Recession what recession

[Bhigdog]

John, very well thought out and articulated. But, this is like deja-vu all over again. Near the very same things were said in the 1970's about a number of your predictions. I well remember Jimmy Carter saying we will never again be dependant on foreign oil. I also remember the White house tree being turned off and Jimmy wearing a sweater in the White House. (Conservation.) Solar tax credits and buzz about fusion power and coal liquification.(alternate sources). And grandious plans for new commuter lines that never happened. Maybe this time the forces at work are different. We shall see.

The point is, in view of the past, and history's very nasty habit of repeating itself, I salute you not only for your ability with words, but also for your optimisum.........Bob

[Guest John Chapman]

Bob,

Thanks for your comments. All those intentions of yore cost too much. At the time, it was easier to revert to the old way. It's a different world now and those band aid fixes just won't suffice.

Cheers,

JMC

[Dave@Moon]

Excellent post, John. (Didn't somebody already say that? ) There's only one thing I'd like to add/comment on:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Prediction 3: The continued fuel of choice for long distance, high speed, non-stop travel will continue to be petroleum based, because:

-- Installed infrastructure

-- Pound for pound, there has yet to be a more affordable, portable, useable, or energy efficient fuel developed

</div></div>

Those studies I spoke of that (partially) led me to buy the Prius sooner rather than later commented often on the future of transportaion. One thing that was universally agreed upon was the imminent death of large scale commercial aviation, the beginnings of which can be seen easily with the industry changes in the last 6 weeks.

Another universally agreed item was that the airlines will soon be replaced by a revitalized passenger rail system in the U.S. The seat-mpg of a passenger train cannot be beat! (Best of all, with features like the Auto Train it may be a way for us to take our cars to national meets in the future! )

Of course both trains and airliners use other oil fractions instead of petroleum, but that's immaterial.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> We’re also going to end this folly of growing food crops, or any other crops, to make ethanol. </div></div>

This is why I mentioned the non-food sources for ethanol, like switchgrass. They should be able to be grown in non-crop suitable areas, and should still be net-generators of energy (from what I've read). If there were no hope of this it would be criminal to continue the work of developing an ethanol infrastructure.

I guess that was 2 things.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Run, run, run for your lives.......the sky is falling. Maybe Al Gore can save us. HAW HAW HAW.

The climate cycles up, and the climate cycles down. 1000 years ago Greenland was just that. 500 years ago there was the Little Ice Age. Then it got warm again. There were Polar bears then. There are Polar bears now. And so it goes........Bob </div></div>

Bob, none of this is correct. The pattern of past climate changes have been well documented by paleoclimatologists. Gas analyses in marine sediment cores and Antarctic ice cores are constantly being analysed, and a consistent/clear record of the earth's climate has been uncovered that goes back tens of millions of years. One thing is clear:

<span style="font-weight: bold"><span style="text-decoration: underline">Nothing</span> like the last 50 years has ever been seen in the history of the planet.</span>

(Interestingly, for instance, here is a 35,000 year record of climate history recorded in cores taken from Greenland's ice cap. The first point to be taken is that the ice cap is at least that old. So much for the myth of Erik the Red's & Leif Erikson's green Greenland! Notice how it <span style="text-decoration: underline">never</span> comes within 4 degrees C of present day.)

If you're interested in learning more there are all sorts of authoritative sources for this information. You just have to look for it.

[Bhigdog]

I don't think anyone's denying the current warming trend. The problem, in my mind, is no one REALLY knows the total reason. I notice that there are 10 degree C temperature swings in your 35K year graph. That's an enormous swing and, if indeed true, the climate did it all by itself with no input from man. This very strongly suggests that there are climate forces in effect that we have no control over. I don't think it will hurt to reduce CO2 emissions but I think it would be gross error to throw the worlds economy into a panic driven disarray.

I personally think that the ultimate solution to our energy and other resource problems is population control. Either we will have to practice reproductive restraint or "nature", being the ultimate leveler, will do it for us.

I understand the existence of viable colonies of farmers and herders in Greenland, that spanned several hundred years

is pretty well documented. I don't think that anyone is saying the entire land mass was free of ice, but rather that the warm cycle kept the sea free of pack ice and the warmer sea enabled the coastal areas to grow grass and some crops...........Bob

[Bhigdog]

Pretty interesting article in Monday's WSJ regarding the probabilty of an "oil bubble". Some anylists see the price collapsing to as low as $50/bbl. Others see an $80/bbl long term price.

