Fuel Prices

UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUMS THE UK PROFESSIONAL DRIVERS FORUM (INTERACTIVE)
141

Carryfast:

Bluey Circles:

Carryfast:
So you’re saying if we bust the myth of Global Warming caused by CO2 on Venus,let alone the minute levels of CO2 resulting from fossil fuel use.

without any greenhouse gases our temperatures would fluctuate between -200 at night to +200 during the day. Yes the massive increase in CO2 in our atmosphere will only ever create a very small increase in the effectiveness of the greenhouse effect our atmosphere already gives us. But even a half percent increase could add two or three degrees to our overall global temperatures, climate will change and sea levels would rise. This small increase in average global temperatures is nothing the planet has not seen many times before, but it has never happened with 7 billion people on board. May be a billion people will need to relocate, it wil make the Syrian refugee crises look like a package holiday gone wrong.

As we know CO2 isn’t the main or even anything like close to being a large factor in the Green House effect of our atmosphere.Which leaves the question of if any.While exactly where does the figure of a half per cent increase in the overall Green House effect of the atmosphere and a 3 degree increase in temperatures,from a minute increase in a minute composite part of the atmosphere,come from.

Bearing in mind the believers don’t seem keen on an answer to the question,what would be the temperature here at 90 bar atmospheric pressure and 1.5 x the intensity of sun input ?.The answer to which would probably bust the myth that CO2 is a supposed Greenhouse Gas at even almost 100% composition of Venus’ atmosphere let alone 0.04% on Earth.

Which leaves the question why are the economists saying that high oil prices are a good thing.Also why are the oil companies bothered about the unit price of oil.When they are sitting on an effectively unlimited supply of of the stuff and if they want to maintain incomes just supply the market at a level that creates a unit price the customer is prepared to pay.Bearing in mind the actual level of income to the producers will remain the same.

Which won’t work while we’ve got a government imposing prohibitive Green taxation on the product without a Green mandate. :imp: :unamused:

if our present atmosphere is protecting us from a 400 degree daily swing in temperatures, a half percent chage could represent 2 degees.

CO2 is indeed a small contribtor, but we have incresed in massively, 50% last 100 years !

Give the Venus nonsense a rest, its more barking than battersea dogs home.

Low oil prices indicate poor demand, the long term ramifications of poor demand is a downturn in the economy.

142

Bluey Circles:
if our present atmosphere is protecting us from a 400 degree daily swing in temperatures, a half percent chage could represent 2 degees.

CO2 is indeed a small contribtor, but we have incresed in massively, 50% last 100 years !

Give the Venus nonsense a rest, its more barking than battersea dogs home.

Low oil prices indicate poor demand, the long term ramifications of poor demand is a downturn in the economy.

Our ‘atmosphere’ means all of it not the miniscule CO2 part of it.A 50% increase in the 0.04% CO2 constituent part of the atmosphere doesn’t equate to a .5 % change in the ‘atmosphere’.It actually equates to an increase in CO2 from 0.04% to 0.06%.

It isn’t surprising that the believers would find the Venus angle inconvenient although they seemed happy enough to rely on it at the start of the bs cult scam.On that note the hypothetical projected temperature of a 90 bar atmospheric pressure Earth with 1.5 x sun intensity input is relevant ‘if’ the believers want to suggest that the Green House effects of CO2,not atmospheric pressure,cooked Venus.

As for low oil prices they actually suggest an over priced product ‘leading to’/‘causing’ low demand and low economic growth not vice versa.They won’t fix that by trying to increase/maintain oil prices and taxation on fuel.The answer is to increase supply and cut taxation thereby providing the consumer with what the consumer wants in exchange for their hard earned cash.Not the ridiculously rationed amount which the government,greens and misguided producers are trying to impose.

The result being more fuel used and more economic growth and more revenues for the producers.

