OT – High Gas Prices to Kill the Exurbs?

[blahblahblah]

The Russians think peak oil is the funniest story to come down the pike since the one about the dead dinosaurs. They are pumping this stuff from deep within the earth as fast as they can stick pipes down there. If it were dead plants and dinosaurs we would have run out a long time ago. Deepwater Horizon was drilling 10K meters down! That’s like an inverted Mt. Everest. Ain’t no dead dinos down that way, and certainly not enough to make oil at 10K PSI or whatever insane pressure that thing tapped into.

Peak oil/global warming are just stories they tell people to get them to accept austerity which is the true goal. More for the few at the top, less for everyone else. When we all believe that we have to stop eating/driving/living/reproducing it frees them up to zoom around on their megayachts and whatnot. Ain’t no TSA gropedowns or x-ray treatments for the private flight crowd he he he…

One thing that IS true is that the easy oil is gonna be gone soon. The next big trend is gonna be from super-deep wells. Unfortunately they make big booms and messes when things go wrong but that’s the price we’re gonna have to pay…

[Arraya]

LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago. Sorry there is not creamy nugget inside the earth to deliver endless supplies of oil. There are solutions but now within the realm of our social systems

you know how we know concho. 150 years of watching oil wells peak and decline. Literally 100 of thousands of them. Also, watching oil regions peak and decline. hundreds of them.

Now, you are not thinking concho. What politician wants to push legislation because of peak oil. Also, what does peak oil mean to global warming.

Think

[Arraya]

LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago. Sorry there is not creamy nugget inside the earth to deliver endless supplies of oil. There are solutions but now within the realm of our social systems

you know how we know concho. 150 years of watching oil wells peak and decline. Literally 100 of thousands of them. Also, watching oil regions peak and decline. hundreds of them.

Now, you are not thinking concho. What politician wants to push legislation because of peak oil. Also, what does peak oil mean to global warming.

Think

[Arraya]

LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago. Sorry there is not creamy nugget inside the earth to deliver endless supplies of oil. There are solutions but now within the realm of our social systems

you know how we know concho. 150 years of watching oil wells peak and decline. Literally 100 of thousands of them. Also, watching oil regions peak and decline. hundreds of them.

Now, you are not thinking concho. What politician wants to push legislation because of peak oil. Also, what does peak oil mean to global warming.

Think

[Arraya]

LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago. Sorry there is not creamy nugget inside the earth to deliver endless supplies of oil. There are solutions but now within the realm of our social systems

you know how we know concho. 150 years of watching oil wells peak and decline. Literally 100 of thousands of them. Also, watching oil regions peak and decline. hundreds of them.

Now, you are not thinking concho. What politician wants to push legislation because of peak oil. Also, what does peak oil mean to global warming.

Think

[Arraya]

LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago. Sorry there is not creamy nugget inside the earth to deliver endless supplies of oil. There are solutions but now within the realm of our social systems

you know how we know concho. 150 years of watching oil wells peak and decline. Literally 100 of thousands of them. Also, watching oil regions peak and decline. hundreds of them.

Now, you are not thinking concho. What politician wants to push legislation because of peak oil. Also, what does peak oil mean to global warming.

Think

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago…
[/quote]

LOL oil prices peaked two years ago too. Why spend money pumping it, refining it, putting it in tankers when the price is falling? Wait till the price hits $120/barrel in 6 months and you’ll see their production ramp right back up to where it was in 2008. Gold mines slow down when the price falls and ramp up when it increases, it’s the same in the oil biz too.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago…
[/quote]

LOL oil prices peaked two years ago too. Why spend money pumping it, refining it, putting it in tankers when the price is falling? Wait till the price hits $120/barrel in 6 months and you’ll see their production ramp right back up to where it was in 2008. Gold mines slow down when the price falls and ramp up when it increases, it’s the same in the oil biz too.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago…
[/quote]

LOL oil prices peaked two years ago too. Why spend money pumping it, refining it, putting it in tankers when the price is falling? Wait till the price hits $120/barrel in 6 months and you’ll see their production ramp right back up to where it was in 2008. Gold mines slow down when the price falls and ramp up when it increases, it’s the same in the oil biz too.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago…
[/quote]

LOL oil prices peaked two years ago too. Why spend money pumping it, refining it, putting it in tankers when the price is falling? Wait till the price hits $120/barrel in 6 months and you’ll see their production ramp right back up to where it was in 2008. Gold mines slow down when the price falls and ramp up when it increases, it’s the same in the oil biz too.

