Quote - On the French version, there are 3 cylinders made of carbon fiber, so that in the event of a crash, they will safely split, and not explode. They meet US safety standards. To completely fill all 3 tanks, takes 4 hours of running a compressor, similar to your standard Sears air compressor. It would certainly be equivalent or less than running my home's AC for the same amount of time. This would be the equivalent of 28% my current gas tank, so as long as it costs less than $28USD to fill all three, it saves money. more info: http://zeropollutionmotors.us/

According to the website the tanks pressurize to 4500 psi. Your typical Sears compressor maxes out around 140psi.

You would need a compressor like they use to fill scuba tanks to get up to 4500psi. Those are around $3000+

somehow i don't think the service stations have that kind of pressure either.

You should see what I would have to go thru to take a bus to work.
Get up at 5AM to be at the bus stop at 6:15AM take a 25 minute trip to Downtown Rochester NY. Wait 35 Minutes for the Bus that goes to East View Mall (AKA Bushnell's Basin) 45 Minute bus trip cost $5 one way.  I only live 5.5 Miles from work I would have to back track 16 miles if I was to take the local Transit. Talk about screwed up!

The vehicle will require a 'compressed air station', or can be plugged in anywhere. There is currently an onboard compressor that will fill all three tanks in about 4 hours. Estimated electric cost to refill: 20¢. This will vary depending on local electricity costs. The more I think about this, the more irritated I am at US car manufacturers, who seem to think cooled cupholders are a priority. I don't want a tricked-out hybrid. No combustion engine, no pollution, no stupid gimmicks. As the old saw goes: If we can put a rover on Mars...

Quote - > Quote - > Quote - I've seen a (news?) story about these compressed air cars in the recent past.  Sounds interesting indeed.

Same here - the Tata car, I think it's called. 'course, I can see gas stations get irate when they see you borrow their free tire-pressure thingy and fill your tank with it. :)

/P

I dunno where you live but gas stations round here now all charge for the "Free" air!

And they should considering the equipment and power isn't "free".

this thing sounds like a fairy tale or a con man pitching a perpetual motion machine.

sorry, but there can be no such thing as a device that will pump enough compressed air into tanks with 20 cents worth of electricity to power an auto for a decent, normal driving range and highway speed.

Wake up to reality.

::::: Opera :::::

Quote - You should see what I would have to go thru to take a bus to work.
Get up at 5AM to be at the bus stop at 6:15AM take a 25 minute trip to Downtown Rochester NY. Wait 35 Minutes for the Bus that goes to East View Mall (AKA Bushnell's Basin) 45 Minute bus trip cost $5 one way.  I only live 5.5 Miles from work I would have to back track 16 miles if I was to take the local Transit. Talk about screwed up!

The first year I lived in the states I had to take the bus to work, because I couldn't afford a car.
12 miles from house to the office took an hour and a half and four transfers, because you have to go surface streets and some odd curcuitous route.

Plus, if they want you to stay little bit late, and you miss the bus and transfers home, you're in for almosta three hour trip.

Over here, most employers aren't symphatetic of that (at least anyone I ever worked for wasn't). They pretty much require you to have your own transportation, and not depend of whatever exists of public transit. if you don't, you end up being considered an unreliable employee. I had to sit through many of pep-talks how, if I don't get a car pretty soon, they may have to hire someone else, whose work hours don't depend on an unreliable bus schedule, or whom has to bee-line it out of the office at 5:03 and leave them in a bind with overtime for something that's due tomorrow, because they need to catch the bus home.

With the car, you hop on the freeway, and you're there in 20 minutes in almost a straight line.

Opera, the technology exists. Even if it takes $5 worth of electricity, to fill 3 tanks that will power the vehicle for 120 miles, that's still better than what I just paid to fill the gas tank 3/4 of the way full. Reality? I'm seeing "Soylent Green" if someone doesn't take the plunge and put alternatives out there. The only way to see what's going to work well and be accepted is to put them on the road and see what floats to the surface. Someone has to take a chance. What's to be gained if this actually does work as advertised? No more dependence on imported fuel supplies, drastically reduced pollution, reduced maintenance costs, reduced risk of oil spills, reduced need for expensive and dangerous off-shore drilling. The only downside I can see is what to do with all those petroleum company employees. Connie, when I lived in Berlin, you could actually get to work on time, switching between the bus, the UBahn and light rail. Over here, the bus may or may not show up on time, if it didn't break down, and you might make the schedule for your transfer. Then some of the people that get on... you're not sure if they're going to pull a knife on you, or throw up on you.