If you've got big set of stones and a strong stomach now might be a good time to short a few contracts.......Bob

[Reatta Man]

OK, to bring this back to Buick, as some have suggested, then what do my fellow Buick think about the following:

1. What is the future of Buick in a world of high energy prices? A good friend of mine, who has been selling Buicks for nearly 35 years, said Buick's market is dying off every day and GM doesn't seem to be going after a new one. Should Buick go in a totally different direction, like Cadillac has seemed to do sucessfully?

2. If so, what should that direction be? Should Buick be the upscale luxury hybrid division of GM? If so, on what platform, perhaps based upon the Chevy Volt?

3. Should Buick have clones of other GM cars, or try to be a stand-alone division? Can ANY car company be a stand-alone division any more?

4. Should Buick import U.S.-spec versions of Chinese Buicks to be built here in the U.S.? Heresy, you say? Just look at how GM's Chinese version of Buick is outselling U.S. Buicks, AND getting more cutting-edge designs.

5. If gas prices stay high, should Buick take overseas versions of other GM luxury and near-luxury cars and transplant them here? If so, which ones, Opel (Germany) or Holden (Australia)?

While some of this may be controversial, even offensive to some, I don't want Buick to wake up one day and find they make the world's best buggy whips in a world with no demand for buggies.

Joe

[Matt Harwood]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave@Moon</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Another universally agreed item was that the airlines will soon be replaced by a revitalized passenger rail system in the U.S. The seat-mpg of a passenger train cannot be beat! </div></div>

I'm terrified of flying and take the train whenever it is a viable option. I love taking the train. I hope more destinations become possible in the future. One of the best trips I ever took was a train to Chicago a few years ago. What a wonderful way to travel. No fuss, no fighting with security, few delays, great scenery, lots of space to stretch out, no canned air, no kid kicking your seat and screeching, and a fraction of the cost of flying. I hope that energy prices make rail more viable for freight, too. There really is no cheaper way to move stuff around, including people.

[Bhigdog]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Originally Posted By: Dave@MoonAnother universally agreed item was that the airlines will soon be replaced by a revitalized passenger rail system in the U.S. The seat-mpg of a passenger train cannot be beat! </div></div>

I love these "universally agreed" upon deals. Most universally never pan out. Rail is a fantastic device to move large amounts of something, relatively slowly, between the same two places. For moving smaller amounts between various points quickly it's not so good.

When people fly they are buying time.

Air travel will never go away as long as anyone values their time.

What is happening however is that the well heeled are abandoning scheduled air lines in favor of charter flights, time share arrangements, or outright ownership of aircraft. My old company just ordered another corporate jet, costing $25,000,000. Why? To save TIME. They will have to wait 3 years for the new plane because they are in line to buy. BTW, travel in a personal jet is just about the most profligate waste of oil you could come up with. It is Al Gore's preferred method of travel.

That last sentence is NOT a political statement. This post IS Buick related because if diesel gets too much higher I most likely will blow Flint off this year.............Bob

[Gary_N]

Looks like someone hit the hot button with this post! Ah, just to keep this part of a Buick forum, I'd like to say that I hope I can drive my old Buick's for a long time to come. And by the way, hey Bob, I thought that secret bank account in Nigeria was mine. I mean I get mail on that all of the time!

And a question: I've been buying gas at Costco these days. The last time I was filling up the '50 I noticed on the pump that the fuel was mixed with 10% Ethanol. Is this a problem for my old, un-restored Straight 8?

Gary

[serb]

Matt,

I agree with you about the train travel. A couple of years ago on a whim, we decided to hop a train for Chicago and then changed our minds and went through to Milwaukee for a couple of days. We then backtracked to Chicago spent time in some Blues bars for a couple of days, had a great time and took a train back home.

I am all for train travel. Those that can ought to go see the train station in Chicago, what a magnificent building. To think, there were many of these years ago that were jammed with people 24 hours a day. The one in Buffalo is being saved but has not been used for at least 20 years. The present facility in Buffalo is nothing more that a threee (3 e's on purpose) car garage as well as the one in Cleveland if memory serves me correctly.

stevo

[Ron Green]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Bhigdog</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pretty interesting article in Monday's WSJ regarding the probabilty of an "oil bubble". Some anylists see the price collapsing to as low as $50/bbl. Others see an $80/bbl long term price. </div></div>

And some are predicting $180 a barrel!