[blahblahblah]

[quote=Arraya]LOL The Russians oil production peaked two years ago…
[/quote]

LOL oil prices peaked two years ago too. Why spend money pumping it, refining it, putting it in tankers when the price is falling? Wait till the price hits $120/barrel in 6 months and you’ll see their production ramp right back up to where it was in 2008. Gold mines slow down when the price falls and ramp up when it increases, it’s the same in the oil biz too.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=paramount]Facts on Temecula-Murrieta area commuting:

*A survey conducted by planning agencies in Riverside and San Diego counties found that more than half of Temecula-Murrieta-French Valley households had at least one person commuting outside the county. For them, the average drive time was one hour.

*Forbes Magazine recently ranked the area first in its list of America’s most unhealthy commutes, beating out every other major metropolitan area in the country, as Inland area drivers breathe the unhealthiest air and have the highest rate of fatal auto accidents per capita. Gas siphoning has also been noted as a problem for vehicles left unattended in the region.

*Workers who live and work in this city: 39.7%

I think when people live in an area for a long period of time, and they are happy living there perspectives become a bit skewed.[/quote]

Unfortunately these are not really facts, most piggies love analyzing data, so if you are bored, here’s the 104 page pdf of that study. I already saw the problems with the study and that is why I used the raw data and made my own percentages, however the newspapers don’t look very deep and that is where you got your percentages.

http://www.i15irp.com/Appendix%20B_i15irp_0307.pdf

One particular item of note is on page 8, where the actual city of temecula has more jobs per household than the I-15 San Diego corridor as a whole, more than escondido, more than vista, but less than san marcos.

But the real problem with the study is dividing modern traffic counts into year 2000 census data in order to determine percentages. Using 2005 traffic paterns (which is where the 29k commuters numbers come from) then factoring those into census 2000 population figures for an area that grew at a rate as fast an any area in the country is just bad math. The used temec’s 2000 pop of 57k and murr’s as 44k, and similar innacurate numbers for the other sw county communities. All of the populations need to be roughly doubled. (they did however say that 40% of the commuters don’t go more than 30 miles, because I go one offramp away, I’ve commuted to another county). Another huge problem with saying only 39% of those that live in the city work in the city is that people with a commute of 5 miles, likely work in another city or unincorporated area. Both Scardey and I live in the unicorporated areas, of course I can wak to the city, I’m 150 yards from the city, but technically, I’m crossing municipal boundaries for not only work but gas and food. There are people who live in Poway, work in Rancho Bernardo and they technically don’t live in the city they work in, one is the City of S.D., while the other is the city of Poway.

But the real reason these so called fact are produced, these are produced by and for government agencies that want to support sales tax votes, these are the mass transit and carpool lane people. This is SanDag and Wrcog, these studies are designed for long term planning but also to create sound bytes for the media to write stories, helping the next ballot measure for their 1/2 cent sales tax. Paramount, you of all people know that you can only trust the government so much when it comes to justifying tax increases.

BTW, the forbes thing is not a sw county thing, it’s ratings are more about the region itself, I’ll give you that, an hour north, the riverside/san bernadino areas are horrible, bad air, bad commutes. The 91 is probably the worst freeway I know of.

If you have videotaped your commute in the rain, I can only say one thing, you need to move. You need to be happy and you aren’t. It is true that happy people tend to overlook things that other people don’t, guilty as charged. But the reverse is true, unhappy people tend to exaggerate the negative, then they start thinking everyone is siphoning their gas.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=paramount]Facts on Temecula-Murrieta area commuting:

*A survey conducted by planning agencies in Riverside and San Diego counties found that more than half of Temecula-Murrieta-French Valley households had at least one person commuting outside the county. For them, the average drive time was one hour.

*Forbes Magazine recently ranked the area first in its list of America’s most unhealthy commutes, beating out every other major metropolitan area in the country, as Inland area drivers breathe the unhealthiest air and have the highest rate of fatal auto accidents per capita. Gas siphoning has also been noted as a problem for vehicles left unattended in the region.