I wouldn't worry about gas prices.  That was just a left jab.  The right knock out will be double digit inflation.

Best of fortune to them.

But don't paint it as a fairy tale....

They are touting "106 MPG" equivalent. But don't show the actual math and logic to support this claim, in my short stay on their site at least. Instead they supply a chart of ordinary vehicles that get from 19 to 48 MPG. If their comparison is against a high MPG car, that means a little over twice the MPG.

Now if true, twice the MPG and no pollution emitted by the aircar, that is highly desirable. The pollution from making the electricity to fill the air tanks would be the trade off. So you'd save half the pollution.

::::: Opera :::::

You know, I think you'd have to have a degree in calculus to do the math on that one. ;) Comparing MPG to MPW (watts?). One thing missing is any estimate of horsepower. (Is that term a throwback, or what?) Speaking of watts, I need to look into the rebate program on solar water heaters out here. With the temperature today, I think an old tin wash bucket filled with water sitting in the sun would probably hot enough to do nicely.

Quote - Connie, when I lived in Berlin, you could actually get to work on time, switching between the bus, the UBahn and light rail. Over here, the bus may or may not show up on time, if it didn't break down, and you might make the schedule for your transfer. Then some of the people that get on... you're not sure if they're going to pull a knife on you, or throw up on you.

Yeah, back home where I grew up, most of the population used transit system, and normal people used it.
Over here, it's the same, you don't get 'normal' people on the busses, but those on the fringes of the society. Whenever I got on the bus dressed for white collar office work, I would get dirty looks, and in many cases feel like prey.... And you'd pretty much be the only person of your type on the bus, so you'd be kind of cornered with nowhere to go.

And... nervous laugh we have a bus-stop-drive-by shooter or two floating around in greater LA area. Someone pulling up to bus stops and randomly opening fire.

well, there's a host of different technologies, and the price point on oil is so high that a lot of them will be viable.

I knew a fella once that saw a diver's tank rupture (at the regulator [?] end). It took off through a cinderblock wall, down a hallway, and I think bounced around for a good while. And that's only 2000psi (I think). This was 25 years ago, my head for details is a little fuzzy..;)

the only thing that's a problem is that it takes time to get all of this online...

Quote -
The first year I lived in the states I had to take the bus to work, because I couldn't afford a car.
12 miles from house to the office took an hour and a half and four transfers, because you have to go surface streets and some odd curcuitous route.

I remember being young and broke... there was quite a period of time when I did the 8 miles between home and work on a bicycle (one car, the ex was a nurse who needed it worse than I do, etc). Took about 35-40 minutes to get each way if I was lazy about it. I wouldn't say it would be recommended for a woman or elderly person late at night (I used to work graveyards, which meant I had the streets to myself most times), but otherwise it was more than serviceable, even in winter (Arkansas rarely got more than a couple of inches of snow at any one time).

--

Quote - You know, I think you'd have to have a degree in calculus to do the math on that one. ;) Comparing MPG to MPW (watts?). One thing missing is any estimate of horsepower. (Is that term a throwback, or what?)

Electrical motors are often rated by horsepower, but IIRC an electric motor rated at 1hp isn't quite equivalent to a gasoline engine rated at 1hp (differences in how they're measured, mostly - electric motors are measured at the output shaft at full voltage and amperage draw, whereas gasoline motors are rated in a number of ways and under different conditions).

/P

Well, How to begin.  Anyone notice that the price of rice, corn, copper and other commodities, including oil have continued their upward spiral when the dollar is recovering nicely, the subprime mortgage "crisis" has been discounted, the world (including the Chinese and Indians) are using less oil (recession?)?  Could it be that the spiral is due to speculation in petroleum and other futures markets.  Want to see $60 to $70  a barrel oil again.   Raise the margin requirements on oil futures contracts from the low 5 - 15% to 100%.  Anybody remember  when the Hunt brothers tried to corner the Silver market?  Raising the margin to 100% shot them out of the saddle.  Write your politician and suggest higher margin requirements on strategic commodities like fuel and food because the commodity exchanges are government controlled.   Who is responsible?  Ask yourself, if you were a big time commercial banker and  had just taken a horrendous writedown in the value of some of your debt vehicles wouldn't you be tempted to regain some of that lost capital by gambling in the futures market, eh?  We're talking big time hedge fund investment of bns of $.   Think?  Can anyone imagine the friendly arabs, chinese and others who bailed out  those commercial banker with bns not wanting to hedge their bets  (can you say "hedge fund?).
  

