Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/19/04 08:07 PM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

At 5/19/04 04:24 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: Model T's got 30MPG..

leaded gas is measured differently than unleaded.
leaded has a different viscosity and unleaded is thinner, leaded also turns to jelly in the winter :-\

What in gods name are you talking about? What does it's viscosity have to do with anything? You're saying leaded gas isn't measured in gallons?

Ok, here's what I don't get.

What is Bush supposed to do about the gas prices? I'd really like to know.

Bush will probably do nothing about the price increases. That's probably the best thing to do, short of rationing gas. Putting a price ceiling on gas will result in massive shortages. The only way to reduce the price of gas is to either use less of it, or increase its supply. Americans need to use fuel-efficient cars, and drive less, and we should negotiate with OPEC to increase oil supply, or hope that a new oil source is discovered.

At 5/19/04 11:31 PM, RedSkvnk wrote:

At 5/19/04 08:07 PM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

At 5/19/04 04:24 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: Model T's got 30MPG..

leaded gas is measured differently than unleaded.
leaded has a different viscosity and unleaded is thinner, leaded also turns to jelly in the winter :-\

What in gods name are you talking about? What does it's viscosity have to do with anything? You're saying leaded gas isn't measured in gallons?

in mpg.
the viscosity has something to do with its being consumed more rapidly in an older engine, so it gets less mpg...........................i may have said it wrong in the last post.

At 5/18/04 07:36 AM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

The U.S. mean for gas on 5/17/04 was $2.53/gal.!

Jeez man, get over it. I say this all the time. In britain it's costing us around $6.50 / gal so shut your yap and get on with your life

We have to

At 5/20/04 09:53 AM, Coop83 wrote:

At 5/18/04 07:36 AM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

The U.S. mean for gas on 5/17/04 was $2.53/gal.!

Jeez man, get over it. I say this all the time. In britain it's costing us around $6.50 / gal so shut your yap and get on with your life

whats your foreign policy like?
ours sucks ass!

At 5/20/04 09:53 AM, Coop83 wrote:

At 5/18/04 07:36 AM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

Jeez man, get over it. I say this all the time. In britain it's costing us around $6.50 / gal so shut your yap and get on with your life

Out of curiousirt did it just recently spike for you too? Over the past couple of weeks I have noticed an 80 cent jump in gas prices here.

America has some of the worst public transportation (of developed nations), because we relied so heavily on our gas prices staying low.

At 5/20/04 05:37 PM, awkward_silence wrote:

America has some of the worst public transportation (of developed nations), because we relied so heavily on our gas prices staying low.

No kidding. In France, one of the bastions of aloofness and snottiness, they've managed to come up with the TGV (trains à grande vitesse).

Here in America, long the bastion of technological ingenuity, we've got...AmTrak?!?

Seriously. Whereas in other countries, mass transportation seems to be shunned and reserved for the lower class here in the US. I've seen empty MARTA buses stuck in bumper to bumper traffic. The MARTA trains are half full, while !-75/85 thru downtown Atlanta is stacked wall to wall, both directions, all 16 lanes.

At 5/19/04 11:31 PM, RedSkvnk wrote:

At 5/19/04 08:07 PM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

At 5/19/04 04:24 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: Model T's got 30MPG..

leaded gas is measured differently than unleaded.
leaded has a different viscosity and unleaded is thinner, leaded also turns to jelly in the winter :-\

What in gods name are you talking about? What does it's viscosity have to do with anything? You're saying leaded gas isn't measured in gallons?

I don't think it has anything to do with viscosity. In the early days of the car industry, they wanted to find a way to get better fuel by doing nothing to it. The problem was is that they needed something to be added into the fuel in order to stop knocking. They tried everything from cornstarch to flour, and they even tried peanut butter! They found out what it was; with lead added, the gasoline has a higher anti-knock rating(the 87, 89, and 93 things). So basically that is why they added lead, to get more anti-knocking characteristics by using the same refinery practices, thus saving money. As for the viscosity thing, you'd have to search that up on your own.

I fully support increased gas prices. It will encourage people to take advantage of our [POS] public transportation, and perhaps call for better such transportation.

It will also encourage car-pooling, conservation, and perhaps even slow urban sprawl for a bit.

yea.. gas prices are fricken crazy! I heard gas companys have had billions and billions of profit from all the gas profits they've been making. Do they really think they could compete with Bill Gates?

First of, the world isn't "running out of oil" its running out of fossil fuels. second off, they don't just raise it to whatever they please. every gallon usually makes the gas station 10 cents, and the government 20 cents. Compared to how fuch they used to make, and the prices now into contrast of the prices what we had a ton, gas is acually CHEAPER now.

