31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming To be Named

And there's a reason you don't prove me wrong Frank.

Because you can't!!!!!!!!!!

I am not trying to prove you wrong. I am just showing that we have had at least 35 years of notice that energy costs will be presenting us with an "energy crisis" until we make more efficient use of the energy we are paying for but wasting.

No, you screwed up in your statement, I proved you wrong and now you're too proud to admit how wrong you are Frank.

Aaron wrote:No, you screwed up in your statement, I proved you wrong and now you're too proud to admit how wrong you are Frank.

So again, you are telling us that that $4.00 a gallon is not ten times 40 cents a gallon, and that from 1973 to 2008 is not 35 years?

That's not what I said Frank and you know it. You can continue your deceptions but all you're doing is showing how foolish you are as you've yet to prove what I actually stated wrong.

Keep digging Frank. I'm having fun.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:No, you screwed up in your statement, I proved you wrong and now you're too proud to admit how wrong you are Frank.

So again, you are telling us that that $4.00 a gallon is not ten times 40 cents a gallon, and that from 1973 to 2008 is not 35 years?

Aaron wrote:That's not what I said Frank and you know it.

But it is what I have said- that $4.00 a gallon is ten times 40 cents a gallon, and that from 1973 to 2008 is 35 years- that we have had at least 35 years notice to increase energy efficiency in response to the "energy crisis".

And you have not shown that to be incorrect.

If you're gong to try and change what you said Frank, you better go back to all the post and change those first. You'll have to take out the part where you said that gas prices had steadily increased every year for 35 years and change it to whatever you're trying to say now.

If you even know what you're trying to say now, that is.

And I like how you try and change my words to fit what you're saying. It shows how desparate you really are!!!!!

What I first said re: oil product prices was:

The prices of fuel oil, diesel fuel and gasoline have all been increasing at about the same rates for 35 years or so. They are more than ten times what they were in 1972.

That is what I said. And I stand behind that. It was in response to Sam's challenge about home heating oil prices specifically.

And when you questioned it, I added:

The increase has been gradual, with intermittent spikes both upward and downward. But the overall 35 year trend has been upward- steeply upward.

What is incorrect about any of that?

Do you deny that prices for fuel oil, gasoline and diesel have been increasing at about the same rate- at about the same rate for each of those three oil based products- since 1972? That was what I said. It was a direct response to what Sam had said. And he didn't dispute it. And you have not shown that my statement about rising oil product prices, from 1972 to 2008, is other than absolutely correct- as relates to heating oil, gasoline and diesel fuel.

And in trying to argue about the price of fuels in some particular year to "prove" me wrong, you totally ignore my primary point about the costs of implementing certain home heating related energy efficiencies in the 1970s would have been less costly then than today, and would be less costly today than in 35 years from now.

You seem not to care about energy efficiency. All you seem to care about is the price of oil. And 35 years from now, some Aarons still won't care about energy efficiency- but will only care about the price of oil.

And you still haven't shown us how procuring even all of our oil from domestic sources will lower prices.

And you still have not told us that "easy" way to eliminate "speculation" on oil prices.

I didn't deny anything. I made a statement and I proved it, which proved yours wrong Frank. Period!

Aaron wrote:Who's going to pay for the leaky buckets of the elderly and poor in area's that will be hardest hit by increased home heating oil cost that can't afford the oil OR the insulation?

Stephanie wrote:I'd like to address a couple of these issues.

First of all, I can't speak very much about the rest of New England. Even RI, it has been a couple of years since I left and things do change over time, but I will tell you what I know.

RI has a program to help low income people insulate their homes etc. The state has been trying for years to address many of the energy efficency problems associated with older construction.

New England is the oldest area of the nation. It is understandable many of the structures aren't going to have windows and furnaces that are state of the art. So what do you propose? Demolition and new construction is far too costly and really not feasible.

And wastefully consuming the increasingly expensive home heating oil is not really feasible, either. Who will pay for fixing those leaky houses? Logically, that would be the same people who have been paying to heat those leaky houses all along- and who will continue to at the higher and higher fuel oil prices we see coming. And we should have done it 35 years ago when we saw the leading edge of that "energy crisis". Some of us did then. And some of us didn't then- but instead we "banked" on some hope that fuel oil prices would return to the "good old days" of 35 or 40 cents a gallon. In the meantime, we have spent fortunes on heating leaky old houses- a small part of which could have been spent on home improvements that would pay for themselves in short order, considering the 10 fold increase in fuel costs in those intervening 35 years.