""She's on minimum wage, yet the shell tanker drivers on strike are complaining that a salary of 32K (Yep 64,000 dollars) a year isn't enough!""

Just wanted to say that for that profession 64k isn't really enough.  I wouldn't compare it to a counter worker at a gas station anyway.  Aside from the fact that the ones you specified are working for Shell - a reasonable starting wage for a long haul trucker should be about 75k per year.   Those guys do alot of hard work and put up with alot of crap - its not just a cozy ride around in a truck for days.  A gas station clerk gets to go home each night and see thier family - a trucker gets to see thier family once every 2 weeks if he wants to make any money.  Damn near everyone I know is underpaid currently - animosity amongst the workers over wages is the last thing we need.  I say pay both the truckers and the counter workers more!  How does that get funded? - well in the age of greed it would unfortunately mean that the corporate big shot would have to live in a 2 million dollar mansion instead of a 5 million dollar one.  Poor corporate big shot!!!

If you want to make money, there's three options:

1. sales
2. financial services
3. management.

That's the way it is in the Netherlands, anyway. The employees that actually DO something are grossly underpaid.
I was the best paid technical employee at my previous employer (MCT, plus head of the certified courses department), and a junior salesman at this same company had a base salary slightly less than mine. Unlike the technical workers, salesmen ALSO got commissions for each and every sale.

No wonder that the companies over here are screaming for qualified technical personnel. Well, if they start paying decent salaries, they'll come again. Right now, our youngsters decide en masse to follow a financial or commercial education, with a) is far easier and b) gets you a higher income. Can't blame them!

Quote - well, there's a host of different technologies, and the price point on oil is so high that a lot of them will be viable.

I knew a fella once that saw a diver's tank rupture (at the regulator [?] end). It took off through a cinderblock wall, down a hallway, and I think bounced around for a good while. And that's only 2000psi (I think). This was 25 years ago, my head for details is a little fuzzy..;)

the only thing that's a problem is that it takes time to get all of this online...

But, of course, a metal container full of highly volatile fluid being pumped into combustion chambers ignited with electricity is much safer. ;D

Quote - You know, I think you'd have to have a degree in calculus to do the math on that one. ;) Comparing MPG to MPW (watts?). One thing missing is any estimate of horsepower. (Is that term a throwback, or what?) Speaking of watts, I need to look into the rebate program on solar water heaters out here. With the temperature today, I think an old tin wash bucket filled with water sitting in the sun would probably hot enough to do nicely.

Horsepower (hp) is a proper Physics term but there are a slew of equivalents: N*m/s (SI), J, erg, ft-lb/s, calorie, Btu, kW.  All of these represent units of Power.

1 hp = 0.746 kW

As an aside, these values probably have changed since the book used as reference was printed (1982), but here are a couple of elements with respect to energy conversion efficiencies:

Solar cell (eh hem): a whopping 11% (~20% noted for recent values)
Automobile engine: 26%
Diesel engine: 37%
Steam turbine: 46%
Storage battery: 73%
Dry cell battery: 91%
Large electric motor (like what would be used for the air compressor): 93%

So, you put a 'large electric motor' powered by a 'dry cell battery' driving a compressed air system, you probably couldn't get worse than an 'automobile engine' in efficiency if you tried.

I'd rather go for the electric car system but the problem is that despite the battery efficiencies (which aren't the problem here) - it is amount of current and how many batteries it takes to get it to generate the required energy - 1.21 gigawatts (oh, wrong car).  ;)  Current fully electric cars have like a battery weight of between 500 and 850 POUNDS (!!) to get respectable power and distance.

So, you put a 'large electric motor' powered by a 'dry cell battery' driving a compressed air system, you probably couldn't get worse than an 'automobile engine' in efficiency if you tried.

Yep - leave the "compressed air" deviation out, and your performance ratio becomes even better. What does everybody think why railway train are driven by electrical power? The most "compressed air" is still used in advertisement and politics.