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/WhyOilCouldHit180DollarsABarrel.aspx

[Bhigdog]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> And some are predicting $180 a barrel!</div></div>

EXACTLY my point vis-a-vis "expert" opinions about most any thing in the future......Bob

[Guest John Chapman]

Dave,

Please provide a link/source for the airline predictions. Here or PM.

Thanks,

JMC

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gary_N</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And a question: I've been buying gas at Costco these days. The last time I was filling up the '50 I noticed on the pump that the fuel was mixed with 10% Ethanol. Is this a problem for my old, un-restored Straight 8?

Gary

</div></div>

The short answer is no. Ethanol is almost impossible to avoid in many areas, and until you start hearing things like "<span style="font-style: italic">Don't drive through Minnesota.</span>" or some such there's no problem. I ran a factory stock 1960 Ford Falcon on E10 (10% ethanol) for 30,000 miles with not ill effects whatsoever.

[Guest imported_Thriller]

I just got through watching Nova's Car of the Future on Prairie Public (PBS - pbs.org or prairiepublic.org). Aside from being generally entertaining, they discussed alternative power sources for cars for the future, including the cellulosic biomass, which Dave has discussed. I really enjoyed it as it exposed a few things we've been talking about here. I really like what the Rocky Mountain Institute has done with their Hypercar.

The Tesla is more interesting, but there is a Canadian company putting out plug-in electric vehicles - ZENN - Zero Emissions No Noise. A comedian, Rick Mercer, visited their plant and had a lot of fun. Of course, moving forward, the plug-in electric vehicles will require relatively clean sources of power.

One idea which wasn't discussed, quite possibly due to cost for a consumer vehicle, was solar cells on the roof of the vehicle. Particularly if we look at trucks and SUVs, which are taller, it wouldn't be a huge appearance issue (many of us can't really see the roof anyway).

As for the niche that Buick will attempt to carve out in the future, I really don't know. So long as there is personal transportation, people will want choice. As Buick is more upscale without being the full-out luxury class, that may simply be the niche to fill. I wish it could be done with more than three models.

As for design, in case anyone is still reading, could we please go back to something a bit wider? My wife and I aren't overly large (although nobody has ever called me slim), but we typically have 3 growing kids in the back seat. In the Rainier, they are starting to run out of sideways space...in the '41 they have lots of space. We should be able to manufacture lighter, generally smaller cars, without truly sacrificing five-passenger space, shouldn't we? If people can't comfortably fit 5 in a car, they won't take 5, making it less efficient overall.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: John Chapman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Dave,

Please provide a link/source for the airline predictions. Here or PM.

Thanks,

JMC </div></div>

John, it's been 3 years since I looked any of that stuff up, and I don't have any of the links I looked at then any more. If you do a Google search on <span style="font-style: italic">["peak oil" airlines]</span> you'll get 120,000 hits. On Yahoo you get 559,000 hits. You can run the gamut sorting through them, from the adamant ostrich approach to the absurdly frightened Chicken Little approach.

The most telling thing to be gleaned from this mess is to look at the authors who insist there's nothing wrong. By far the most quoted statistic they use is the continuing health of Boeing, with heavy orders for new planes coming in. There's rarely any analysis beyond that.

Is replacing older, inefficient planes with newer models an indication of nothing wrong? Especially when those order have to placed 3-4 years in advance (when jet fuel was less than 1/2 today's cost)?

Older jets are at best capable of 40-50 seat-mpg. Newer ones can get 70 seat-mpg. ( National Academy of Engineering, 1992 ) My Prius (5 seats) gets 250 seat-mpg. Today's pathetically neglected Amtrak passenger trains beat airline travel by 20% in energy efficiency already, with no equipment changes in decades. Meanwhile American freight trains have improved 75% in this area since 1980. ( National Assn. of Railroad Passengers, 2007 ). European and Japanese trains are vastly more efficient.

(The citations above are typical, but not definitive. The statistics, however, are definitive. I couldn't find any reference that disagreed with them.)