*Workers who live and work in this city: 39.7%

I think when people live in an area for a long period of time, and they are happy living there perspectives become a bit skewed.[/quote]

Unfortunately these are not really facts, most piggies love analyzing data, so if you are bored, here’s the 104 page pdf of that study. I already saw the problems with the study and that is why I used the raw data and made my own percentages, however the newspapers don’t look very deep and that is where you got your percentages.

http://www.i15irp.com/Appendix%20B_i15irp_0307.pdf

One particular item of note is on page 8, where the actual city of temecula has more jobs per household than the I-15 San Diego corridor as a whole, more than escondido, more than vista, but less than san marcos.

But the real problem with the study is dividing modern traffic counts into year 2000 census data in order to determine percentages. Using 2005 traffic paterns (which is where the 29k commuters numbers come from) then factoring those into census 2000 population figures for an area that grew at a rate as fast an any area in the country is just bad math. The used temec’s 2000 pop of 57k and murr’s as 44k, and similar innacurate numbers for the other sw county communities. All of the populations need to be roughly doubled. (they did however say that 40% of the commuters don’t go more than 30 miles, because I go one offramp away, I’ve commuted to another county). Another huge problem with saying only 39% of those that live in the city work in the city is that people with a commute of 5 miles, likely work in another city or unincorporated area. Both Scardey and I live in the unicorporated areas, of course I can wak to the city, I’m 150 yards from the city, but technically, I’m crossing municipal boundaries for not only work but gas and food. There are people who live in Poway, work in Rancho Bernardo and they technically don’t live in the city they work in, one is the City of S.D., while the other is the city of Poway.

But the real reason these so called fact are produced, these are produced by and for government agencies that want to support sales tax votes, these are the mass transit and carpool lane people. This is SanDag and Wrcog, these studies are designed for long term planning but also to create sound bytes for the media to write stories, helping the next ballot measure for their 1/2 cent sales tax. Paramount, you of all people know that you can only trust the government so much when it comes to justifying tax increases.

BTW, the forbes thing is not a sw county thing, it’s ratings are more about the region itself, I’ll give you that, an hour north, the riverside/san bernadino areas are horrible, bad air, bad commutes. The 91 is probably the worst freeway I know of.

If you have videotaped your commute in the rain, I can only say one thing, you need to move. You need to be happy and you aren’t. It is true that happy people tend to overlook things that other people don’t, guilty as charged. But the reverse is true, unhappy people tend to exaggerate the negative, then they start thinking everyone is siphoning their gas.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=paramount]Facts on Temecula-Murrieta area commuting:

*A survey conducted by planning agencies in Riverside and San Diego counties found that more than half of Temecula-Murrieta-French Valley households had at least one person commuting outside the county. For them, the average drive time was one hour.

*Forbes Magazine recently ranked the area first in its list of America’s most unhealthy commutes, beating out every other major metropolitan area in the country, as Inland area drivers breathe the unhealthiest air and have the highest rate of fatal auto accidents per capita. Gas siphoning has also been noted as a problem for vehicles left unattended in the region.

*Workers who live and work in this city: 39.7%

I think when people live in an area for a long period of time, and they are happy living there perspectives become a bit skewed.[/quote]

Unfortunately these are not really facts, most piggies love analyzing data, so if you are bored, here’s the 104 page pdf of that study. I already saw the problems with the study and that is why I used the raw data and made my own percentages, however the newspapers don’t look very deep and that is where you got your percentages.

http://www.i15irp.com/Appendix%20B_i15irp_0307.pdf

One particular item of note is on page 8, where the actual city of temecula has more jobs per household than the I-15 San Diego corridor as a whole, more than escondido, more than vista, but less than san marcos.

But the real problem with the study is dividing modern traffic counts into year 2000 census data in order to determine percentages. Using 2005 traffic paterns (which is where the 29k commuters numbers come from) then factoring those into census 2000 population figures for an area that grew at a rate as fast an any area in the country is just bad math. The used temec’s 2000 pop of 57k and murr’s as 44k, and similar innacurate numbers for the other sw county communities. All of the populations need to be roughly doubled. (they did however say that 40% of the commuters don’t go more than 30 miles, because I go one offramp away, I’ve commuted to another county). Another huge problem with saying only 39% of those that live in the city work in the city is that people with a commute of 5 miles, likely work in another city or unincorporated area. Both Scardey and I live in the unicorporated areas, of course I can wak to the city, I’m 150 yards from the city, but technically, I’m crossing municipal boundaries for not only work but gas and food. There are people who live in Poway, work in Rancho Bernardo and they technically don’t live in the city they work in, one is the City of S.D., while the other is the city of Poway.