The gasoline manufactures in the US haven't even been trying to build fuel efficient vehicles that run on petroleum. You could make a chainsaw engine pull a real horse around with the right gears. Not very fast of course which brings us to another point. To do a hundred miles an hour you need an engine and transmission combined with a drive train that needs more gas than say one that will only do fifty five miles per hour. You see America can build whatever the petroleum suppliers need to keep people here and the economy going for many many years. The problem is you need to know what fuel is going to cost. Manufacturers can't build for roller coaster oil price economics. They sell cheap oil people can afford a guzzler. The price goes up, people buy mizers. The manufacturer builds what they can sell. At today's high prices, mizers. If the price falls, what then?

dogor,

Quote - Horsepower (hp) is a proper Physics term but there are a slew of equivalents: N*m/s (SI), J, erg, ft-lb/s, calorie, Btu, kW.  All of these represent units of Power.

1 hp = 0.746 kW

Robert, you're scaring me. ;) The only way I'd be able to judge that little compressed air car, is to get in and drive it. If I didn't get run over on Greenway, that's one point in its favor. Then if I plug it in at home, and the circuit breaker doesn't explode, it's a go. (Wonder if that's a 110 or 220 plug it needs?) Doesn't even need a cupholder. The '66 Mustang didn't have one, either. Come to think of it, neither did the Chrysler Laser.

If you loved Reagan and Dubya, don't read this -- but from the radical-liberal-minds-may-have-told- us-so department, here in the US, all the "supply-side" tax cuts for the well-to-do for the last couple of decades may have been, well, somewhat of a mistake.

The Roosevelt and Eisenhower administrations both invested in the infrastructure of this country, but no one has much lately. If a significant portion of those tax cuts had been so invested for the last 25 years or so, it is very likely this wouldn't be hitting us so hard now.

Just a thought. Please don't kill the messenger.

Er a President doesn't set the gas prices. Politics has nothing to do with it. There is no regulated control, THAT'S the problem. These companies can charge whatever they feel like it for a gallon of gas and get away with it.

They can charge you ten dollars US money for 1 gallon of gas.

You have a Dem Congress why aren't they doing anything about it? All they've been good for is raising taxes and collecting their big phat pay checks and doing nothing in the mean time.

The tax cuts have nothing to do with gas prices either.

*eyeroll.

I think we're going to see a lot of people working from home, companies switching to 4-day work weeks, and (already seeing it around here) people just not being able to afford to drive to work. Like Connie said, most places here in America have crappy to no public transportation, and lifestyles here are so "rush rush" and things are inconvenient...it's really hard to do without a vehicle in most parts of the country.

It seems to me the folks hurting most right now are the ones making min. wage, mostly in retail, and when they stop showing up to work, businesses can't function.

Here in Charlotte we recently got light rail, but...it goes along only one street that is already a very good, straight shot into town even if you drive, so most of the city doesn't benefit. I think even when it's done it will still just go up the same street on the other side of town. You have to work uptown, and you have to live close enough to the one street it goes back and forth on to get any use out of it. zzzzzzzzzzzz.....great idea, city council.

My job is 38 miles one way - I've recently started carpooling with a co-worker and we each are saving two full tanks per month. As one of the guilty ones with a big-@$$ truck, I can't complain - I chose to buy it, I love my truck (hey this is North Carolina...) and I won't give it up. But thankfully I do well enough that it's not hurting financially yet, especially with the carpool, and I can work from home frequently.

My wife has a small car that is much cheaper to drive, and we use that for all of our errands and weekends, etc. And with the way people drive around here, there's no way in hell I'd take a bike out. :)

It will be interesting to see how things play out as it trickles down to affect more things...and we'll see more companies of all sizes scramble to figure out how they can leverage the 'net and other technologies to create more virtual offices.

The min. wage and lower-end jobs will likely see a lot of shifting - except for urban areas and remote locations, the employers at this level will simply make up for the lost workers by hiring from folks living closer-by.

It's the suburban "bedroom community" areas with no real public transportation to speak of that will feel it. I can walk less than 500 yards to the nearest bus stop, no prob.

On my part, I usually respond to head-hunters with two questions now:

1. is it close to public transportation (yes I have a pretty decent-mileage car, but I'd rather not use it after getting very used to taking the train)?

2. If not, will the proposed salary compensate me for rising fuel costs, both now and within the next 2-3 years?

--

As for politics, err, no... the Democrats have a majority in Congress. They will likely have the Oval Office come next January. Clinton got off light due to the artificially low prices throughout the 1990's, but Obama won't have that luxury.

Oil companies making gasp profits? Whoda thunk it? As publicly traded companies, they have an obligation to do so, or their shareholders will sue the unholy frig out of them for fiscal irresponsibility. The best way to get a piece of that money for yourself is to buy stock in those companies, where you can get dividends off the stock.

