Which Cost More? Oil or ...

"Mark A" <nobody.TakeThisOut@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:NYE7k.3226$NQ5.2297@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rnC7k.4029$i5.2200@trndny07...
>> Bullshit. Show us your evidence that this is true.
>>
>> Furthermore, not all oil is the same. Different types of oil damage the
>> environment in different ways and in different degrees. In addition, to
>> oil leaking out of wells, there is oil leaking from pipes, from tanker
>> crashes like the Exxon Valdez, as well as other environmental damage
>> done, like disruptions of the sea floor or areas where the wells are from
>> different types of vehicles.
>
> So are you going to support nuclear energy like France, Japan, and most of
> Western Europe? France gets about 80% of its electricity from nuclear, and
> is building new plants frequently.

I'd be for nuclear energy if: only safe plants - not older, verging on
decrepit ones which barely meet safety standards - were on-line, & the
storage of the waste problem could be solved in a way which everyone could
accept.

Cathy
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Mark A" <nobody RemoveThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:f1F7k.3228$NQ5.1042@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
> "Dont Taze Me, Bro!" <DontTaze RemoveThis @MeBro.com> wrote in message
> news:a%D7k.119504$G33.40324@trnddc03...
>> Of course, neither is consumed like oil and assuming it is fair for
>> anyone to be forced to forgo the good things in life just to make the oil
>> pimps happy is something out of a neo-conservative exxon stockholder's
>> story book.
>
> Yes, must be those neocons at CNBC who published the list.
>
> You get very emotional when someone publishes facts.

Those prices may well be factual, but they're completely out of context.
But the point of that circulating e-mail (there are variations of it) want
people to view them in such a way that they correlate those prices with the
price of gas, to make then feel better about how much they[;'re paying for
gas. But how many people stop & realize that it makes no sense, since we
don't purchase gallons of those items on a weekly or biweekly basis, as we
do gasoline?

Cathy
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Ripcord" <kf DeleteThis @beth.net> wrote in message
news:oBG7k.10844$PZ6.5290@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Dont Taze Me, Bro!" <DontTaze DeleteThis @MeBro.com> wrote in message
> news:PXD7k.972$9J.3@trnddc06...
>>
>> "Mark A" <nobody DeleteThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:dCn7k.2478$1I.1673@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>>> Price per barrel:
>>>
>>> Oil $133
>>> Coca Cola $126
>>> Milk $163
>>> Perrier Water $300
>>> Budweiser $447
>>> Starbucks Latte $954
>>> Ben & Jerry's $1,609
>>> Tabasco Sauce $6,155
>>> Chanel No 5 $1,666,560
>>
>> This has been posted in here before and let me say again, it is f-ing
>> retarded. Are you an apologist for big oil?
>>
>> I am sorry but how much Ben and Jerry's do you need? How much Tabasco
>> sauce do you need? How much Perrier do you need? Furthermore, how the
>> f__k do you think that stuff gets to your location when you do decide to
>> dabble in it?
>>
>> Stop being a dumbass moron.
>
> If you want to look at it your way.
> A barrel of each would last a person:
> Oil 1 day(maybe)
> Coca Cola 3 months
> Milk 3 months
> Perrier Water 3 weeks
> Budweiser 2 months
> Starbucks Latte 2 year
> Ben & Jerry's 2 year
> Tabasco Sauce 20 years
> Chanel No 5 100 years(really don't use the stuff myself)

Chanel No. 19 is nicer, anyway.

Cathy


> Now if a barrel of oil could last as long as any of these we would be
> doing real good.
> You dumbshit!
>
> These are my estimation and not to be taken serious.

