The Power of Sports on a City a Community

[Hammer58]

_ Name another industry that price fixes on a routine basis only to generate "windfall" profits. I cant. _

Define "windfall profit". Ihear that term thrown around a lot by those oppossed to the oil & gas industry but have never seen it defined. The lefties like to throw out the total dollar figure made by the O&G industry but they never want to discuss the dollars expended to find and produce that product. I bet if we compare expenditures to income we will find many other eenterprises that generate a greater windfall in terms of expense versus income. Without having done any hard research, I think it would be a safe bet that Oprah, Tom Cruise and many of the other liberal elites (especially the windbags in the Congress) would generate a much larger "windfall profit" as a percentage of the expenditure to generate their "product".

And before you go railing against the oil & gas industry you might want to take a look around at your own life and see how many products and essential itmes in your life are made with or depend on the energy and pertochemical industry for their existence. Unless you are willing to give all of that up you are a hypocrite.

[CajunSaint]

_ Define "windfall profit". Ihear that term thrown around a lot by those oppossed to the oil & gas industry but have never seen it defined. The lefties like to throw out the total dollar figure made by the O&G industry but they never want to discuss the dollars expended to find and produce that product. I bet if we compare expenditures to income we will find many other eenterprises that generate a greater windfall in terms of expense versus income. Without having done any hard research, I think it would be a safe bet that Oprah, Tom Cruise and many of the other liberal elites (especially the windbags in the Congress) would generate a much larger "windfall profit" as a percentage of the expenditure to generate their "product".

And before you go railing against the oil & gas industry you might want to take a look around at your own life and see how many products and essential itmes in your life are made with or depend on the energy and pertochemical industry for their existence. Unless you are willing to give all of that up you are a hypocrite. _

just a question about your last assertion: why do we have to be so dependent on this resource at all? why can't we develop alternatives rather than being always held hostage by one single resource? i agree that we depend on the petrochemical industry for much of what we take for granted in our lives. but, let's be realistic, we saw this train of over-dependency on a non-renewable resource coming down the track a long time ago. why did it take so long for us to develop some sense of urgency, if we have developed one at all. not arguing; merely musing.

[VObserver]

_ just a question about your last assertion: why do we have to be so dependent on this resource at all? why can't we develop alternatives rather than being always held hostage by one single resource? i agree that we depend on the petrochemical industry for much of what we take for granted in our lives. but, let's be realistic, we saw this train of over-dependency on a non-renewable resource coming down the track a long time ago. why did it take so long for us to develop some sense of urgency, if we have developed one at all. not arguing; merely musing. _

To answer the question: It did not take long. 30 years ago there was extensive testing done on geopressure and geothermal resources for energy production right here in Louisiana. Nuclear power was introduced to generate electricity almost before the mushroom cloud dissipated over Nagasaki. Hydroelectic power was widely implemented during the Great Depression. Wind and/or water powered tubines have been providing significant sources of clean and renewable energy for over 600 years. The freaking street cars in New Orleans and subways in most major cities have used electricity since the beginning of time. [Now, that electricity has been produced by gas or coal fired plants, but that is not the fault of the technology, and the opportunity is there to use nuke or hydro.]

The problem is not the lack of available technology: the problem is the morons in government who block TVA from building the largest power station in their system because it will destroy the habitat for a fish that NO ONE had ever heard of until the stoppage [the snail darter]. Or the ones who do not allow the construction of new nuclear powerplants in the US or of new hydroelectric plants in California, but DO allow the building of a natural gas fired plant near Eunice [which uses our drinking water aquafer for freaking cooling water!!!] to send electricity to California. Or the ones who will not allow the building of a wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts, and who now want to block new wind farms in other areas because of a perceived [though not real] danger to birds.

There is also a lack of understanding in the general public that virtually ALL serious research into alternative energy is either done by or funded by Energy companies [Exxon/Mobil, Chevron Texaco, T-Boone Pickens folks, Amoco/BP], or companies that make Energy producing/using products [GE, ABB, etc].

