Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Energy and the Mother of Invention

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.
Post a reply

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 18:23:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'B')ut the mpg changes match the changes in miles driven almost exactly.
Only if you limit your gaze to the 1980's. That graph spans 5 decades. Try analyzing MPG and MPV from 1950 to 2000 and coming to the same conclusion.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'T')o asset that that efficiency gains had no influence on MPV even if the price of gas dropped defies science and logic.
I am not making that claim. The question is, how much of the MPV increase came from cheap oil, and how much came from efficiency gains? Also, of the MPV increase that came from efficiency gains, did overall fuel usage actually rise? These questions were studied in detail in the Jevons' paradox report I linked to. Their conclusion was that direct rebound effects reduced efficiency gains by 10-20%. IE, if you saved 10 gallons of fuel from efficiency gains, you only saved 8-9 gallons overall because your MPV increased.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'A')nd as for that bar graph you keep posting Monte, I love how it cherry picks years and doesn't account for population growth.
Which is why I posted this one along with it.
Great. Now why don't you also mention what happened to the price of oil during the 1970's, 80s, and 90s? Namely, that it ranged from nearly $70 a barrel(lowest MPV), to less than $20 a barrel(highest MPV).
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby TonyPrep » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 18:25:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'S')hocker! In fact, miles driven keeps going up in the 90's as well. Oil stays cheap in the 90s, mpg flat lines. So you tell me, who is wearing the rose colored glasses here?
Kublikhan, if efficiency improves markedly, a glut of oil will ensue, lowering the price and encouraging more people to drive more miles. This would raise the price again but then the end result would be more miles for the same cost. At the same time, you keep the economy growing, you get richer and now you can afford to spend a bit more on traveling, so your miles go up again, even if the oil price rises.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby TonyPrep » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 18:27:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'H')owever I still believe the US could achieve significant energy savings without plunging us into a recession.
Well, you're entitled to that belief but I very much doubt it's true.
If France and Germany could do it, why would you doubt the US could do it?
Maybe if they had 16 to thirty years. But to do it when they are already in a practical recession is, shall we say, highly unlikely. I'd be surprised if France and Germany could do it now.
Uh, that drop happened in a few years. And they were recession years.Thanks for proving my point. Reducing energy use will lead to recession, and yet you think the US can avoid that. Doesn't sound likely, to me.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 18:35:42

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', ' ')The question is, how much of the MPV increase came from cheap oil, and how much came from efficiency gains?


Matters not what the precise split is.

Like I said before, we are getting caught up in the minutiae.

The point being that efficiency gains are not going to power the fruition of new technology, nor will conservation.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Montequest', 'R')emember, in a post-peak world, all new energy expenditures must come from the existing supply. For example: if demand is 100 units and supply is 75 units, we must improve efficiencies or cut use through conservation to meet supply. This will put someone out of work as the economy contracts.

Put them to work building solar you say? Where will the energy come from?

It must come from the remaining 75 units, displacing even more people and contracting the economy even more.

Feel like you are pushing a rope yet?

Like the dollar poor people of the Great Depression, who will loan you "energy" to get your business/ invention/innovation going?

