M.Dancer Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 As for your car per capita breakdown, what is your source of that information and please have a quote from some unbiased source (ie something other than a pro-green site). http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/tra_mot_...-motor-vehicles Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 2, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 I just read the other day, the the US has a 5th of the population in the world but uses 40% of the oil!! Someone said on the forum, everyone wants or NEEDS a car but if places made it easier to travel by bike,motorcyles, scooters, blading or walking to work people would have less health problems and cut done on the environment and the fuels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 I just read the other day, the the US has a 5th of the population in the world but uses 40% of the oil!! Both claims are patently false. Someone said on the forum, everyone wants or NEEDS a car but if places made it easier to travel by bike,motorcyles, scooters, blading or walking to work people would have less health problems and cut done on the environment and the fuels. Don't forget pogo sticks and donkeys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 Both claims are patently false. You didn't know the population of the planet is only 1.5 billion? You must get your info from the illuminati, who, for their nefarious reason want you to think it is much much higher..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 You didn't know the population of the planet is only 1.5 billion?You must get your info from the illuminati, who, for their nefarious reason want you to think it is much much higher..... The funny part is that the real numbers for US population and oil consumption are even more lopsided..... about 5% of the world's population and 23% oil consumption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 I absolutely agree Europeans pay more for gas than Canadians and then again I hope thats always the case. But like almost all fuel prices worldwide, a large portion of the price is due to government taxes. Taxes that are collected to be used in whatever way the government would like and I for one want as little money going to the government as possible. The only real way for a country to be green is for the population to believe in acting in a responsible way. Everyone has to do their part, that means drive alot less, consume a lot less etc.....and not have the government mandate a bunch of phony promises to get elected.As for your car per capita breakdown, what is your source of that information and please have a quote from some unbiased source (ie something other than a pro-green site). As for Euros travelling more by rail, I can believe it because they have the population density to support a rail system (more frequent stops = more frequent travellers). Europeans could very well take more urban transport and buy smaller cars due to the fact that they have much older cities which are more tightly packed and that leads to smaller cars and more city transport due to convenience and not out of a green conscience. Now that oil has hit 100 bucks a barrel I wonder what the price of "motion lotion" will climb to? As for the Euro folks. It is rare they need to heat their house for 7 months (or more) of the year, drive more than an hour to work, depend upon vehicles to keep the economy moving or for that matter - even more rare - to not have mass transit available for the working class. When Canada has a system to move folks to and from their place of employment - including those who live outside the sphere of influence of the major cities - then and only then will we be able to stop complaining about the price of fuel. Sometimes we live where we live because we MUST - not because we want to. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runningdog Posted January 2, 2008 Report Share Posted January 2, 2008 QUOTE(Sully @ Jan 1 2008, 02:36 PM) I absolutely agree Europeans pay more for gas than Canadians and then again I hope thats always the case. But like almost all fuel prices worldwide, a large portion of the price is due to government taxes. Taxes that are collected to be used in whatever way the government would like and I for one want as little money going to the government as possible. The only real way for a country to be green is for the population to believe in acting in a responsible way. Everyone has to do their part, that means drive alot less, consume a lot less etc.....and not have the government mandate a bunch of phony promises to get elected. As for your car per capita breakdown, what is your source of that information and please have a quote from some unbiased source (ie something other than a pro-green site). As for Euros travelling more by rail, I can believe it because they have the population density to support a rail system (more frequent stops = more frequent travellers). Europeans could very well take more urban transport and buy smaller cars due to the fact that they have much older cities which are more tightly packed and that leads to smaller cars and more city transport due to convenience and not out of a green conscience. but Sully, if the Indians and the Chinese don't agree to stop consuming so much, how can we possibly agree to consume less. We better consume more, just to be on the safe side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 (edited) Now that oil has hit 100 bucks a barrel I wonder what the price of "motion lotion" will climb to?As for the Euro folks. It is rare they need to heat their house for 7 months (or more) of the year...... Borg Yes because Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Latvia, Estonia and Scotland are known for their incredibly long tropical summers... Edited January 3, 2008 by M.Dancer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Yes because Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Latvia, Estonia and Scotland are known for their incredibly long tropical summers... There will always be small exceptions and no one will deny - have not been to Finland, Norway or Denmark for some many years - but for the most part they do not have the weather we do as the winters are moderated by oceanic currents. I have never been to Latvia and Estonia so cannot comment but their populations are quite diminutive asnd they do not benefit from the vast natural resources we have. Scotland? Warm compared to what you and I are used to. I was there last year at this time and quite enjoyed the weather - did not have to wear anything more than a light windbreaker. Despite your weak attempt at humour, what I wrote is quite true. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 but Sully, if the Indians and the Chinese don't agree to stop consuming so much, how can we possibly agree to consume less. We better consume more, just to be on the safe side. Well the way to make China and India stop comsuming as much as they do is to curb the West's consumption, their industries will not belch out as much pollution if there was no demand for it. Right now China's and India's economies are booming because of the cheap cost of labour within the manufacturing industries. Try find something nowadays that is not stamped "Made in China" or clothes that are not made in India. I would never agree to consuming less when others around me consume more, its human nature and the really great thing about it, is that it will eventually lead to conflict. YAY we never learn from our history... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sully Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Yes because Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Latvia, Estonia and Scotland are known for their incredibly long tropical summers... Also you forgot to include the immense sizes of the countries as well, think of the vast distances that these people must travel, since all of these countries combined could fit into Quebec with 3.5 times Quebec's population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
