Hydrogen research on riseState makes name for self in emerging technology By Ron Menchaca (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Sunday, August 3, 2008
Grace Beahm The fuel nozzle for a hydrogen-powered Chevy truck. 
The Post and Courier Video
Scientists at the Center for Hydrogen Research in Aiken are working to make hydrogen a viable energy alternative. Watch » While foreign oil prices remain at record highs and Americans increasingly look to take better care of the planet, scientists and entrepreneurs across South Carolina are quietly working to develop a new, cleaner alternative to gasoline. South Carolina might seem a surprising hub for efforts to revolutionize the nation's transportation system, but there are signs that the state is making a name for itself in the creation of a hydrogen economy. Next year, for example, some of the brightest minds and deepest pockets in hydrogen fuel research and technology will converge on Columbia for the emerging industry's premier convention. Organizers expect the National Hydrogen Association's conference in March to boost the state's green credentials and promote clean-burning hydrogen as an alternative to fossil fuels. South Carolina already has made inroads into the hydrogen market by forming partnerships among various public and private interests. The University of South Carolina, Clemson University, South Carolina State University and Savannah River National Laboratory are among the higher profile institutions with hydrogen-related research programs. Bridgestone Firestone in Graniteville uses hydrogen-powered forklifts in its production facility. That combination of public and private interests have helped place South Carolina among the top five states in the country for hydrogen research, said Patrick Serfass, the national association's director of technology and communication. Just four years ago, the state's hydrogen work was barely a blip on the national scene, said Neil McLean, executive director of EngenuitySC, a public-private partnership trying to nurture a knowledge-based economy. "The reaction of most folks is why South Carolina? Now, we are on the radar. South Carolina could be to hydrogen what Houston was to oil. We think we can be a significant player." Though hydrogen fuel cell technology still faces significant hurdles to becoming an affordable and efficient alternative to gasoline, high gas prices are helping reshape perceptions about hydrogen, once dismissed as the stuff of science fiction or too dangerous for consumer use. But as hydrogen gains converts and other states, notably California, invest public money in its development, is South Carolina doing enough to stake a claim? And is such spending a good bet? Hydrogen fuel The chief benefit of hydrogen is obvious: Hydrogen-powered vehicles generate zero emissions because the only byproduct is water vapor so pure you can drink it. Hydrogen can power traditional internal combustion engines or be used to generate electricity in a fuel cell. A hydrogen fuel cell works much like a battery, but instead of requiring a recharge, it can be refilled with hydrogen. Such technology has been around for decades and has been used successfully by NASA to power space craft. It's also being used in South Carolina and around the country to power everything from small electronics to forklifts. A kilogram of hydrogen has about the same energy content as one gallon of gasoline. And though its price at the pump is estimated to be $6 to $12 for the equivalent of one gallon, that price becomes less shocking when you consider that hydrogen is two to three times more efficient than gasoline. But hydrogen has long been dogged by concerns over its safety, partly because of lingering fears from the infamous Hindenburg disaster of 1937. Scientists later proved that the hydrogen-filled blimp caught fire because it was coated in a flammable petroleum product. Still, the notion of storing the highly flammable gas in pressurized tanks and bolting them onto fast-moving passenger cars makes some uneasy. This challenge lies at the heart of one of hydrogen's most perplexing dilemmas: How to store enough of it in a space no larger than a current vehicle fuel tank while still powering a car a few hundred miles and not placing motorists at risk. That's one of the challenges scientists in Aiken County are trying to overcome. Horses and hydrogen A solution to America's fuel problems and pollution woes could spring from a region of the state better known for breeding the nation's original equine transportation system. Aiken County also is home to the "bomb plant" where America built its nuclear arsenal during the Cold War. Yet in building those weapons, scientists