But the real reason these so called fact are produced, these are produced by and for government agencies that want to support sales tax votes, these are the mass transit and carpool lane people. This is SanDag and Wrcog, these studies are designed for long term planning but also to create sound bytes for the media to write stories, helping the next ballot measure for their 1/2 cent sales tax. Paramount, you of all people know that you can only trust the government so much when it comes to justifying tax increases.

BTW, the forbes thing is not a sw county thing, it’s ratings are more about the region itself, I’ll give you that, an hour north, the riverside/san bernadino areas are horrible, bad air, bad commutes. The 91 is probably the worst freeway I know of.

If you have videotaped your commute in the rain, I can only say one thing, you need to move. You need to be happy and you aren’t. It is true that happy people tend to overlook things that other people don’t, guilty as charged. But the reverse is true, unhappy people tend to exaggerate the negative, then they start thinking everyone is siphoning their gas.

[temeculaguy]

[quote=paramount]Facts on Temecula-Murrieta area commuting:

*A survey conducted by planning agencies in Riverside and San Diego counties found that more than half of Temecula-Murrieta-French Valley households had at least one person commuting outside the county. For them, the average drive time was one hour.

*Forbes Magazine recently ranked the area first in its list of America’s most unhealthy commutes, beating out every other major metropolitan area in the country, as Inland area drivers breathe the unhealthiest air and have the highest rate of fatal auto accidents per capita. Gas siphoning has also been noted as a problem for vehicles left unattended in the region.

*Workers who live and work in this city: 39.7%

I think when people live in an area for a long period of time, and they are happy living there perspectives become a bit skewed.[/quote]

Unfortunately these are not really facts, most piggies love analyzing data, so if you are bored, here’s the 104 page pdf of that study. I already saw the problems with the study and that is why I used the raw data and made my own percentages, however the newspapers don’t look very deep and that is where you got your percentages.

http://www.i15irp.com/Appendix%20B_i15irp_0307.pdf

One particular item of note is on page 8, where the actual city of temecula has more jobs per household than the I-15 San Diego corridor as a whole, more than escondido, more than vista, but less than san marcos.

But the real problem with the study is dividing modern traffic counts into year 2000 census data in order to determine percentages. Using 2005 traffic paterns (which is where the 29k commuters numbers come from) then factoring those into census 2000 population figures for an area that grew at a rate as fast an any area in the country is just bad math. The used temec’s 2000 pop of 57k and murr’s as 44k, and similar innacurate numbers for the other sw county communities. All of the populations need to be roughly doubled. (they did however say that 40% of the commuters don’t go more than 30 miles, because I go one offramp away, I’ve commuted to another county). Another huge problem with saying only 39% of those that live in the city work in the city is that people with a commute of 5 miles, likely work in another city or unincorporated area. Both Scardey and I live in the unicorporated areas, of course I can wak to the city, I’m 150 yards from the city, but technically, I’m crossing municipal boundaries for not only work but gas and food. There are people who live in Poway, work in Rancho Bernardo and they technically don’t live in the city they work in, one is the City of S.D., while the other is the city of Poway.

But the real reason these so called fact are produced, these are produced by and for government agencies that want to support sales tax votes, these are the mass transit and carpool lane people. This is SanDag and Wrcog, these studies are designed for long term planning but also to create sound bytes for the media to write stories, helping the next ballot measure for their 1/2 cent sales tax. Paramount, you of all people know that you can only trust the government so much when it comes to justifying tax increases.

BTW, the forbes thing is not a sw county thing, it’s ratings are more about the region itself, I’ll give you that, an hour north, the riverside/san bernadino areas are horrible, bad air, bad commutes. The 91 is probably the worst freeway I know of.

If you have videotaped your commute in the rain, I can only say one thing, you need to move. You need to be happy and you aren’t. It is true that happy people tend to overlook things that other people don’t, guilty as charged. But the reverse is true, unhappy people tend to exaggerate the negative, then they start thinking everyone is siphoning their gas.

[Author]

Posts