And while we argue and finger-point about increasing domestic oil production- but without any evidence that even that would lower fuel oil prices- and argue about "speculation" on oil prices, and on and on ad nauseum, people fiddle while fuel prices continue to rise and their energy hog homes freeze. And the politicians encourage apathy by joining in the finger-pointing and pleas and pledges for lower energy prices, with the goal of only procuring votes and letting the people fiend for themselves.

And the people listen to the bickering and hold out hope that energy costs will somehow miraculously return to the prices of yesteryear, and do nothing more. But it ain't gonna happen.

The really smart people are taking their home energy fate into their own hands and fixin' up that old leaky house and paying for it with avoided fuel costs- not unlike most successful businesses are doing with their own buildings. But as long as the politicians hold out the impossibly simplistic hope than "we'll fix those pesky energy prices", and the homeowners buy into that fantasy, inertia in energy efficiencies will continue to be the rule of the day.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:No, you screwed up in your statement, I proved you wrong and now you're too proud to admit how wrong you are Frank.

So again, you are telling us that that $4.00 a gallon is not ten times 40 cents a gallon, and that from 1973 to 2008 is not 35 years?

Hiya Zig,

No one can argue with your math, but the causes I think are both supply and demand sided. I do think that we are overconsuming, but I think it quite clear that we are underproducing as well. I dare say if we could change BOTH conditions (which strikes me as unlikely) we would be out of this problem quite quickly.

Frank,

Tell me so I understand where you're coming from, what EXACTLY is this 'energy crisis' that Jimmy Carter warned us about and has you saying the ONLY way we can address it is conservation?

Aaron,

I think you are correct that conservation (particularly if limited to the US--and let's not deceive ourselves into believing that India and China have any intentions of playing fair) just isn't going to do it by itself.

ziggy wrote:

Aaron wrote:Once again your fibbing Frank. It hasn't increased 'tenfold' in 35 years.

Your numbers are not correct. I was buying gasoline and diesel fuel when you were still in diapers. Gasoline and diesel fuel were about 30 cents a gallon in early 1973. By late 1973- less than a year later- they had doudled in price to near 60 cents a gallon. By 1980 gasoline and diesel fuel were about $1.20 a gallon- a quadrupling in price in only 7 years.

In October of 1973 Middles-eastern OPEC nations stopped exports to the US and other western nations. They meant to punish the western nations that supported Israel, their foe, in the Yom Kippur War, but they also realized the strong influence that they had on the world through oil. One of the many results of the embargo was higher oil prices all throughout the western world, particularly in America. The embargo forced America to consider many things about energy, such as the cost and supply, which up to 1973 no one had worried about (Spiegelman).

The immediate results of the Oil Crisis were dramatic. Prices of gasoline quadrupled, rising from just 25 cents to over a dollar in just a few months. The American Automobile Association recorded that up to twenty percent of the country’s gas stations had no fuel one week during the crisis. In some places drivers were forced to wait in line for two to three hours to get gas (Frum, p.320). The total consumption of oil in the U.S. dropped twenty percent. This was do to the effort of the public to conserve oil and money. There was an instant drop in the number of homes created with gas heat, because other forms of energy were more affordable at this time (Arab Oil Embargo of 1073-74).

The U.S. government went to desperate measures to improve the situation that America found itself in. Congress issued a 55mph speed limit on highways. This was a good thing. Not only did oil consumption go down, but fatalities decreased overnight. Today's fuel economy stickers come from the effort to preserve oil in the 70's. Daylight savings time was issued year round in an effort to reduce electrical use. These changes were made in hopes of preserving oil. Tax credits were offered to those who developed and used alternative sources for energy (The Arab Oil Embargo of 1973-74). These included solar and wind power. Nixon, who was president at that time, ordered the department of defense to create a stockpile of oil in case the country needed the military to carry it through a time of chaos. There was a large cutback in oil consumption. Emergency rationing books were printed although they were never necessary due to the end of the embargo. Nixon formed the Energy Department and it became a cabinet office. It developed the national energy policy. They made plans to make the U.S. energy independent (The Arab Oil Embargo of 1973-74).

