National Boycott Gas Day

[Sayonara]

Also burnig fossil fuels isnt the only was of obtaining hydrogen.The developers are now thinking of extracting it from water.

Which is a process that requires external energy, which will come from...?

[Tesseract]

Which is a process that requires external energy, which will come from...?

 

I dont know, the powerful intellect of everyone on this site.

 

No serioulsy probably nuclear plants, which really dosnt help much with pollution.Still this is better than using gas.

 

Unless someone can create cold fussion to power it.

[Sayonara]

No; I said "which will come from", not "which could come from".

 

If we had cold fusion we wouldn't need to waste our time faffing around with hydrogen cells.

[Tesseract]

"No serioulsy probably nuclear plants, which really dosnt help much with pollution.Still this is better than using gas."

[Sayonara]

I'm guessing you pulled that out of thin air, instead of checking how much energy is produced from nuclear reactors, and how much of that powers industry.

[Tesseract]

Yes, I had just thought of it.

[admiral_ju00]

as long as you don't ask where the hydrogen came from. Since the answer to that is "fossil fuels," hydrogen doesn't actually solve any problems of fossil fuel consumption.

 

very true. since there is no pure Hydrogen gas anywhere on the planet, extracting, especially in sufficient numbers is a super expensive task.

[admiral_ju00]

The developers are now thinking of extracting it from water.

 

that's called hydrolysis(using electricity) and it's very expensive.

 

{edit: i meant: electrolysis}

[swansont]

INo serioulsy probably nuclear plants, which really dosnt help much with pollution.Still this is better than using gas.

 

We're already using that electricity. You have to build new plants for the hydrogen electrolysis. So, in the US at least, that kinda rules out nuclear for the time being.

[blike]

The thing is, it's not a petrol "blockage" at the ports or anything. All they want you to do is not fill up on gasoline today. Funny though, because you'll end up buying the gas, just a day later. The oil companies will still receive the same amount of money. No other industry is participating. The only way it might have an effect is if all petrol consuming industries halted for a day, which is impossible.

 

Here in tampa the price for the cheapest gasoline (regular unleaded) is 1.95/gallon. It costs me nearly $33~ to fill my tank.

 

So while for others it may be "boycott gas day", for me its "no line at the pump" day.

[Sayonara]

that's called hydrolysis(using electricity) and it's very expensive.

{edit: i meant: electrolysis}

Hydrolysis literally means "the breaking of water", so it'll do

[J'Dona]

We had a petrol blockade a few years ago - they cause absolute chaos. It just goes to show that a small group of people can make their message heard just by blocking a few petrol tankers (admittedly, it was quite a few more than a few though).

I remember that... iirc the police and army forces they sent in were sympathetic at first but eventually they took command of the situation and sent the tankers out. I thought it was good though while it was happening, as there was cleaner air and less cars for a while. Mind you, I don't have a job or car yet, so that's just my view of it. The protestors let out tankers for emergency services though.

 

It's interesting... 81.9 pence per litre would equate (at current exchange rates) to about $1.46 per litre, or

$5.53 per US gallon. I guess that reflects how the cost of living over here is just generally higher. :/ Not sure how things are now as I don't pay for these sort of things, but according to a BBC News article from the 7th of May UK prices have now reached 80p per litre, which is $1.43 per litre, just below the petrol crisis point.

Here's the article in case anyone wants it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3693391.stm

 

 

As for hydrogen cars... I think they should be concentrating more on pure alternative sources like solar and hydroelectric and waste-recycling related ones like biomass, than on hydrogen cars, since to manufacture the hydrogen with water instead of fossil fuels (which are the same problem as without hydrogen cars) they're going to use power, and that power needs to come from renewable sources to avoid the same problems. It is possible to have hydrogen cars without using fossil fuels at all... it's just very expensive by current methods, so they need to put more research into it.

 

I'm worried about the pollution they would put out though, even though it would be far less than fossil fuel cars. I know it's just water, but water is a greenhouse gas, and replacing smog layers over cities with rainclouds still has its problems. With extra rain and temperature, the area in and around some large cities might turn into a tropical climate.

[-Demosthenes-]

$5.53 per gallon. I always thought that it cost so much in England becasue the goverment puts mor taxes on the gas so they can promote mass transit? Is that close, or was the news making stuff up??

