I doubt that they will do that unless supplies get dangerously low. Either way, we're going to be paying dearly for the next few months at a minimum. Amazing how Nigeria controls so little oil, but the economic climate there influences what we pay at the pump here. Something has to be done to control the speculation in the market. How about a windfall profit for speculators in the oil market?
Well I am not so sure. This might be WAY old news but during the Clinton Administration (remember them?) the coal interests were taken care of in almost ROYAL style. I am sure you can look this up, but we are a HUGE exporter of coal (to China among others) . We of course do not burn coal as much here (to placate the environmental types in the party) so in that sense, no harm, no foul.
Wouldn't you have to have an infrastructure set up to convert the coal? Does this exist yet? I am sure costs would not be much cheaper than the current method.
I am sure costs would not be much cheaper than the current method. waste coal to diesel
The price of diesel produced by the Mahanoy plant will be well below current market costs since the waste coal fuel source is essentially free, and the commonwealth will lock in the supply for some 10 years, the Governor explained.
Aside from being cheaper, the plant's diesel will be cleaner. The fuel will burn with no sulfur emissions -- a contributor to acid rain and global climate change -- and burn with a high level of energy efficiency, making it more economical for drivers. The plant will use state-of-the-art control technology in its manufacturing process to control air emissions. Diesel can be made from coal, waste coal, natural gas, animal fats, plant oils, household garbage, water treatment sludge and additional material sources.
That table doesn't show much difference in tax per gallon between diesel and gasoline. In fact, since the energy content of diesel is higher, diesel has a lower tax per unit of energy than gasoline. Diesel drivers are actually getting a tax break!
does the higher energy content of diesel explain why it is more expensive than gasoline in the US?
Politics has everything to do with fuel pricing. Today's WSJ had refined low sulfur diesel at the NY port for $1.76 per gallon. Unleaded regular gas was $1.79. It is taxing that makes the difference.
I would only guess that it is taxed more because a majority of diesel fuel is purchased for commercial use. I guess they figure companies have no choice but to pay. Just a guess?
You are right. That was the incentive in CA. Trucks are tougher on the roads so they charge more road tax. They are not concerned that it all gets paid by the consumer. Higher road tax, higher grocery bill.
You are right. That was the incentive in CA. Trucks are tougher on the roads so they charge more road tax. They are not concerned that it all gets paid by the consumer. Higher road tax, higher grocery bill.
What's in your garage? If you are wise it is a modern diesel vehicle. A hedge against rising gas prices.
rising oil prices have lifted the fortunes of a once-shunned technology that converts another fossil fuel, natural gas, into clean-burning diesel.
This new diesel fuel is far cleaner than the diesel commonly used in passenger cars in Europe and heavy trucks in the United States. Diesel is usually made from the sulfur-laden parts of crude oil
Exxon Mobil and Qatar Petroleum are working together on one venture to produce cleaner diesel from natural gas that is expected to require $7 billion over the next several years. It would be the single largest investment in Exxon Mobil's history.
Rome, Jan. 19 - An analysis of the Italian car market conducted by UNRAE, the association of foreign car makers operating in Italy, shows that the ratio of new diesel cars to petrol cars rose from 58.05pct in 2004 to 58.48pct in 2005.
The first ever diesel-powered Chevrolet SUV will go on sale this August.
I think Reuters forgot the SUV that all other SUVs strive to emulate. Glad to see that Chevy is getting a useful diesel onto the market, even if it is in the EU for now.
quote gagrice-"What's in your garage? If you are wise it is a modern diesel vehicle. A hedge against rising gas prices."-end quote
I would modify that to read as follows:
What's in your garage? If you are wise it is a modern diesel or hybrid vehicle. A hedge against rising fuel prices.
For more than a year, the average diesel price in the USA has been higher than the average gasoline price. So for the last year, a hybrid achieving 45 MPG would have cost you less in fuel costs than a diesel achieving 45 MPG.
If you are wise it is a modern diesel or hybrid vehicle.
One of each would be good. IF you were one of the very lucky few that got a good deal on a hybrid. No reason to hash over the cost advantages vs disadvantages of a hybrid.