And the public also doesn't understand that research costs must be recouped; that EVERY energy source has hidden costs, economic and environmental; or that Industry as a whole has a right to a reasonable return on investment.

Then again, the public also doesn't understand that just about the most barren environment on earth is a mature stand of virgin redwoods; while one of the most vibrant, life-filled and dynamic environments is a forest 5 years after clear cutting or major forest fire, but that's another topic.

Government talks: Industry does.

[CajunSaint]

vo, you make some good points with your historical references. i vividly remember the snail darter controversy. and i realize how long we have been aware of the power of water. my question still remains: why are we, in the year of our lord, 2009, still so overly dependent on a resource that we will eventually go to war for, if we have'nt already? i realize that the petro corps. are all into alternatives. but do you really think they're in a big rush to develop a source that will supplant oil? gradually, over a period of time, yes. but now? i don't think so. unless it looks like someone will beat them to the punch. fusion? anyway, good dialogue. you and hammer have me thinking. just when i have the mets, nuggets, and college softball on the tube.

[Hammer58]

_ just a question about your last assertion: why do we have to be so dependent on this resource at all? why can't we develop alternatives rather than being always held hostage by one single resource? i agree that we depend on the petrochemical industry for much of what we take for granted in our lives. but, let's be realistic, we saw this train of over-dependency on a non-renewable resource coming down the track a long time ago. why did it take so long for us to develop some sense of urgency, if we have developed one at all. not arguing; merely musing. _

I do not dispute the need or value of finding alternative enrgy sources. But I would at leaast like to see the political demogoguery (sp?) taken out of the discussion. And like VO I'd like to see the government get out of the discussion or at least not be so hevy handed. We also can't change from fossil fuels to whatever new source (and no one seems to have settled on which source is going to be the next format) overnight. If the new energy format is going to be electric where, as VO has pointed out, is the elctricity going to come from? Is Obama ready to fly in the new electric Air Force One? Or how about a solar Air Force One? Better avoid those cloud banks. In addition, is everyone ready to alter their lifestyles? Because stoping to charge your electric car every 40 miles is really going to put a kink in your shcedule. Or how about squeezing your big American body into that tiny little SMART car for a long trip acroos the country much less around town? And the argument goes beyond fuel. There are numerous other items that people rely on for everyday usage that use materials derived from the petrochemical industry. For those of us who toil in this industry and provide a product and service that everyone relies on, including all of those windbag politicians who have no clue as to what it takes to recover this resource, the demonizing of our industry, profession, co-workers and ourselves gets old.

When Nancy, Waxman, Obama and all the other "environmentalists" start walking or riding horses as their mode of travel while wearing hemp clothing and shunning any other item derived from hydrocarbons and the pertochemical industry then maybe I'll start taking them seriously.

[Cajunsmike]

I do not dispute the need or value of finding alternative enrgy sources. But I would at leaast like to see the political demogoguery (sp?) taken out of the discussion. And like VO I'd like to see the government get out of the discussion or at least not be so hevy handed. We also can't change from fossil fuels to whatever new source (and no one seems to have settled on which source is going to be the next format) overnight. If the new energy format is going to be electric where, as VO has pointed out, is the elctricity going to come from? Is Obama ready to fly in the new electric Air Force One? Or how about a solar Air Force One? Better avoid those cloud banks. In addition, is everyone ready to alter their lifestyles? Because stoping to charge your electric car every 40 miles is really going to put a kink in your shcedule. Or how about squeezing your big American body into that tiny little SMART car for a long trip acroos the country much less around town? And the argument goes beyond fuel. There are numerous other items that people rely on for everyday usage that use materials derived from the petrochemical industry. For those of us who toil in this industry and provide a product and service that everyone relies on, including all of those windbag politicians who have no clue as to what it takes to recover this resource, the demonizing of our industry, profession, co-workers and ourselves gets old.

When Nancy, Waxman, Obama and all the other "environmentalists" start walking or riding horses as their mode of travel while wearing hemp clothing and shunning any other item derived from hydrocarbons and the pertochemical industry then maybe I'll start taking them seriously.