Quote - It will be interesting to see how things play out as it trickles down to affect more things...and we'll see more companies of all sizes scramble to figure out how they can leverage the 'net and other technologies to create more virtual offices.

Yep - which is why I've been getting a lot of headhunter calls of late. :)

/P

Politics. A friend who works for the state is hearing an interesting rumor. Seems that the states vehicle standards code is being re-written to prohibit any vehicle that uses "espansive gas" as a fuel and does not meet an arbitrary miles-per-tank minimum. Ah, but the good news is Bush has requested more off-shore drilling. That will certainly fix everything. (and, yes, that was dripping with sarcasm)

p.s. in case anybody asks: a large part of the problem is that gasoline-consuming
countries (e.g. Iran, U.S.) haven't built any new refineries in decades.  oil companies
say they need the huge profits to be able to do that, but of course the profits go to
the owners, shareholders and execs, and not to build new refineries.  not that building
new refineries is gonna solve global warming or anything else, mind you.

the deal about opening up alaska drilling: almost all of that oil goes to japan.  not much
help there, other than oil company profits.

Miss Nancy, nice globe for an avatar. Now imagine the ice on the top and bottom of that gone on the real one. That's the problem.

dogor,

Oil overall is fungible - oil drilled and sold to Japan means Japan uses relatively less of others' oil, which in turn can be purchased by other nations.

The big thing about refineries has nothing to do with money for construction and capital expenses, but more to do with regulation and a big fat NIMBY attitude... everyone wants them, just not in their town.

Solving global warming is literally (at this time) impossible. Mostly because it is cased by (and operates under) forces well beyond human control. The idea of Anthropogenic Global Warming (that is, "it's all man's fault") is slowly but surely becoming less tenable as a hypothesis - at least outside of political quarters. We're still far too puny as a species to manage a trick like that... yet.

Got nothing against conservation measures and alternative energy sources - far from it... the sooner the better. But, if you think things are pricey now, wait until carbon taxes and GW-based restrictions start to come along. Corporations certainly aren't going to eat the cost - they'll simply pass it on to the consumer in the form of higher prices.

It'll be interesting to see how all of this plays out, really.

/P

Quote-"Solving global warming is literally (at this time) impossible."

We now see that those planets imagined in sci fi films that are completely covered in cities are actually impossible. lol

Quote - Er a President doesn't set the gas prices. Politics has nothing to do with it. There is no regulated control, THAT'S the problem. These companies can charge whatever they feel like it for a gallon of gas and get away with it.

They can charge you ten dollars US money for 1 gallon of gas.

You have a Dem Congress why aren't they doing anything about it? All they've been good for is raising taxes and collecting their big phat pay checks and doing nothing in the mean time.

The tax cuts have nothing to do with gas prices either.

*eyeroll.

Er, I didn't say, nor even imply, the president set gas prices.

Nor did I say or imply  that tax cuts had anything to do with gas prices.

I didn't think I needed to explain the comment as I thought the impact of more investment in better, more efficient hydroelectric dams, more investment in state-of-the-art mass transportation systems, etc., etc.  would be obvious .... but I guess not.

As for the companies charging whatever they like for a gallon of gas, the higher prices are largely being driven by speculation on the world oil market and that is mostly due to what is essentially legalized insider trading, a la Phil Gramm ...

(I more or less argued the other point of view just a couple of weeks ago, but I have researched it some since, and apparently I was wrong -- and now I'm off to apologize to SeanMartin for being such a bonehead.)

Well,  I just busted out the windshield on the townecar.  Now,  I'll be able to hitch up the mules and run the reigns to the front seat.

The oil crisis is a major issue in the upcoming US Presidential Election and has a significant impact for all Americans where Obama and McCain talk about in http://pollclash.com .just like soaring oil prices are affecting the costs of everything from food to gas and even houses rental. There are also significant issues on local and global environmental impact. While there are many issues, we need to look at our next leader and determine which will have the best course of action going forward. Both candidates, John McCain and Barack Obama are attempting to address the issue and differentiate their positions from one another. And I think that everyone is missing the point of this. We need a new resource. We need a solution to this problem not another way around it…and now here come the problem that makes the whole world worry about..how about the war in iraq? can can the bush administration do something about it? so far that i saw the video  in pollclash i can say that Obama  has a better plan than McCain has..but its just my opinion then and make comparison of the two video there.

Nobody is missing any point.  Any alternative fuel source is going to take decades to replace most fossil fuel usage (where it can or should).  Oil is still needed for machine lubrication and such.  Any new source of oil is going to take decades to start having an impact on fuel consumption and costs.

