You're absolutely right. That's why we've just been handed the nations 
first faith-based energy strategy.

Jim

On Apr 28, 2005, at 1:13 PM, Gabriel Ross wrote:

> OK, I've got to jump in here. The industry is acknowledging that 
> fossil fuels will run out IN OUR LIFETIME. More refineries might hold 
> down prices but does nothing about this underlying issue. As the oil 
> and natural gas runs out, it becomes harder and harder, and thus more 
> expensive, to obtain. Guess who will bear the costs? Using closed army 
> bases is a good solution to the problem of refinery placement, I 
> agree, but why aren't we looking very, very hard at alternative fuels 
> and alternative energy generation? Do a google search on "peak oil." 
> Five years ago, the major players were calling anybody talking about 
> peak oil foolish and crazy environmentalists; now, their own analysts 
> are saying there is a problem looming. (With sarcasm) Do you really 
> think so? Think on this: before the "discovery" of oil, the planet 
> supported around two billion people. Now, the planet's population is 
> over six billion. What do you imagine will happen when agri-business 
> doesn't have the energy to continue current production levels, or get 
> product to market?
>
> I'm with John Rogers who said, "Careful, careful, careful......it's 
> taking all I can do to keep my soapbox under the table and rant podium 
> in the closet."
>
> Gabriel
> Nor CA Sierras
> '84 Westy
>
>
> At 11:43 AM 4/28/2005 -0600, jimt wrote:
>> Interesting thing on the news last night.  Seems most of the US 
>> refineries
>> are right at max output and some are actually pushing past safety 
>> limits to
>> meet demand.  No new refineries have been built since the 70s.  The
>> restrictions on where and how to build them has made it way to 
>> expensive to
>> build a new one and takes to many years to do the paperwork.  To 
>> build a new
>> refinery they would need a crystal ball that sees ten years into the 
>> future
>> and hundreds of millions to fight the green people and meet the 
>> current
>> placement laws.  Part of the Bush fuels rules proposed would open old 
>> Air
>> Bases for development by refiners.  This actually makes sense because 
>> a lot
>> of these bases were also on the pipe lines.
>> Jimt
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/28/05 10:21, "Jim Felder" <felder@KNOLOGY.NET> wrote:
>>
>> > Don't forget that China is getting big into agribusiness and is an
>> > exporter of farm goods now. Of course all that runs on diesel, as it
>> > does in India, to name two growing, diesel-based economies. And with
>> > snow just off the ground in parts of the US, a cold spring also pits
>> > heating oil against diesel supplies.
>> >
>> > Jim
>> >
>> > On Apr 28, 2005, at 9:48 AM, Brent Berisford wrote:
>> >
>> >> The bottom line.
>> >>    Diesel in the past has always been the better value. Trucking 
>> firms
>> >> and train better bang for the buck. The largest problem with diesel
>> >> and cost at the moment is that the war machine runs on diesel not
>> >> gasoline.We have created a demand by supporting the war in the 
>> middle
>> >> east. Just my 2 cents. The demand for diesel high mileage cars also
>> >> proves that diesel is the smarter choice at least in my local 
>> commuter
>> >> market.
>> >> Brent
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> ����������������������������������������
>> jimt
>> Planned insanity is best.
>> Remember that sanity is optional.
>> http://www.tactical-bus.info (tech info)
>> http://www.westydriver.com
>