Rather than the present,artificially imposed,economically suicidal,fuel cost inflation which was kicked off by OPEC for political reasons and now supported and added to by the Greens and prohibitive taxation policy.All of which conspires to leave the stuff in the ground instead of using it. :unamused:

143

Carryfast:
Our ‘atmosphere’ means all of it not the miniscule CO2 part of it.A 50% increase in the 0.04% CO2 constituent part of the atmosphere doesn’t equate to a .5 % change in the ‘atmosphere’.It actually equates to an increase in CO2 from 0.04% to 0.06%.

It isn’t surprising that the believers would find the Venus angle inconvenient although they seemed happy enough to rely on it at the start of the bs cult scam.On that note the hypothetical projected temperature of a 90 bar atmospheric pressure Earth with 1.5 x sun intensity input is relevant ‘if’ the believers want to suggest that the Green House effects of CO2,not atmospheric pressure,cooked Venus.

As for low oil prices they actually suggest an over priced product ‘leading to’/‘causing’ low demand and low economic growth not vice versa.They won’t fix that by trying to increase/maintain oil prices and taxation on fuel.The answer is to increase supply and cut taxation thereby providing the consumer with what the consumer wants in exchange for their hard earned cash.Not the ridiculously rationed amount which the government,greens and misguided producers are trying to impose.

The result being more fuel used and more economic growth and more revenues for the producers.

Rather than the present,artificially imposed,economically suicidal,fuel cost inflation which was kicked off by OPEC for political reasons and now supported and added to by the Greens and prohibitive taxation policy.All of which conspires to leave the stuff in the ground instead of using it. :unamused:

CO2 performs much better than water vapour in trapping warmth, yes it may only be 0.04% but it contributes around 10% of greenhouse effect. Methane is even more powerful, only takes up 0.0002% by volume, but contributes around 4% of total greenhouse affect.

I am aware of Hansens studies of Venus and CO2, but your take on his findings would be like saying Isaac Newton was wrong because we haven’t all been killed by falling apples.

The economic concern for the lack of demand for oil is down to demand in the far east, I don’t think anyone really knows what is happening with the Chinese economy at the moment, and oil demand is used as yard stick. I can’t see our road fuel taxation being of any real global significance.

I still think Europe should be moving away from our reliance on fossil fuels, and still see high taxation as a good way to encourage companies to invest in alternatives.

144

Bluey Circles:
CO2 performs much better than water vapour in trapping warmth, yes it may only be 0.04% but it contributes around 10% of greenhouse effect. Methane is even more powerful, only takes up 0.0002% by volume, but contributes around 4% of total greenhouse affect.

I am aware of Hansens studies of Venus and CO2, but your take on his findings would be like saying Isaac Newton was wrong because we haven’t all been killed by falling apples.

The economic concern for the lack of demand for oil is down to demand in the far east, I don’t think anyone really knows what is happening with the Chinese economy at the moment, and oil demand is used as yard stick. I can’t see our road fuel taxation being of any real global significance.

I still think Europe should be moving away from our reliance on fossil fuels, and still see high taxation as a good way to encourage companies to invest in alternatives.

Suddenly now CO2 is supposedly an even better Greenhouse gas than water vapour.You should tell that to even the believers because they obviously think it’s water vapour which is the biggest player.While then suddenly leaping to the convenient conclusion that Earth’s miniscule level of CO2 is enough to warm the place to add enough water vapour to increase levels of global warming.While conveniently wanting to dodge the question as to where is the mathematical proof that even an almost 100% CO2 atmosphere actually adds to the temperature of Venus,as opposed to it being the pressure,not the composition of the atmosphere,that did/does it.

However if you really believe such bs it seems strange why you seem so keen on effectively rationing fossil fuel use out of existence in ‘Europe’ while seeming to be happy to allow China to use as much as it likes.