Solar/wind power are currently laughably inefficient.  Any efficiency that would become economical would be 20-50 years in the future.  And these are totally useless for vehicles.

Ethanol and other grain-based fuel sources might work for Brazil for a while but are impractical for a nation of 250,000,000 vehicles like the US which is not only the largest ethanol producer in the world but one of the largest producers of grain crops.  We'd need to divert food resources for larger ethanol production.  Ethanol is expensive to create and, although a reusable biofuel, could have a devastating impact in a major crop failure - not only in fuel but in food (which has never happened in the past, ever - he said very sarcastically).

Electric may become a viable full alternative (compared to hybrids) eventually.  And hybrids may be the gateway.  What is needed here is a means to ramp up efficiency vs. weight (of the hundreds of pounds of batteries!) so that fully electric cars are more reasonable both in cost and weight-to-efficiency ratio.

Unfortunately, most alternatives are even less efficient that gas-guzzling combustion engines (at 25%).  And some of these are much more expensive, if not due to complex processes, due to the lack of infrastructure which would expand production and lower costs.

Here's the fact: It will take at least ten years (more like 20-30) to retool completely our fuel source infrastructure.  There is no bandaid to fix this quickly.  I'd expect that near the time we've reached the hump going towards a fully alternative infrastructure, we will have gas going for $10/20/30 per gallon.  Pinch those pennies, ride public transport, get a hybrid, fly less.

The answer is not use as much fossil fuel. Ford said they're retooling to build vehicles more like they build in Europe. This is the coming trend. Smart Car or Nano typr vehicles.

If it's legal I'd ride a go-cart before I'd walk.

I echo kuroyume's points.

Personally I favor electric cars, but really GREAT electric cars. Just think of the reduction in noise, for one thing, in addition to no emissions from the car/truck.  That storage problem, however......can't some of these Quantum Physics genius guys figure out a breakthrough? I also think there is a future for electric generation on peoples roofs, with coatings and hyper-cheap electric-gen systems. Those could pay for themselves without subsidy, possibly.

To make the electricity? I favor clean coal and nuclear. But because of the ill-advised 'social' blockage of building the plants, we are far, far behind now. "France" (as in 'france the concept') has blocked it, but France The Country runs their nation on nuclear! [and one of their reactors does nothing but recycle the spent fuel from the others, resulting in a minimal waste problem]. I call that cultural un-imperialist warfare.

One of the reasons I favor electric powered vehicles and a powerful push to solve the storage problem, is that far future power plants will be way cheaper, way safer, like nuclear fusion and hence continuum of feeding electricity to vehicles and homes for heating/cooling. This reduces manufacturing costs, also, because manufacturing needs electricity, not the burning of fossil fuels.

In the meantime, how about taking the constraints and hobbles off the oil industry here, let them build refineries and prospect/develop new oil fields. That would bring the price down in the medium future.

::::: Opera :::::

P.S. Al Gore's plan for us to go off fossil fuels COMPLETELY in 10 years is sick. I mean, sick in the 'i feel sorry for this delusional soul' type sick.
 

*P.S. Al Gore's plan for us to go off fossil fuels COMPLETELY in 10 years is sick. I mean, sick in the 'i feel sorry for this delusional soul' type sick.

*hehehe
Sure we could do it... with a brand new quadrillion billion budget deficit and a whole new great depression - but the environment will be clean.
Quartering earth's population will have about the same effect (on the environment and on people)

The real trick is doing it without destroying people's quality of life - and that's going to take some time.

Significant fast changes in societies always have negative effects (whether they're social or environmental). History gives us many examples of this.

I found an interesting tidbit about gas prices in most European countries. It's not that they are paying a high price for oil, they seem to be paying similar base prices to the US, however, unlike our government which imposes 10% or 15% tax per gallon, most Euro countries impose 50%-100% tax per gallon. So, if they're paying 9 dollars per gallon, 3-4 or even 5 dollars out of that is government taxes.  Finding that out was pretty enlightening.

If US charged that much in taxes per gallon, perhaps we'd have much better freeways and better public transportation too, and I wouldn't mind it as much.

Right now, it's mostly going to line someone's pockets, or to manipulate public opinions when it comes to energy - just in time for elections. For all I know Bush's oil business buddies are doing it to put pressure on public to help push through his domestic drilling proposals or somesuch thing.

Quote -

Ethanol and other grain-based fuel sources might work for Brazil for a while but are impractical for a nation of 250,000,000 vehicles like the US which is not only the largest ethanol producer in the world but one of the largest producers of grain crops.  We'd need to divert food resources for larger ethanol production.  Ethanol is expensive to create and, although a reusable biofuel, could have a devastating impact in a major crop failure - not only in fuel but in food (which has never happened in the past, ever - he said very sarcastically).

Actually Brazil uses sugar cane to make ethanol, which is a much more efficient process,
as there is more sugar in sugar cane than there is in corn.  With corn it takes about as
much energy to grow and process the corn into ethanol as is gotten out of the ethanol
in energy.  Unfortunately it is too cold in most of the US to grow sugar cane.

dbowers22:  Correct... exactly... yeessss. ;D

Quote - Right now, it's mostly going to line someone's pockets, or to manipulate public opinions when it comes to energy - just in time for elections. For all I know Bush's oil business buddies are doing it to put pressure on public to help push through his domestic drilling proposals or somesuch thing.

Yes, exactly.  This is the big argument over free-enterprise/low-prices/prices-set-at-whim and big-government/regulation/higher-prices (but for higher good hopefully).  One problem with government involvement, as you note, is seeming lack of oversight.  The GAO is supposed to keep track of where tax dollars go and how they are used - but, in the end, we only know about it in the end while getting it in the end (if you follow me).  Iow, if our government is going to impose massive taxes onto fuel prices, there had better be a very stringent control on where that money goes and how it is used.  It sure would be a boost to our ailing transport infrastructure (just heard today on CNN that 1-in-4 (or 25%) of all bridges are in need of repair).  Wait.  Hold on.  Shhh.  I hear the death knell of the 'free' American riding the 2 ton 440 8-cylinder big-block, slurping fuel like a gnat sipping water at a massive lake. ;)  Abusive consumption might be at an end - maybe.

"...most Euro countries impose 50%-100% tax per gallon. .."

That is indeed so. Where I live (Finland), long winters literally annihilate roads if they are not maintained regularly. Tax money is used to maintain road safety. There is also another reason for high fuel taxation in EU. That reason can be summed up as "damage control". If, for any reason, gas prices start to seriously damage the inner workings of EU, EU can use emergency tax reductions to ease things up for the logistic companies. It's like a buffer zone of sorts.

On a totally different note ... there are Toyota-manufactured hydrogen cars (built on Toyota Prius chassis) already in the streets in Norway - and demand is higher than supply. Norway gives significant tax-cuts to buyers of hydrogen cars, parking  is free in cities, and even the hydrogen  (available from certain gas stations) remains free for now. Governments CAN do things if they want.  Most governments still choose  to do nothing.

I don't know if hydrogen is ever going to be a real answer as the fuel of choice for transportation, but is intriguing to realise that California is planning (or perhaps even executing the plans already?) a somewhat similar system in the States than what is now used in Norway. I distinctly remember that about 5 years ago when hydrogen car prototypes were used in Germany, "experts" stated that it will take decades for hydrogen cars to show up available to consumers. It did not take decades. Cars are ready, but their production numbers remain low since governments around the world do not give incentives to buy them. Technology to use these things is already there - only the will to jump in and use these technologies is missing.

You should move to the USA.  Yes.  Do that.  If you want to see a partisan, greedy, lobby-ridden, red-tape government that gets little done at work, welcome! ;)

A somewhat recent study shows that the best form of government is a dictatorship.  Things get done, people are satisfied and happy.  You just have to live with human rights abuses, genocide, and desire to rule the world...

(The reason - in a dictatorship there isn't public opinon, debate, levels of vote and agreement to deal with - the glorious leader always has the power for instant enactment.  Neither the Pyramids nor the Great Wall of China were built by a democracy.)

Oh but the marvels of ancient Greece WERE built by democracies. Not exactly similar to ours today, but democracies nonetheless. 

*"...most Euro countries impose 50%-100% tax per gallon. .."

That is indeed so. Where I live (Finland), long winters literally annihilate roads if they are not maintained regularly. Tax money is used to maintain road safety. There is also another reason for high fuel taxation in EU. That reason can be summed up as "damage control". If, for any reason, gas prices start to seriously damage the inner workings of EU, EU can use emergency tax reductions to ease things up for the logistic companies. It's like a buffer zone of sorts.

That makes more sense. Initially when this thread started, and so many people chimed in with 'what are you complaining about, we're paying a lot more...'  I was left under the impression that somehow US has that much better of a deal on purchasing oil then anyone else, or perhaps at the expense of everyone else.

