Energy thread

[NorthSideSox72]

Like the last two dollars per gallon increases have sharply driven demand down for gasoline? Gasoline doesn't behave like a normal commodity. It has an elasticity of near zero. People buy it, almost no matter what.

Yet another reason why it wold be nice to see us fund mass transit at something a little better than 1/40 of roads.

 

[YASNY]

Yet another reason why it wold be nice to see us fund mass transit at something a little better than 1/40 of roads.

 

That's cool it you live in a relatively large city or the suburbs of one.

[NorthSideSox72]

That's cool it you live in a relatively large city or the suburbs of one.

I'm not just talking about that kind of system. Amtrak is a friggin joke - it could be used so much better all over the country. Also, mass transit includes bus service in towns that range down to pretty small. Not like 500 people small, but a few thousand small. It also includes commercial intercity bus service.

 

[StrangeSox]

That's cool it you live in a relatively large city or the suburbs of one.

 

Unless you need to commute from one suburb to another and not into the city. I can't imagine how much larger the mass transit infrastructure would have to be to help with all the people that take 355, 83, or 294 from the southern suburbs to the northern suburbs. It would take me about 2 1/2 hours each way to use public transportation right now.

[NorthSideSox72]

Unless you need to commute from one suburb to another and not into the city. I can't imagine how much larger the mass transit infrastructure would have to be to help with all the people that take 355, 83, or 294 from the southern suburbs to the northern suburbs. It would take me about 2 1/2 hours each way to use public transportation right now.

It wouldn't really need to be much larger. Mass transit doesn't need to be trains, necessarily.

 

[YASNY]

I'm not just talking about that kind of system. Amtrak is a friggin joke - it could be used so much better all over the country. Also, mass transit includes bus service in towns that range down to pretty small. Not like 500 people small, but a few thousand small. It also includes commercial intercity bus service.

 

When you have a small city, for example a county seat that is the largest city in the county... you may have bus service in that city, if someone can make a profit. That still doesn't help people that live in the unincorporated areas or the smaller communities of the county.

[StrangeSox]

It wouldn't really need to be much larger. Mass transit doesn't need to be trains, necessarily.

 

It wouldn't need to be trains only, but even a bus from my front door to O'Hare (I work about a mile away from the airport) would double my commute with all of the stops and generally driving slower.

 

I just don't believe that mass transit is a feasible option for everyone. I do what I can and carpool with my gf who works down the street.

[Balta1701]

It wouldn't need to be trains only, but even a bus from my front door to O'Hare (I work about a mile away from the airport) would double my commute with all of the stops and generally driving slower.

 

I just don't believe that mass transit is a feasible option for everyone. I do what I can and carpool with my gf who works down the street.

Mass Transit clearly isn't a feasible option for everyone, and I don't think anyone would argue that point. But I think that there are a lot of places (i.e. Los Angeles) where a well developed, well funded Mass transit system would be an excellent option that would cut pollution, cut energy use, and save the nation a boatload of money compared to having half the city spend 5 hours locked in gridlock every day because there aren't enough roads to take care of the cars.

 

Furthermore, I still find it pretty disappointing that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the developed world on high speed rail lines. There are more than a few routes in the country where a well developed system would be an excellent alternative to air travel (The entire east coast from Boston to D.C., for example, or San Diego to San Francisco/Sacramento going through L.A., or L.A. to Vegas, or maybe St. Louis/Chicago/Detroit)

[Balta1701]

Unless you need to commute from one suburb to another and not into the city. I can't imagine how much larger the mass transit infrastructure would have to be to help with all the people that take 355, 83, or 294 from the southern suburbs to the northern suburbs. It would take me about 2 1/2 hours each way to use public transportation right now.

Part of the reason that these commutes exist is the lack of solid mass transit architecture in these areas. It's vastly cheaper in terms of time to drive those distances than it is to live closer in but take mass transit. A key part of the energy problem is actually this issue...because we've put so much money in to roads, it actually encourages urban sprawl, which is in most cases a big detriment to the environment, as it winds up chewing up more gasoline, requiring more roads, and just spreading everything out.

[NorthSideSox72]

Mass Transit clearly isn't a feasible option for everyone, and I don't think anyone would argue that point. But I think that there are a lot of places (i.e. Los Angeles) where a well developed, well funded Mass transit system would be an excellent option that would cut pollution, cut energy use, and save the nation a boatload of money compared to having half the city spend 5 hours locked in gridlock every day because there aren't enough roads to take care of the cars.

 

Furthermore, I still find it pretty disappointing that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the developed world on high speed rail lines. There are more than a few routes in the country where a well developed system would be an excellent alternative to air travel (The entire east coast from Boston to D.C., for example, or San Diego to San Francisco/Sacramento going through L.A., or L.A. to Vegas, or maybe St. Louis/Chicago/Detroit)

Agreed on the above - Balta just articulated it better than I did. I wasn't trying to say it was great for everyone, just that it could be great for a lot more people than it currently is.

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

I'm not just talking about that kind of system. Amtrak is a friggin joke - it could be used so much better all over the country. Also, mass transit includes bus service in towns that range down to pretty small. Not like 500 people small, but a few thousand small. It also includes commercial intercity bus service.

 

Unlike every other national rail service, Amtrak doesn't own the rails it uses with the exception of the Northeast Corridor (Washington D.C. - Boston) and a portion of track running from Chicago to Detroit, and I believe some of the Caltrain lines that it runs in Northern California.

 

On the tracks that it runs trains on for intercity service outside of the Northeast, it has the lowest priority in traffic dispatching, because of the bizarre track ownership situation. Although it is a quasi-public company and has requirements to run routes that are unprofitable, it has never been fully funded. It has been unable to maintain its rolling stock in a way to maximize the speeds that the current trains could acheive. It has been unable to improve much of the track it does own to eliminate grade crossings that would allow the train to increase its speeds on intercity routes.

