Bush's Drain America First Plan - Alaska Redux

[Timber Loftis]

Yep, Epona, that's a bit above what I calculated it at when I was there in 1999. It was like 0.78 quid per liter IIRC.

[wellard]

Originally posted by Night Stalker: Quote: Originally posted by wellard: Whats a gallon?... [img]graemlins/wink10.gif[/img] in the modern world [img]graemlins/1pokeme.gif[/img] it is about 95cents to the litre, somedays a whole doller. That makes it about 50 cents yank a litre.

If one wanted to be truely anal, technically the litre is not the proper SI unit for volume. The proper unit is m^3. CC (centimetre cubed) works as well since it is just a scale factor.[/QUOTE]The accurate way to measure petrol or any liquid is of course to use its weight, Specific Gravity (or density), heat and volumetric measurement. [img]graemlins/showoff.gif[/img]
Using any measure like cc or litres or m3 is not taking into account the changes brought about by heat and of course the specific gravity of the fluid. Petrol from one service station to another would have had deliveries at different times and the specific gravity of the petrol you would find to be quite different.
IIRC the SG of fuel would be about 0.8, given the grade and amount of impurities this could vary quite easily by about 20%. While these variables while filling a car are not that important, fuelling something like a Boeing 747 would of course be different. The discrepancy of just using cc or m3 could result in on average under or over fill of say 2000 litres and sometimes astronomically more.

Now THATS being truly anal

[ 03-13-2003, 03:56 AM: Message edited by: wellard ]

Originally posted by Kaltia: Just wanna take this opportunity to point out we'll use all our oil up within a century. If we, as a world, don't do something about it now, we are going to be screwed in interesting ways. THIS IS NOT JUST THE US I'M TALKING ABOUT HERE...MagiK... Actually in a way, developing the Alaska Oil reserves will hasten the Eco-groups ultimate goal, an oil free world....so why not use it all up now and force ourselves to find alternatives, necessity is the mother of invention after all...we use it all up, acid rain stops (not that it ever really was as damaging as claimed) and no more nasty hydrocarbons polluting the air.... Unfortunatly it takes a damn while to make fossil fuels (plus they cause acid rain). As MagiK pointed out, the US needs to start developing enviromental energy sources for the rest of the world to start. So far we haven't really got many alternatives but we need some. Yep, US companies alone are spending billions on developing alternatives, it is just a matter of time, Other nations are trying to as well. In the mean time, lets get rid of all that nasty oil so it doesnt ooze up out of the ground and pollute some poor sea otter or seagull [img]smile.gif[/img] EDITED to add second paragraph. MagiK, can I call you "M"? You may call me M or Mag or magik or Ray, just don't call me late for dinner......and ya doesn't have to call me Johnson (probably before your time that last...)

Originally posted by Rokenn: Quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Quote: Originally posted by Rokenn: Here in the bay area I've seen $2.10 a gallon near my home, and $2.40 a gallon in San Francisco. But then we always seem to get smacked with the highest gas prices around [img]graemlins/madhell.gif[/img] You can thank Grey Davis and his administration for that.

[/QUOTE]Odd, since under Republican govenors we always seem to have the highest gas prices around too. I guess that must have been Davis' fault as well. If he is that powerful we better all watch out![/QUOTE]Really now? When was the last time a Republican Governor was in office? and exactly who supported California's short sighted and ridiculous energy policy that resulted in your most recent energy Catastrophe? I do believe it is the leftists in the oh so silly state of California. The state that mandated electric cars...never stopping to think where they were going to get all the needed additional electric generation capability since they don't allow power plants to be built in the friggin state....oh so very smart california is. Altho I did recently read that they did finaly wake up and cancele the battery driven cars and are now mandating fuel cells instead.....let me know when you all can finaly share California's advanced technology with the rest of us mere mortals....oh and do something about that 20 billion dollar state deficit of yours while you are at it....its the size of some small countries budgets.

[Rokenn]

Originally posted by MagiK: Really now? When was the last time a Republican Governor was in office? and exactly who supported California's short sighted and ridiculous energy policy that resulted in your most recent energy Catastrophe? I do believe it is the leftists in the oh so silly state of California. The state that mandated electric cars...never stopping to think where they were going to get all the needed additional electric generation capability since they don't allow power plants to be built in the friggin state....oh so very smart california is. Altho I did recently read that they did finaly wake up and cancele the battery driven cars and are now mandating fuel cells instead.....let me know when you all can finaly share California's advanced technology with the rest of us mere mortals....oh and do something about that 20 billion dollar state deficit of yours while you are at it....its the size of some small countries budgets.[/QB]

Troll

Originally posted by Rokenn: Troll

Out of curiosity when did sarcasm become trolling? Everything I posted was to the point.