My emphasis is on unleaded gasoline shortages that cannot be overcome by higher prices. We saw that surge during Katrina. The only folks not waiting in lines in the areas affected were those with diesel vehicles. You and I both know that diesel prices are held artificially high for several political reasons. The USA is in the minority charging more for diesel than gasoline. When push comes to shove and fuel is $5 or more per gallon, diesel will be plentiful and gas an overpriced commodity. For those that are addicted to the hybrid idea, a diesel hybrid would be a wise choice.
quote gagrice-"The only folks not waiting in lines in the areas affected were those with diesel vehicles."-end quote
Also probably not needing gasoline were hybrid drivers who were getting 700 miles to a tank.
The shorter lines at diesel pumps during Katrina were simply because there are so many fewer diesel cars, combined with the fact that there will always be an ample supply of diesel fuel because the TRUCKERS need it. It has nothing to do with diesel cars being a better choice than gasoline cars.
If you plan your car purchase based on worrying about a natural disaster, then you have paranoia issues. :shades:
"If you plan your car purchase based on worrying about a natural disaster, then you have paranoia issues. :shades: "
You might have hit on something here. It might explain why Americans are so skitzoid about unleaded regular gas and its supply. Sort of like why 9/11 happened despite app 30 years of warning signs? Katrina merely let America focus on what happens if one can't get unleaded regular at ANY PRICE? Unleaded regular wholesales for 1.73. (whatever is the current/furture and/or spot price)this of course is given the enormous quantities used.
While using a hybrid, which in theory lessens the "personal use" of unleaded regular, i.e., 45 mpg when 20-25 was the norm, it does absolutely nothing about the logistics and further dependence on "foreign oil" One still uses unleaded regular refined from those "foreign sources"
I would say the best thing that can happen for the RAPID growth for diesel products is for the environmentalists to be as successful as they have been in the past:
1. to limit alternative fuel cars such as diesel and to contribute to conditions where in effect unleaded regular gas prices continue to rise. b. hydrogen while clean burning is at 16 dollars per gal and gets 22 mpg (Honda Civic hydrogen) diesel can be processed for as little as .45 cents per gal.
2. continue to man the gauntlet's which keep new refining capability and capacity from coming on line to serve the markets
3. Hurricane Katrina's destruction to the oil facilities dispelled any notion that the Gulf Coast area for oil production is NOT the jugular vein for the whole northeast region and has been for YEARS.
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- March sugar climbed as high as 17.21 cents a pound on the New York Board of Trade, a futures level not seen in over 24 years. It was last at 16.99 cents, up 0.87 cent, or 5.4%. "Demand is up mainly as it has a dual role as a food and bio-fuel product,"
Is sugar used in the making of bio-diesel? If so it looks like the price will go a little higher.
I'm sure the Brits and Aussies and Germans are too
You know how they compare the hybrids to diesels in those countries. I would imagine there are more hybrids in CA than the entire EU & Australia combined. The reason being. You cannot buy a diesel car in CA. I have people stop me and ask how they can get a diesel into CA. I tell them all the same. Buy one with 7500 miles.
You are still speculating that the Japanese are happy with their hybrids. Remember they had to give up the superior diesel to drive a hybrid. I am sure that the Japanese government is much more generous in the hybrid incentives than we are. Remember they have more to lose with trying to reach their Kyoto treaty goals. So far GHG reduction is not happening in Japan. Sounds like they will get a load of hybrids and a landfill full of batteries to recycle.
Since there is a bounty on the batteries, I doubt that will happen. Isn't nickel worth a decent nickel these days? I'd be more concerned with the soot problem I just read about in California. They said it was from diesel trucks and ships.
You are absolutely correct. So CARB outlaws clean burning diesel cars and act like they have done something to alleviate the problem. I only use BP ULSD in my Passat TDI and It is very clean burning. Ships, trains and heavy equipment are not under the 2006 ULSD mandate. It is not the bounty that concerns me, it is the production pollution and cost for new batteries.
Lots of things run on batteries today. How many people do you think recycle their batteries they use in electronic equipment? I'd be more concerned about Duracells in the dump than hybrid batteries.
Exxon Mobil and Qatar Petroleum are working together on one venture to produce cleaner diesel from natural gas that is expected to require $7 billion over the next several years. It would be the single largest investment in Exxon Mobil's history.