at the Savannah River Site also gained valuable experience with hydrogen as part of their work with tritium. That in-house expertise is now proving valuable as South Carolina looks to cash in on hydrogen. "We've been an expert in hydrogen for 50 years and nobody knew it," said Fred Humes, director of the Economic Development Partnership in Aiken and Edgefield counties. Then, in 2003, President Bush pledged $1 billion to commit America to investing in hydrogen as an alternative fuel. That allowed SRS to open its doors a bit and helped hydrogen boosters in surrounding Aiken County pitch a $10 million bond referendum to pay for the state's first stand-alone hydrogen research center, which opened in February 2006. The center also raises money by renting its laboratories and other space for hydrogen-related research projects. Among the center's tenants are scientists and researchers from the nearby Savannah River National Laboratory and auto maker Toyota. By converting hydrogen into a powder, the lab's scientists also hope to avoid the risks associated with using hydrogen in gas form. "The research has to do with getting the size and weight down to what the car companies want," said Dr. William Summers, who manages the national laboratory's hydrogen programs. To illustrate the importance of size, Humes, a Charleston native, shows off the center's hydrogen-powered 2007 Chevrolet Silverado, the state's first registered hydrogen vehicle. The big V-8 truck revs up to highway speeds in seconds and can fly over the county's rolling hills. It looks and drives just like a gasoline-powered model. But drop the tailgate and you'll find the pick-up's bed filled with three large hydrogen cylinders that fuel the truck's internal combustion engine for up to 200 miles. The truck's price tag also is telling of hydrogen's challenges. Converting the truck's engine and computer systems to work with hydrogen cost about $120,000 — not exactly an affordable price for the average South Carolinian. The truck also highlights another of hydrogen's hurdles. It is fueled at a portable hydrogen station housed at the research center. The "station" must be driven to Florida to fill up on hydrogen. While hydrogen is the most abundant element on earth, it does not exist alone in nature and must first be extracted from other sources. Most hydrogen produced in the U.S. today is made from natural gas, a process that creates emissions of carbon dioxide. Though these emissions are only about half of what's produced by gasoline-powered vehicles. Critics of hydrogen question whether it's fair to tout its zero-emission benefits when its production from natural gas can produce some of the same harmful pollution as traditional power-generation methods, said Jack Nerad, author of The Complete Idiot's Guide to Hybrid and Alternative Fuel Vehicles. Nerad, a former editor of Motor Trend magazine, said most of the world's auto makers have "at least dipped a toe" into hydrogen fuel research. But so far, most of those efforts have yielded only experimental or prototype vehicles. Honda and BMW are among the latest to roll out hydrogen vehicles. Many of these vehicles will arrive in Columbia and other parts of the state later this month as part of a national tour to promote hydrogen fuel. Tour organizers haven't said how they plan to fill up the vehicles along the way, as there are only a smattering of hydrogen stations around the country. Developing a true hydrogen support network would take decades, Nerad said. "There are 175,000 gasoline stations in the country now. With hydrogen, you are at square one." The state's role All of these challenges help explain why the state's commitment to hydrogen to date has been spotty. The S.C. Hydrogen Infrastructure Development Act was supposed to set aside $15 million over three years to provide crucial seed money to fund hydrogen projects, but the state's recent budget crunch shrunk this year's amount to $2.5 million. That's still better than the state's main umbrella group for hydrogen fared. The South Carolina Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Alliance, a public-private partnership focused on developing a hydrogen fuel cell market, received about $367,000 in state money during each of its first two years of operation. But the General Assembly nixed the group's funding this year as the state's financial picture worsened. The alliance is now scraping by on dues collected from its members such as the state universities and other partners, said Shannon Baxter-Clemmons, the alliance's executive director. She said the cuts are particularly painful when so much of the state's budget goes toward fuel. Still, Baxter-Clemmons, a Hanahan native