As for investing in ‘alternatives’ it’s the consumer who pays for your ideologically driven crusade not ‘companies’ and the fact remains fossil fuel is/should be cheaper than all the alternatives and will/should stay that way.Which just leaves the question of telling the Green nazis to do one at least until/unless they get an electoral mandate for the imposition of their cult.Mandate in this case not meaning the infiltration of other Parties or Socialists dressing up wealth re distribution,or helping their Communist Party cronies in China,as ‘environmentalism’.

As for what’s happening in China even Stevie Wonder could see it’s a non Fordist Communist regime.That uses exploitation of cheap,effectively slave,labour to undermine the western economies by the dumping of cheap exports.With obvious predictable effects on its domestic economy related to consumer demand.While unemployed/low paid western workers can’t/won’t afford to buy sufficient cheap imports to keep the commy zb hole afloat.No surprise that artificially rationed inflated priced oil isn’t going to be a big seller anywhere in that environment.

145

chicane:
Fertilizers, most potash (potassium) is mined (new one opened up in Yorkshire recently). Nitrogen can be fixed by leguminous plants rather than chucking neat ammonium nitrate on our fields. Lime which is used to regulate PH is still sitting around in the large sedimentary rock deposits though we have kind of buggered ourselves by destroying the cheap source of slag (mainly phosphate but includes a whole load of other useful elements) from the UK steel industry. New research is showing that rather than help fertility bag fertilizer is, over the long term, destroying the microbes that break down the nutrients in the soil and make them available to the plants, thus bag fertilizer is not only eye-wateringly expensive but destroys the soil over the long term. Note to my ex colleagues here, if you didn’t spend so much on bag fert and and agri-chems to produce much the price for grain, milk and meat would go up to a viable level (supply and demand).

i largely agree . but only potash is mined , nitrates and phosphates and insecticides are all a product of oil in modern agriculture . and they are valuable resources at this time of massive over population and climatic difficulties . besides the only balanced natural fertiliser i know of is comfrey

the main source of blame for this , i think , is supermarkets and EU .

i spent first 20 years living on quite small mixed farms in south west .
we cared for our animals and environment . everything was done to keep the quality of soil with natural manures , green manures and crop rotation . but in the 80’s we were effectively bust . all the profit was in large scale monoculture for big agribusiness and supermarkets .first the MMB was privatised and our dairy herd became loss making unless it could be expanded . pigs were worthless . we couldnt grow any of our traditional root veg , legumes or cereals in sufficient quantities to sell to supermarkets, in a balanced sustainable small agricultural system .

the farm house became worth more to londoners as a holiday home and somewhere to keep their horses than the land was to us as a family farm .

so i agree that the overuse of industrialised NPK is very bad for us , but i dont see it as possible to go back to days of mixed farming . at least until the big buying monopolies are broken up and we return to local seasonal food as our main diet . then our dependence on oil based nitrates and phosphates will obviously reduce .

chicane:
As to the need for oil, not all oil based products need to be derived from mineral oil, an increasing amount is being derived from plants. What we need is to diversify our sources of power i.e. biofuels, wind, solar, tidal, nuclear and get better at recycling. The only thing we currently NEED oil for is transport.

this bit about transport is wrong .

the same forces that ruined mixed agriculture rely on cheap oil for their business models .it should be stopped and road transport nationalised .

why do morrisons send a load from bridgwater to yate and return empty ■■ passing sainsburys lorry from longwell green delivering to bridgwater and returning empty ■■

competition ? its such an unbelievable waste of fuel , especially when transport is not their core business .

these industries need to be forced to cooperate , and the best way of doing this is to have fuel prices so high their eyes bleed with shock .

146

boredwivdrivin:
these industries need to be forced to cooperate , and the best way of doing this is to have fuel prices so high their eyes bleed with shock .

Which seems to be based on a selective worse case example of seperate co incidental runs in which return or onward loads aren’t generally part of the specific sector of the industry and operation.