Before anyone acts like a dipshit and say that it isn't cheaper, think about this: If a movie theater in the 50's charged a penny a movie, this would be a kick-ass deal. Some dipshit's (the same who would argue that gas is realy more expensive now, opposed to what I said earlier) would go "phttt, that not a good deal, the value of a penny was worth more then!" wich is like saying "phttt, gas isn't cheaper, it costed less money then!" and true it a penny WAS worth more, but it wasn't worth $8.50, and by today it would be about 2.00 for a movie. like wise, it WAS cheaper then, but if the cos per ammountage where still used, it would be about $3.50 per gallon U.S. however, Europe wouldn't change as much as you would think, only by about .50 per gallon more.

At 5/19/04 11:31 PM, RedSkvnk wrote:

At 5/19/04 08:07 PM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

At 5/19/04 04:24 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: Model T's got 30MPG..

leaded gas is measured differently than unleaded.
leaded has a different viscosity and unleaded is thinner, leaded also turns to jelly in the winter :-\

What in gods name are you talking about? What does it's viscosity have to do with anything? You're saying leaded gas isn't measured in gallons?

You brought up the stat that model t's got 30 mpg, but if the gasoline back then was denser, more thick, and thus "contained more potential power" or whatever you want to say per gallon, then that model-t getting 30 mpg might actually be LESS energy efficient than a currently typical sedan getting 20 mpg on our current lowest octane gasoline.

That's what he was saying, I think.

As for the whole "OH GOD, STOP COMPLAINING, IN EUROPE IT COSTS 6 BUCKS" thing, that's something I get tired of hearing. America has INSANELY more surface area than Europe. The average American driver drives higher distances than European drivers. Europe, also due to being smaller, but possibly smarter as well, has a much better train system than America has. Small pockets of America have good ones (NY's subway), but there is no good nationwide solution. Amtrack doesn't go everywhere like some systems in Europe do. There's just TOO MUCH DAMNED SPACE here. Heh.

So anyway, the point is that Europeans tend to have an alternative to driving and thus the price shouldn't BOTHER them as much. And even if all they do is drive, they have smaller distances to cover than we do.

I lived in Japan for 3 years, and it was a similar thing there. My city was a thin city stretching between a mountain range and the ocean, and thus three parallel train lines with a good connecting bus system for going perpendicular to the trains.... was PERFECT for getting you just about everywhere. Here in Houston, if I use the train and a bus, I might still have to also walk a half hour to get to my destination, in sum. Houston is over 600 million square miles, it's spread out like a motherfucker.

Kobe, Japan, was nice and dense and easy to get around in by comparison, especially without a car. So gas prices only affected my family in that my dad drove to work, but the rest of us used trains and buses, and the fares may have been impacted by the gas prices, but not as much as driving your own car is.

The lowest it is around here is $1.99 for 87 octane, which I hate using but I can't afford 89 at this point. What sucks is the fact that I've been looking into getting a muscle car in the near future, but it'll end up costing me for gas than it will for insurance, and that's just not right.

At 5/20/04 09:51 PM, Ravens_Grin wrote: I don't think it has anything to do with viscosity. In the early days of the car industry, they wanted to find a way to get better fuel by doing nothing to it. The problem was is that they needed something to be added into the fuel in order to stop knocking. They tried everything from cornstarch to flour, and they even tried peanut butter! They found out what it was; with lead added, the gasoline has a higher anti-knock rating(the 87, 89, and 93 things). So basically that is why they added lead, to get more anti-knocking characteristics by using the same refinery practices, thus saving money. As for the viscosity thing, you'd have to search that up on your own.

Um, lead has nothing to do with knock, octane does. Octane ratings tell you how much the fuel can be compressed before it spontaneously combusts; the higher the number, the higher the tolerance. Lead was used as a lubricant to prevent wear in soft valve seats in pre-1971 engines.

At 5/21/04 04:06 AM, Antipode wrote: The lowest it is around here is $1.99 for 87 octane, which I hate using

whats wrong with 87?
it works, too!

Here's my (crazy) view on gas prices:

Bush just lets gas prices rise and rise, pulls some crazy scheme (opens reserves, does moronic terrorism thing that makes his approval rating actually go UP) right before the election to make gas prices go down and sway ignorant voters to Bush/Nader.

sigh...

At 5/19/04 01:46 AM, RugbyMacDaddy wrote:

At 5/18/04 08:42 PM, Hell_Toupee wrote: i think that this sucks...
today, i spent $10 to fill up my lawn mower!!!!

I remember when I could fill up my car for $20.

trust me i remember when i could do it for $17.

It sucks so much now, i have to pay like $25 -$30 now, its impossible to keep up when i wanna go out to the club and the beach, i have to just drive to work now, instead of having a nice time on the weekends, i guess those days are probably temporarly over.

oh i forgot to mention, the price around here is $2.20. they just rasied the price recentely from $1.70 up to 1.80 now up to the maximum at the moment $2.20, and in other areas maybe more. Its mind boggling.

At 5/22/04 04:31 PM, slicric131 wrote: oh i forgot to mention, the price around here is $2.20. they just rasied the price recentely from $1.70 up to 1.80 now up to the maximum at the moment $2.20, and in other areas maybe more. Its mind boggling.

in california i imagine it's about $5.00/gal!
unleaded

At 5/21/04 04:11 AM, Antipode wrote:

Um, lead has nothing to do with knock, octane does.