who holds a doctorate in chemical engineering, believes South Carolina can become a serious player in the hydrogen business. As author of California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's hydrogen policy blueprint, she saw firsthand what can happen when state leaders back alternative fuel research and development. California spends about $100 million annually on hydrogen and alternative fuel efforts and has about 25 hydrogen fueling stations. South Carolina's first permanent hydrogen fuel station in downtown Columbia is expected to come online in January as part of the city's efforts to create the nation's first "fuel cell district." The $1.5 million station project, funded through a combination of city, state and federal funds, is needed to help fuel a hydrogen-powered passenger bus that will be on loan to the state for a year from the federal government. The solution? Even hydrogen's biggest supporters don't see it as the silver bullet. If hydrogen emerges as a viable energy solution, it's likely to be among a mixture of other alternative fuel solutions such as wind, solar, natural gas, biofuels and other sources. "We have never said hydrogen is the answer," Humes said. "It's an answer." Summers, who has been working with hydrogen for some 30 years, believes the real challenge is promoting hydrogen as a long-term solution in a culture that values the quick-fix. "We are talking about a major transformation of our energy system. If gas was four dollars a gallon a few years ago, we'd already be there." Reach Ron Menchaca at 937-5724 or rmenchaca@post andcourier.com. |
Article toolsSponsored Links |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 40 comment(s)
Posted by palmettoruckus on August 3, 2008 at 1:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
FIRST!
Posted by zoomru on August 3, 2008 at 6:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
WOW !!!!
"...If gas was four dollars a gallon a few years ago, we'd already be there."...
THIS is a BLATANT example of........WHAT ??
PAYOLA....and LACK OF PLANNING !!!!
Its great to be FIRST....isnt IT; when its not implemented and USED by the taxpaying public !!!
Legislators......what does this make YOU look like !!! You wait on DC to invest money?? The SMART CAR has been used in EUROPE for HOW long.....Andre' "the GIANT" Bauer??
....and YOUR trying to FOOL ....WHO????
...and your costing YOUR children and grandchildren....WHAT?
SMART....real SMART !!!
Posted by zoomru on August 3, 2008 at 6:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What ?????
"...If hydrogen emerges as a viable energy solution.."
IF? IF ???? IF? (Fist POUNDS)
What is the SUN? Who are you trying to fool??
Are you afraid your precious funding is going to get CUT??!
If it does....call a press conference! NAME the fools that cut YOU and ...CRY !!!
Posted by Johnq2 on August 3, 2008 at 6:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I guarantee something is rotten here.
There is no way with our dismal education record and low status nationwide in many categories that cutting edge technology companies would partner with our state unless some sort of kickback or other scheme to fleece taxpayers was involved.
Public funding has been nixed this year because of budget shortfalls! After 3/4 of a million dollars has already been paid by taxpayers, now they stop funding? How was this money spent and who benefited from the payments? It surely wasn't the taxpayers as it now appears the project was not important enough to continue funding.
Those in government who waste our money to benefit their cronies in this and other wasteful projects know the gravy train is about to end with the coming elections. I expect we will spend the next several years investigating and prosecuting corrupt government officials as we uncover how they have robbed us blind the last 7 1/2 years. Follow the money trail and get our money back from these traitors and throw them in prison.
Posted by zoomru on August 3, 2008 at 7:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gov Mark Sanford:
Are you going to stand for another "STABBING in the BACK" by Harrell-asa and McConnell-ista??
Harrell-asa and McConnell-ista....your days are NUMBERED!! YOu mean ttell me that YOU 2 will let Jake "SNOTTY" KNOTTz pork US taxpayers to kingdom Come and allow Barfield to pork 110k to the German tourists but you CUT funding for ENERGY !!
WHOLLY ..COW !!! YOU 2 and the SORRY LOT ...legislators are TOAST !! You are not looking out for US at ALL !!
This is conduct UNBECOMING a South Carolinian and borders on ....COWARDLY TREASON to the STATE !!! YOU RAVENEL'ers!!
When is the last time you 2 have been down to AIKEN? WHEN? WE want to know??