[Sayonara]

That was the excuse the .gov gave for adding more tax. The equivalent value did not go in to improving mass transit systems, in fact on a national level we have an appaling rail system.

[atinymonkey]

The thing is' date=' it's not a petrol "blockage" at the ports or anything. All they want you to do is not fill up on gasoline today. Funny though, because you'll end up buying the gas, just a day later. The oil companies will still receive the same amount of money. No other industry is participating. The only way it might have an effect is if all petrol consuming industries halted for a day, which is impossible.

 

Here in tampa the price for the cheapest gasoline (regular unleaded) is 1.95/gallon. It costs me nearly $33~ to fill my tank.

 

So while for others it may be "boycott gas day", for me its "no line at the pump" day.[/quote']

 

That was the original plan of the UK boycott. It's a suprisingly effective method of causing a enconomic domino effect, even with a small percentage of people taking part. It can really f@uk up the balance sheets of the companys, and the backup of petrol demand throws the whole system out. On paper, they lose a heck of a lot of money and without proper controls can destabilise the process. Same thing would happen to a large supermarket chain, really. Over order and you can't pay your bill on time, to look at it simply.

 

The UK just decided to make it a publicy visible demonstration instead of a paper based hidden loss. It was very effective, and surprisingly people didn't blame the truckers for the loss of petrol. We English blame everything ont the most obvious person, normally (like the crappy fire service strike, the arseholes (or the French)).

[Dave]

I'm still reckoning that cars powered by electricity are the way to go. I can also invision that when the fossil fuels run out, there's gonna be some serious fallout in the Middle East where most of the oil comes from.

[swansont]

The thing is' date=' it's not a petrol "blockage" at the ports or anything. All they want you to do is not fill up on gasoline today. Funny though, because you'll end up buying the gas, just a day later. The oil companies will still receive the same amount of money. No other industry is participating. The only way it might have an effect is if all petrol consuming industries halted for a day, which is impossible.

[/quote']

 

Right - it's a matter of supply and demand, and it seems that almost nobody "gets" that. In the US there are an awful lot of SUVs and other gas-guzzlers, and instead of just buying more efficient cars and using less gas, people behave as if there's some constitutional right to cheap gas, and it's a failure of the government that gas has hit $2 a gallon. A case study in the general irrationality of the populace.

[atinymonkey]

Well, as the president has substancial assests in the oil industry, perhaps the govenment could do something.

[Tesseract]

Well, as the president has substancial assests in the oil industry, perhaps the govenment could do something.

They are doing something:making it worse.

[fafalone]

Actual gas station in california.

[admiral_ju00]

is that pic fake?

 

i'm only asking cause i've seen it floatin' around on the i'net for a few days now.

[Tesseract]

Actual gas station in california.

Lol, did you take that picture?

[blike]

They are doing something:making it worse.

One thing people do is assign blame to the administration for high gas prices. I don't believe they have much say in the issue. OPEC doesn't want to increase production, and demand is up. The prices are bound to go up regardless of the president. It's not just oil prices in America, the price per barrel being pumped out of the middle east is much much higher than usual. It's an international issue really.

 

swanson is right in his observation that the common american feels it's his right to have cheap gasoline. I'm not sure why people are in such outrage. We are not 'entitled' to cheap gas. What we should be outraged at is the taxation kerry promises on gasoline. Think the price per gallon is high now? Elect kerry and see how high they can get.

[J'Dona]

Well, whether things would end up more expensive or not under a Kerry administration given the fluctuating international issues is speculative (though you're almost certainly correct), and not really the point of this thread... although it is your thread. Just trying to avert this from a political debate.

 

I have to wonder, if the USA has one of the highest GDP's per capita (second only to Luxembourg, I believe), why would the "common American" think that petrol that costs less than half that in the UK is too much? :S Is this because the oil reserves in places like Texas have now passed their peak, and until then oil in the USA was cheap? I don't know enough about the situation so forgive me if I sound a bit rude, but it seems a bit, er, complaintative on the part of the American public (those of them who do complain, that is).

[Sayonara]

I have to wonder, if the USA has one of the highest GDP's per capita (second only to Luxembourg, I believe), why would the "common American" think that petrol that costs less than half that in the UK is too much?

Because the average consumer in the USA uses a hell of a lot more of it, so ends up paying out more cash.

 

They ought to buy proper cars. And live in a smaller country.