The reason we are still so dependent on petroleum for our standard of living is simple, no other product is nearly as economic. Even if wind and solar were to triple their output, it would still be less than 10% of the energy supply. For that to happen, oil will have to go up substantially The % I just described is what Hammer was alluding when he said transition time is needed for alternate energy sources to have impact. Were oil to stablilize over $100/bbl, alternate sources become more attractive. The OPEC countries know this and would increase production to stop that from happening. That is in the short term. Once India and China have their economies revitalized, energy consumption may reach a point that OPEC can't produce enough to prevent large increases in the price. One way to address that is to allow multinational companies into their fields again due to the technology they bring. That of course may be difficult for them to swallow. Hammer brings up electrical use. Much of electricity will come from natural gas in the future as it is a cleaner burning fuel than coal. Guess how you get natural gas. The same way and in many of the same places you get oil. You have to drill for it. Also, natural gas is a hydrocarbon. It is simply oil which has converted due to pressure and temperature changes. I laugh every time Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore say we have to get away from hyrdocarbons and use more things like natural gas. Those folks are supposedly some of the brightest minds in America. In reality they are not much different than Rosie O Donnell who believes 9/11 was a conspiracy as fire can't burn steel.

[Hammer58]

_ The reason we are still so dependent on petroleum for our standard of living is simple, no other product is nearly as economic. Even if wind and solar were to triple their output, it would still be less than 10% of the energy supply. For that to happen, oil will have to go up substantially The % I just described is what Hammer was alluding when he said transition time is needed for alternate energy sources to have impact. Were oil to stablilize over $100/bbl, alternate sources become more attractive. The OPEC countries know this and would increase production to stop that from happening. That is in the short term. Once India and China have their economies revitalized, energy consumption may reach a point that OPEC can't produce enough to prevent large increases in the price. One way to address that is to allow multinational companies into their fields again due to the technology they bring. That of course may be difficult for them to swallow. Hammer brings up electrical use. Much of electricity will come from natural gas in the future as it is a cleaner burning fuel than coal. Guess how you get natural gas. The same way and in many of the same places you get oil. You have to drill for it. Also, natural gas is a hydrocarbon. It is simply oil which has converted due to pressure and temperature changes. I laugh every time Nancy Pelosi and Al Gore say we have to get away from hyrdocarbons and use more things like natural gas. Those folks are supposedly some of the brightest minds in America. In reality they are not much different than Rosie O Donnell who believes 9/11 was a conspiracy as fire can't burn steel. _

Plus you have the question of which alternative surce will be the standard. that has not been settled. That doesn't mean you can't have different methods for different things such as one alternative source for power grids and a different type for transportation. But within one sector such as transportation you pretty much have to settle on a standard. Otherwise you have to have fuel (recharging) stations and maintenence facilities for a myriad of diverse propulsion systems. Right now you have proponents of agri-fuels, bio-fuels, hydrogen, recycled animal and vegetable oils, electridc, solar and wind energy. Which is it going to be? Before we just jump into ask yourself if you want to be the guy that buys the auto equivalent of Beta when suddenly the VHS-equivalent propulsion system corners the market and suddenly Beta refueling systems are scarce.

When the Dear Leader, Obama, is ready to give up his gas guzzling luxury Cadillac Escalade for an armored two seater SMART car or a used-vegetable oil burning armored go-kart, I'll consider turning in my pickup.

[Just1More]

What is going on with this alternative fuels "strategy" is that politicians and the general population are not scientists and engineers and have not got a single clue what they are talking about. The oil industry conspiracy theories... "monopoly nonsense"... has been disproved around the globe now for the past 40 years... 1000 times over. Countries with monsterous programs researching alternative fuels... and if you can't believe that China, India, Japan, and most of Europe have not tried to figure out a way to come up with an alternate source of energy in every imaginable way... you are a moron.

When you refine a barrel of oil... the components that emerge are unimaginable to the products we utilize in every walk of life. You do not crack a barrel of oil into the numerous hydrocarbon chains and leave anything to waste. In order to get what we aren't discussing doing away with... you get the rest. The ignorance of our "shutting off oil as the primary source of fuel and so much more" is so shortsighted, it borders on retardation. A refinery makes a huge amount of gasoline, diesel, kerosene and avjet just from boiling oil... the initial treatment. We are not going to get plastics, polymers and everything else that goes into medical, fabric, home and automotive and everything else... out of wind, hydro, solar or any of the other elements in our surroundings.