Who will have it to lend?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 18:56:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'H')owever I still believe the US could achieve significant energy savings without plunging us into a recession.
Well, you're entitled to that belief but I very much doubt it's true.
If France and Germany could do it, why would you doubt the US could do it?
Maybe if they had 16 to thirty years. But to do it when they are already in a practical recession is, shall we say, highly unlikely. I'd be surprised if France and Germany could do it now.
Uh, that drop happened in a few years. And they were recession years.Thanks for proving my point. Reducing energy use will lead to recession, and yet you think the US can avoid that. Doesn't sound likely, to me. I am not really sure what your point is anymore. First you claimed energy savings were highly unlikely in a recession. Then you state that energy reduction = recession. Make up your mind. Assuming your second stance is what you are really trying to say, I should point out that France emerged from that recession and it's GDP rocketed to three times its 1980 value, and over 4x it's lowest recession value. Yet their oil consumption never passed it's 1980 level. Also, I might add there is plenty of evidence of lower energy intensity and increasing GDP if for some reason you thought that to be highly unlikely.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'K')ublikhan, if efficiency improves markedly, a glut of oil will ensue, lowering the price and encouraging more people to drive more miles. This would raise the price again but then the end result would be more miles for the same cost. At the same time, you keep the economy growing, you get richer and now you can afford to spend a bit more on traveling, so your miles go up again, even if the oil price rises. The oil shocks and later oil glut were not the result of efficiency gains. They were politically motivated.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby TonyPrep » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 19:40:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'I') am not really sure what your point is anymore.
Then let me remind you what you said here (and it has been reproduced in most of these exchanges):$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'H')owever I still believe the US could achieve significant energy savings without plunging us into a recession.
I said that is unlikely. You said other countries had done it, over 15-30 years. I pointed out that the US may not have that long. You then said it could be done in a very short time but used, as evidence, energy decline in two contries during a recession, thus completely negating your claim that the US could do it without plunging into a recession. If you're now trying to claim that the US could come out of its self imposed recession (imposed by using less energy) and grow an even larger economy without increasing energy beyond what it first used, then that is a separate issue.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'K')ublikhan, if efficiency improves markedly, a glut of oil will ensue, lowering the price and encouraging more people to drive more miles. This would raise the price again but then the end result would be more miles for the same cost. At the same time, you keep the economy growing, you get richer and now you can afford to spend a bit more on traveling, so your miles go up again, even if the oil price rises.
The oil shocks and later oil glut were not the result of efficiency gains. They were politically motivated.
So what? That's not related to what I was saying above.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 22:01:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'I') am not really sure what your point is anymore.
Then let me remind you what you said here (and it has been reproduced in most of these exchanges):$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'H')owever I still believe the US could achieve significant energy savings without plunging us into a recession.
I said that is unlikely. You said other countries had done it, over 15-30 years. I pointed out that the US may not have that long. You then said it could be done in a very short time but used, as evidence, energy decline in two contries during a recession, thus completely negating your claim that the US could do it without plunging into a recession. If you're now trying to claim that the US could come out of its self imposed recession (imposed by using less energy) and grow an even larger economy without increasing energy beyond what it first used, then that is a separate issue.
Ok, let me get this straight. You dismiss lower energy consumption if it happens during a recession, even if it later leads to a higher level of GDP and lower level of energy use. You also dismiss a lower energy intensity, even if it happens during periods of GDP growth, if the total energy use increases, even if GDP increases faster. The one and ONLY thing you want to find evidence of, is growing GDP and lowering energy consumption, is that correct? If that is the case, here you go:

France oil consumption(millions of barrels a day):
1984: 1.77
1985: 1.75

France GDP(2005 dollars):
1984: 525 billion
1985: 549 billion

Germany oil consumption(millions of barrels a day):
2001: 2.81
2002: 2.72
2003: 2.68
2004: 2.67
2005: 2.61

Germany GDP(2005 dollars):
2001: 1,891 billion
2002: 2,019 billion
2003: 2,442 billion
2004: 2,751 billion
2005: 2,795 billion

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'S')hocker! In fact, miles driven keeps going up in the 90's as well. Oil stays cheap in the 90s, mpg flat lines. So you tell me, who is wearing the rose colored glasses here?
Kublikhan, if efficiency improves markedly, a glut of oil will ensue, lowering the price and encouraging more people to drive more miles. This would raise the price again but then the end result would be more miles for the same cost. At the same time, you keep the economy growing, you get richer and now you can afford to spend a bit more on traveling, so your miles go up again, even if the oil price rises. Tony, between the time the oil shock of 79 occurred and the time it was lifted, their was only very minor efficiency gains implemented. They did not cause any "glut".
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby TonyPrep » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 22:24:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'I') am not really sure what your point is anymore.
Then let me remind you what you said here (and it has been reproduced in most of these exchanges):$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'H')owever I still believe the US could achieve significant energy savings without plunging us into a recession.
I said that is unlikely. You said other countries had done it, over 15-30 years. I pointed out that the US may not have that long. You then said it could be done in a very short time but used, as evidence, energy decline in two contries during a recession, thus completely negating your claim that the US could do it without plunging into a recession. If you're now trying to claim that the US could come out of its self imposed recession (imposed by using less energy) and grow an even larger economy without increasing energy beyond what it first used, then that is a separate issue.
Ok, let me get this straight. You dismiss lower energy consumption if it happens during a recession, even if it later leads to a higher level of GDP and lower level of energy use. You also dismiss a lower energy intensity, even if it happens during periods of GDP growth, if the total energy use increases, even if GDP increases faster. The one and ONLY thing you want to find evidence of, is growing GDP and lowering energy consumption, is that correct?
No. You said that you "still believe the US could achieve significant energy savings without plunging us into a recession". You've tried to offer evidence of that but have failed to do so. You've cherry picked a couple of years (or a few years) of raw data but not related that to the US position, relative to the position of the countries and time you cite as evidence. Sorry, you appear to have a strong belief that the US will do this and that's fine, but I'm not convinced. Good luck with that.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', 'T')ony, between the time the oil shock of 79 occurred and the time it was lifted, their was only very minor efficiency gains implemented. They did not cause any "glut".So? I didn't say there was; I was putting forward a general argument about efficiency gains and how they are unlikely to lead to big improvements (decreases) in consumption, especially where growth appears to be a prerequisite. You seemed to acknowledge this earlier, though you hope for a better overall outcome.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 11 Jul 2008, 23:50:54

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'Y')ou've tried to offer evidence of that but have failed to do so. You've cherry picked a couple of years (or a few years) of raw data but not related that to the US position, relative to the position of the countries and time you cite as evidence. Sorry, you appear to have a strong belief that the US will do this and that's fine, but I'm not convinced. Good luck with that.
WTF I failed? I provided examples of GDP growing faster than energy, you say that is no good, energy cannot grow at all. I provided examples of shrinking energy and you say that is no good because it was a recession. I provided nearly 30 years of data to you with growing GDP and less energy consumption, you say that is too long. I provided 5 years of data to you. You say 5 years is too short. I provide exactly what you asked for, and then I am "cherry picking". I just don't get you. If I am understanding you correctly, your requirements are:
#1 Country can only be the United States.
#2 Country must have continuous, uninterrupted GDP growth. No periods of intermittent negative GDP growth will be accepted.
#3 Country must have declining energy use.
Did I miss anything? Does the moon have to be in proper alignment? Any requirements if the year is a prime number or not?
This is turning into one of the most asinine exercises I have ever participated in, but here goes:

United States Oil Consumption(millions of barrels):
1980: 17.1 million barrels
1981: 16.1 million barrels
1982: 15.3 million barrels
1983: 15.2 million barrels

United States GDP(2005 dollars):
1980: 2,769 billion
1981: 3,105 billion
1982: 3,230 billion
1983: 3,509 billion

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'S')o? I didn't say there was; I was putting forward a general argument about efficiency gains and how they are unlikely to lead to big improvements (decreases) in consumption, especially where growth appears to be a prerequisite. You seemed to acknowledge this earlier, though you hope for a better overall outcome.
Well thank you for your general theorizing. I was pointing to something that actually happened, you know, in reality? You see the glut I was talking about was not caused by efficiency gains. It was caused by OPEC opening up the taps and flooding the market with cheap oil.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby MonteQuest » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 00:46:08

Image

Ok. kublikhan says that the blue line rose because of cheap oil, thus cheap gasoline, even though it rose in direct relation to MPG gains and the decline of gallons per vehicle.

This is pure coincidence?

Look at the three lines correlation before 1973. The lines are pretty parallel except for GPV consumption from about 1967 to 1973 when the oil crisis hit. The muscle cars of that era caused that GPV rise. The Hemi-Cuda, Roadrunner, Z28, etc.

Then, in 1973, MPG improved a little as people drove slower and bought Japanese vehicles. MPV and GPV dropped as gas was rationed.

1974 -75 all three lines are now rising parallel to each other until the Arab Embargo in 1979. Then MPV and GPV dropped while MPG rose due to slower speeds, the depression at that time, and people buying more efficient and smaller cars from Japan.

Then suddenly, GPV goes flat, and MPV an MPG rise parallel to each other.

We are to disregard this direct correlation and evidence of Jevons Paradox and believe it was cheap gas that made MPV rise?

Man...that had to be some cheap gas, indeed! Cheaper than before 1973 even, right? Otherwise why wasn't MPV going up like crazy then? MPV was only rising slightly while MPG was sligthly declining as the chart shows.

So, what was the price of gas during these periods?

1970 $.35/gal
1980 $1.22/gal
1981 $1.35/gal peak
1990 $1.09/gal
1991 $1.15/gal
2000 $$1.66/gal

Here is the data from a guy living in Texas using 1090 fill ups of Super unleaded, the most expensive.

Image

Looks like gas prices were rising when MPV started it's climb in 1981-82, not dropping and then only a few cents. The faint line next to the dark line, shows the average price for the entire U.S., from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Where is this $.10 cents a gallon or "cheap gas" that caused MPV to rise, kublikhan?

Hmmm?

Looks like more efficient engines and cars drove up MPV & GPV.

It's called Jevons Paradox.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:19:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'O')k. kublikhan says that the blue line rose because of cheap oil, thus cheap gasoline, even though it rose in direct relation to MPG gains and the decline of gallons per vehicle.This is pure coincidence?
Not coincidence, its rose colored glasses.
1950-1969 - MPG falls, MPV rises
1969-1979 - MPG is relatively flat. MPV is all over the place.
1979-1981 - MPG is rising. MPV is falling.
1981-1991 - MPG and MPV are both rising.
1991-2000 - MPG flat, MPV is rising.

You pick 10 years out of 50 and say "here is my evidence" the other 40 years doesn't fit, but you seem ok with that.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:24:15

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'L')ooks like more efficient engines and cars drove up MPV & GPV. It's called Jevons Paradox.

This is Jevons' Pardox? I think not:
Image
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby MonteQuest » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:29:50

Where is this $.10 cents a gallon or "cheap gas" that caused MPV to rise, kublikhan?

That's your contention, right?

There is no cheap gas to support that spurious notion.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby tsakach » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:34:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'T')hen suddenly, GPV goes flat, and MPV an MPG rise parallel to each other.

We are to disregard this direct correlation and evidence of Jevons Paradox and believe it was cheap gas that made MPV rise?

....

Looks like more efficient engines and cars drove up MPV & GPV.

It's called Jevons Paradox.


From 82-90 GPV is flat while both MPV and MPG are rising. This is due to the rebound effect and not Jevon's Paradox. There's a big difference between the two.

If the GPV is not rising while MPG is rising, then it's the rebound effect. If both GPV and MPG are rising then it's Jevons Paradox or the "Khazoom-Brookes Postulate".
User avatar
tsakach
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:41:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'W')here is this $.10 cents a gallon or "cheap gas" that caused MPV to rise, kublikhan? That's your contention, right?
There is no cheap gas to support that spurious notion.

Image
I would say the entire period from 1986-2000 is the period of cheap gas you are looking for. Also the era before 1973. What a coincidence, those also happen to be the eras of rising MPV.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby kublikhan » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:42:34

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tsakach', 'F')rom 82-90 GPV is flat while both MPV and MPG are rising. This is due to the rebound effect and not Jevon's Paradox. There's a big difference between the two.
If the GPV is not rising while MPG is rising, then it's the rebound effect. If both GPV and MPG are rising then it's Jevons Paradox or the "Khazoom-Brookes Postulate".
Thank you. I have tried to make that point several times.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 5064
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Illinois
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby MonteQuest » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:47:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tsakach', ' ') From 82-90 GPV is flat while both MPV and MPG are rising. This is due to the rebound effect and not Jevon's Paradox. There's a big difference between the two.

If the GPV is not rising while MPG is rising, then it's the rebound effect. If both GPV and MPG are rising then it's Jevons Paradox or the "Khazoom-Brookes Postulate".


GPV was flat because people owned more cars, the total gasoline consumption was spread over more cars.

The fact still remains, it wasn't cheap gas that caused MPV to go up as kublkan posits.

There wasn't any cheap gas to do it. Period.

End of discussion, except for those in terminal denial of the facts.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby MonteQuest » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:51:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', ' ')I would say the entire period from 1986-2000 is the period of cheap gas you are looking for. Also the era before 1973. What a coincidence, those also happen to be the eras of rising MPV.


1970 $.35/gal
1980 $1.22/gal
1981 $1.35/gal peak
1990 $1.09/gal
1991 $1.15/gal
2000 $$1.66/gal

Cheap gas? Where?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby tsakach » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 01:59:29

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', 'T')he fact still remains, it wasn't cheap gas that caused MPV to go up as kublkan posits.


What are you attributing to the increase in MPV? Jevon's Paradox?
User avatar
tsakach
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Wed 09 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Re: Energy and the Mother of Invention

Unread postby yesplease » Sat 12 Jul 2008, 02:30:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kublikhan', ' ')I would say the entire period from 1986-2000 is the period of cheap gas you are looking for. Also the era before 1973. What a coincidence, those also happen to be the eras of rising MPV.


1970 $.35/gal
1980 $1.22/gal
1981 $1.35/gal peak
1990 $1.09/gal
1991 $1.15/gal
2000 $$1.66/gal

Cheap gas? Where?
Here. Gasoline prices were cut nearly in half during the 1980s. Image
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Professor Membrane', ' ')Not now son, I'm making ... TOAST!
User avatar
yesplease
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3765
Joined: Tue 03 Oct 2006, 03:00:00
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests



cron