It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Oil , ''Cheaper Then Pepsi,Coke and Mineral water!

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Aug, 28 2006 @ 01:57 PM

Originally posted by mecheng
Wheres the sense?

Its just one of those things… like when people get exited because of record profits, well yeah, a more expensive product plus same or greater level buy equals bigger earnings. However people often don't look at the marginal profits, there are some businesses out there that would make Oil Execs blush when it comes to marginal profits but again people don't seem to care about that, so like I said, its just one of those things.

posted on Aug, 28 2006 @ 02:03 PM

Originally posted by krax
Either way, why don't people use soya then as fuel, would save alot of money and might stop the war in Iraq lol

I haven't put a drop of petroleum based fuel in my truck in almost two months. Biodiesel is readily available and there's a thread on ATS about it here:

Something that everyone is ignoring in regards to this (ridiculous) price comparison, is the level that petroleum is taxed at at both the state and federal level. Remove the tax amount, and suddenly the price is quite attractive. If this doesn't piss you off, nothing will:

posted on Aug, 28 2006 @ 02:11 PM
Thanks for the Link Mirthful Me, my state (PA) is third on the list in terms of taxes, 31 cents on every gallon is substantial, that's what... just a little over 4.50 in taxes to fill up your car.

posted on Aug, 28 2006 @ 03:25 PM

Originally posted by WestPoint23
......31 cents on every gallon is substantial......

Seems like a luxury to me. The second paragraph on this link may make you feel a bit better.

But then we also have to pay Value Added Tax on soft drinks @17.5% . And if I don't recycle the damn plastic bottles I could get charged again by the local councils for producing too much waste and not recycling (refuse collection costs are already covered by another tax btw). And so it goes on and on.

Sounds like you are getting away with a bargain there.

posted on Aug, 29 2006 @ 04:22 PM

Originally posted by dbates
We should note that there's a $15.00 monthly fee for having a water meter in this example, but I think you get the point. Do you still think this is a fair comparison?

Imo It is a more that fair comparison as lay people's comparisons go...

The argument that capital expenditures would be a constraint was countered by noting that costs are, by the most liberal estimate, under two dollars a barrel and more accurately about $.50 a barrel. The Saudi’s admitted to the use of water flooding in their fields but pointed out that the water cut after four decades at Ghawar was below 40%, had been stable for five years, and was far below what Western companies often produce in their fields. The New York Times Article The article in February 24 New York Times is a fascinating and sweeping review of water are referred to as the tired Saudi oil fields.

Now considering that that is 44 gallons of usable material and around 19 gallons of gas it works out to 10 US cents per gallon of gas.

These are some of the links i found tonight ( less than a hour of reading and searching ) during my frequent expeditions to see what's happening in this 'field'.

All i can ask is that no one buy into Peak oil and that they keep asking questions till they are ready to continue demanding ever higher and efficient standards of living. Don't compromise you rights due unfounded fears!


new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in