Invisapeeps 2.0

winds55 wrote:

---

Actually, Richard, lower gas prices are not a godsend to "pretty much everyone else".
There's the very real economic problem of un- and underemployment in areas with a lot of oil and refinery related jobs. Not just for those directly employed by oil companies, but all the jobs in the area are at risk.
There's the reduced dollars going to the states for road repairs because of reduced sales tax being paid.
Then there's the fact that people in the US are not paying anything close to what oil use really costs - and the lower the cost of gas, the more people will drive big trucks, SUVs and other gas-guzzlers with abandon. The environmental costs are enormous.

---

Actually, winds, the oil and refinery people are the exception to my statement. I was pretty clear with that when I said "I can see how that could be an issue for them. I do feel sorry for them."

Most people ("pretty much everyone else") in this country are not in the oil production or oil production equipment supply businesses... in any way-shape-or-form. And you'd be wrong about the impact lower prices on gas has on them, at least in most states.

Gas taxes aren't "dollar based" they are "gallon based". $1.95 gas has the same amount of taxes on it as $3.87 or $4.55 gas does. (this link might help you understand that), so lower gas prices could actually INCREASE tax revenue if more people use more gas because it's more affordable.

winds55 wrote:

---

Richard, the only one not understanding is you. I'm not ignorant, nor am I heartless. Too bad the same can't be said for you.

---

You may not be heartless (that's in doubt though, considering how you just love to jab at others), but when it comes to gas taxes you are, indeed, ignorant... as I proved (more fuel consumption due to lower prices would actually INCREASE tax revenue, because gas taxes are by the gallon).

On the other hand, I am actually neither ignorant nor heartless.

I don't know how true it is, but, I recently came across some sort of ad/article on some sort of new fuel made from sand (Google "new fuel from sand to replace oil") that's supposed to kill oil as a fuel in the near future. Is it possible there could be some credibility to this and the lower price is OPEC's way of trying to defer research into this new fuel as long as possible?

I've always said we need to get off of oil/gas (sooner or later the oil WILL run out, there's no denying that) and the only way to do that was to make the research into something else a priority... something that the overpricing of gas could easily have caused.

Diesel engines run great on used fryer oil (they can be "tweaked" a little to run better... but no extra parts are needed or tweaking is required to get them to work)... as long as you strain out anything "non-liquid".

This is an interesting Mythbusters clip on a car running on used fryer oil:

Me too... except when they get them wrong... LOL.

(my favorite one they got wrong was: They said "busted" to "Can a car stereo really destroy the car that houses it?". I've seen it happen back in the early 90's at a car stereo "sound-off" competition (blew out all the windows, warped the door frame and rattled the car so badly over about 5 minutes that several panels fell off and various things had to be tightened that had come loose in the engine bay), so I KNOW it's possible. They (Adam and Jamie) created a huge "speaker" that was "driven" by the car's engine via the drive shaft... and when it didn't break the windows they called it "busted" {even though their "speaker" failed due to extremely poor design in just a few seconds!}.)