---------
Now that's just plain stupid. America has coal... and coal gasification is a old, reliable, and existing technology. We can make sulfur-free diesel by converting sulfur-free coal into it.
But instead, ExxonMobil wants to spend billions researching a 'new' technology that won't help us in the here and now. Not to mention keeping us reliant on imported fuel.
Talk about bass-ackwards.
What is it with US companies nowadays? The Big 3, oil companies, and our airlines have no friggin' clue how to operate in a market economy anymore.
Don't universities teach free market principles to Business majors anymore?
We should concentrate our efforts on this technology. Why are we dragging our feet? Only thing I can think of that the oil companies enjoy the price they're getting for their product. Anyone notice that oil is approaching 70 per barrel?
Since there is a bounty on the batteries, I doubt that will happen. Isn't nickel worth a decent nickel these days? I'd be more concerned with the soot problem I just read about in California. They said it was from diesel trucks and ships.
Since we distinguish pollution production between gas and diesel then we need to make a third category for ships.
Most deep sea ships run on black oil or bunker oil, both the same almost. Even the diesel ships use black oil heated to about 180 degree F to run the main diesel engine or engines. On some ships even the generators run on a blend of diesel and black oil. Generally speaking, tugs, fishing boats, ferries, etc. use plain old diesel.
Without knowing how the CARB states broke down the sources of pollution, it sounds like they lumped black oil in with diesel.
Ah yes bunker fuel. Rember seeing that on an invoice in a company I was auditing. I would imagine that the prevailing westerlies brings in all that pollution from the ships into the LA basin area. Thanks goodness CARB has no jurisdiction on that! It's bad enough that most of their legislation is ridiculous to say the least.
The other thing is that boats, ships, locomotives, planes, helicopters, home furnances that use home heating oil (aka red dyed #2 diesel)etc etc ALL have NO emission control devices!! They are also allowed to burn VERY high sulfur fuel.
So it is disengenuous for the regulatory agencies to leave this totally alone and all but ban clean diesel!
CARB does have jurisdiction. They also answer to politicians. And guess who owns the politicians. Lobbyist that work for the oil & shipping industry. It is very big bucks. It is also oil that is difficult to refine. It was a big deal when they built ship engines that would run on bunker oil. It was a way to sell a nasty bunch of crude. Of course it does nothing for the air we breathe.
No, heating oil can be up to 3000 PPM and will not be under the mandate. From what I have read it burns cleaner in a furnace. The off road diesel for tractors and heavy equipment are also left out of the 2006 mandate. I use BP ULSD in my little Kubota tractor and it never smokes like it did with red dye diesel. There is a 2012 mandate on off road diesel.
ExxonMobil wants to spend billions researching a 'new' technology that won't help us in the here and now.
It does seem like a big undertaking. I think the reasons are multiple. Exxon does not want to be on the trailing edge of anything to do with petroleum products. With the growing concern over ultra low sulfur diesel, it would seem like a good supply coming from a country we have good relations with. Qatar is a small very wealthy country surrounded by those that would take advantage of that natural gas. It is more expensive to liquefy natural gas and ship it than to make it into diesel and transport. Diesel is very easy and relatively safe to ship.
Coal to diesel has been a known process since before WW2. The Germans used it to power the war machine. I have heard price points from $40 to $80 to make it cost effective on a price per barrel equivalent. Then you have the environmentalists that would block all coal production in the USA. Plus who owns the coal reserves?
I think fuel is easier to produce some place other than the USA. I believe we may be the most restrictive country in the world from an environmental standpoint. There are those in our society that would block any and all progress if given control. That is what Exxon has to take into consideration on any venture.
If they spend 7 billion and make 8 billion, who can fault that?
So build the coal gasification plant 12 miles off-shore on a converted oil platform.
That way there is NO regulations at all as it is in international waters. It would be outside US juristiction.
Just barge in the coal and barge out the diesel.
No forms, no EPA, no environmentalist, nothing except a possible hurricane.
And that's something that can be avoided if you build the platform in the right area. Let's say... off the coast of Pennsylvania.
Near the West Virginia and Pennsylvanian coalmines, yet far enough north to avoid the major effects of hurricanes.
But heaven forbid an oil company executive would think of that. That would involve actually trying to increase auto fuel supplies to meet demand.
So, of course, they can't do it. For that would be in accordance with free market principles. Something foreign to their mindset.
It's like the US auto, airline, and oil industries were all taken over by the Soviets. The inability for our oil companies to understand the basic free market fundamental: "Supply increases to meet demand" is simply astounding.
:mad: :mad: :mad:
Not that I'm expected instant results, but I am expecting to see news reports that indicate that oil companies are moving in that direction.
But I don't see any major expansions to refineries (and only one small refinery being proposed). Nor do I see the oil companies (who predict oil prices staying high) moving to coal gasification. Or doing much of anything in trying to increase the supply of refined fuels.
Which is on par with Soviet Union standards... and their shortages of nearly everything were the butt of jokes worldwide. (Gotta follow the 5-year plan, comrade. Who cares if the motherland needs more! The plan is all you need.)
LNG vessels also use a % of its cargo to keep it compressed. This also means there is a known loss per day. It is also hard to convey how explosive natural gas is. Relatively it takes a fair amount of "motivation" to set diesel afire.
Despite this it might be a better risk than to try to start up production on our own shores. Not many folks win the gauntlet in getting new projects passed. There are good reasons why there has been no new refineries in the USA for a LONG time.
It is a good idea. I think you will find the government controls far beyond 12 miles. If it was open water out there the oil companies would drill 13 miles off the shore of Florida or CA. They are drilling hundreds of miles out in the Gulf and are regulated by our government or that of Mexico.
The Great Lakes, for example, are completely under the control of the US or Canada.
The Gulf of Mexico is the same way, with the US and Mexico controlling the waters out to an imaginary line crossing between the Yucatan peninsula and Cuba and Florida.
But off the east coast, it is a different matter. If you've ever gone on a 'gambling' cruise, all the ship has to do is move 12 miles off-shore, and all the US laws involved no longer apply.
It is a cottage industry on the east coast of Florida.
Good article While diesel clearly isn't the answer to everyone's prayers, the U.S. market is unquestionably missing out on the modern diesel phenomenon. Bountiful torque, excellent refinement and a huge range are qualities well suited to the American highway. It is surely time to put away the prejudices of the 1970s and embrace the modern diesel engine.
Kind of reminds me of the HOV sham in CA & VA. What next free movies for a year if you buy a hypebred? And hybrid owners wonder why there are anti hybrid posters. Why should I subsidize someone that can well afford to buy his own techno toys.
Hybrids meanwhile are going nowhere in Europe. All hybrids have automatic gearboxes. Europeans still prefer to change gear themselves, with manual gearboxes accounting for about 80 percent of new car sales.
There is one glimmer of hope for hybrids in Europe - European cities might copy London's so-called "congestion charge". Anyone driving into central London, except those driving hybrids, now has to pay $14 a day for the privilege.
The hybrid failed another real world test in 2004 when a USA
Today reporter compared a Toyota Prius hybrid with a Volkswagen Jetta diesel, driving both between his home in Ann Arbor, Michigan and the Washington, D.C. area. Both should have made the 500-mile trip on one tank of gas.
"Jetta lived up to its one-tank billing," reporter David Kiley wrote. "Prius did not."
I'm not surprised. Drving a Jetta Wagon TDI manual will result in 50 mpg plus on highway and drive it like a hybrid fanatic and it will deliver 60 mpg. Heck, driving a Golf automatic in the winter delivers 42 mpg without any of the high tire inflation and other hybrid driving nonsense.
The only thing that does surprise me is the ridiculous results from the "Hybrid Road Rally" in MN. 42 mpg over 1200 miles is certainly not accepted as the "gospel" when driving for efficiency. Of course, the resident hybrid fan refers to the 2002 "Hybrid Road Rally" results as if they were written on a stone tablet.
quote larsb-"Any tests which shows the Hybrid as having superior MPG is a ridiculous test"
quote larsb-Any tests showing the TDI as having superior MPG is GREAT
Your words larsb, not mine.
I am in favor of hybrids as long as they exist on their own merits and do not require tax break incentives, I am in favor of diesel, I am in favor of E85 and CNG vehicles. Let the market choose.
Indeed you provide credible evidence that you consistently misread hybrid information.
No one is saying the hybrid doesn't not have better mileage than say another gasser. However it did say in the real world that VW TDI DID get BETTER mpg: given the real world comparisons outlined in the article. This is without a diesel hybrid? Now can you imagine a diesel hybrid? I fully realize you might want to cook the books to support your conclusion but..... I say let the products come in and let the markets chose. Be it CNG, biodiesel, diesel, mix, ethanol, hydrogen, etc.
quote mpoarbad-"Your words larsb, not mine."-end quote
Nice little trick. But you know I was Paraphrasing your previous post. Here are YOUR EXACT words:
"...ridiculous results...." -when you were referring to the Road Rally test which showed hybrid MPG superior to TDI.
AND
"I'm not surprised. Drving a Jetta Wagon TDI manual will result in 50 mpg plus on highway and drive it like a hybrid fanatic and it will deliver 60 mpg." - when referring to the test where the Jetta "outdid" the Prius.
Another logic problem occurs when you say "drive it like a hybrid fanatic and it will deliver 60 MPG." The problem is that TDIs cannot drive solely on electric power alone like some hybrids can, and TDIs tradtionally do poorly in City driving compared to the hybrids. TDIs get decent gas mileage on the highway only because they are geared that way and can use low RPMs at highway speeds. Hybrids do well in highway because they are engineered to get good gas mileage under ANY circumstances.
I know people who are getting in the 60s in City driving with their hybrids. Diesels ( those which are available to USA drivers )of comparable size CANNOT do that.
Like I said, here is the perfect answer to hybrid owners who are not happy with their MPG:
1. Learn how to drive your vehicle using the tools available to you in the car and the knowledge which can be gained on certain hybrid websites, OR 2. Sell your car.
That's the perfect solution for anyone who is not getting what they expected from their hybrid.
1. This to me is the essential advantage of a diesel vs gasser/hybrid. One HAS to drive the hybrid like a fuel miser. When I give no concern to fuel miserliness in a diesel, I get what a hybrid gets. When I drive like a fuel miser in a diesel, I can easily get 62 mpg. This is of course at app 7500 less acquisition cost.
2. This is probably a good thing to do in that one can probably get a premium for a used hybrid
So I am not unhappy at all. I also dont have to have the fuel miser advocation also! Life is good!
You might get 62 MPG, but it's a far dirtier 62 MPG than anyone who does it in a hybrid.
Hybrids are NOT JUST ALL ABOUT MPG. They are about CLEAN emissions also. Let's neither forget nor minimize that fact.
Until ULSD and clean diesel engines and particulate filters and etc etc technology that it requires to make diesel passenger cars as clean as hybrids FINALLY hit the streets in the USA, let's not forget that.
Comments
waste coal to diesel
The price of diesel produced by the Mahanoy plant will be well below current market costs since the waste coal fuel source is essentially free, and the commonwealth will lock in the supply for some 10 years, the Governor explained.
Aside from being cheaper, the plant's diesel will be cleaner. The fuel will burn with no sulfur emissions -- a contributor to acid rain and global climate change -- and burn with a high level of energy efficiency, making it more economical for drivers. The plant will use state-of-the-art control technology in its manufacturing process to control air emissions.
Diesel can be made from coal, waste coal, natural gas, animal fats, plant oils, household garbage, water treatment sludge and additional material sources.
GTL (gas to liquids)
dead cat diesel
That table doesn't show much difference in tax per gallon between diesel and gasoline. In fact, since the energy content of diesel is higher, diesel has a lower tax per unit of energy than gasoline. Diesel drivers are actually getting a tax break!
Politics has everything to do with fuel pricing. Today's WSJ had refined low sulfur diesel at the NY port for $1.76 per gallon. Unleaded regular gas was $1.79. It is taxing that makes the difference.
rising oil prices have lifted the fortunes of a once-shunned technology that converts another fossil fuel, natural gas, into clean-burning diesel.
This new diesel fuel is far cleaner than the diesel commonly used in passenger cars in Europe and heavy trucks in the United States. Diesel is usually made from the sulfur-laden parts of crude oil
Exxon Mobil and Qatar Petroleum are working together on one venture to produce cleaner diesel from natural gas that is expected to require $7 billion over the next several years. It would be the single largest investment in Exxon Mobil's history.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/18/business/worldbusiness/18diesel.html
More diesel cars
I think Reuters forgot the SUV that all other SUVs strive to emulate. Glad to see that Chevy is getting a useful diesel onto the market, even if it is in the EU for now.
http://motoring.reuters.co.uk/reuters/vocmain.jsp?lnk=101&id=1530
I would modify that to read as follows:
What's in your garage? If you are wise it is a modern diesel or hybrid vehicle. A hedge against rising fuel prices.
For more than a year, the average diesel price in the USA has been higher than the average gasoline price. So for the last year, a hybrid achieving 45 MPG would have cost you less in fuel costs than a diesel achieving 45 MPG.
One of each would be good. IF you were one of the very lucky few that got a good deal on a hybrid. No reason to hash over the cost advantages vs disadvantages of a hybrid.
My emphasis is on unleaded gasoline shortages that cannot be overcome by higher prices. We saw that surge during Katrina. The only folks not waiting in lines in the areas affected were those with diesel vehicles. You and I both know that diesel prices are held artificially high for several political reasons. The USA is in the minority charging more for diesel than gasoline. When push comes to shove and fuel is $5 or more per gallon, diesel will be plentiful and gas an overpriced commodity. For those that are addicted to the hybrid idea, a diesel hybrid would be a wise choice.
Also probably not needing gasoline were hybrid drivers who were getting 700 miles to a tank.
The shorter lines at diesel pumps during Katrina were simply because there are so many fewer diesel cars, combined with the fact that there will always be an ample supply of diesel fuel because the TRUCKERS need it. It has nothing to do with diesel cars being a better choice than gasoline cars.
If you plan your car purchase based on worrying about a natural disaster, then you have paranoia issues. :shades:
You might have hit on something here. It might explain why Americans are so skitzoid about unleaded regular gas and its supply. Sort of like why 9/11 happened despite app 30 years of warning signs? Katrina merely let America focus on what happens if one can't get unleaded regular at ANY PRICE? Unleaded regular wholesales for 1.73. (whatever is the current/furture and/or spot price)this of course is given the enormous quantities used.
While using a hybrid, which in theory lessens the "personal use" of unleaded regular, i.e., 45 mpg when 20-25 was the norm, it does absolutely nothing about the logistics and further dependence on "foreign oil" One still uses unleaded regular refined from those "foreign sources"
I would say the best thing that can happen for the RAPID growth for diesel products is for the environmentalists to be as successful as they have been in the past:
1. to limit alternative fuel cars such as diesel and to contribute to conditions where in effect unleaded regular gas prices continue to rise. b. hydrogen while clean burning is at 16 dollars per gal and gets 22 mpg (Honda Civic hydrogen) diesel can be processed for as little as .45 cents per gal.
2. continue to man the gauntlet's which keep new refining capability and capacity from coming on line to serve the markets
3. Hurricane Katrina's destruction to the oil facilities dispelled any notion that the Gulf Coast area for oil production is NOT the jugular vein for the whole northeast region and has been for YEARS.
Is sugar used in the making of bio-diesel? If so it looks like the price will go a little higher.
Sugar cane is one of the main sources of Ethanol in Brazil. I am sure it will impact the sugar market.
You know how they compare the hybrids to diesels in those countries. I would imagine there are more hybrids in CA than the entire EU & Australia combined. The reason being. You cannot buy a diesel car in CA. I have people stop me and ask how they can get a diesel into CA. I tell them all the same. Buy one with 7500 miles.
You are still speculating that the Japanese are happy with their hybrids. Remember they had to give up the superior diesel to drive a hybrid. I am sure that the Japanese government is much more generous in the hybrid incentives than we are. Remember they have more to lose with trying to reach their Kyoto treaty goals. So far GHG reduction is not happening in Japan. Sounds like they will get a load of hybrids and a landfill full of batteries to recycle.
You are absolutely correct. So CARB outlaws clean burning diesel cars and act like they have done something to alleviate the problem. I only use BP ULSD in my Passat TDI and It is very clean burning. Ships, trains and heavy equipment are not under the 2006 ULSD mandate. It is not the bounty that concerns me, it is the production pollution and cost for new batteries.
---------
Now that's just plain stupid. America has coal... and coal gasification is a old, reliable, and existing technology. We can make sulfur-free diesel by converting sulfur-free coal into it.