margrace Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 There will always be small exceptions and no one will deny - have not been to Finland, Norway or Denmark for some many years - but for the most part they do not have the weather we do as the winters are moderated by oceanic currents.I have never been to Latvia and Estonia so cannot comment but their populations are quite diminutive asnd they do not benefit from the vast natural resources we have. Scotland? Warm compared to what you and I are used to. I was there last year at this time and quite enjoyed the weather - did not have to wear anything more than a light windbreaker. Despite your weak attempt at humour, what I wrote is quite true. Borg Yes Borg I agree with you, I too have been to Ireland, Scotland and Northern England in March and in Edinburgh the flower beds were quite pretty. Lot different than here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Scotland? Warm compared to what you and I are used to. I was there last year at this time and quite enjoyed the weather - did not have to wear anything more than a light windbreaker.Borg Southern Scotland yes. But the northern highlands are almost in the arctic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borg Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Southern Scotland yes. But the northern highlands are almost in the arctic. Actually the northern most section of Scotland is only at 60 north and heavily moderated by the warm currents - winters are short and mild by any comparisom. Look if it makes you feel better I will say - and have said - there are areas that do not apply. Generally speaking the entire Euro area is far, far warmer than canada. Having travelled Europe extensively and some associated countries under the guise of work many times I can assure you that they do not put up with anything like the average canucklehead in canada. They also do not have the lengthy drives to get to work or to the nearest town. In fact all of Europe could easily fit into Ontario or Quebec. Just because a country is in a northern latitude does not mean it is cold. Last one from me on this - if only because it leads to nothing other than a discussion with someone who will not ever understand - you win. Borg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted January 3, 2008 Report Share Posted January 3, 2008 Actually the northern most section of Scotland is only at 60 north and heavily moderated by the warm currents - winters are short and mild by any comparisom.Look if it makes you feel better I will say - and have said - there are areas that do not apply. Generally speaking the entire Euro area is far, far warmer than canada. Having travelled Europe extensively and some associated countries under the guise of work many times I can assure you that they do not put up with anything like the average canucklehead in canada. They also do not have the lengthy drives to get to work or to the nearest town. In fact all of Europe could easily fit into Ontario or Quebec. Just because a country is in a northern latitude does not mean it is cold. Last one from me on this - if only because it leads to nothing other than a discussion with someone who will not ever understand - you win. Borg Gnerally speaking yes, most of Europe is warmer than Canada..... Here's the recent weather for scotland.... Meanwhile, up to 20cm (8in) of snow in areas of Eastern Scotland and North East England have wreaked havoc on the roads. A driver died when his BMW slid off the A90 and down a 30ft embankment north of Dundee. Part of the A1 in Northumberland was closed temporarily after cars became stuck in the snow. Hazardous driving conditions were also reported in North Yorkshire, where there have been around 30 car collisions. The ocean currents (the gulf stream) do not affect eastern scotland as they do in Wales where they can grow palms... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Gas prices are on the way again and the reason is the killing of Bhutto. I hope no leader breaks a fingernail!!! I don't think consumers believe that one! Question..... why isn't Canada using our own product of oil. Is it lack of refineries to change oil to gas?? I would think prices would go down if we did. Anyone??Gasoline and oil are both freely traded on commodity exchanges and prices reflect marketplace movements. A "made-in-Canada" price would encourage consumption and be wasteful of foreign exchange that could be earned from exports of crude and/or product. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 4, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Today, the radio news is reporting that gas prices in Canada will probably reach 1.25 alitre of more by the end of the year. How much would that be if we were still in gallons?? Would it be about 4.50 -6.00 gal.?? Anyone? It seems we are getting closer to the Europeans prices! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 Today, the radio news is reporting that gas prices in Canada will probably reach 1.25 alitre of more by the end of the year. How much would that be if we were still in gallons?? Would it be about 4.50 -6.00 gal.?? Anyone? It seems we are getting closer to the Europeans prices!With currences at par, that's $4.8375 per US gallon. It may be different in imperial gallons. I still expect a big drop and soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 4, 2008 Report Share Posted January 4, 2008 With currences at par, that's $4.8375 per US gallon. It may be different in imperial gallons. I still expect a big drop and soon. Add 20% for Imperial gallons and you will be close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted January 6, 2008 Report Share Posted January 6, 2008 I still expect a big drop and soon. I'm taking your side on this one. Don Drummond's outlook was $60/bbl by the end of '08 in a market report I read about a month back. I'm siding with this argument. The US is sliding fast into a recession, led by a further declining housing market (it's declining in real terms and their is less access to financing... bad news) and if no one has a place to live, fewer will have cars (unless they live in their cars I suppose.....). I'm guessing business is good and getting better for a guy like you, hey jbg? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted January 6, 2008 Report Share Posted January 6, 2008 I'm taking your side on this one. Don Drummond's outlook was $60/bbl by the end of '08 in a market report I read about a month back. I'm siding with this argument. The US is sliding fast into a recession, led by a further declining housing market (it's declining in real terms and their is less access to financing... bad news) and if no one has a place to live, fewer will have cars (unless they live in their cars I suppose.....).My reasoning is more that oil seems to trade in a "real range" with a bottom close to real 1971 levels, and a real top of 1980-81 levels. The levels reached in 1986 and 1998-9 (respectively around $8 and $9.50 per barrel) were very close to 1971 levels (around $2.50) when inflation was removed. The early 1974 levels (around $14) and current levels (around $100) are almost identical to 1980-1 levels (around $42) when adjusted for inflation. In all earlier peaks people, when they bought cars, looked for fuel economy. Also, eager young drivers, often teens are on "fixed incomes" i.e. Daddy's allowance. The gas money doesn't go as far when prices rise. During the "low price" periods of the 60's through 1972, and mid-80s to early 21st century "muscle cars" and SUV's were, respectively the rage. Mighty expensive perk now.I'm guessing business is good and getting better for a guy like you, hey jbg?That's blood money. I don't want to get rich that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.