>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:10:18 GMT, "Augustus" <no_one.TakeThisOut@no_where.net> wrote:

>
>"Dont Taze Me, Bro!" <DontTaze.TakeThisOut@MeBro.com> wrote in message
>news:PXD7k.972$9J.3@trnddc06...
>>
>> "Mark A" <nobody.TakeThisOut@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> news:dCn7k.2478$1I.1673@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
>>> Price per barrel:
>>>
>>> Oil $133
>>> Coca Cola $126
>>> Milk $163
>>> Perrier Water $300
>>> Budweiser $447
>>> Starbucks Latte $954
>>> Ben & Jerry's $1,609
>>> Tabasco Sauce $6,155
>>> Chanel No 5 $1,666,560
>
>I don't see the nations economy and infrastructure running on lattes and
>Coke. Or F-22's or M1 Abrams for that matter. Idiot.
>
Well, the Abrams will run on Chanel No 5, or jack Daniel's, for that matter.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Speak softly and carry a loaded .45
Lifetime member; Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

Cathy F. wrote:
> "Mark A" <nobody.DeleteThis@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:NYE7k.3226$NQ5.2297@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:rnC7k.4029$i5.2200@trndny07...
>>> Bullshit. Show us your evidence that this is true.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, not all oil is the same. Different types of oil damage the
>>> environment in different ways and in different degrees. In addition, to
>>> oil leaking out of wells, there is oil leaking from pipes, from tanker
>>> crashes like the Exxon Valdez, as well as other environmental damage
>>> done, like disruptions of the sea floor or areas where the wells are from
>>> different types of vehicles.
>> So are you going to support nuclear energy like France, Japan, and most of
>> Western Europe? France gets about 80% of its electricity from nuclear, and
>> is building new plants frequently.
>
> I'd be for nuclear energy if: only safe plants - not older, verging on
> decrepit ones which barely meet safety standards - were on-line, & the
> storage of the waste problem could be solved in a way which everyone could
> accept.
>
> Cathy

Yes, I think we should build many more nuclear power plants. Of course,
they should be safe. In addition, they should all use the same
technology, with groups of plants sharing the same design.

Jeff
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Mark A" <nobody RemoveThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:b8J7k.10954$3F5.5275@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
>
> No, they can make 42 gallons of gas from a barrel of oil if they wanted
> to. Instead, they typically make about half that, but the remaining
> product produced is jet fuel, heating oil , etc. If you assume that there
> are only 21 gallons of gas per barrel, then the cost per barrel should be
> cut in half since the other products besides gasoline that are refined
> from the same barrel are worth about the same as the gasoline (on
> average). I chose to leave the cost of the barrel the same, and assume
> there are 42 gallons of gas per barrel.
>
> Some of you morons cannot read (no offense).

Okay, I'll rephrase my response to you.

Depending on each individual's requirements, that would last some longer
and others far
less time. Personally, I drive an F-150 crewcab four by four and I manage
to squeeze just about 60 miles out of every $30.00 that I put in the fuel
tank (at today's price).

By the way, you still appear to be a moron.
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

Hachiroku wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 23:23:36 +0000, Jeff wrote:
>
>> Mike hunt wrote:
>>> How often have we heard from the environuts that we should switch to ethanol
>>> or bio-fuels etc? Where in the hell will we get enough ethanol or
>>> bio-fuels to replace the 400,000,000 gallons of gasoline we use every day in
>>> the US?
>> Well, if you stopped drinking, then we would be 1/2 way there.
>>
>> We should be using waste oil (like used fryer grease)
>
>
> We are:
>
> http://www.greasecar.com/
>
> There are a whole bunch of them around here, since the company is ~12 from
> my home.
>
> Interesting. Smell french-fries? Look for a VW with a GREASECAR sticker.
>
> I have a friend who runs veggie oil in his F-350, unmodified. Says it
> costs about $1 a gallon, but you know that will change.
>
> The only real reason you need to modify the car is to keep the grease from
> solidifying. Once the temp gets above 75 degrees, that's not an issue.
> Below 75 degrees you can mix it with diesel fuel, but only down to about
> 70.