Now that I know it's more self inflicted (within the domestic policies of each country) rather then US inflicted, I don't feel guilty about it.  I'm hoping at least people got to have a vote in it.

"I'm hoping at least people got to have a vote in it."
Heh well since each and every country in the EU has a democratically elected government, it's fair to say people have had a vote in it. It's just differing systems at work. Gas prices have always been higher than in the States due to taxation. Hence also the small-consumption cars are way more common here than beyond the Atlantic. I imagine high prices of gas - even if the gas itself in US is still dirt cheap compared to EU countries - have a greater economic impact on North American consumers due to high-consumption cars people are accustomed to. 
 

Quote - Oh but the marvels of ancient Greece WERE built by democracies. Not exactly similar to ours today, but democracies nonetheless. 

But Greeks didn't build things that you can see from Earth orbit! :D

It really depends upon the society and how it manages its government (as it were).  The Greeks excelled at just about everything while the Romans borrowed everything from the Greeks.  The Roman great accomplishments happened when they abandoned the Republic for dictatorship (Caesars) - Colliseum, Apian way, aqueducts a-plenty (mainly under Augustus/Octavian), Hadrian's wall, and so on.  Hitler, for all of his pure, unadulterated evil, pushed through the Autobahn (though its real plan wasn't revealed to the people) and the Volkswagen.  Hey, with enough 'poking and prodding' you can even realize the first rockets and jet engines!  There is mounting evidence that China, during the Ming dynasty, had the greatest naval sailing fleet in history up until the 18th century probably.

Free societies can do great things but only with the mediation of their government.  The US (narrowly) won the 'space race' to the Moon by force of will and a salient government intradiction  Note that we can't even get near the moon with a manned mission these days since there is no 'immediate threat' or other provocation.  As Admiral Yamamoto said, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant....".  Meaning, invariably, that it seems to require a pressing need to instigate movement in a free society.  One thing that the Greeks didn't do was promulgate their knowledge and superior society outward with any pressing need - which allowed foreign intervention (Persia, Rome).  The only 'Greek' (Macedonean) who did so was the greatest warrior/leader of history, Alexander the Great.  But an empire built simply on expansionist glory and not intention quickly dissolves - as it did.

Quote - You should move to the USA.  Yes.  Do that.  If you want to see a partisan, greedy, lobby-ridden, red-tape government that gets little done at work, welcome! ;)

A somewhat recent study shows that the best form of government is a dictatorship.  Things get done, people are satisfied and happy.  You just have to live with human rights abuses, genocide, and desire to rule the world...

(The reason - in a dictatorship there isn't public opinon, debate, levels of vote and agreement to deal with - the glorious leader always has the power for instant enactment.  Neither the Pyramids nor the Great Wall of China were built by a democracy.)

methinks that happy middle in government is just about as elusive as a happy balanced life. Only when you step away from it and squint it appears even and balanced.
Up close, there's always sumpthin to deal with.

I was mildly surprised with Al Gore's challenge. It occurred to me that, if John Kennedy could throw down the gauntlet and say we'd walk on the moon within a set time frame, why couldn't someone step up to the plate and do the same for the fuel problem? There is little humans can't do if they focus and stop saying "it can't be done". 

It's interesting to note that Exxon is now running an ad campaign touting their new breakthrough in fuel cell separator membranes. You know darned well they wouldn't spend the money on research or ads if they didn't expect to turn a profit with fuel cell development. Nor would they spend the time and money if they thought they are going to continue to move oil at the current pace. 

Challenges are good - but only in the right hands/framework.  Very unfortunately (eh hem) Al Gore isn't in the position to legislate or execute anything by mandate like JFK (who was President and was, of course, just echoing the hierarchy behind his power - NASA, Pentagon, and so forth).  Since we have Dubya (who doesn't know a shiitehole from a mountain), there ya go.  The leadership is absent.

It is great that private corporations are taking some initiative but I suspect that their reason for such endeavors is more profiteering than philanthropic.  This is why I'm not really pushing such endeavors - currently, these corporations have profits that almost match what the government would fund for a long-term, in-depth project yet they are making 'strides'.  How disingenuous!  With tens of billions of dollars in PROFIT (40.6 BILLLION in 2007 ALONE for Exxon!!!!), they could stop saying 'it can't be done' and do something substantial, but they are too busy lining their mansions with irfrugalless reaping.  This is one downside of commercialism.