And yes... just like in the housing industry... the market goes down... it hammers 500 other support businesses. The same is true of the oil industry. It is far more reaching into the entire US business culture, for good or bad, than people realize. If the public thinks the price of gasoline is far reaching... just wait to see what the price of jacking the oil industry (a global business) around in this kindergarden approach to "alternative fuels utopia" does to their lives. It isn't going to happen anyway... but watch how much our politicians mess things up in order to find out what they can't ever learn.

Is the general public so stupid after all these years to believe that some other element is yet to be discovered on earth or reachable space... or that scientists haven't attempted just about every chemical combination to transform sources of energy into safe, practical human contraptions? When they talk of alternatives... how about miraculously coming up with an alternative to oxygen. It is one step off of that ridiculous. Even battery materials require petroleum bi-products. The proposed arguments are so non-scientific... the general dumbass public, politicians, and the media are talking pure nonsense. We have entered a zone in our human existence where too many are the recipients of such unbelievable wonders of modern science without having a clue as to how they got them. The general public is so ignorant now... despite being the operators of "Star Trek gadgets"... they don't even realize they are lacking the common sense of a chromagnon man.

We can go back to sticks and stones... "that" is the more probable route. The US, in order to curb the dependence on foreign oil has but limited, practical measures at its disposal. And the word is "curb". More fuel efficient automobiles (gee, that took a lot of thinking)... and that is a decade process when you are in a huge recession. Second, we need to build more nuclear energy facilities... which we are starting to do... another decade process... and who do you think was blocking that path in the last 2 decades... the same neanderthals in the Democratic party that can't figure out what to do about our climate propoganda and CO2 emissions. The other path is by federal "encouragement" for oil drilling off the Florida and California coasts... and in Alaska. You talk about putting people to work while you slowly curtail the use of gas and diesel, work on clean coal and other processing technologies that clean up green house gases... there are a lot of ways to work on these items than to ignorantly go on some stupid "green mission" to tax the crap out of our incredibly large and far-reaching petroleum industry and a population with a megolithic tax burden they have yet to realize.

I haven't even touched on the severity of how stupid and non-scientific the left has approached this subject. The bottom line is... the only people that need be asked... and the others need to shut up... are scientists and engineers that have worked in the petroleum and alternative industry theatres... ask those that are no longer in the industry... if you are so conspiracy-minded (and those people are generally the most ignorant souls I've ever encountered) make certain that they have no monetary or political gain for speaking the absolute truth. They will tell you without a shadow of a doubt what the only practical path forwards are. These absolutely stupid politicians, public blowhards, and university "never have done anything directly in those industries" spokespeople do not have a clue.

Politicians have given the dumbed down public this belief that we can bulldoze trillions of dollars in US infrastructure, and yet achieve tax growth while it declines, while in a monster recession, and convert our economy into alternative businesses... in order to climb out of this deep recession. Can you believe this stupidity?

Ummm... Geaux Cajuns!

[Zeebart21]

_ What is going on with this alternative fuels "strategy" is that politicians and the general population are not scientists and engineers and have not got a single clue what they are talking about. The oil industry conspiracy theories... "monopoly nonsense"... has been disproved around the globe now for the past 40 years... 1000 times over. Countries with monsterous programs researching alternative fuels... and if you can't believe that China, India, Japan, and most of Europe have not tried to figure out a way to come up with an alternate source of energy in every imaginable way... you are a moron.

When you refine a barrel of oil... the components that emerge are unimaginable to the products we utilize in every walk of life. You do not crack a barrel of oil into the numerous hydrocarbon chains and leave anything to waste. In order to get what we aren't discussing doing away with... you get the rest. The ignorance of our "shutting off oil as the primary source of fuel and so much more" is so shortsighted, it borders on retardation. A refinery makes a huge amount of gasoline, diesel, kerosene and avjet just from boiling oil... the initial treatment. We are not going to get plastics, polymers and everything else that goes into medical, fabric, home and automotive and everything else... out of wind, hydro, solar or any of the other elements in our surroundings.