US REP James "GRAND MASTER FLASH" CLYBURN: Where is your ..VOICE? Hmm...to be this quiet...you must APPROVE!!
US REP Henry "the work horse" BROWN: You ..obviously are not looking out for South Carolina either to not stand UP against these CUTz !!
Shannon Baxter-Clemmons, the alliance's executive director.
....where has your VOICE been? We sure didn't hear you scream or RIP OFF YOUR BRA in the Statehouse LOBBY area ??? Are you a leader or a foundation ...WONK?? Are you going to stand for this 100k porking by BARFIELD??
Senatoro Lindse' Suave' Graham-nista....stop smelling McCains underwear and start realizing what is going ON down Here in the STATE you were elected to represent!! Do you approve of the 100k pork to Barfield and the German tourists?? Its the ENERGY....SUAVE'!! YOU are...TOAST!!
Gov Sanford..... Go POSTAL...NOW!!
Posted by eatmorecollards on August 3, 2008 at 7:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In science class in about the 7th grade, more years ago than I care to mention, it was demonstrated that passing a electrical current through water caused the water molocules to seperate into atoms of hydrogen and oxygen. A tube was routed from the beeker containing the electrolite and electrodes to a water filled ballon where the water was displaced by the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. The ballon floated, then a flame was aplied to it and the ballon exploded. We were told that someday it would be the fuel of the future, but at present it wasn't plausible due to taking more power to generate the hydrogen than one could get from the hydrogen as a fuel.
Well guess what, home tinkerers across the nation are taking this sinple princible, making devices adapted to thier vehicles and reporting 10 to 90 percent fuel savings. Google "homemade hydrogen generator". I know some are hoax, some are boast, but I don't think all are.
It makes sense. The vehicles electrical system is used costing nothin. The vehicles OBD system automatically adjust the fuel flow as the hydrogen and oxygen is routed into the vehicles intake manifold. Savings would be commensurate depending on how efficiently the device was built.
I'm not saying to build one as I don't know how safe it would be. I guess the safety of a homemade system such as this would be dependent on ones ability to include proper safety devices. I do think these systems would increase gas mileage.
Posted by jammer on August 3, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd be one of the first in line for one of those cars, I've been telling my family for a cpl yrs Hydro is the way of the future... it just makes so much sense
just have to wait for the inventors to get it right, sort of like waiting for the smaller chip to be made but it's on the way
Posted by UrGatorbait on August 3, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The oil barons and their minions have the power through years of monopoly as the lone source of energy for vehicles. Now we have an opportunity for increased sources of energy to break the grip and the state cuts funding. It really shows a couple of things. The lack of guts and the lack of an imagination.
Time for a revolution. Boot them all out.
Posted by UrGatorbait on August 3, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks archdude.
I believe the energy issue is a multi-pronged effort to find a variety of sources to meet our needs; not the one magic bullet so to speak.
Cutting funding for research/development was a bad move but not surprising in this state at all.
Posted by jefferymaier on August 3, 2008 at 11:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hydrogen is not the answer. It takes more energy to produce it then you get from using it. It requires a lot of electricity to produce hydrogen. Electric cars are the future. Battery technology is gaining fast.
Posted by jammer on August 3, 2008 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
they are leasing hydrogen run Honda's in California now, I think it's a little over $400 a month... I called Honda a cpl weeks ago and asked them when they were coming east with them, they said they are waiting to see how demand is
for around 5K you can have an energy co. like SCE&G install a fill up pump for hyrdo at your house, govt tax rebates for using hydro almost equal that so it's almost free to setup your own personal filling station in your own driveway... setting up the infrastructure isn't the big deal some are trying to make it out to be
Posted by Neponset on August 3, 2008 at 11:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As my father use to say, interesting if true.