First line in the abstract proves what I said

At 5/19/04 09:02 PM, ReiperX wrote: Bush said today that he's not going to open the reserves because it would "make us vulnerable to terrorism."

That kind of left me speachless, while opening the reserves would have a limited effect overall, it would at least help people out for a few weeks.

Also don't understand how it would make us any more vulnerable to terrorism?

Because once the reserves are gone, then we'll have to rely on foreign (Arabian) oil even more, and more than likely the prices will go up more, and we'll end up paying more to the Arab nations. Then some terrorist group will get funding by one of the Arabian oil producers, then the Arabian oil producer will stop the flow of oil to America. So, it would end up with the terrorists in control of money, and oil, and us, nothing.

At 5/23/04 01:20 PM, sunbeast78 wrote: stuff ^^

\[so basically were screwed]/

At 5/20/04 10:19 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: I fully support increased gas prices. It will encourage people to take advantage of our [POS] public transportation, and perhaps call for better such transportation.

It will also encourage car-pooling, conservation, and perhaps even slow urban sprawl for a bit.

You live in a city, obviously. Try living in a place where you have to drive 15 minutes just to get to a gas station, and before you say move, who do you think grows your food?

The idea of a car that runs on hydrogen is really nice, but I doubt any of us will see until it's about time for us to take the old dirt nap.

Right now, I'd be happy if my old Ford LTD would get more than 17 miles per gallon. Some new shock absorbers would be nice too...

At 5/23/04 07:01 PM, Jimsween wrote: You live in a city, obviously.

Hum.. nope.

Try living in a place where you have to drive 15 minutes just to get to a gas station,

OK - check.

and before you say move, who do you think grows your food?

The corn farm across the road?

( Ok - it is cow corn, but the point remains - I know who grows my food (Ok - not personally, but you get the idea))

At 5/20/04 10:19 PM, RedSkvnk wrote: I fully support increased gas prices. It will encourage people to take advantage of our [POS] public transportation, and perhaps call for better such transportation.

It will also encourage car-pooling, conservation, and perhaps even slow urban sprawl for a bit.

I agree with rising gas prices, but for different reasons. Since fossil fuels are a limited resource, not one we can rely on for too much longer as a sustainable use for society as a whole, rising gas prices might help nudge capitalism in the direction of finding alternative fuels. For example: I recently read a story on the AP that said people are trading in the SUVs for hybrids. Ford, this Summer, is releasing the very first hybrid SUV. When pushed, capitalism works.

As for mass transportation, America is a pathetic failure. We're nearly a century behind other civilized nations when it comes to trains (which could, if upgraded properly, bring us from one destination to another in the same time as a plane with little to no fossil fuel use), buses are hardly timely (compare with most of Europe) and some people (like me) don't enjoy sitting next to a puking, ranting, raving, singing, hippie on drugs he/she stole from a pharmaceutical the night before.

Maybe that's just Portland.

At 5/23/04 08:17 PM, Proteas wrote: The idea of a car that runs on hydrogen is really nice, but I doubt any of us will see until it's about time for us to take the old dirt nap.

theyve been available to the public for over 20 years.

Right now, I'd be happy if my old Ford LTD would get more than 17 miles per gallon. Some new shock absorbers would be nice too...

17m/gal?
that sucks, i feel for you

The main problem with people trying to evaluate gas prices is that they only factor in the price of oil. This is only one factor to the price of gas. Otherwise, while oil prices have remained fairly constant (near $30/BBL) gas prices have increased. The main reason? Enviornmental protection measures. We have to clean and purify our gasoline so much for enviornmental laws that gasoline refinery just plain costs more. Every "Clean Air" act or ordinance passed increases the 'clarity' of the gasoline required, thus increasing the price. That's why gas is much higher in California and New York than in less liberal and less enviornmentally concerned states. It also explains how gas costs more in major cities (aside from higher demand/supply). Add in all the enviornmental restrictions to drilling oil here in the U.S., and you have a bigger influence to the price of oil than the Middle East could pressure us on. \

Overall, your gas costs more partly because of enviornmental laws. So if you vote for clean air, don't complain about higher gas prices, because you are causing alot of it yourself.

At 5/24/04 07:43 AM, Hell_Toupee wrote:

At 5/23/04 08:17 PM, Proteas wrote: The idea of a car that runs on hydrogen is really nice, but I doubt any of us will see until it's about time for us to take the old dirt nap.

theyve been available to the public for over 20 years.

That's news to me. Who's making them?

At 5/20/04 09:53 AM, Coop83 wrote: Jeez man, get over it. I say this all the time. In britain it's costing us around $6.50 / gal so shut your yap and get on with your life

I thought the British used the metric system, and here you are talking about how much gas costs in gallons over there. Does anyone else see anything wrong with this?