This is BS

From: koswix 3 May 2011 20:47
To: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 17 of 65

It's not just packaging, it's /everything/. Like actually /everything/.

 

I still beleive that the real cause of the recession is/was oil prices, and as the world/west recovers and the demand goes back up the price rises again, and it'll come back and bight us in the ass again and again.

 

It's not to do with oil running out per se, but to do with the maximum rate at which we can get it out of the ground. There is very little spare capacity in the system (most of the OPEC capacity is unverified and probably made up, as member quotas are based on how much oil they /say/ they have in the ground)

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubbert_peak_theory

 


And peope here still want big cars and to consume non stop, it's just that on a widescale cultural level it hasn't reached the same level of engrained 'entitlement' to consume that seems to exist in the US (I say this entirely based on chatting to people online and your countries media output - I've never been to the US, closest I've been is Canada which seems quite similar in a lot of ways :$).

 

That is changing here though, each new generation seems to think it's entitled to more and more. I think I'm getting old :(

From: koswix 3 May 2011 20:51
To: koswix 18 of 65
This is a message I sent to Xen in November 2008. Still freaks me out how acurate this guy's book is about stuff :|


quote:
I've been banging on about this book for what seems like ages now, but I've been re-reading some parts of it today and came across this passage. Book was written 2 years ago roughly, and this reads more like a history of the last 18 months rather than conjecture on what could happen if oil production peaks.

Do you know much/read much about 'peak oil'? It's a pretty interesting topic, but it's hard to know what to take seriously in all the poo that's out there.
quote: The Last Oil Shock
[talking about realisation in the markets that oil only needs to peak, not run out, to cause chaos]
But the moment the money men get it, the price of oil and other energy assets will soar, and almost everything else will go into meltdown.

A major spike in oil price is recessionary not only because of its direct effects on the global economy, but also because it is likely to cause stock markets around the world to crash, further reinforcing the recessionary pressures. This in turn will lead to second order effects, such as the deepening insolvency of many pension funds, which hold the bulk of their investments in stocks and shares. This fallout is likely to be particularly bloody in Britain, where the Pensions Regulator is monitoring 300 major occupational schemes that are already in danger of going bust.
...
The value of endowment policies will collapse too, with devastating effect on the borrowers who were counting on them to repay their mortgage, and the housing market as a whole. The banking sector will act as a multiplier: since so much lending is ‘secured’ against future economic growth, as the outlook worsens lending will fall, leading to further contraction. [my emphasisisisis]
From: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 3 May 2011 20:53
To: koswix 19 of 65

True dat homie.

 

I used to feel entitled and then I too got old. It's funny how time does that to you.

 

Something certainly has to change, and I sure wish I had the answer to how we are going to get our dependence on oil reduced but I don't.

From: Matt 3 May 2011 20:58
To: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 20 of 65
We should all get Mr Fusions installed on our cars. We should all own and drive DeLoreans, too.

Or maybe not.
EDITED: 3 May 2011 20:58 by MATT
From: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 3 May 2011 21:00
To: Matt 21 of 65
I would take a hoverboard!
From: PNCOOL 4 May 2011 16:53
To: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 22 of 65
You can keep your cheaper-than-UK fuel. My car would spit the fuel back out if I tried to run it on 93 RON unleaded. I don't even think it would let me open the fuel cap if it knew I was trying to put 87 RON fuel into it.
From: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 4 May 2011 18:58
To: PNCOOL 23 of 65
87 is the only thing we can afford!
From: koswix 4 May 2011 20:08
To: PNCOOL 24 of 65

That's actually 91 RON and 97-ish RON. The figures are displayed in AKI, apparently.

 

What car do you drive? Is it FAST?

From: Dan (HERMAND) 4 May 2011 21:22
To: PNCOOL 25 of 65
Although Kos has already pointed out the AKI thing, remember that RON isn't a measure of fuel quality. Unless your car is going to make use of it, there's just no point.
From: ANT_THOMAS 4 May 2011 21:30
To: Dan (HERMAND) 26 of 65
Genuine question, how does one car make better use of higher RON fuel than another?
From: koswix 4 May 2011 21:32
To: Dan (HERMAND) 27 of 65

Higher than what your engine is meant for is no benefit, but lower can damage the engine.

 

It totally is a measure of quality if you would consider that fuel that makes your engine break as bad quality fuel :C

From: koswix 4 May 2011 21:34
To: ANT_THOMAS 28 of 65

Higher RON can withstand higher pressure (turbo chargered cars, for instance) before auto igniting.

 

Some clever cars and bikes can adjust engine timing to suit the RON of the fuel, too :O

 

{{{wikipedia}}}

From: Dan (HERMAND) 4 May 2011 21:40
To: ANT_THOMAS 29 of 65

Rapid summary: RON is a measure of 'explosiveness' and / or octane. Contrary to VERY popular belief, high octane fuel is LESS explosive than low octane fuel. What this does is allow the fuel to be more compressed without spontaneous ignition, meaning when it's deliberately ignited by the spark plug (At JUST the right moment) the energy created is much more.

 

Essentially, high performance cars have high compression engines. Most cars, well, don't.

 

Running high octane fuel in a normal car will make zero difference, whatsoever*. Running normal fuel in a high compression engine will do one of the following:

 

-Cause pre detonation, where the fuel explodes prior to the spark plug lighting. This is pretty bad for the engine and obviously kills performance

 

-The ECU will detect the above and back the timing off. Engine will be fine but performance suffers heavily

 

*Regardless of what someone will no doubt say, any differences in performance are either because the car is specced for high octane fuel OR the high octane fuel happens to have better detergents in it which clean the engine.

 

Conclusion: Unless your car really is high performance / high compression, don't waste your money.

From: Dan (HERMAND) 4 May 2011 21:41
To: koswix 30 of 65
Haha, you wikipediad AND beat me to the punch. Ah well, my explanation was off the top of my head because I know this shit!
From: Dan (HERMAND) 4 May 2011 21:42
To: koswix 31 of 65
But that's an idiotic measure of "quality", isn't it?
From: ANT_THOMAS 4 May 2011 21:54
To: Dan (HERMAND) 32 of 65
So to sum things up I shouldn't put high RON petrol in my diesel car (giggle)
From: Dan (HERMAND) 4 May 2011 21:57
To: ANT_THOMAS 33 of 65
Well, I wasn't addressing you personally, but no, I wouldn't.
From: ANT_THOMAS 4 May 2011 22:10
To: Dan (HERMAND) 34 of 65
Since you know about these things. Should there be a noticeable difference in using higher RON fuel in a pretty standard 50cc moped?
From: Ken (SHIELDSIT) 4 May 2011 23:36
To: ALL35 of 65
If the weather would ever get nice I'd get my girl out and not cry so much about gas prices!
Attachments:
From: CHYRON (DSMITHHFX) 5 May 2011 00:09
To: JonCooper 36 of 65
:-(( :-(( :-((