This site is definitive! The most comprehensive comparison site is Energy Efficiency of different modes of transportation by a James Strickland. I have no idea who he is beyond a Canadian with a Master's Degree (<span style="font-style: italic">The site is his blog and the name is too common to pin down in a search.</span>), but he's done his homework. There are TONS of facts and comparisons to be gleaned from this work. For instance, the seat-mpg of a "next generation" Boeing 737 is 58.9, and that of the ultra-modern Swedish Railways X2000 is 320.0. (The Queen Mary clocks in a 18.0!) The comparison bar graphs alone are worth the price of admission.

Energy is the major cost of transportation for any system. With efficiency differences like that it only stands to reason that as oil dwindles in availability and skyrockets in price an advantage like this will not be something that can be overcome.

I do recall one of the papers I read 3 years ago predicted that regular scheduled major commercial airline traffic would effectively end around 2020, a point in time at which fuel was expected to break through the $10.00/gal level. (Fuel was anticipated by that author to plateau at $5-$6/gal for most of the next decade, then rise again.) I guess at that point anybody whose time is that valuable will be flying Al Gore style anyway.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Thriller</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I just got through watching Nova's Car of the Future on Prairie Public (PBS - pbs.org or prairiepublic.org).

</div></div>

I just watched it too, and had the web site saved in a window to post here as soon as I finished my reply to John. <span style="text-decoration: underline">Don't miss it</span> if you haven't seen it! Most PBS shows have multiple runnings in most markets, and it should be repeated where you are. If not, starting tomorrow you can watch it online (for free) here.

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As for the niche that Buick will attempt to carve out in the future, I really don't know. So long as there is personal transportation, people will want choice. As Buick is more upscale without being the full-out luxury class, that may simply be the niche to fill. I wish it could be done with more than three models.

</div></div>

I think Buick's niche had better change BIG and SOON. "<span style="font-style: italic">Traditional American Luxury Cars</span>" (which used to be a formal description by GM if it isn't still) is beginning to sound like "<span style="font-style: italic">Traditional Tube Televisions</span>" to a lot of people.

Exactly <span style="text-decoration: underline">none</span> of the latest innovations in car design are in the works for Buick (as much as I've been able to hear). If they want to compete with Lexus they're going to have to be a lot more modern in product. When <span style="font-style: italic">Hyundai</span> is beating you in the introduction of hybrid drivetrains and you're trying to sell yourself as a high-end company, something is <span style="text-decoration: underline">wrong</span>!

[NTX5467]

Whether you believe there is a "recession" can depend upon which part of our society you might be a part of. If you might be a "victim" of downsizing/consolidations/off-shore/outsource orientations of many business entities, then the recession is real and the cost of oil and fuel is a big part of your lessened available discretionary income. On the other hand, if you are part of our younger expanding population with a two-income household (which can also afford a new $250K house, recent new vehicles to haul the family around), then things are probably doing well for you. Oil/fuel prices are affecting everybody evenly, but some are obviously being affected more than others.

Mass transit is fine if it goes where you are going and when, but it really doesn't fit "the masses" as well as some might like for it to--especially in the parts of the country where it was not designed-in many years ago.

I have recently read a few articles on bio-fuels and corn-based ethanol. We know that corn-related food products have increased in price since the E85 and E10 fuels came online, but the affect on corn exports has been serious on other countries. Seems these countries are now clearing forests and other lands to plant crops to keep them alive. Hence, more adverse affects upon the atmosphere from these farming operations and less oxygen-generating rain forests in existence. As they claim, the carbon footprint expands rather than shrinking--just the opposite of what the whole "green" orientation advocates.

Recycling restaurant oil to make bio-diesel is a great form of recycling and keeping these waste oils out of where ever they might have otherwise ended up.

Where Buick and other similar upper-middle-class vehicle brands might end up in the future is highly debateable. Many of the younger operatives don't understand WHY General Motors needs to cover all market demographic bases, even if the selling prices are similar for some brands/models. As they don't understand it, or why it needs to be that way, they just want "less" rather than "more" rather than try to understand WHY it worked so well 100 years ago, even 50 years ago. Or that when the USA brands decrease their model offerings, the consumers move to other brands which fill the vacated niche the USA brands just vacated. No Camaro? Check out a Mitsu Eclipse! No Regal coupe? Check out the Toyota Solara! Nor have they watched as Toyota, Kia, and Hyundai have expanded their model lines (under the same "vehicle for every purse" orientation that GM used to have AND the same orientation they claim GM needs to abandon!)!

As the middle class demographics continues to shrink, Buick will have to move upscale in price and stature to stay in the game. Or they can offer exceptional value in luxury vehicles as they have for many decades--but moving downmarket in several lines (as Mercedes has tried to do) might be done cautiously. Many new consumers don't seem to understand the allure of the Buick brand which made the compact Buicks of the '60s such desired vehicles back then (economy in a more luxurious and upscale package than what Chevy or Pontiac offered--AND uniquely Buick).

To me, the biggest problem in Michigan is the "We can't do things like we used to, we have to cut back on model offerings and variations to decrease production costs AND make money." This might make perfect "group think", but it make NO sense in the marketplace . . . a marketplace that is expanding in numbers AND available products. I suspect that one reason that truck chassis vehicles are so popular (at least in TX) is that you can get more variations in them than in similar vehicles (options, colors, interior trim, ENGINES). One reason that USA brands did so well was that you could buy them in many variations of equipment and such rather than the "buy what we build" orientation of the imports back then. Of course, these many build variations did cause some problems . . . but also consider that what we see of oriental brand vehicles in the USA is not representative of what is build in their homeland (same with many European brands!). I remember reading that one model of Nissan had something like 40 different steering wheels, several years ago.

So, in the name of "We can't do that any more . . ." we now have TWO interior colors, cloth or leather, dedicated equipment groups, FEW engine choices (with the larger engines only in the higher trim level vehicles--so much for "economy hot rods!). I guess that VVT is more important than snazzy interior configurations or flashy exterior colors?

IN the short term, you might consider buying ANY Buick or GM vehicle with the 3800 V-6 . . . new or used. Good power, great reliability, great fuel economy (better than the engines which will replace it, by my own observation), and low cost of ownership. IF things get as bad as some predict in the next couple of years, THOSE attributes will come in very handy! All in the comfort, luxury, and larger size of a Buick rather than a smaller econo-box vehicle.

There are lots of side issues in the current economic situation--oil prices are just ONE aspect of the whole deal. No easy or universal answers.

Plug-in hybrids can make sense to more people than many suspect, but GM's choice in putting hybrids in the city transit bus fleets is saving MUCH more fuel than the bulk of passenger vehicle hybrids on the road today. I suspect the Chevy Volt, when it finally hits, will be very popular for many consumers. Whether we end up with gas/electric or diesel/electric hybrid cars can be debateable . . . but each will probably have their place in our vehicular future . . . just as our vintage Buicks do. Perhaps . . . a Buick version of the Volt can be an upscale "Electra 220"??

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[R W Burgess]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Recycling restaurant oil to make bio-diesel is a great form of recycling and keeping these waste oils out of where ever they might have otherwise ended up.</div></div>

Might I add NTX, that there was never a waste in the restaurant oil business. Their byproducts were bought up by renderers who in turn cleaned it and resold everything to the feed industry. Now, with the "Go Green" group getting interest, all of our edible food stuffs are costing us more at the grocery store. It's a vicious cycle. Nothing is free anymore.

Wayne

[michel88]

When I get gas in any of my old cars, if I see that it has 10% ethanol I drive away and go somewhere else. I have heard it can damage seals and other rubber parts in the carb and fuel pump. It is also a solvent that may break loose deposits in the fuel syster and cause problems. It is better to be safe than sorry.

[Guest John Chapman]

Buick has alrady lost the competition with Lexus, at least in California. For the price of a Enclave, you can purchase an RX350, a far finer machine. The 350 will retain much more of it's value and you get Lexus SERVICE instead of GM garage. If any of you doubt where the sale is made, just visit a Lexus showroom and more importantly the customer lounge area and compare with ANY domestic dealership. In SoCal, Lexus has crushed Buick, passed Cadillac, and is after Mercedes.

JMC

[HurstGN]

OK, I've read 7 pages of this, and I'll add some fuel to the fire....

It's good for me to have the price of gas rise to a point where I can't afford to fill my tank.... BS. Yea, go buy another more fuel efficient car, move closer to work. Uh, those are two of the most expensive things people can spend money on, and I'm just supposed to treat them as disposable items and make a switch. I don't think so. I did live close to work. Then work moved...now my commute is twice what it was. Should I move again? Go back into another 30 year mortgage? NO! Why not? Well, the lease in the building I work in is up next year, and there's no guarantee I'll still be in this building at that time. If work moves again, I'll have to move again. Too expensive to do.

