has to be paid back. Food that is "given away" is sold some where else not only ruining the local farmers as SchutzeSepp already mentioned but also making profit for some.

There is a reason why 122 countries have debts which they never can pay back (100 billion iirc)

In short with international aid the western world makes money, it is the modern form of colonialism.
 

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
35
they say that there is enough energy in 1 liter of seawater to power a big city for one year, only we can't extract that energy yet.
and honestly, people who invent new free energy sources have a strange tendancy to disappear or get visits from guys in black suits. like the inventor of the joe cell, who can make cars run on tapwater.

as long as the world is run by money we will only see fake sollutions like hybrid cars or hydrogen fuel cells. all these "sollutions" are provided by the same companies who earn money out of oil and want to keep us strangled in their grip by offering us complicated and expensive technologies. while there are thousands of easy and clean ways to produce energy, like the sun, wind, seawaves, methanisation, wood, thermal energy, water barrages. sure these sources are not sufficient, but if all the money that we spend on making biofuels would instead had been spent to improve the thermal isolations of houses and make them more energy efficient, then we would have saved out more fossile fuel, then what we would have produced in biofuels with that money...

but again, global warming and clean energy has already become a multybillion dollar industry on wich many many people are earning indecent amounts of money, so don't hope for them to solve that problem, as their wealth directly depends on the size of the global warming problem.
 
Last edited:

EvilAmericanMan

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 27, 2005
1,331
168
0
29
Palm Coast, FL
[cough]BS[cough]
http://www.poverty.com/internationalaid.html

I dont see what healtcare or aid have to do with gasprices though, americans are lucky, drive big gascomsuming cars and pay almost nothing
I dunno if this is right but since the US economy is so big isn't that why the percent per income is so low? Maybe we spend the majority of our income on our military...Last time I looked it was $430 billion and China was 2nd in the world at $90 billion.
 

=GG= Mr Moe

FNG / Fresh Meat
Mar 16, 2006
9,797
890
0
54
Newton, NJ
I dunno if this is right but since the US economy is so big isn't that why the percent per income is so low? Maybe we spend the majority of our income on our military...Last time I looked it was $430 billion and China was 2nd in the world at $90 billion.

As a whole, the percent amount (of our budget) we spend on our military has been in constant decline overall since the mid 80s while things such as entitlements has seen a constant percent increase.
 

LogisticEarth

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 24, 2007
831
132
0
Pennsylvania, USA
I dunno if this is right but since the US economy is so big isn't that why the percent per income is so low? Maybe we spend the majority of our income on our military...Last time I looked it was $430 billion and China was 2nd in the world at $90 billion.

Actually we spend well over twice as much on social programs as on the national defense budget:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2007#Total_spending

As to the solution to our gas prices, it's not going to be easy. The only long term solution is going to have to come from redesigning our cities and towns. Right now you basically need a car to get ANYWHERE. Hell I live in a town and the only places I can convienently walk to are a 7-11, a CVS, and a bank.

In the suburbs or rural areas, you've got thousands of people who may live upwards of 10 miles away from a supermarket, hardware store, etc. We need to start redesigning towns so that we can actually walk down the street to the bank, post office, local market, and school again. You know, TOWNS instead of SPRAWL.

Our urban planning since the 50's in this country has failed miserably.
 

Bobdog

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 22, 2005
1,916
218
0
Texas
they say that there is enough energy in 1 liter of seawater to power a big city for one year, only we can't extract that energy yet.

Well, all matter is energy in a different form, according to Einstien's special relativity, so technically there is a massive amount of energy in *everything*. That being said, it would take much more power to actually extract said energy that you would get out of the water.

and honestly, people who invent new free energy sources have a strange tendancy to disappear or get visits from guys in black suits. like the inventor of the joe cell, who can make cars run on tapwater.

There is no such thing as "free energy". That violates the laws of physics. All of these "amazing car runs on water" stories always turn out to be internet rumors or hoaxes. Any minor reading about the joe cell you mentioned will quickly show that is is just like all the other internet hoaxes like perpetual motion machines, etc.

as long as the world is run by money we will only see fake sollutions like hybrid cars or hydrogen fuel cells. all these "sollutions" are provided by the same companies who earn money out of oil and want to keep us strangled in their grip by offering us complicated and expensive technologies.