H is a fuel that can be used for cars etc, but the question is, where will we get it from? There are a number of processes that can be uses and electrolysis come to mind, but it takes energy to separate it from the usual compound H20 - I don’t know, but I think it takes just as much energy to get it as it will produce when you combine it. Nothing is free, H is not available in its pure form, as nature gas, and must be separated from compounds. Every one is looking for a panacea, but it does not exist.
Posted by glevans on August 3, 2008 at 12:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Oops, sorry people, we already have hydrogen fuel cell vehicles up and running here in Texas....check it out at http://www.utexas.edu/news/2007/11/05/el...
Posted by manacle on August 3, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Any article on this subject should state explicitly that hydrogen is an energy carrier, not an energy source. All hydrogen does is transfer energy from an energy source (fossil fuels, biomass, water) to users. Thus, both the financial and environmental viability of hydrogen is based partly on what source produced the energy that the hydrogen is transferring.
Also, as one throwaway line in the article only mentions tangentially, the least expensive and most widely used method of producing hydrogen is steam reforming, which isolates hydrogen atoms from methane and results in greenhouse gas emissions. This too must be stated explicitly given the common misconception of hydrogen as a zero emission fuel.
These are facts that any responsible article seeking to educated readers on hydrogen must carry.
More info easily available from the EIA:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/...
Posted by laurasmorris on August 3, 2008 at 12:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Another reason SC is on the cutting edge with hydrogen and that this is a public/private partnership is that we have a number of industries that are currently venting off their hydrogen by-product and would like to sell it. We need to develop this infrastructure. And, yes,jammer, infrastructure IS a big deal. "Infrastructure" is more than an automobile filling station. Besides, if you had a personal filling station, would you want to have to drive back home to use it every time you needed to fill your tank? I don't think so!
Another plus for SC is that Concurrent Technologies Corp, which has offices in Charleston and Columbia, operates the Department of Defense's Fuel Cell Test and Evaluation Center and is able to share the results of DoD spending in this area, allowing state organizations to quickly eliminate products that don't test out and focus on new, promising technologies.
Posted by creeker on August 3, 2008 at 12:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Archdude, you said that the vehicle costs 1 illion to build, and their is no infrastructure to build them anyway.
WELL! why don' we just stop giving away money to every nation that comes with their hand out, that would cut out just about 50 billion and what about all of the money the gov gives away in grants, WHERE THE F*^(K DOEs THE GOV GET OFF GIVING MY MONEY AWAY TO SOME LOWLIFE TO START A COFFE SHOP, OR A ANYKIND OF BUSINESS FOR THAT MATTER. It is not in the constitution, have any of yu'all read it lately.
There is no money in our government to do anything, except protect our borders and build roads and bridges.
But I will not just go on and complain as most of you do without offering a fix for the problem, simple H.R.25 and S.B.25, for those of you that have been on another planet for about the last year. This little jem gets the IRS out of the common mans life for good. It's called the "Fair Tax", and if you don't know about it there are several books that explain it in depth and also explain it for us more common people,,,
Posted by restless on August 3, 2008 at 2:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
i guess none of u dum ausses went to church today and try to pray for the young lady or that her kids is resten in peace just about your stupidness dummess
Posted by jammer on August 3, 2008 at 2:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
natural gas from co's like SCE&G will bring us hydrogen... it's easy to setup the process so you car fills itself up every night as you sleep and only cost and avg of about .86 a gallon in several areas
if you want to learn how it all works all you have to do is go on Honda's or Toyota's sites and read up on it, Honda has an excellent description http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity...
Posted by Neponset on August 3, 2008 at 2:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Man..
Not sure what a "carrier" is, but it fits my definition of a fuel, that when combined with an oxidizer (O2), reacts and releases heat (energy).
Posted by guidedbystewart on August 3, 2008 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
SC needs some sort of niche if it expects to compete in the global market place. As far as hydrogen energy becoming a viable alternative, we really have to wait and see. Right now it is too expensive, and it takes too much energy to produce it, but this could change. All in all, SC needs to invest in something that will provide tens of thousands of potential jobs, so that in the future we are not stuck as a tourist state and a place companies can just come to for cheap labor.