About that more fuel efficient car....can't afford to keep dumping cars like that. See, if I'm selling my car because it wastes too much gas, what will make somebody else want my hog? Nothing. So I'll get nothing near what the car is worth and I'm into another payment for the new car. Guess what, the new car payment will be more than filling the tank of the car I already paid for. I better not sell this one because I may need the money to move closer to work as work moves farther away from me.

Speaking of cars, it took 6 pages till the Tesla was mentioned? That's kinda sad. Somebody is putting huge dollars into the development of the Tesla, and I actually like it. Priced one out for fun...kinda pricey...and that included an $8,000 surcharge to service the vehicle. See, again, I don't live in the right place. I live too far away from the Tesla service area, so I would have to pay an additional $8,000 to buy the service contract for the car. This didn't look to be optional either, and I can't imagine trying to work on it myself...too complex. Oh well, it's an idea, and it was in development BEFORE gas prices went through the roof. Hrmm, somebody thought about building a better car BEFORE they were forced to do so by high gas prices. Now that's a novel concept.

Oh, Detroit....unions....figurative guns held to management's head to sign a contract or we stop building cars. On how many levels is this wrong? The other day they said autoworkers were on strike, and one striker was asked why they were on strike. The answer, "I don't know. We were told to walk off the job, so we did." WHAT?!? Now we've got a bunch of lemmings building our cars. What ever happened to doing a job, and doing it well, and getting paid accordingly? I agree, unions did much for the working man in this country, but they've stepped over a line and it makes all our lives change due to their actions. Now, it it were cheaper to buy a car, would the automakers follow in the footsteps of investigating electric vehicles like the Tesla? I don't know. But if you build a better mousetrap..... I really hope the Tesla takes off.

Al Gore...what a maroon. I saw a show about the natural disasters in movies and the feasability of them happening in real life. They were talking about the Hollywood types using CGI to make these fantasticly realistic images of very unrealistic events. Like a 300 foot wall of water hitting New York. Nice images. Oh, I really liked the one showing glacial ice melting and huge chunks breaking off and falling into the ocean. It was really neat looking. They showed it twice. Once from the movie it was made for, then a second time from where Al Gore described this global warming thing. Then they played the two clips side by side in a split screen. Odd, Al's clip of the effects of global warmming was identical to the CGI movie clip. Hrmm.....makes one think.

Oh, I've rambled on enough here. No, make that ranted. If this offers food for thought, good. If you feel I wasted your time, I apologize. Opinions are like you-know-what's, everyone has one and most of them stink. I'm just glad to have the opportunity to voice an opinion in public.

[Guest John Chapman]

Thanks, Dave. Flying will continute to be time-value driven. It's just that more folks will discover their time isn't worth as much as it was. In my business, we've already replaced a lot of face-to-face meetings with teleconferernce and VTC. The $20K investment for VTC has an immediate and enormous ROI. For $500-1000 in service costs, I can have a VTC with five or six folks for eight hours and go home at six. The old way was a day each way in transit a day at the meeting, a day to recover/catch up. Not so efficent.

We'll continue to have mass air travel, albeit more expensive, and I think regular commercial passenger service will not end at 2020. What will change enormously will be aircraft design. Flying wing form factor is far more effiecent than todays fuselage/wing/empenage form factor, which has a very high parasitic drag penalty. Flying wings haven't made it because of public perception. Peception will change when the price is right. Passenger loading will also increase to be 800-1200 routinely. Ground transportation will have to grow to support short (<200-250 miles) journeys.

JMC

[Guest John Chapman]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...the most quoted statistic they use is the continuing health of Boeing, with heavy orders for new planes coming in. There's rarely any analysis beyond that.

Is replacing older, inefficient planes with newer models an indication of nothing wrong? Especially when those order have to placed 3-4 years in advance (when jet fuel was less than 1/2 today's cost)?</div></div>

Replacement of ageing aircraft isn't a symptom of something wrong, not to say that there isn't something wrong, it's just the wrong symptom.

Many factors influence aircraft replacement. The most important are:

1. Useful design life exenditure (and subsequent cost of refurbishment/overhaul/service life extension). Replacment is often more cost effective.