But which obviously also affects every transport operation regardless and/or private vehicle use.The result being that the private vehicle user doesn’t make as many journeys and those they do make remove more disposable income from the economy.While the truck operator either closes down or reduces operations by reducing mileage run.Resulting in less demand for the oil and a hit on economic growth and employment and wage levels in the road transport industry.

All seemingly to pander to your misguided idea that your preferred use for oil ( chemicals and chucking it on our food :unamused: ) is in some way in competition with all the different fractions of a barrel of crude used for road fuels anyway.When your ideas actually just reduce demand for a barrel of crude oil in its original entirety which means it just gets left in the ground or left unsold in its storage tanks.While the economy suffers because of your economically suicidal ideas regarding the rationing of fuel use by pricing it at more than its worth to its potential consumers. :unamused:

147

I’m not saying leave the oil the ground, what I am saying is that we should manage our use of it more frugally, as until recently we were using it faster than we could discover new exploitable reserves. Like coal, if it’s still in the ground it is there to be exploited at a future date. If nothing else it buys us more time to discover/develop alternatives.

Boredwiv, you’re right about the harmful growth of monoculture especially in the arable areas and I’m by no means an apologist for ‘organic’ farming in fact I think the reasons given in its sales spiel are borderline dishonest. However I did spend at least 20yrs rebuilding the soil structure on our ‘conventional’ farms, you simply can’t continue ‘taking out’ without putting back (like a bank account), bag NPK doesn’t put everything back and depletes the microbial biology of the soil and hence its structure, it’s like putting DERV in your engine but never topping up the oil or coolant.

I would suggest that the low demand for oil and other raw materials is a symptom of a knackered global economy rather than a cause.

148

chicane:
I’m not saying leave the oil the ground, what I am saying is that we should manage our use of it more frugally, as until recently we were using it faster than we could discover new exploitable reserves. Like coal, if it’s still in the ground it is there to be exploited at a future date. If nothing else it buys us more time to discover/develop alternatives.

I would suggest that the low demand for oil and other raw materials is a symptom of a knackered global economy rather than a cause.

You’re saying use it ‘more frugally’ to save more for ‘the future’ which by definition means ‘leave it in the ground’.As I said the logical conclusion of which is that successive generations all leave the stuff sitting there for the future generations to use.Probably because you’ve been brainwashed into the idea that ‘new discoveries’ are the same thing as reserves and it’s all running out. :unamused:

As for your reverse cause and effect the results on the western economies ever since OPEC’s rationing of the stuff prove that it’s high oil prices which trigger the price led inflationary environment that eventually stops people buying much of anything including oil.

IE your bs crusade to leave the stuff in the ground means less consumption of it and less economic growth.Because the resulting unit price inflation makes it economically unviable to use in viable quantities and removes otherwise disposable incomes from the economy.

So congratulations you’ve got what you want the oil companies can’t shift enough of the product because if/when it isn’t the Arabs turning off the taps because they want Israel wiped off the map it’s your lot doing it.Thereby creating an environment of unsustainable fuel price inflation in which the only way they’ll get things moving again is to increase supply and lower the price and taxation levels to what we were paying for the stuff well before 1973 in real terms.With a supply regime to match.

Which will obviously upset all those like you who’ve been brainwashed into the idea that it’s all running out in the foreseeable future and we must covet the zb stuff like gold dust. :imp: :unamused:

149

If you leave something in the ground - it doesn’t have a future. Just look at what’s happened to all the coal mines in this country. Stacks of it left, but its the drop in demand (in favour of cleaner burning fuels) that has done the most to kill it off.

Don’t forget a century ago Britain were masters of the world - and it all ran on Coal!

Thatcher could have saved the coal mines by saying “■■■■■■■■ to the clean air act. Let’s have more people at work, even if they die aged 50 instead”.

150

Winseer:
If you leave something in the ground - it doesn’t have a future. Just look at what’s happened to all the coal mines in this country. Stacks of it left, but its the drop in demand (in favour of cleaner burning fuels) that has done the most to kill it off.