The problem is that amount of grease generated by McDonalds and other
restaurants is not enough to supply more than a tiny bit of the energy
needed for vehicles.
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Mark A" <nobody RemoveThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:b8J7k.10954$3F5.5275@bignews2.bellsouth.net...
> "Brian Smith" <Halifax RemoveThis @NovaScotia.Canada> wrote in message
> news:91J7k.866$2G6.26@edtnps83...
>> I'd have to go with "you" as the answer to that question (no offence
>> meant <g>). You would only have 21 gallons of gas to use and depending on
>> each individual's requirements, that would last some longer and others
>> far less time. Personally, I drive an F-150 crewcab four by four and I
>> manage to squeeze just about 60 miles out of every $30.00 that I put in
>> the fuel tank (at today's price).
>
> No, they can make 42 gallons of gas from a barrel of oil if they wanted
> to. Instead, they typically make about half that, but the remaining
> product produced is jet fuel, heating oil , etc. If you assume that there
> are only 21 gallons of gas per barrel, then the cost per barrel should be
> cut in half since the other products besides gasoline that are refined
> from the same barrel are worth about the same as the gasoline (on
> average). I chose to leave the cost of the barrel the same, and assume
> there are 42 gallons of gas per barrel.
>

I am not a chemist or expert on refining oil, but I don't think that it is
economically feasible to get 42 gallons of gas from 42 gallons of crude oil
because the crude oil has different components with different properties.

These articles seem to confirm this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery
http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-refining3.htm


--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

The storage of nuclear waste is not a scientific problem, it is a political
problem. Other counties made arrangements years ago to store their waste
under the ground from which it came. Only the US is behind because the
environuts do not want us to use nuclear power, the least expensive, safest
and cleanest way to make electricity.

Few people realize storage of nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain site is
far safer than the storage any place else in the world or were all of our
waste, for all of our nuclear power plants is currently stored, under six
feet of water at the generating site . How many realize the nuclear fuel
is taken TO the power station is by truck. By the way none of it shipped
to, or currently stored at the power stations, has ever been a problem.

The fact is ALL of the nuclear waste for all of our nuclear activates since
1943 and ALL of our nuclear power stations, was held in one place it would
not fill up the average high school gym.

Ask any sailor who is or has served, on any of our aircraft carriers or subs
over the past thirty five or forty years, if they are afraid of nuclear
power





"Cathy F." <clfrclfr.RemoveThis@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote in message
news:ptqdnaiLDvltkP3VRVn_vwA@giganews.com...
>
> "Mark A" <nobody.RemoveThis@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:NYE7k.3226$NQ5.2297@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
>> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:rnC7k.4029$i5.2200@trndny07...
..
>>
>> So are you going to support nuclear energy like France, Japan, and most
>> of Western Europe? France gets about 80% of its electricity from nuclear,
>> and is building new plants frequently.
>
> I'd be for nuclear energy if: only safe plants - not older, verging on
> decrepit ones which barely meet safety standards - were on-line, & the
> storage of the waste problem could be solved in a way which everyone could
> accept.
>
> Cathy
>
>
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Cathy F." <clfrclfr.DeleteThis@adelphiadotdashdot.net> wrote in message
news:78-dnSZA4e8Vkv3VRVn_vwA@giganews.com...
> Those prices may well be factual, but they're completely out of context.
> But the point of that circulating e-mail (there are variations of it) want
> people to view them in such a way that they correlate those prices with
> the price of gas, to make then feel better about how much they[;'re paying
> for gas. But how many people stop & realize that it makes no sense, since
> we don't purchase gallons of those items on a weekly or biweekly basis, as
> we do gasoline?
>
> Cathy

The original source of my post is not an email, I saw it on the CNBC
website.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25086684

Admittedly, some of the items on the list are farfetched (Channel No 5), but
it is interesting to see how much it costs to produce and distribute things
that are almost commodities like milk, soft drinks, and beer.

I live about 4 miles from work (8 miles roundtrip), and I get about 24 miles
per gallon, so I spent about $1.33 today for gasoline (assuming $4.00 per
gallon). I had a soft drink at lunch ($1.50) and another at dinner ($1.75),
and had a coke from the machine at work during the day ($0.70). I figure I
spent $3.95 for soft drinks (restaurants are charging outrageous prices for
soft drinks these days, even if you do get free refills). This evening I had
a beer at home, which I only paid $1.00 because I previously bought a 12
pack at a grocery store (would have been about $3.00 at a restaurant).