2. Impact of governmental regulation (EPA noise levels and emissions for example.) Engine replacement/mod is expensive, but may suffice in specific applications. FedEx operated Boeing 727s for years with hush kit updates long after they were no longer economical for passenger use. They even had a nickname: "Jurassic Jets" owing to the age.

3. Operator desire to fly newer equipment. Unseen to the majority, aircraft, like ships, have a faily predictable ownership life cycle. Generally, major airlines operate new, pass used to secondary carriers, who in turn pass to charters, who in turn, fly to retirement. From retirement, the aircraft are scrapped, modified for other use (private aircraft, specialty operations, cargo... it was said at one time FedEx had a small staff who did nothing but track the location of every DC-10 in service worldwide for purchase/conversion to freight)

4. Wholesale technology upgrades and operating effiecency (regardless of fuel cost.) The B 777 was the first fully CAD aircraft and was computer assembled before any 'metal bending'. It was also manufactured using CNC parts production. The resulting precision allowed wing/fuselage mating tolerances of only several thousandths as opposed to the .25-.50 inch tolerance on the B 747. Sleeker aircraft have lower drag, so are cheaper to operate, are quieter, easier to produce, and easier to maintain.

So, fuel cost is a factor, but not a lead driver.

What you will see with rising fuel cost is that older, less efficent aircraft will be sidelined/mothballed/sold/scrapped and the flight frequency reduced to raise capacity levels. You might also see limitations on baggage, termination of marginal operations (routes and operators), and mergers. Deja vu all over, eh?

Cheers,

JMC

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">About that more fuel efficient car....can't afford to keep dumping cars like that. </div></div>

Dan, I took a $3000 bath on my Nissan to buy the Prius. (I owed that much more than the trade-in.) I calculated that, with gas @ $2.50/gal, I'd break even in about 3 1/2 years.

I broke even in less than 2. This happened in part because gas went up faster than anyone expected and becuase my wife's 28 mpg Elantra became the family gas hog (necessitating a switch to the Prius for most duties). The Prius now gets about twice the mileage (13-14K/yr.) that the Nissan used to. The Elantra is lucky if it sees 5K/yr.

Best bath I ever took.

==========================

BTW, Al Gore was/is right no matter his journalistic skills. (<span style="font-style: italic">Which are pretty darn good, BTW. They don't give Nobel Prizes [or Academy Awards {</span>generally<span style="font-style: italic">}, or Humanitus Prizes, or National Board of Review Prizes, or about 20 film critics prizes, or.....] to "maroons".</span>) Are you really suggesting he had the time/means/motive to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to cgi a fake glacier collapse for a college lecture tour?

He has about 10-15,000 PhD's behind him. If you want to be one of Exxon's mighty expert army trying to debunk that, I'm sure they'll hire you on and provide the credentials. At this point they have about 7 recruits, but they're always happy for more!

Sugarless gum should have such universal acclaim!

[Dave@Moon]

John, this being a major Delta hub this story is getting press like crazy here, but it was likely in every paper in American this morning. Sadly, I think we'll be seeing a lot more like it the days and years to come.

Delta CEO says fares need to rise 15-20% (This Summer)

[Guest John Chapman]

And, don't forget ATA. They folded early this month after losing a government charter contract.

There have been five worldwide 'low cost' airlines fold or declare bankruptcy in the first two weeks of April: ATA, Aloha, Oasis (Hong Kong based), Frontier (operating in Ch 11... ), and SkyBus (Columbus, OH.)

Somebody said the canaries are dying... Can't argue that.

My bet is USAirways will go under next, assuming the Delta/NWA merger happens.

Cost will go up, reducing passengers, reducing revenue, increasing cost.... a downward spiral.

JMC

[Bhigdog]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> BTW, Al Gore was/is right no matter his journalistic skills. (Which are pretty darn good, BTW. They don't give Nobel Prizes [or Academy Awards {generally}, or Humanitus Prizes, or National Board of Review Prizes, or about 20 film critics prizes, or.....] to "maroons".) </div></div>

Nobel Peace Awards:

2001. Kofi Annan. (No mention made of him and his son skimmimg millions from oil for food money.)

2002. James (Jimmy) Carter. (No mention made of of his bumbling ineffective efforts that did little more than give gravitus to tyrants/terrorists)

2007. Albert (AL) Gore. Shared prize. (No mention made of his 12000 sq ft house or extensive travels by private jets while he exhorts the "masses" to sacrifice. No memtion made of his justification of above by buying "carbon offsets")

Any year Acadamy Award winner. Pick any politically correct, racially diverse, sexually perverse, gay pushing, liberal over the top cause movie, and it got an award for something.

The Academy Awards have been a publicity driven joke for years. The Nobels, at least as far as "soft sciences" are concerned have been used to make political statements also for years. Were I looking to gain credibility I wouldn't cite either of those "Awards". Most "awards" of this nature are agenda driven and the awarders couldn't care less if the awardee was a Maroon or not as long as their agenda is pushed and people are manipulated into a certain point of view.....Bob

[Guest John Chapman]

Just to keep on theme here....

Buicks are purchased and driven by both politically correct, racially diverse, sexually perverse, gay pushing, liberals and by we less 'enlightened' plugger types. In fact, Buick will sell to anyone.

Kofi Annan... now, there's a lead to a whole new discussion area. I'd vote the UN as the most systemically corrupt and bureaucratically inept organizations in history. They only want socialism... one planet at a time. They also operate a fleet of Buicks as staff vehicles... but, maybe I made that up.

Cheers,

JMC

[Dave@Moon]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Pick any politically correct, racially diverse, sexually perverse, gay pushing, liberal over the top cause movie, and it got an award for something.

</div></div>

I thought all movies were, just like rock and roll went downhill after Buddy Holly died. Damn surfin' s--t!

[Bhigdog]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I thought all movies were</div></div>

Nah, just the ones that are fawned over by the "Hollywood Elite". And, HEY, I like the Beach Boys. They had some rockin car songs like Little Deuce Coupe. Oh wait a minute. That would be a street rod. DOH!........Bob

[Guest John Chapman]

Hey, careful... you don't know surfers! At least the old dogs. They're more conservative than you might think... oh, and boy, are they ecology conscious. See: http://www.surfrider.org/

Cheers, dude...

[Bhigdog]

A live surfcam. HAW HAW HAW. Ya gotta luv it.......Bob

[Guest John Chapman]

Actually, it's San Clemente's beach cam, not Surfriders.

We do love it! If you watch closely, you'll get to see the Amtrak Surfliner (note tracks ~10 feet from the beach)

About 25 minutes south of this site, in Encinitas, the annual Wavecrest Woodie meet happens in September. On the beach. Lots of BUICK woodies show up. (Note Buicks on beach in photo: http://www.wavecrestwoodies.com/photos.html

JMC

[Bhigdog]

I do a lot of hang gliding (it's been called "sky surfing") and we have a "wind talker" that we can acess to get the latest wind data from a mountain top launch site. Sort of a surfcam. Like I said, GOTTA luv it.........Bob

[NTX5467]

Michael88, whether a pump has ethanol or not is based on the location (i.e., metropolitan area) rather than a particular gas station or brand. Ethanol has been in the blend for years, just not to the level of current 10% or E85--probably since before the first oxygenated fuels or "reformulated gas" went on sale. Typically, now that ethanol has replaced MTBE as the oxygenate of choice, you now see labels on the pumps that the fuel being dispensed CAN contain up to 10% ethanol. Of course, E85 pumps will be completely marked as to that fact, I would suspect as E85 is only meant for vehicles designed to use it OR normal gasoline . . . designed to do it from the factory OR possibly with a carburetor modified/designed to run on it exclusively (as Edelbrock sells some of their 4bbls to do just that).

In other words, if one station has it in your area, they all most probably do.

Just some thoughts,

NTX5467

[NTX5467]

I concur with the restauranteurs selling waste oil to the rendering operations and have seen those trucks at the rear of the kitchen areas over the years. In more recent years, it's been "waste oil" companies' names on the side of the trucks. One way or another, the cooking oil gets recycled. The City of Denton, TX started running all of their city diesels on bio-diesel a few years ago, purchased from a local bio-diesel plant.

Not to forget that some private-owned restaurants would also sell the scraps from the tables to farmers to feed to their hogs (used to see the ragged pickups pull up to the kitchen area as the cooks emptied barrels, or loaded them, into the farmer's pickup). I guess they now have garbage disposals and pay sewer charges accordingly?

Enjoy!

NTX5467

[lrlforfun]

OK Buick People: I Recently attended a swap meet and John Milner was there signing autographs. He didn't look so good. Maybe the recession has him in a funk too. Mitch