Gas Price Outrage!

Everyone loves a healthy debate. Post an idea or comment about a current event or issue. Let others post their ideas also. This area is for those who love to explore other points of view.

Moderator: Nicole Marie

Postby BenODen » Wed Sep 20, 2006 7:58 pm

piqaboo wrote:Can we compare to 05, 04, 03 etc pls?

Ok, I found a source of historic gasoline prices here:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleu ... story.html

and I snipped out mid grade prices by year for Feb, may, aug, sep and oct. Unfortunately my excel Graph fu isn't up to snuff, maybe somebody else can chart this for improved intuition.. Too bad html tables aren't allowed here... Formatting is pretty rough, but this is the data.

Best I can see, there's mostly a summer bump, that doesn't go back down in the fall most years. YOu can see the effects of Y2K (mabye), 9/11, the Iraq war, and Katrina.. Then you have this big huge spike this year which started early and is now easing to some extent after summer... Prudoh bay is late summer, as is The Lebanon-Israel war.. I can't remember any particular incident that tipped things over the edge this year... Oil price history would be the next step.

Year Feb May Aug Sep Oct
1995 117.8 130 123.6 122.1 117.9
1996 118.1 134.8 128.2 127.8 129.5
1997 132.5 127.6 132 131.2 127.4
1998 113 112.4 108.6 107.4 109.1
1999 99.7 117.1 128.7 132.5 132.8
2000 148 158.5 157 161.4 159.3
2001 152.2 171.5 147 150.9 129.2
2002 118.7 145.4 145.8 146.1 151.9
2003 171.3 152.7 177.7 175.2 163
2004 174.6 212.5 195.1 194.3 210.6
2005 198.7 218.7 269.1 295.4 260.7
2006 233.4 295 297 263.7

Edit: Ah, here we go, I'll leave it to someone else to extract the data though. Gas prices don't seem to track well with gas prices. Oil is the same price this month as feb this year, but the gas is 30 cents more expensive. Better to drop them to look good for the election?
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/wtotworldw.htm
If only I could fly on my own wings.
BenODen
3rd Chair
 
Posts: 653
Joined: Fri May 30, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Colorado, YAY

Postby BigJon » Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:48 pm

OperaTenor wrote: I HIGHLY recommend reading Armed Madhouse before voting.

Have you ever met a conspiracy theory that you didn't love?

Here's an article pointing out some of the flaws in Palast's peak oil treatise.
Even a blind nut finds a squirrel once in a while. – Me! Feb 9, 2001
BigJon
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Postby Selma in Sandy Eggo » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:25 am

Seems to me I remember the price of gas going down a couple of months before every election. Doesn't seem to matter what party is in power, what the talking points are this time around, whether there's a war or a depression or a hurricane.

Whichever party is in power always seems to claim credit for it, though. Politicians. They're dependable. :curse:
>^..^<
Selma in Sandy Eggo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6273
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:01 am
Location: San Diego

Postby OperaTenor » Thu Sep 21, 2006 1:54 am

BigJon wrote:
OperaTenor wrote: I HIGHLY recommend reading Armed Madhouse before voting.

Have you ever met a conspiracy theory that you didn't love?

Here's an article pointing out some of the flaws in Palast's peak oil treatise.


Why don't you try reading the book before you take potshots at it? You don't even know what it really says. Beyond ignorant.

As for the link, the guy's incredibly defensive because Palast debunks Peak Oil, but ends up agreeing with Palast on all of the major points. The letter writer is an environmentalist who uses Peak Oil to scare his listeners into conservation, and doesn't like having his talisman stained. He essentially did nothing more than voice his dissenting opinion.

However, the numbers don't lie. We are, at the very least 800 billion barrles over Hubbert's projection. That's more than a slight misunderestimation, as your darling president would say.

Besides, since when did you become a proponent of Peak Oil?

Here is a more current depiction of projected depletion curves:
Image

All of those scenarios extend well beyond Hubbert's.

Image

Or is it that you just don't like Greg Palast?

Maybe it's you who's enjoying being sucked in by a conspiracy theory.
"To help mend the world is true religion."
- William Penn

http://www.one.org
OperaTenor
Patron
 
Posts: 10457
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Paradise with Piq & Altoid, southern California

Postby barfle » Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:10 am

I remember paying 25.9¢ per gallon while the Democrats were in power. Clearly, this is all the Bush administration's fault.
--I know what I like--
barfle
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Springfield, Vahjinyah, USA

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:15 am

Image

How come the OPEC 2004 curve is missing? It's listed in the key but does not appear on the graph. It should be shown in cerulean, according to the key.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby GreatCarouser » Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:41 am

Shapley wrote:How come the OPEC 2004 curve is missing? It's listed in the key but does not appear on the graph. It should be shown in cerulean, according to the key.


Darn! Cerulean is my fourth favorite color! Right behind puce,mauve, and chartreuse! :curse: :rant:
Sacred cows make the best hamburger.
Mark Twain
GreatCarouser
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 12:01 am
Location: Semi-permanent Vacation CA

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:54 am

'puce' sounds sort of sick.

'Mauve' is just mauvelous.

I had a glass of chartreuse the other night with my dinner.

Didn't Captain Kirk battle the Ceruleans on the old Star Trek series?

V/R
Shapley
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 9:55 am

I also like 'Magenta', the name sounds sort of attractive.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:01 am

I think I sometimes get 'cerulean' and 'cyan' confused. I suppose the OPEC line, if it were there, would actually be 'cyan', which is currently faced with a military coup.

I enjoyed the original "Anna and the King of Cyan', but the Jody Foster Remake wasn't up to the original. Yun-Fat Chow is no Yul Brenner, although he looked more Cyanese than Yul did.