So for today, I spent $4.95 for beverages, and $1.33 for gas. I have no
agenda and not trying to prove anything. But maybe gasoline is not the only
overpriced things we consume.

Warren Buffet is the richest man on the planet (or close to it) and he made
a big chunk of his money in Coca Cola stock. I don't recall that he has
owned many energy related stocks (but I could be wrong about that).
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:MZudnTyEW9gD9f3VnZ2dnUVZ_qDinZ2d@comcast.com...
> I am not a chemist or expert on refining oil, but I don't think that it is
> economically feasible to get 42 gallons of gas from 42 gallons of crude
> oil because the crude oil has different components with different
> properties.
>
> These articles seem to confirm this:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery
> http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-refining3.htm
>
>
> Ray O

I think you are missing the point. When a barrel (42 gallons) of oil is
refined, and it produces 21 gallons of gasoline, it also produces 21 gallons
of other refined hydrocarbons with a fairly substantial economic value. So
the economic value of the output of the refining process needs to be
distributed among the products produced.

So if you want to stick with 21 gallons of refined gasoline per barrel of
crude, then you need to cost the barrel of crude at about $68 (about one
half the current price of $136 per barrel). Otherwise you are assuming that
the raw material cost of the other refined products in a barrel of oil
(including jet fuel, fuel oil, etc) is zero (which might surprise a lot of
airlines and homeowners).
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

"Mark A" <nobody DeleteThis @nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:_2_7k.11604$PZ6.9198@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
> news:MZudnTyEW9gD9f3VnZ2dnUVZ_qDinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> I am not a chemist or expert on refining oil, but I don't think that it
>> is economically feasible to get 42 gallons of gas from 42 gallons of
>> crude oil because the crude oil has different components with different
>> properties.
>>
>> These articles seem to confirm this:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery
>> http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-refining3.htm
>>
>>
>> Ray O
>
> I think you are missing the point. When a barrel (42 gallons) of oil is
> refined, and it produces 21 gallons of gasoline, it also produces 21
> gallons of other refined hydrocarbons with a fairly substantial economic
> value. So the economic value of the output of the refining process needs
> to be distributed among the products produced.
>
> So if you want to stick with 21 gallons of refined gasoline per barrel of
> crude, then you need to cost the barrel of crude at about $68 (about one
> half the current price of $136 per barrel). Otherwise you are assuming
> that the raw material cost of the other refined products in a barrel of
> oil (including jet fuel, fuel oil, etc) is zero (which might surprise a
> lot of airlines and homeowners).
That explanation makes a lot more sense.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ... 

Mark A wrote:
> "Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
> news:MZudnTyEW9gD9f3VnZ2dnUVZ_qDinZ2d@comcast.com...
>> I am not a chemist or expert on refining oil, but I don't think that it is
>> economically feasible to get 42 gallons of gas from 42 gallons of crude
>> oil because the crude oil has different components with different
>> properties.
>>
>> These articles seem to confirm this:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery
>> http://science.howstuffworks.com/oil-refining3.htm
>>
>>
>> Ray O
>
> I think you are missing the point. When a barrel (42 gallons) of oil is
> refined, and it produces 21 gallons of gasoline, it also produces 21 gallons
> of other refined hydrocarbons with a fairly substantial economic value.

with just distillation, that would be about right, though it depends on
what's being distilled. however, if we introduce modern hydrocracking
and catalysis, which refiners do in fact use, we can get substantially
more than 21 gallons of gasoline [and a lower quantity of heavier product].


> So
> the economic value of the output of the refining process needs to be
> distributed among the products produced.
>
> So if you want to stick with 21 gallons of refined gasoline per barrel of
> crude, then you need to cost the barrel of crude at about $68 (about one
> half the current price of $136 per barrel). Otherwise you are assuming that
> the raw material cost of the other refined products in a barrel of oil
> (including jet fuel, fuel oil, etc) is zero (which might surprise a lot of
> airlines and homeowners).
>
>
 >> Stay informed about: Which Cost More? Oil or ...