And yes... just like in the housing industry... the market goes down... it hammers 500 other support businesses. The same is true of the oil industry. It is far more reaching into the entire US business culture, for good or bad, than people realize. If the public thinks the price of gasoline is far reaching... just wait to see what the price of jacking the oil industry (a global business) around in this kindergarden approach to "alternative fuels utopia" does to their lives. It isn't going to happen anyway... but watch how much our politicians mess things up in order to find out what they can't ever learn.

Is the general public so stupid after all these years to believe that some other element is yet to be discovered on earth or reachable space... or that scientists haven't attempted just about every chemical combination to transform sources of energy into safe, practical human contraptions? When they talk of alternatives... how about miraculously coming up with an alternative to oxygen. It is one step off of that ridiculous. Even battery materials require petroleum bi-products. The proposed arguments are so non-scientific... the general dumbass public, politicians, and the media are talking pure nonsense. We have entered a zone in our human existence where too many are the recipients of such unbelievable wonders of modern science without having a clue as to how they got them. The general public is so ignorant now... despite being the operators of "Star Trek gadgets"... they don't even realize they are lacking the common sense of a chromagnon man.

We can go back to sticks and stones... "that" is the more probable route. The US, in order to curb the dependence on foreign oil has but limited, practical measures at its disposal. And the word is "curb". More fuel efficient automobiles (gee, that took a lot of thinking)... and that is a decade process when you are in a huge recession. Second, we need to build more nuclear energy facilities... which we are starting to do... another decade process... and who do you think was blocking that path in the last 2 decades... the same neanderthals in the Democratic party that can't figure out what to do about our climate propoganda and CO2 emissions. The other path is by federal "encouragement" for oil drilling off the Florida and California coasts... and in Alaska. You talk about putting people to work while you slowly curtail the use of gas and diesel, work on clean coal and other processing technologies that clean up green house gases... there are a lot of ways to work on these items than to ignorantly go on some stupid "green mission" to tax the crap out of our incredibly large and far-reaching petroleum industry and a population with a megolithic tax burden they have yet to realize.

I haven't even touched on the severity of how stupid and non-scientific the left has approached this subject. The bottom line is... the only people that need be asked... and the others need to shut up... are scientists and engineers that have worked in the petroleum and alternative industry theatres... ask those that are no longer in the industry... if you are so conspiracy-minded (and those people are generally the most ignorant souls I've ever encountered) make certain that they have no monetary or political gain for speaking the absolute truth. They will tell you without a shadow of a doubt what the only practical path forwards are. These absolutely stupid politicians, public blowhards, and university "never have done anything directly in those industries" spokespeople do not have a clue.

Politicians have given the dumbed down public this belief that we can bulldoze trillions of dollars in US infrastructure, and yet achieve tax growth while it declines, while in a monster recession, and convert our economy into alternative businesses... in order to climb out of this deep recession. Can you believe this stupidity?

Ummm... Geaux Cajuns! _

never mind, you guys have covered it. Now lets discuss the marvels of Cap and trade, and clean coal technology!

Z

[Cajunsmike]

_ never mind, you guys have covered it. Now lets discuss the marvels of Cap and trade, and clean coal technology!

Z _

I would love to see a debate between Al Gore and Just 1 More. Al won't know what hit him. Those politicians don't have a chance when they go against people with technical knowledge. At times they talk to scientists who lean to their point of view but never someone who know a little about how business works.

[Hammer58]

_ I would love to see a debate between Al Gore and Just 1 More. Al won't know what hit him. Those politicians don't have a chance when they go against people with technical knowledge. At times they talk to scientists who lean to their point of view but never someone who know a little about how business works. _

And any scientist who disagrees with Al's global warning (oh, wait we had to change the termonology to "climate change" when someone pointed out the colder winters and data showing a cooling of the earth) is branded an evil, paid dupe of the oil conglomorate conspiracy.