V/R
Shapley
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby OperaTenor » Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:24 am

I see the Shap/*igJon hip joint is still intact.

I suppose since the OPEC line isn't apparent or maybe missing, the entire graph is invalid.
"To help mend the world is true religion."
- William Penn

http://www.one.org
OperaTenor
Patron
 
Posts: 10457
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Paradise with Piq & Altoid, southern California

Postby Catmando » Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:39 am

Ok, all of you admit it. This ISN'T about gas prices at all.

C'mon, we all know this is just an excuse so that you can all paste fancy schmancy graphs and trend charts!

:roll:
Catmando
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:01 am

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:46 am

I suppose since the OPEC line isn't apparent or maybe missing, the entire graph is invalid.


I've made no statements on the validity or lack thereof, I merely asked why it wasn't included in the graph since it's included in the key.

V/R
Shapley
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby OperaTenor » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:01 pm

So, since you're still proxying for *igJon, you accept that Peak Oil is inaccurate by a vast underestimation?
"To help mend the world is true religion."
- William Penn

http://www.one.org
OperaTenor
Patron
 
Posts: 10457
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Paradise with Piq & Altoid, southern California

Postby barfle » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:13 pm

Catmando wrote:Ok, all of you admit it. This ISN'T about gas prices at all.

C'mon, we all know this is just an excuse so that you can all paste fancy schmancy graphs and trend charts!

:roll:


Have you seen the pics of my laundry room over in the "Projects" thread?
:victory:
--I know what I like--
barfle
1st Chair
 
Posts: 6144
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2001 1:01 am
Location: Springfield, Vahjinyah, USA

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:19 pm

OT,

All I really know about the 'peak oil theory' is what I've read here and on the links. From what I gather, it is erroneous.

Ever since the oil crisis of the '70s we've had various experts telling us that we're running out of oil. The fact of the matter is that we will run out someday, given that the rate of new creation of oil reserves is minute, and our consumption of known reserves is high. I don't see it happening anytime soon. The problem with the doomsday theorists is that they think we are locked in to oil because we lack the ability to switch to other means, rather than acknowledging that we use oil because it is the cheapest source of energy. As the cost of oil use rises (and it will as easily-extractable sources diminish), we will begin to switch to alternatives to oil based on the economics of doing so.

BTW, here's more on non-OPEC oil production:

Department of Energy on Non-OPEC Oil Production

V/R
Shapley
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby Catmando » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:37 pm

barfle wrote:
Catmando wrote:Ok, all of you admit it. This ISN'T about gas prices at all.

C'mon, we all know this is just an excuse so that you can all paste fancy schmancy graphs and trend charts!

:roll:


Have you seen the pics of my laundry room over in the "Projects" thread?
:victory:


Yes I have barfle, and I know what that project thread is all about! It's all about showing off fancy pictures of houses, power tools (arrrrrrgh!!Tim the Tool Man Taylor emoticon), etc.

:mrgreen:
Catmando
1st Chair
 
Posts: 2866
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2006 1:01 am

Postby Shapley » Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:07 pm

From the DOE link posted earlier, here is the table of proved oil reserves.
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Shapley
Patron
 
Posts: 15196
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 1:01 am
Location: Cape Girardeau, MO

Postby piqaboo » Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:15 pm

OT, can you provide a link to the source of that more current projections graph? I'm in a graphing frame of mind and want to track down that elusive cyan-ical band.
Altoid - curiously strong.
piqaboo
1st Chair
 
Posts: 7135
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Paradise (So. Cal.)

Postby BigJon » Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:52 pm

OperaTenor wrote: Why don't you try reading the book before you take potshots at it? You don't even know what it really says. Beyond ignorant.

I didn't take a single potshot at it because I didn't read it. I did google the book title and read some commentary on it. Even the people who love the book say it has conspiracy theories in it. I don't have time to read books by conspiracy theorists. The vast majority of them are as valuable as the pseudo-intellectual parlor games that our Victorian forefathers engaged in when they thought they had become educated. Point me to a grand conspiracy theory that involves more than 20 people with secret knowledge that has proven to be genuine in the last 50 years.

OperaTenor wrote: As for the link, the guy's incredibly defensive because Palast debunks Peak Oil, but ends up agreeing with Palast on all of the major points. The letter writer is an environmentalist who uses Peak Oil to scare his listeners into conservation, and doesn't like having his talisman stained. He essentially did nothing more than voice his dissenting opinion.

I just provided the link as a service to the readers. No opinions offered by my one way or the other.

OperaTenor wrote: However, the numbers don't lie. We are, at the very least 800 billion barrels over Hubbert's projection. That's more than a slight misunderestimation, as your darling president would say.

Bush is not my darling

OperaTenor wrote: Besides, since when did you become a proponent of Peak Oil?

Huh!? I don't understand you. What did I propo?

OperaTenor wrote: Or is it that you just don't like Greg Palast?

Maybe it's you who's enjoying being sucked in by a conspiracy theory.

I don't like conspiracy theorists in general. When I was younger I used to get sucked into the emotional seductiveness of many conspiracy theories. (You should have seen my bookshelf on the Kennedy assassination.) "The men of gray and mist are controlling your lives. They are only letting you see what they want you to see. Beware! How can you be such a dupe!" Etc. etc. etc. As I matured and stopped allowing others to think for me, I found most conspiracy theories to be laughable in construction and untenable. I believe people who often fall for conspiracy theories to be intellectually immature or mentally ill.
Even a blind nut finds a squirrel once in a while. – Me! Feb 9, 2001
BigJon
2nd Chair
 
Posts: 1158
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 12:01 am
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

PreviousNext

Return to The Debate Team

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot]

cron