I think you might better have used the word, annoying, or perhaps irritating, but I don't think it was trolling. I will abide by the Mods decision, if one of them were to tell me this was a troll post I will retract it.

[Kaltia]

Oi, Rokkenn, MagiK, don't turn this thread into a personal flamewar, k?
Anyway, Uncle M ( ), until such time as Nuclear fusion for power needs is possible, you may well be right. I was rather uplifted to hear about the efforts towards renewable energy in the form of the Hoover Dam, over the river Colorado (of course you know where it is... )
My main annoyance is that in drilling for this oil in Alaska they will be destroying animals.
And don't patronise me by explaining "get rid of all that nasty oil so it doesnt ooze up out of the ground and pollute some poor sea otter or seagull ". I'm fifteen years old. I'm not a little frikkin' kiddy! ( ) Besides, seeing as all damages to wildlife involving oil concerns:
a)The removal of habitats in order to set up rigs
b) the spillage of oil at sea
I hardly believe that all that oil will ooze up from miles beneath the ground and coat the "poor sea otter or seagull" unless we remove it from the ground first.
Over and out, Johnson. (Was before my time, you're right )
Laterz.

[ 03-13-2003, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: Kaltia ]

[Timber Loftis]

From my research at work today:

Reasons explaining a surge of environmental citizen suits:

The extractive induestries by their nature are very intrusive physically. They can involve massive distubances of land, generate huge amounts of low-level toxic wastes, use highly toxic chemicals, and cause widespread water contamination. Oil spills are pereniial notorious threats. Natural resource operations often occur on federal lands or near sensitive or scenic areas, where the run up against competing uses and aesthetic values.

Daniel J. Dunn, Environmental Citizen Suits Against Natural Resource Companies, ABA Natural Resources and Environment, Vol. 17, No. 3, Winter 2003.

Originally posted by Kaltia: Oi, Rokkenn, MagiK, don't turn this thread into a personal flamewar, k? Anyway, Uncle M ( ), until such time as Nuclear fusion for power needs is possible, you may well be right. I was rather uplifted to hear about the efforts towards renewable energy in the form of the Hoover Dam, over the river Colorado (of course you know where it is... ) My main annoyance is that in drilling for this oil in Alaska they will be destroying animals. And don't patronise me by explaining "get rid of all that nasty oil so it doesnt ooze up out of the ground and pollute some poor sea otter or seagull ". I'm fifteen years old. I'm not a little frikkin' kiddy! ( ) Besides, seeing as all damages to wildlife involving oil concerns: a)The removal of habitats in order to set up rigs b) the spillage of oil at sea I hardly believe that all that oil will ooze up from miles beneath the ground and coat the "poor sea otter or seagull" unless we remove it from the ground first. Over and out, Johnson. (Was before my time, you're right ) Laterz.

Kaltie, no patronizing intended at all, I woul dhave made the same comment to any age person...infact the comment itself was not specificly aimed at any one person but said to the general public...it was a bit of humor [img]smile.gif[/img]

As for killing animals, I pointed out that Oil drilling did not kill the animals in alaska where there is current drilling, the Alaskan pipeline didn't kill off the animals, the extensive oil drilling earlier in the 19th and 20th centuries in Pennsylvania, Texas, Oklahoma and California didn't kill off the wild life there, there is still an abundance of wildlife in the North Atlantic where Companies from England and other nations drill, and as far as I can tell, the middle east is still teaming with at least the two legged variety of animal. I am saying that drilling and exploring doesnt kill off the native life forms. It actually doesn't really affect a large percentage of the total land mass.

Edit: Oil Oozing from miles below the sea...read recently (Think it was in the MIT Technology in Review magazine that I subscribe to) the estimated oil seepage from the ocean floor in the Gulf of Mexico (Due to natural causesis in the tens of thousands of barrels annually.....oil doesnt just stay in its nice little pocket under the earth...it does get into the environment natuarally.

[ 03-13-2003, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

I did neglect to mention that a lot of the Oil that seeps up from the ocean floor stays mixed with sediments and silt, unlike an oil tanker leak which permeats from the top down, but either way it does get into the eco system.