But instead, ExxonMobil wants to spend billions researching a 'new' technology that won't help us in the here and now. Not to mention keeping us reliant on imported fuel.
Talk about bass-ackwards.
What is it with US companies nowadays? The Big 3, oil companies, and our airlines have no friggin' clue how to operate in a market economy anymore.
Don't universities teach free market principles to Business majors anymore?
:mad: :mad: :mad:
Since we distinguish pollution production between gas and diesel then we need to make a third category for ships.
Most deep sea ships run on black oil or bunker oil, both the same almost. Even the diesel ships use black oil heated to about 180 degree F to run the main diesel engine or engines. On some ships even the generators run on a blend of diesel and black oil.
Generally speaking, tugs, fishing boats, ferries, etc. use plain old diesel.
Without knowing how the CARB states broke down the sources of pollution, it sounds like they lumped black oil in with diesel.
So it is disengenuous for the regulatory agencies to leave this totally alone and all but ban clean diesel!
Probably more like 60k for the first job out of college. Then after an MBA going for the 6 figure incomes.
It does seem like a big undertaking. I think the reasons are multiple. Exxon does not want to be on the trailing edge of anything to do with petroleum products. With the growing concern over ultra low sulfur diesel, it would seem like a good supply coming from a country we have good relations with. Qatar is a small very wealthy country surrounded by those that would take advantage of that natural gas. It is more expensive to liquefy natural gas and ship it than to make it into diesel and transport. Diesel is very easy and relatively safe to ship.
Coal to diesel has been a known process since before WW2. The Germans used it to power the war machine. I have heard price points from $40 to $80 to make it cost effective on a price per barrel equivalent. Then you have the environmentalists that would block all coal production in the USA. Plus who owns the coal reserves?
I think fuel is easier to produce some place other than the USA. I believe we may be the most restrictive country in the world from an environmental standpoint. There are those in our society that would block any and all progress if given control. That is what Exxon has to take into consideration on any venture.
If they spend 7 billion and make 8 billion, who can fault that?
That way there is NO regulations at all as it is in international waters. It would be outside US juristiction.
Just barge in the coal and barge out the diesel.
No forms, no EPA, no environmentalist, nothing except a possible hurricane.
And that's something that can be avoided if you build the platform in the right area. Let's say... off the coast of Pennsylvania.
Near the West Virginia and Pennsylvanian coalmines, yet far enough north to avoid the major effects of hurricanes.
But heaven forbid an oil company executive would think of that. That would involve actually trying to increase auto fuel supplies to meet demand.
So, of course, they can't do it. For that would be in accordance with free market principles. Something foreign to their mindset.
It's like the US auto, airline, and oil industries were all taken over by the Soviets. The inability for our oil companies to understand the basic free market fundamental: "Supply increases to meet demand" is simply astounding.
:mad: :mad: :mad:
Not that I'm expected instant results, but I am expecting to see news reports that indicate that oil companies are moving in that direction.
But I don't see any major expansions to refineries (and only one small refinery being proposed). Nor do I see the oil companies (who predict oil prices staying high) moving to coal gasification. Or doing much of anything in trying to increase the supply of refined fuels.
Which is on par with Soviet Union standards... and their shortages of nearly everything were the butt of jokes worldwide. (Gotta follow the 5-year plan, comrade. Who cares if the motherland needs more! The plan is all you need.)
Despite this it might be a better risk than to try to start up production on our own shores. Not many folks win the gauntlet in getting new projects passed. There are good reasons why there has been no new refineries in the USA for a LONG time.
It is a good idea. I think you will find the government controls far beyond 12 miles. If it was open water out there the oil companies would drill 13 miles off the shore of Florida or CA. They are drilling hundreds of miles out in the Gulf and are regulated by our government or that of Mexico.
The Great Lakes, for example, are completely under the control of the US or Canada.
The Gulf of Mexico is the same way, with the US and Mexico controlling the waters out to an imaginary line crossing between the Yucatan peninsula and Cuba and Florida.
But off the east coast, it is a different matter. If you've ever gone on a 'gambling' cruise, all the ship has to do is move 12 miles off-shore, and all the US laws involved no longer apply.
It is a cottage industry on the east coast of Florida.