Don’t forget a century ago Britain were masters of the world - and it all ran on Coal!

Thatcher could have saved the coal mines by saying “■■■■■■■■ to the clean air act. Let’s have more people at work, even if they die aged 50 instead”.

If they’d have paid the miners what they were worth thereby reducing their shift time at work and thereby exposure to danger they wouldn’t have been dying as prematurely.Nor creating the political environment of industrial unrest and therefore unreliability in supply which is the real reason why the Cons closed the industry down.That obviously needed import controls to stop the dumping of imported cheaper produced coal dug by miners on lower terms and conditions.As for the clean air act we were using British coal within London’s clean air act boundary which met the requirements of it at least.

The idea of leaving the oil in the ground being based on the totally different idea.Of rationing the stuff to keep the Greens happy and those who think it should be coveted to the point of being an unviable to use resource because they think it’s all running out and must be ‘saved’ for ‘the future’. :unamused:

151

A barrel of oil is now cheaper than a bargain bucket from KFC. It’s off its head!

152

I love a bucket of extra crispy

153

newmercman:
A barrel of oil is now cheaper than a bargain bucket from KFC. It’s off its head!

It’s the pump price including taxes that matters and in that regard at around £1 per litre,we’re not back to pre 1973 levels at 5-7 bob a gallon,in real terms,by a long way yet. :bulb: :wink:

Although no doubt someone will try to make the case that no one was earning more than £10 per week then. :unamused: :laughing:

154

Carryfast:

newmercman:
A barrel of oil is now cheaper than a bargain bucket from KFC. It’s off its head!

It’s the pump price including taxes that matters and in that regard at around £1 per litre,we’re not back to pre 1973 levels at 5-7 bob a gallon,in real terms,by a long way yet. :bulb: :wink:

Although no doubt someone will try to make the case that no one was earning more than £10 per week then. :unamused: [emoji38]

No it isn’t the pump price that matters, not in the big picture.

155

Anyone remember that old KFC gag? Why is KFC like a woman… When you’ve finished with the breast and thigh, all you have left is a greasy box to put your bone in.

156

newmercman:
No it isn’t the pump price that matters, not in the big picture.

:confused:

The pump price is what the consumer pays,at least in terms of road fuel,and is a massive guide to the level of crude price combined with taxation.While if you’ve got an extortionate level of taxation as in this case that is just compounded when someone like OPEC,among others,decides to inflate the cost of the product beyond viable levels.Which is why the pre 1973 benchmark is the important comparison in this case.As I said everyone needs to get away from the idea of coveting the stuff and valuing it at unviable levels.In which case it needs to go ( and stay ) a lot lower yet.Together with a serious taxation haircut to match.Then watch the economy,especially the road transport industry,take off. :bulb:

157

please can I ask, for the sake of the thread no one argue with carryfast.

158

Carryfast:
As I said everyone needs to get away from the idea of coveting the stuff and valuing it at unviable levels.In which case it needs to go ( and stay ) a lot lower yet.Together with a serious taxation haircut to match.Then watch the economy,especially the road transport industry,take off. :bulb:

Wouldn’t happen, rates would simply be forced downwards by those who have the upper hand in the business arrangement.

159

newmercman:
A barrel of oil is now cheaper than a bargain bucket from KFC. It’s off its head!

Word has it that after eating a bargain bucket of KFC in a drive-thru - your car will fail it’s emissions test at it’s next MOT and all… Even if it’s not a VW… :smiley:

160

war1974:
please can I ask, for the sake of the thread no one argue with carryfast.

Why.

Let’s hear all the reasons as to why inflated oil prices are supposedly a good thing.So far we’ve got let’s leave it in the ground to save it for ‘the future’.To leave it in the ground because of Global Warming.To leave it in the ground to stop the fraction of crude used for road fuel competing with that used for chemicals/agrichem. :unamused: