fuel prices

[yoxer]

"Why and for what?"

 

To support a benifit driven society

[kleinboet]

Yoxer, methinks you have to go back to school and learn about income tax and how to post adult answers to sensible postings.

[blankedagain]

kleinbot,

The Government keeps the rate of tax exactly the same, it is a constant percentage of the total and that does not go up or down. Insofar as oil companies being a major stumbling block to development of alternative fuels you are quite right, the reason for that is to appease the greed of their shareholders.Those alternative fuels that are available, LPG for instance are fine but the problem is the technology to make it work with the vehicles, as an example in the NHS Trust that I work for a whole fleet of ambulances that were supposed to dual fuelled have had to be sent back because everytime they were run on LPG it ****** the engine. And yes, one of the reasons that the new fleet was dual fuelled was going to be the wide availability of LPG, in the event a fifteen mile round trip was needed to refuel with LPG passing lots of garages selling petrol/deisel only. And thats another sign of the oil companies greed you can do your weeks shopping at the same time as filling up with petrol but try buying something for your car at the GARAGE,,,,,,,,,no chance.

[yoxer]

Klienboet when you make a sensible post youll get a sensible answer.

 

"It is alleged that the major oil groups have bought off ideas which could be a threat to them." Wow the shock of this revelation must have shattered your idea of fairness and justice. What the hell do you expect them to do ?

 

"the motorist pays tax twice on purchasing a new car, pays road tax and pays both V.A.T. and tax on fuel.

Why and for what?" My apologies , I took the "what" for a question to which you had the reply. If you refute the tax taken is to support a welfare driven society then please by all means enlighten me as to what it is being used for. At present all your rambling equates to a virgin saying how great sex is.

[Lid]

We will eventually bleed this planet dry of all oil and then what? To me the answer is in the sky and in the sea.

 

I have seen several articles proposing a hydrogen infrastructure to replace petrol. It looks very promising and can apparently be done safely. Hydrogen burning engines are being developed by the likes of BMW and I think they work as well as petrol ones.

 

So we simply use the sun's energy to electrolyse hydrogen from water. It's completely pollution free too and has little, if any, environmental impact. When you burn the hydrogen in your hydrogen engine, it combines with the same amount of oxygen released when it was originally made and the becomes pure water again.

 

So why aren't we doing this already?

[yoxer]

Because the few controlling the wealth have an interest in oil and realy dont give a stuff about ideological concerns of humanity.It has always been this way and always will be.

[Lid]

The thing is burning all the planet's carbon based fossil fuels in just a few decades is not ideological concern. If you look at it objectively it just plain stupid.

[Little Tinca]

It's a beautifully simplistic theory, Lid and a poser that has been around for more years than I care to remember.

It is very easy to electrolyse water into it's component parts. The problem is very much the same as desalinisation, i.e. the logistics.

The only logical source of water is the sea, the by products are enormous.

The amount of power needed to generate another source of power has a negative value. But that besides just the scale of the plant needed to perform this process in a large enough amount to satisfy say, just motorists is mind bogglingly huge.

With fossil fuels the base product is "free" in so much that it is already there and 'only' has to be abtracted. A dob of heat and a fractionating column and bingo not only do you get petrol you get the raw ingredients for just about every 'man made' product.

[Lid]

Cheers for the update LT. I was thinking of using solar power as the energy source. However as you say, the scale would still have to be enormous.

 

Maybe the answer is in atoms then. A safe fusion cell perhaps?

[yoxer]

"The thing is burning all the planet's carbon based fossil fuels in just a few decades is not ideological concern."

 

Im afraid it is to those that control wealth