Posted by moonpie on August 3, 2008 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yes Creeker, fair tax! Only took $4 gasoline to get us thinking and trying some alternative fuels sources.
What the heck is restless talking abour. This sounds like a public school educated statement.
Well I'll be "restin" if ya'll needs my "stupidness dummess".
Posted by jammer on August 3, 2008 at 3:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
guided and others where do you get that it's too expensive?? it isn't unless you think .86 cent a gallon is too expensive, or $600 a month lease is too high for you
many already pay more than that one thier current car payments and we all know a difference .86 a gal is compared to $4 and up
several states already use it and are saving millions, one of manyyy examples: Ft.Lauderdale's city buses run on it, Ga's forklifts, Cali's civic's etc etc
Posted by UrGatorbait on August 3, 2008 at 3:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Looks like you missed the short bus restless...carry on duh-huh
Let's get these technologies on-line and affordable. Sitting around griping about them costing to much and the Dreaded IRS(Rock on HR 25!!) gets people nowhere.
There have been some fine examples listed by some posters on here.
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 7:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Dont worry, Obama will fix everything;
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/08/03/...
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 7:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
democrats could careless about the working middle class
First, Queen Pelosi wants the Prez to open up the strategic oil reserves, and says it will help, but then she says;
"The president knows ... that the impact of any new drilling will be insignificant, promising savings of only pennies per gallon many years down the road," says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who has called the demand to lift the drilling bans a hoax."
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080802...
which is it queen pelosi? The left are the hoax, and they know it.
she wont allow a vote because obamanation will have to vote against drilling, go on record. so they are protecting his weak and pathetic run for office.
Obama is nothing new, he knows that real Americans want to drill, so being the politician he is;
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/c...
the emperor is not wearing any clothes;
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=...
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 7:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
what a joke;
http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=143513
this guy really believes his hype!
http://hypemovie.com/
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 8:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"...scientists and entrepreneurs across South Carolina are quietly working to develop a new, cleaner alternative to gasoline."
the great thing is, that these entrepreneurs, wouldnt be doing this without research $$$ and investment with the possible promise of RETURN on investment - profit-.
Of course, like any other industry, the left will find a way to handicap this industry with stupid regulations, punishing taxes and the price for this technology will increase.
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 8:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/06/03/...
archdude, as you said though "...real limiting factors right now are getting the infrastructure built to support a hydrogen economy."
the world economy is built around oil based products. We will still need oil for 20 - 30 years.
personal transportation is a small percentage of the energy we use. dont forget that huge ships burn oil products to import/export goods all over the world.
OIL OIL OIL - we need it and we need our own supply.
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
oh gee whiz, I forgot -
aviation. military hardware, tanks, trucks, fighters, crago aircraft... yep we need OIL!
Oil - OUR oil - its about keeping our freedom.
Posted by letstakeawalk on August 3, 2008 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
archdude
"As for electric, why did Cali destroy all the EV-1s in 2000 when GW became Pres?" - Take off the tin-foil hat and get your facts straight: The EV-1 lease specified the return date; lessees knew exactly what they were getting into. The car was never intended to be owned permanently. The car was a step forward in automotive thinking, but suffered from the battery technology of its time.
The EV-1s were taken off the road in 2003, not 2000.
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 8:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/blog2/ind...
"The problem I have is with using intermittent wind energy to free up natural gas for CNG vehicles as a bandage for the next 10 to 30 years until hydrogen cars are ready to go. The fact is that hydrogen cars are just about ready to go now. The only thing holding back hydrogen cars is the infrastructure."
"
Posted by EvilGenius on August 3, 2008 at 8:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Perspective anyone? (the more things change the more they stay the same)
"The high world oil prices of 2000 have had little effect on
demand for transportation fuels, so far. Oil prices recovered from their 1998 record lows throughout 1999 and
surpassed $30 per barrel in the fourth quarter of 2000.