All the alternatives to gasoline will be complicated and expensive now. Every new technology starts out being expensive. Replacing gasoline will be immensely hard, simply because when they early innovators in internal combustion engines settled on a fuel to use, they made a very good choice. Gasoline is easy to refine, easy store and transport, and has a very high energy density. From an energy standpoint, it is almost the ideal fuel for a vehicle like a car. Since they are in early stages of development, all the other technologies still need to catch up to gasoline in terms of cost and ease of production.

while there are thousands of easy and clean ways to produce energy, like the sun, wind, seawaves, methanisation, wood, thermal energy, water barrages. sure these sources are not sufficient, but if all the money that we spend on making biofuels would instead had been spent to improve the thermal isolations of houses and make them more energy efficient, then we would have saved out more fossile fuel, then what we would have produced in biofuels with that money...

Billions of dollars are already being spent on sources such as solar, wind, tidal power, and biomass methane production. They all have their own associated problems, however. Wind power for example, is erratic, and therefore can only be used to fill in gaps in power production, rather than being used to supply base power.

but again, global warming and clean energy has already become a multybillion dollar industry on wich many many people are earning indecent amounts of money, so don't hope for them to solve that problem, as their wealth directly depends on the size of the global warming problem.

I'll agree with you that the E85 ethanol plan is stupid, but that is the government's fault rather than industry's. Businesses are will always be out to make a profit when they can. They have seen that oil-based power will eventually no longer be a feasible power source and they are investing money researching alternatives. That's why we have many companies producing alternative-energy cars, such as the hybrids, electrics, air powered cars, and all the other ideas.
 

Oldih

Glorious IS-2 Comrade
Nov 22, 2005
3,418
412
0
Finland
and honestly, people who invent new free energy sources have a strange tendancy to disappear or get visits from guys in black suits. like the inventor of the joe cell, who can make cars run on tapwater.

"Car running on tapwater" is just like humans flying without wings. Not gonna happen.

If you want to have good explanation, drink 5-10 litres of water in a day for few weeks and you still won't gain any weight. Simply there is just no real energy in water.

And I keep hearing one gallon of raw oil has enough energy to feed a man for roughly 40-50 days energy-wise, if a man would be able to use oil as a source of energy for its own body. That's quite hell of a lot, atleast 70,000 - 87,500 kcal. And 1,5l bottle of Coca-Cola has *only* about 730kcal of energy.


And with this miracle energy stuff, sounds just rather questionable that "Hey in water there is an energy source that could save the world we just can't use it" - kinda like asking someone to prove that does some object exist in this world without using our senses to "sense" the object.
 
Last edited:

SchutzeSepp

FNG / Fresh Meat
Sep 23, 2006
1,540
8
0
35
"Car running on tapwater" is just like humans flying without wings. Not gonna happen.

If you want to have good explanation, drink 5-10 litres of water in a day for few weeks and you still won't gain any weight. Simply there is just no real energy in water.

explain nuclear energy to someone from the 1920's, and he will give you the exact same answer as you just did.
it took humans thousands of years to discover that petrol could actually be used for something.
how many people know that gasoline crs can perfectly run on wood, the germans had converted plenty of cars during the war to run on wood, its not verry practical, but its simple and effective.

and as a replie to bobdog, the internal combustion engine was initially designed to run on vegetable oil. the conversion to fossile fuels was an economic and practical move, as in fact vegetable oil behaves better inside combustion engines, while fossile fuels require chemical additives to limit their negative effects on the engine mechanics and increase their energetic efficiency.
 

Oldih

Glorious IS-2 Comrade
Nov 22, 2005
3,418
412
0
Finland
explain nuclear energy to someone from the 1920's, and he will give you the exact same answer as you just did.

Could be, but at the moment some of them does seem rather questionable. Then again, I never denied the possibility that it could exist.

But to think about it, possibly some of the main reasons of this oil-related stuff is somewhat funny is that 1. figuring out proper alternative for oil is not that easy exactly and 2. if someone does, it would mean less money for oil companies, so they should be kept under wraps.


And while some of these miracle-energy stuff that keeps popping up, some of them are just plainly ridiculous, and while they may not be impossible in the long run, who knows how much energy (mainly oil) they would reguire to be extracted from the miracle-source, let alone who knows what kind of machinery it would reguire.