[Hammer58]

_ What is going on with this alternative fuels "strategy" is that politicians and the general population are not scientists and engineers and have not got a single clue what they are talking about. The oil industry conspiracy theories... "monopoly nonsense"... has been disproved around the globe now for the past 40 years... 1000 times over. Countries with monsterous programs researching alternative fuels... and if you can't believe that China, India, Japan, and most of Europe have not tried to figure out a way to come up with an alternate source of energy in every imaginable way... you are a moron.

When you refine a barrel of oil... the components that emerge are unimaginable to the products we utilize in every walk of life. You do not crack a barrel of oil into the numerous hydrocarbon chains and leave anything to waste. In order to get what we aren't discussing doing away with... you get the rest. The ignorance of our "shutting off oil as the primary source of fuel and so much more" is so shortsighted, it borders on retardation. A refinery makes a huge amount of gasoline, diesel, kerosene and avjet just from boiling oil... the initial treatment. We are not going to get plastics, polymers and everything else that goes into medical, fabric, home and automotive and everything else... out of wind, hydro, solar or any of the other elements in our surroundings.

And yes... just like in the housing industry... the market goes down... it hammers 500 other support businesses. The same is true of the oil industry. It is far more reaching into the entire US business culture, for good or bad, than people realize. If the public thinks the price of gasoline is far reaching... just wait to see what the price of jacking the oil industry (a global business) around in this kindergarden approach to "alternative fuels utopia" does to their lives. It isn't going to happen anyway... but watch how much our politicians mess things up in order to find out what they can't ever learn.

Is the general public so stupid after all these years to believe that some other element is yet to be discovered on earth or reachable space... or that scientists haven't attempted just about every chemical combination to transform sources of energy into safe, practical human contraptions? When they talk of alternatives... how about miraculously coming up with an alternative to oxygen. It is one step off of that ridiculous. Even battery materials require petroleum bi-products. The proposed arguments are so non-scientific... the general dumbass public, politicians, and the media are talking pure nonsense. We have entered a zone in our human existence where too many are the recipients of such unbelievable wonders of modern science without having a clue as to how they got them. The general public is so ignorant now... despite being the operators of "Star Trek gadgets"... they don't even realize they are lacking the common sense of a chromagnon man.

We can go back to sticks and stones... "that" is the more probable route. The US, in order to curb the dependence on foreign oil has but limited, practical measures at its disposal. And the word is "curb". More fuel efficient automobiles (gee, that took a lot of thinking)... and that is a decade process when you are in a huge recession. Second, we need to build more nuclear energy facilities... which we are starting to do... another decade process... and who do you think was blocking that path in the last 2 decades... the same neanderthals in the Democratic party that can't figure out what to do about our climate propoganda and CO2 emissions. The other path is by federal "encouragement" for oil drilling off the Florida and California coasts... and in Alaska. You talk about putting people to work while you slowly curtail the use of gas and diesel, work on clean coal and other processing technologies that clean up green house gases... there are a lot of ways to work on these items than to ignorantly go on some stupid "green mission" to tax the crap out of our incredibly large and far-reaching petroleum industry and a population with a megolithic tax burden they have yet to realize.

I haven't even touched on the severity of how stupid and non-scientific the left has approached this subject. The bottom line is... the only people that need be asked... and the others need to shut up... are scientists and engineers that have worked in the petroleum and alternative industry theatres... ask those that are no longer in the industry... if you are so conspiracy-minded (and those people are generally the most ignorant souls I've ever encountered) make certain that they have no monetary or political gain for speaking the absolute truth. They will tell you without a shadow of a doubt what the only practical path forwards are. These absolutely stupid politicians, public blowhards, and university "never have done anything directly in those industries" spokespeople do not have a clue.

Politicians have given the dumbed down public this belief that we can bulldoze trillions of dollars in US infrastructure, and yet achieve tax growth while it declines, while in a monster recession, and convert our economy into alternative businesses... in order to climb out of this deep recession. Can you believe this stupidity?

Ummm... Geaux Cajuns! _

Well said. Thanks.