Gasoline companies and stations also did all that they could to preserve oil. Nixon had issued a voluntary cutback on the consumption of gasoline. Gas stations would voluntarily close on Sundays. They refused to sell to customers who weren't "regulars." Gas stations also wouldn't sell more than ten gallons of gasoline to a customer at a time. They felt that these efforts would help the public to become more fuel-efficient (The Arab Oil Embargo of 1973-74).

The public helped to retain energy as well. Families turned their thermostats down to sixty-five degrees. The rise in oil prices also caused the public to be more fuel-efficient. Companies and industries switched their energy source to coal (The Arab Oil Embargo of 1973-74). People searched for alternative energy sources. People traded their mammoth cars that had thoughtlessly been speeded down highways to over-heated homes in the suburbs for smaller more fuel-efficient models (Spiegelman).

http://www.ccds.charlotte.nc.us/History/MidEast/04/horton/horton.htm

ziggy wrote:And through those 7 years we heard the same kinds of screams we are hearing today of how people will freeze and the economy will tank because of fuel prices. But almost no one actually cared enough to do anyhing about it other than fret and cuss. We laughed at Jimmy Carter's asmonition that the "energy crisis" was the moral equivalent of war. Today those prices are more than $4.00 a gallon. That's a more than 10 fold increase in 35 years.

YES Zigster, ……. but because of you handicap of a “one (1) track mind” you are unable to realize the “overall cost of living” is not what it was back in the 70’s. The government wasn’t extorting all their money and they could afford to “pay more” for gasoline and heating oil if necessary.

Wall Street Journal
September 29, 2004

Heating Oil:
Despite soaring prices, oil remains less costly for home heating than either natural gas or electricity. With demand strong and supply tight, natural gas costs at least 15% more than heating oil. Using electricity for heat costs as much as 15% more than natural gas.

Analysts say prices could reach $2 a gallon this year, and higher if a particular cold winter boosts demand. The average consumer will pay as much as $1,800 for heating oil this year, an increase of several hundred dollars from last year, says David O'Connor, commissioner for energy resources for Massachusetts, which had an average price of $1.45 a gallon last year.

http://www.jamieoil.com/news/combat.htm

Ziggy baby, if that average consumer was paying $1,800 for that 1,241 gallons of heating oil in 2004 @ $1.45 a gallon, how much do you figure they will be paying this winter @ $4.45+ a gallon?

Wouldn’t that be about $5,522.45?

So Zig, with the cost of gasoline, food, etc., etc. all up substantially, …… where is all the extra money they will need coming from?

Ziggy, starting this year, how many years in a row can you afford to pay an extra $4,000 to heat your home?

.

Aaron wrote:Frank,

Tell me so I understand where you're coming from, what EXACTLY is this 'energy crisis' that Jimmy Carter warned us about and has you saying the ONLY way we can address it is conservation?

There has been some alleged "energy crisis" or other for 35 years or so- as the first part of Sam's post just above tells us.

That current "energy crisis" is the scenario Sam talks about in the latter part of the post just above this one- and that Stephanie and others have alluded to- the costs of heating homes in the northeast with fuel oil.

I did not say that the ONLY way we can address it is conservation. But I am saying that the best way homeowners can address their 35 year and still increasing cost of fuel oil is to make their homes more energy efficient. If that had been done years ago, the impact of today's fuel oil prices would be significantly less. If they do it now, the impact of incresasing fuel oil prices over the next 35 years will be far, far less.

Homeowners may not be able to do much, if anything, to decrease the price per gallon of fuel oil. But they, like automobile owners and drivers, can do something about how much of that expensive fuel they consume.

Ziggy, starting this year, how many years in a row can you afford to pay an extra $4,000 to heat your home?

Not very many. And that costs appears to be increasing even more in coming years.

That is why making homes more energy efficient is so important to the people paying the heating bill- the homeowners.

There is no energy crisis because there is no shortage of resources for energy. The crisis is that we are held hostage to foreign oil because we do not use our own resources. There is enough oil, coal and natural gas to, if not eliminate our dependence on foreign, to at least get it to a manageable number.

If we practiced some form of modest conservation (an increase of MPG gallon standards would help tremendously) and utilized our own resources, there is no reason we should be paying what we are for energy. We could reduce our energy cost and energize our economy simply by using our own resources. That is a simple fact.

But foreign countries know we are committed to them because we're held hostage from using our resources by our government and environmentalist that feel they have an inalienable right to stop every new construction of a refinery, power plant or drilling site.

