Pat Oliphant for April 27, 2011

  1. Mom and amanda 106
    wrust33  about 12 years ago

    T. Boone Pickens is right - convert to natural gas for all vehicles

     •  Reply
  2. Missing large
    beenthere41  about 12 years ago

    Of course that’s what Pickens wants. He owns and operates NG fueling stations from Canada to Mexico with his company (Clean Energy Fuels Corp). If you don;t think he will monopolize the industry, here is what he had to say about water after he bought up the ground water rights in Roberts County, Texas: “‘I know what people say—water’s a lot like air. Do you charge for air? ‘Course not; you shouldn’t charge for water,. Well, OK, watch what happens. You won’t have any water.’”

     •  Reply
  3. Missing large
    meetinthemiddle  about 12 years ago

    ^ He bought all those stations because he thinks $4/gallon gas will make a lot of people run to NG…

     •  Reply
  4. Amnesia
    Simon_Jester  about 12 years ago

    T’ain’t that simple. Getting a vehicle to run on NG ( and/or Propane ) requires some serious conversion. I once drove a company vehicle that could run on either one at the flick of a switch.

    In theory…in practice, these cars were constantly breaking down and developing leaks.

    I don’t think we’ve ever agreed on anything before, beenthere, but you’re dead right about T. Boone Pickens. He’s not just peddling natural gas, but also Snake Oil.

     •  Reply
  5. Warcriminal
    WarBush  about 12 years ago

    ^I was watching Horsepower TV TRUCKS! and it seems that conversions are not that complicated (if you’re not mechanically challenged that is). The emissions on propane are a lot less than gasoline but its better than nothing. Plus 500 miles off of one tank of liquid propane on a TRUCK…That’s huge!

     •  Reply
  6. Cat in lime helmet
    sappha58  about 12 years ago

    I learned a saying: “Don’t eat where you sh|t, don’t sh|t where you eat.” Going after natural gas involves pumping hundreds of thousands of gallons of poisonous, toxic chemicals down around the aquifers to frack the rock to get the gas.

    Is it so important to get yet another fossil fuel that we must poison our water supply? Really?

     •  Reply
  7. John adams1
    Motivemagus  about 12 years ago

    ^Or earlier. But I agree. Of course, as Larry Niven pointed out, a fusion plant is likely to be just short of a fusion bomb…

     •  Reply
  8. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  about 12 years ago

    I want a nuclear powered bicycle.

    Actually, we were running NG on an experimental basis in 1971. Handling liquified NG is NOT easy! Even today. NG is just another bullet in the cylinder of your Russian Roulette revolver. All these “stop gap” measures ignore that finite resources ARE finite!

    Exxon is saying we have a 100 year supply of NG in shale. Okay, “we” won’t be around at the end of that time, but what happens when THAT is gone too? Grandkids are just worthless little scabs, right?

     •  Reply
  9. Marx lennon
    charliekane  about 12 years ago

    It’s all good.

    Donnie Trump’s gottit unda control!

    King Abdullah gonna find a, you know, horse’s head part in his bed. Ya know whatta mean.

     •  Reply
  10. Computerhead
    Spyderred  about 12 years ago

    In a lot of places in the west, there isn’t much by way of public transportation and taking cabs everywhere is a terrific expense too. But switching to a fuel source like NG just delays the consequences as it is a heavy polluter and is also a limited resource.

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    s9999a  about 12 years ago

    Isn’t the real problem the burgeoning population?

    Shouldn’t we just have fewer people?

    If we really went bonkers with our wars, maybe we could thin the herd….?

     •  Reply
  12. 71 blk
    trimguy  about 12 years ago

    As Human said, we’ve had over 30 years to deal with this problem, except the oil companies seem hell bent on keeping us addicted to foreign oil thereby making more profit for them.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Pat Oliphant