Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
6848 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 8:44 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 16, 2009 6:23 am) Of course there is another level of schzoid in the oil importation metric. As we so called "seek to bring the oil importation percentage down": we systematically cut off domestic drilling which would... allow domestic oil supplies.... or aka, actually bring DOWN the oil importation percentage !!!???  
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 16, 2009 6:23 am) That is probably true. The only thing that will slow them down is higher energy prices. Even increased coastal flooding may not make much of an impact. They are rather good at making millions move as in the case of Three Gorges Dam. I still think we can set a better example. Does it cost anymore to buy a four cylinder Camry or a six cylinder? The four gets better mpg, costs thousands less over its lifetime and also reduces the amount of CO2 emitted by almost a ton a year. There is no good reason for buying the six. Yet, people are so ego driven that they think they need 265 hp in their family sedan. They don't. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ruking1 (Jul 16, 2009 6:46 am) Restrictions are not the issue. The number of drilling rigs is dropping. Why? I has to do with the price of oil. Here in North Dakota the number of rigs dropped and people were laid off. Did the state government suddenly stop drilling in the Middle Bakken? No. It was the under $50 oil that stopped the drilling. Domestic oil production is dependent on the price of oil. Even if we opened up ANWR and some additional offshore drilling we would not see an impact now or in the next ten years. As I mentioned before, the higher oil prices in the future will likely have a bigger impact on CO2 emissions than any cap & trade legislation. What I do not know is when we will see $100 plus oil. My best guess is the summer of 2010. Over the last year I have changed my mind about Global Warming. The thing that changed it was $147 a barrel oil. At that price the global economy started misfiring. In the next few years we might be able to tell how much CO2 emissions decreased because of the downturn.
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Jul 17, 2009 7:52 am)  best a strawman. OIl went from an interesting $147 per barrell to mid 40's, all within a very compressed time frame. It happened when demand was cut back only 3%. Now a cut back of 3% in the context of 104% growth per year is still a 1% growth rate !!!!!!??? Bloomberg market hack indicates a barrel of oil is $63.25. So in that sense, they have for multiple decades followed this strategy and the % of oil importation has grown to 70%. (or so they say) Indeed the price of oil is higher than its ever been (historically high) and guess what? Oil importation is 70% (even higher) . Indeed European importation is higher than that and they have even HIGHER at the pump fuel prices !!!! You can repeat this short sighted argument untill we start to import upwards of 90% of the oil and then...what would you have then accomplished!!?? So very simply, if you want to increase oil importation, follow the present strategy (ever increasing prices and taxation) . Believe it or not.... it works!!!
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Jul 17, 2009 7:52 am) Lynn Helms, director of the state Department of Mineral Resources, said recent production results from 103 newly tapped wells in the Three Forks-Sanish formation show many that are “as good or better” than some in the Bakken, which lies two miles under the surface in western North Dakota and holds billions of barrels of oil. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 17, 2009 1:38 pm)
|
|
|
"While we've seen some algae bloom from time to time, we really haven't seen something quite like this." The color, in particular, didn't make sense, he said. You might expect to see green or reddish algae but not this black, viscous gunk. Whitledge, with the university, said one possible explanation is that the algae has partially decomposed into a darker hue. He looks forward to the university examining the sample too, to identify exactly what kind of algae it is. It's worth noting that Alaska Natives in the region reportedly hadn't seen anything like it before, he said. But asked if the blob's surprise appearance could be connected to global warming, Whitledge hesitated to draw a link. "The water's actually very cold this year compared to other years," he said. Why is the ice in the Arctic melting if this is a cold year? Or is the ice melting just a story made up by "the cult"?
|
|
|
SAN DIEGO -- A new independent analysis by a nonprofit environmental group finds San Diego has the most solar roofs and greatest solar- power capacity in place statewide. Environment California ranks San Diego No. 1 in its California's Solar Cities report released earlier this month, according to The San Diego Union-Tribune. Ten years ago, San Diego wasn't even among the top 10 solar cities in the state. Today, San Diego has 2,262 solar roofs that together can generate 19.4 megawatts of electricity, the Union-Tribune reported. "San Diego has just basically woken up to its potential," said author Bernadette Del Chiaro. Los Angeles ranked second this year with 1,388 solar roofs, while San Francisco was third with 1,350 solar roofs. Del Chiaro and San Diego city officials told the Union-Tribune three things contribute to San Diego's solar success: lots of sunshine, City Hall's fast-track permitting for solar projects and the Kearny Mesa headquarters of the California Center for Sustainable Energy. The center promotes solar projects through government rebates and other means. One such program is set to launch this fall, designed to allow San Diego homeowners to obtain 20-year loans for installing solar projects. The loans will be repaid through their property tax bills. http://www.10news.com/news/20072199/detail.html |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ruking1 (Jul 17, 2009 7:55 am) http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/images/aoilpolicy2_2.gif How about the graph on this page??? http://www.peakoil.nl/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/consumption_production.png Consumption is the issue. We will never drill our way out of this. ANRW only has about 16 billion barrels of oil. The USA will use it up in 5 years. The good news about this is that CO2 emissions can only go so high.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jul 17, 2009 1:38 pm) Curious, why do you think the oil in the U.S. is the best? Funny you should mention Lynn Helms. I have seen his presentations on energy. I have also had the opportunity to talk with him. We are both in the North Dakota Geological Society. http://ndgeosociety.tripod.com/ In one presentation, Lynn made the comment that there is no "easy button". I am familiar with the work being done on the Three Forks-Sanish Formation. One of the issues we face here is the ability to ship the oil out. The pipelines are full. New pipelines are being added. It will take some time before they can get full potential from the fields. There was also an issue of being able to put ND oil on the pipeline going from Canada (oil sands) to the gulf refineries. http://www.downstreamtoday.com/news/article.aspx?a_id=14765 It is also important to keep in mind that ND is only producing about 200,000 barrels a day. We will never be a large producer (1 million plus barrels a day).
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