And like it or not Frank, is the ONLY energy crisis that America faces.

And when and if- as Sam and Strephanie predict- those folks in the northeast freeze to death because they can't afford to buy fuel oil- your scenario will still be the only "energy crisis" around- right?

Or are Sam and Stephanie just being simpled minded Chicken Little alarmists? I don't think that they are.

But foreign countries know we are committed to them because we're held hostage from using our resources by our government and environmentalist that feel they have an inalienable right to stop every new construction of a refinery, power plant or drilling site.

But we can fix up our homes so that they aren't energy sieves, and then tell "our government and environmentalists" and those foreign countries to just keep most of their damned old oil- that we're not going to keep buying as much at today's prices, right? And that is just what the folks should do. But as long as we hold out hope that tomorrow's fuel prices will be less than today's, why should anyone care?

Your last two statements make no sense Frank. You're rambling.

"Fix up out..."

Perhaps you should calm down, take your medicine, wipe the dribble off your screen and try again. Don't rush. I've got a plant inspection I need to take care of so you have time.

ziggy wrote:I did not say that the ONLY way we can address it is conservation. But I am saying that the best way homeowners can address their 35 year and still increasing cost of fuel oil is to make their homes more energy efficient. If that had been done years ago, the impact of today's fuel oil prices would be significantly less. If they do it now, the impact of incresasing fuel oil prices over the next 35 years will be far, far less.

Zig, we know what you are saying.

You are saying we SHOULD BE LOOKING AT THE NORTH END OF A SOUTH BOUND MIGRATING GOOSE.

Zigster, won'tcha tells us what you all shoulda done years ago, so that the impact of today's coal mining practices would be significantly less on the people and the environment.

ziggy wrote:Homeowners may not be able to do much, if anything, to decrease the price per gallon of fuel oil. But they, like automobile owners and drivers, can do something about how much of that expensive fuel they consume.

Zig, to drive or not to drive an automobile ........ is a choice, .... an option.

To keep warm or freeze to death ......... is neither.

Ziggy, please tell us all, ...... what you would recommend all residents and businesses should do ......... if the Natural Gas prices in WV were to INCREASE five-fold in the next four (4) months.

I mean like Zig, what do you recommend they do, .... if come November, .... they start getting a $1,000/mth NG bill ......... instead of their $200/mth NG bill.



.

Aaron wrote:There is no energy crisis because there is no shortage of resources for energy. The crisis is that we are held hostage to foreign oil because we do not use our own resources.

If we .................... utilized our own resources, there is no reason we should be paying what we are for energy. We could reduce our energy cost and energize our economy simply by using our own resources. That is a simple fact.

Aaron, the Democrats, ...... the greenies, ...... the conservationists ..... and Ziggy, ...... all believe that we should not be harvesting "the food out of our own gardens" ......... but should trot down to the "company store" and pay those outrageous prices for everything we want to eat.

Aaron, ....... or the milk from our own cows.

They pass Laws that FORCE YOU to purchase your dairy products from one of their "political donating friend$".

And iffen ya need "sand or gravel", ........ ya better not be gettin it outta the creeks and streams where it has accumulated anda pluggin up n' fillin up the channels a causin flooding and killing the fish and aquatic life, ........ ya better also purchase your sand and gravel from one of their "political donating friend$" or ...... do without or get your ass arrested.


.

Ziggy, please tell us all, ...... what you would recommend all residents and businesses should do ......... if the Natural Gas prices in WV were to INCREASE five-fold in the next four (4) months.

If that is what people contemplate, they should tighten up their homes, put in some (more) insulation, and do it now, and therby use less natural gas. This would have the effect of (1) immediately lowering one's gas consumption and therefore heating and/or cooling costs, (2) lessening the economic effects of future increased cost of natural gas, and (3) If done on a large scale (statewide or regionside), it would maybe delay the date and degrees of anticipated natural gas price increases.

Zig, is Medicare gonna pay for all that fixing-uping?

.

SamCogar wrote:Zig, is Medicare gonna pay for all that fixing-uping?

I would not think so.

It should be paid for by the same people who would otherwise either pay higher natural gas bills or who would freeze for lack of a heated home. It is another one of those matters of personal responsibility.

So what about the people who can't afford to be so responsible? They should freeze because environmentalists are preventing us all from utilizing our natural resources? I don't think so.