Brewmaster

Neither do I. Granted, I'm all for better uses of land, more emphasis on transit, and stronger cities, but I just don't understand how people can cheer for high gas prices where the two aforementioned social classes are taking the highest hit. Change doesn't happen without a stimulus, which in this case, is high gas prices. I cheer high gas prices because I want things to change. I have no doubt that people will adapt (electric cars, telecommuting, rebuilding our communities, strengthening mass transit, etc...). I also have no doubts that some will be slow to adapt and feel some pain. That's life.

I know there are quite a few airline industry experts on these boards, so I'll just post my question here rather than starting a new thread... What are the odds that Cleveland gets direct flights to the Portland or Seattle anytime soon? You'd think that Continental would route some of their traffic from these cities though Cleveland, rather than Houston and Newark.

^ Thanks Hootenanny. Yes, I'm talking about gov't mandated energy efficiency programs. It was in response to Boreal's statement which blamed Washington for not forcing citizens to conserve energy (or perhaps forcing utilities to force citizens to conserve energy).

Absolutely. Efficiency is cheaper than fuel. Too bad no one in Washington gets this. Why must we rely on Washington to make our personal homes more energy efficient??? This should be something every American should be doing on their own! I would hope that people are smart enough to make their own decision based on their own unique circumstances. AMEN! We need to stop blaming the government for refusing to force us to make smart decisions. Energy efficiency only gets more profitable when bills go up. I spend $70/month on electric and gas combined (3 story condo, shared 16" thick brick walls, built in the 1870's). If that were to double or triple, I'd be motiviated to do something about it. Right now, I'm doing just fine, and I wouldn't appreciate my tax bill going to help an energy glutton change their habits. The gluttons should be motivated by the economics.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080801/BIZ01/808010347/1076/NEWS http://blog.cleveland.com/business/2008/07/ohios_electric_utilities_seeki.html

Well gee...I hope we'll be ready to take the first step in 2014. This is embarassing.

Grilling Weiler could be a lot of fun. Talk about an obvious conflict of interest! Too bad that they charge admission to listen to people have a discussion.

At 5:30 tonight in Council Chambers (2nd floor hearing room), Councilwoman O'Shaughnessy will be hosting the 2nd of 4 public meetings about regional transportation goals and plans. Chester Jourdan of MORPC will be the main speaker. I also understand that an OSU professor with knowledge of Peak Oil will also be there. Sorry for the late notice!

I'm just not buying that people or animals have enough energy in their pee (the source of her urea) to run an electrolyzer and a car. I also wonder what the capital costs would be just to convert your transportation energy to run off of said pee. Lets pretend this gets commercialized. You've now got to buy a fuel cell car that only runs on ammonia ($$$$), an in-home electrolyzer (up front $$ and electricity to run it $$), separate your urine from the rest of your plumbing ($$$). You'd also have to drive around town in a car that could kill everyone within a two block radius if the anhydrous ammonia tank ruptures. I hate to be a naysayer because I love technological innovation, but this feels like one of those things that we'll look back on in 40 years with the same nostalgia that we do with the flying cars of the 1960's. Anaerobic digesters working off of poop and creating methane is a much more practical process.

Another shining example of how colleges can do completely impractical things just to get grant money and publicity. Ammonia comes from shifted natural gas in a capital and energy intensive process. Anhydrous ammonia is also pretty hazardous stuff...especially to be driving around with a pressurized tank full. If the benefit is that we have 3,000 miles of ammonia pipelines, then why not just skip the costly step where we turn natural gas into ammonia, and fill our cars with natrual gas. After all, we've got hundreds of thousands of miles of natural gas pipelines in this country...most of them lead right into people's homes!

Well...the Volt started out costing around $30k. Then it was revised to $30-40k. Now it looks like it's $48k. Any guesses on where it'll settle out? Nevermind, I'm sure my tax dollars will subsidize the hell out of it. I'm gonna say it'll cost $30k with subsidies, GM will make out like a bandit, and people will save their suburban lifestyles.

This is really crazy. At least O'Shaughnessy gets it. The rest are going to be answerable to the voters when we're staring at $6/gal gasoline.

Mexico is in some deep sh!t... http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080421/mexico_oil_production.html We need to seal that border ASAP. Between the rising prices of corn and fuel, and now the falling revenue from their government's huge funding source, things are about to get ugly south of the border.

There's nothing but a big rubble-filled hole in the ground where the condemned Lazarus garage once sat.

See...I think these two fit perfectly into my theory. Nobody was ready for asian demand to take off. The Saudi's massively increased production in 2003-2004 when it did, which basically amounted to opening up the valves at existing fields and blowing their planned spare capacity. The rig counts match up perfectly with them developing new fields in the 2008-2012 time frame. They were caught with their pants down.