[Balta1701]

Unlike every other national rail service, Amtrak doesn't own the rails it uses with the exception of the Northeast Corridor (Washington D.C. - Boston) and a portion of track running from Chicago to Detroit, and I believe some of the Caltrain lines that it runs in Northern California.

 

On the tracks that it runs trains on for intercity service outside of the Northeast, it has the lowest priority in traffic dispatching, because of the bizarre track ownership situation. Although it is a quasi-public company and has requirements to run routes that are unprofitable, it has never been fully funded. It has been unable to maintain its rolling stock in a way to maximize the speeds that the current trains could acheive. It has been unable to improve much of the track it does own to eliminate grade crossings that would allow the train to increase its speeds on intercity routes.

Amtrak is, to my eyes, this bizarre cycle of budget cuts where its budget starts off inadequate at some point while the government funds roads, it's forced to cut back on service because of it, people fail to use it as an option and build their homes and businesses based on the assumption that the only method of travel is going to be the well funded roads, and then they demand additional budget cuts on Amtrak because no one's riding it.

 

A true mass transit system has to at some level be an organic thing. When you have a functioning, well designed mass transit system, the area will grow around it, and that will in tune feed continued development or improvement of that system. But if you start off with a limited, inadequate system, and expect that it will grow itself at some point, its never going to be able to grow itself because the growth will follow the money going in to roads and away from the areas that could be served by a transit system.

[Rex Kickass]

Amtrak requires a budget appropriation of somewhere between 1.4 to 2 billion in order to maintain its rolling stock, pay track rental fees, maintain its track that it owns, and fund some limited infrastructure improvement projects, in addition to continuing its normal passenger service - much of which is unprofitable but is mandated to operate by various state and federal government laws.

 

The Bush administration appropriated 900 million dollars in its current budget.

[NorthSideSox72]

$111

 

Also, Gold = $1000/oz.

 

[kapkomet]

$111

 

Also, Gold = $1000/oz.

No inflation here!

 

Japan (economic model of the late 1980's), here we come.

[southsider2k5]

No inflation here!

 

Japan (economic model of the late 1980's), here we come.

 

Actually this is going to be way worse, because Japan had no inflation.

[NorthSideSox72]

Actually this is going to be way worse, because Japan had no inflation.

But, unlike Japan's 20 year slow burning semi-recession, the US government actually has a chance to knock out one of the major catalyzing problems - energy costs. I can't say enough times how much I hope that our new leaders come November will realize this.

 

[Cknolls]

Actually this is going to be way worse, because Japan had no inflation.

 

 

And their personal savimgs rate was /is through the roof. Ours is in the sub-basement.

[EvilMonkey]

I would buy this hybrid.

 

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/03/13/fi...eed-to-be-sexy/

[southsider2k5]

I had my first of the new lightbulbs burn out after only 6 months.

 

I thought these stupid things were supposed to last forever?

[NorthSideSox72]

I had my first of the new lightbulbs burn out after only 6 months.

 

I thought these stupid things were supposed to last forever?

You know, its interesting you say that. We installed them all over the house probably a year ago. And mostly they are just fine. But there is one particular one that burned out early - like after 2 months. Replaced it, and the new one in that same location burned out AGAIN. I have a suspicion that perhaps these CFL's are more sensitive to power spikes and such.

 

Your bulb probably had a warranty, if you still have the receipt.

 

[EvilMonkey]

You know, its interesting you say that. We installed them all over the house probably a year ago. And mostly they are just fine. But there is one particular one that burned out early - like after 2 months. Replaced it, and the new one in that same location burned out AGAIN. I have a suspicion that perhaps these CFL's are more sensitive to power spikes and such.

 

Your bulb probably had a warranty, if you still have the receipt.

You are probably correct with the power spike thing. I have had several of the damn things blow out on the ceiling fan in my front room. None lasted more than 6 months. I have since switched back to the cheap bulbs, at least for that light.

[NorthSideSox72]

You are probably correct with the power spike thing. I have had several of the damn things blow out on the ceiling fan in my front room. None lasted more than 6 months. I have since switched back to the cheap bulbs, at least for that light.

That's exactly what I did, for that one light. All the others have kept on going. Seems weird though, doesn't it? I mean, I know some outlets will have less conditioned power than others, but it shouldn't be THAT different from one outlet to another.

 

[southsider2k5]

You know, its interesting you say that. We installed them all over the house probably a year ago. And mostly they are just fine. But there is one particular one that burned out early - like after 2 months. Replaced it, and the new one in that same location burned out AGAIN. I have a suspicion that perhaps these CFL's are more sensitive to power spikes and such.

 

Your bulb probably had a warranty, if you still have the receipt.

 

Interesting. I'll have to pay attention to that. These things are too damned expensive to waste.

[NorthSideSox72]

These economists seem to think that gas prices, nationally, will spike to around $3.50 to $3.75 per gallon by May, with some areas paying over $4. But, they say it will likely settle back to $3.25-ish, due to the decreased demand that goes with those price levels.

 

I hate to even go here, being not an expert but... I think I see a problem in that assumption. People's demand for gas is only variable on elective use - vacations and road trips, basically. They will still go to work, still go to the store, etc. So the variable part is only a very small fraction of the demand. The rest is almost static*.

 

* = the caveat here is that as prices go really high, people will start to do things like buy more hybrids and electric cars, get jobs closer to home, etc. But those sorts of things don't happen over a period of weeks. They take years to change enough for major effect to be felt.