Are we really willing to change our habits or we just talking about the here and now. I would love to see a progression from our reliance on fossil fuels because I think it would be the best of all possible worlds in the long run.

But I also think that Americans embrace fads without thinking of long-term gain.

One of the problems we have with converting our energy dependency from petroleum (I don't want to say "fossil fuel" because coal is a fossil fuel, too, and we know what chance there is in that) to some other form of energy is that oil is still the most cost efficient. Or to put it another way, you get more bang for the buck with a gallon of gasoline than from a gallon of anything else. And the more oil you take out of that gallon and replace with vegetables, the less bang you get.


Indeed. I am fully in agreement with investigating alternate forms of energy production beyond petroleum. One reason is because such scientific endeavor could come up with sources of energy that are, on balance, more efficient and reliable than oil.

I put in the "on balance" caveat because we can all agree that nuclear power has more bang for the buck I was talking about before, but the "what-do-we-do-with-the-waste?" question certainly tips the balance scale.

Solar, wind, and water power sound nice, sound desirable, but we get back to the efficiency factor as well as short-term considerations. Arguments about the various time-frames of extended oil drilling are not answered by saying, "Let's switch to solar or wind" since THESE forms of energy aren't about to replace oil in any short-term time frame.

We also get back to the reliability factor. A gallon of gasoline still provides just as much energy on cloudy, windless days as it does on sunny, near-hurricane days. And that's a fact.

So I repeat, let us work toward development and implementation of alternative energy sources, but let us not throw the baby out with the bathwater simply because it is the "faddishly" popular thing to do.

Lordy, Lordy, Lordy! Am I actually saying this?

I agree with you, Ray!!!! Teh-Da!!!! (Bring in the Drum and Bugle Corps or the shofars.)

There was an article in the paper today about how plug-in electrical cars will affect the grid in Cali. The power companies' responses were that the power needed to run plasma TVs is giving them the 'experience' they need in how to deal with plug-in electrics.

I've said before that, right now, there's no short-term answer to gasoline powered ICEs. Is there a long-term answer to power generation for things other than the automobile?

It cost my husband $67 to fill a 15 gallon tank, today. Our local newpapers publish lists of lower-priced gas stations--if you can find one in your local driving area. And the tribal casinos are undercutting the locals when it comes to gas.

here's the big question:

Oil/gas: we all know that:

this is a great fuel;

packs great energy density;

is very portable; and

up till recently the Western economy was able to afford it (more or less).

Right now: gas, relatively cheap, certain sodas (no names please) cost more per gallon. If you knew there was something in the world that would not be there after a while and you were using it up anyway, the supply and demand law of Capitalism says that the price will go up. Where's the surprise? Here's the news, guys & gals, it ain't gonna get cheaper until it runs out, it will get dearer. Economics, my dear Watson. When gas gets more expensive it will be economical to invest in alternatives.

A bill to rein-in oil futures' speculators failed to pass last week. The bill was opposed by virtually ALL republicans who must have been throroughly bribed by lobbyists.

Now, expect these same republians to once again call for more drilling.

Is siding with rich speculators instead of the average consumer betraying ALL of us?

I think if Republicans will get off their asses and make hay with the issue that left-wingers have handed them, they will not only keep the White House, but could even take back the Congress. And that issue is the completely nonsensical approach the Democrats have taken with the issue of oil drilling.

While Democrats are busy blaming Big Oil (Oops! Sorry! That was last month.) While Democrats are busy blaming speculators for the high cost of oil, all the President had to do was remove the Executive Order preventing off-shore drilling and the price of oil fell. All the president had to do was make more noise about drilling and the price fell further. Democrats continue to maintain that drilling isn't going to help the price of oil, yet just "talking" about drilling drives the oil price down.

If Republicans want to turn this election around all they need to do is spend the next 3 months drilling the Democrats right in the butt on this issue.

Perhaps Republican friends of Ted Stevens (including Arlen Spector and John Warner) will kick him in the ass and out of the Senate for taking bribes from VECO.VECO employees solicited Stevens for "multiple official actions" .... knowing that Stevens could and did use his his office on behalf of VECO. Instead "Friends of Ted" are defending him against the federal indictment.

It seems to me that unless we have completely fallen down on our collective fannies regarding oil.....Oil companies will demand that every last drop that exists must be used up before any alternative is developed......Cheap energy is INCOMPATIBLE with capitalistic enterprises who loathe the term "cheap".

When did the Earth stop making oil?

A gallon of gas can be had here for $3.74. That's down from a common price of $3.99 a few weeks ago. Oil is down to $122.00 a barrel. The price of gas, here anyway, has come down to about what it was the least time oil was this price, back in June.

American drivers are continuing to decrease their demand for gas. We are driving more fuel efficient vehicles and driving less.

Here in CT the price is down from 4.49 to 4.21 and as low as 4.19 in some places. It would be below four dollars but for the huge gasoline tax this state adds on.