The efforts of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries (OPEC) to bring prices down to what it considers
the optimal range of $22 to $28 per barrel by adding
700 thousand barrels per day to production in July
and another 800 thousand in September were largely
unsuccessful [1].
Some consumers in the United States, especially those in
the Midwest and in California, saw summer motor gasoline
prices surpass $2 per gallon—the result of a combination
of high world oil prices, supply problems related
to pipeline disruptions, and the higher refinery costs of
new Federal regulations on motor gasoline. High gasoline
prices focused consumer attention on the issue in
the atmosphere of a U.S. presidential election year. Political discussions included suggestions for temporarily
reducing or removing Federal motor gasoline taxes, but
with lower prices after the summer peak the issue was
dropped."
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu.gdTJZIEe...
Posted by UrGatorbait on August 3, 2008 at 11:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well thought out contribution TP. Glad to see that the whackos on the left are so well...ah...uh..uh..(using Barackstar speak here so you'll understand)..uh...ahh..tolerant and sometimes don't take their meds. Yeah it shows the maturity of you and his followers. So while your prodding people to stop doing bad things to McC you'll have to stop first and wipe your nose off a bit and clear your mouth out. Good. We are talking energy and all this vitriol is just well so typical of people like you and the empty suit you adore.
If you think barackstar is worried about you, then you really do show your stripes. You apparently think you have something in common with him judging from your "inspired" post. If you get a teleprompter then you can be like him and say nothing and add nothing but sound good doing it.
Then again you probably contribute zero and will be the first in line for your check.
Posted by EvilGenius on August 4, 2008 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
TP, I hope the enema works for you. You are full of crap.
Oh, and what Gator said!
Good luck with that loser Prince O.
Posted by EvilGenius on August 4, 2008 at 6:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
TP, guess who voted for Bush's energy plan in 2005 that favored the "evil" oil companies? - OBAMA
Guess who voted against it? - McCain.
Obama is a hoax and a joke, but even worse he is an idiot.
Posted by proletariat on August 4, 2008 at 6:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Obama is a good socialist...or is that a oxymoron?
Posted by EvilGenius on August 4, 2008 at 7:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OH TP....?
McCain Not First to Compare Obama to Paris Hilton
"Andy Warhol said we all get our 15 minutes of fame," says Barack Obama. "I've already had an hour and a half. I mean, I'm so overexposed, I'm making Paris Hilton look like a recluse."
That is pretty much the who and the why of Sen. McCain's explanation of his ad, is it not? It turns out he wasn't mocking Sen. Obama so much as channeling him. Or making a mini-documentary out of the Post's article."
----------------------------------------------------------
http://newsbusters.org/stories/mccain_no...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn...
Posted by EvilGenius on August 4, 2008 at 7:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Obama's Chicago Named Worst 'Nanny State' in US
August 4, 2008 - 11:01 ET
Chicago is the worst “nanny-state” city in the U.S. — the metropolis with the most stringent regulations interfering with the exercise of personal freedoms.
That’s the finding of a survey by Reason magazine;
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/nanny_s...
Posted by EvilGenius on August 4, 2008 at 8:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
TP, or butt wipe,
you are a clown and the sad fact is, you are a loser. you support an empty suit that has at best 143 days work experiance in the senate. Yes, a sheep loves the sheppard, and you are a sheep. BAAAAAAAAAAA Obamaaaaaaaaaaa...
Posted by EvilGenius on August 4, 2008 at 8:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
yo butt wipe (TP)The Washington Post? Its as liberal as you can get...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn...
"There's nothing exotic or complicated about how phenoms are made in Washington, and, more to the point, how they are broken.
"Andy Warhol said we all get our 15 minutes of fame," says Barack Obama. "I've already had an hour and a half. I mean, I'm so overexposed, I'm making Paris Hilton look like a recluse."