While diesel clearly isn't the answer to everyone's prayers, the U.S. market is unquestionably missing out on the modern diesel phenomenon. Bountiful torque, excellent refinement and a huge range are qualities well suited to the American highway. It is surely time to put away the prejudices of the 1970s and embrace the modern diesel engine.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Features/articleId=108977#9
The view of Niel Winton: Politics and hype are driving hybrids and even Toyota is backing away from them, and Americans just don't get diesel.
Niel just does not get it!
Hybrids meanwhile are going nowhere in Europe. All hybrids have automatic gearboxes. Europeans still prefer to change gear themselves, with manual gearboxes accounting for about 80 percent of new car sales.
There is one glimmer of hope for hybrids in Europe - European cities might copy London's so-called "congestion charge". Anyone driving into central London, except those driving hybrids, now has to pay $14 a day for the privilege.
That's politics, not choice
Hybrdis - Welfare for the wealthy
The hybrid failed another real world test in 2004 when a USA
Today reporter compared a Toyota Prius hybrid with a Volkswagen Jetta diesel, driving both between his home in Ann Arbor, Michigan and the Washington, D.C. area. Both should have made the 500-mile trip on one tank of gas.
"Jetta lived up to its one-tank billing," reporter David Kiley wrote. "Prius did not."
I'm not surprised. Drving a Jetta Wagon TDI manual will result in 50 mpg plus on highway and drive it like a hybrid fanatic and it will deliver 60 mpg.
Heck, driving a Golf automatic in the winter delivers 42 mpg without any of the high tire inflation and other hybrid driving nonsense.
The only thing that does surprise me is the ridiculous results from the "Hybrid Road Rally" in MN. 42 mpg over 1200 miles is certainly not accepted as the "gospel" when driving for efficiency. Of course, the resident hybrid fan refers to the 2002 "Hybrid Road Rally" results as if they were written on a stone tablet.
"Any tests which shows the Hybrid as having superior MPG is a ridiculous test"
and
"Any tests showing the TDI as having superior MPG is GREAT!"
Is that what you are saying?
quote larsb-Any tests showing the TDI as having superior MPG is GREAT
Your words larsb, not mine.
I am in favor of hybrids as long as they exist on their own merits and do not require tax break incentives, I am in favor of diesel, I am in favor of E85 and CNG vehicles.
Let the market choose.
No one is saying the hybrid doesn't not have better mileage than say another gasser. However it did say in the real world that VW TDI DID get BETTER mpg: given the real world comparisons outlined in the article. This is without a diesel hybrid? Now can you imagine a diesel hybrid?
Nice little trick. But you know I was Paraphrasing your previous post. Here are YOUR EXACT words:
"...ridiculous results...." -when you were referring to the Road Rally test which showed hybrid MPG superior to TDI.
AND
"I'm not surprised. Drving a Jetta Wagon TDI manual will result in 50 mpg plus on highway and drive it like a hybrid fanatic and it will deliver 60 mpg." - when referring to the test where the Jetta "outdid" the Prius.
Another logic problem occurs when you say "drive it like a hybrid fanatic and it will deliver 60 MPG." The problem is that TDIs cannot drive solely on electric power alone like some hybrids can, and TDIs tradtionally do poorly in City driving compared to the hybrids. TDIs get decent gas mileage on the highway only because they are geared that way and can use low RPMs at highway speeds. Hybrids do well in highway because they are engineered to get good gas mileage under ANY circumstances.
I know people who are getting in the 60s in City driving with their hybrids. Diesels ( those which are available to USA drivers )of comparable size CANNOT do that.
1. Learn how to drive your vehicle using the tools available to you in the car and the knowledge which can be gained on certain hybrid websites, OR
2. Sell your car.
That's the perfect solution for anyone who is not getting what they expected from their hybrid.
2. This is probably a good thing to do in that one can probably get a premium for a used hybrid
So I am not unhappy at all. I also dont have to have the fuel miser advocation also! Life is good!
Hybrids are NOT JUST ALL ABOUT MPG. They are about CLEAN emissions also. Let's neither forget nor minimize that fact.
Until ULSD and clean diesel engines and particulate filters and etc etc technology that it requires to make diesel passenger cars as clean as hybrids FINALLY hit the streets in the USA, let's not forget that.