Oil is all about cash baby.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

And if this (http://www.energy.ca.gov/pier/iaw/industry/petro.html) (Thanks Darell!) page doesn't prove it, I don't know what does. The key points are (circa 2000)

-CA extracts ~300 million bpy (second table), and in order to do this needs about
3,846 million KWh of electricity 2,910 million Therms of gas.

-CA refines ~15 billion gallons of gasoline per year, and this requires roughly
7,266 million KWh of electricity and 1,061 million Therms of natural gas.

Note these as well
-1 therm=29.3KWh
-There are about 20 gallons of gasoline in a barrel of oil.
-NG combined cycle power plant efficiency is about 55%.
-Electricity transmission efficiency is about 93%.
-Charger/controller/motor efficiency is about 72%.
-Gasoline production and distribution efficiency is about 83%.
-Average ICE vehicle efficiency is about 20%.

Since we extract 300mbpy, and get about 20 gallons of gasoline per barrel, we extract what will be 6bbpy. In order to do this we used 3.846 billion kwh of electricity and 85.263 billion KWh of NG. If we had used this electricity and NG for electricity, we would have roughly 85.263(.55)(.93)=43.612 + 3.846=47.458 billion KWh of electricity at consumer's homes. Which is about 7.91KWh/gallon of gas, just for extraction.

Refining takes up some too. During this we use up 31.087 billion KWh of NG, and 7.266 billion KWh of electricity, which could be 23.167 billion KWh of electricity at the consumer's home, or 1.55KWh/gallon of gasoline refined.

Combined this gives us 9.46KWh/gallon if we only look at gasoline, or 4.73KWh/gallon if we look at the entire barrel. Since gasoline takes more than most distillates, it probably uses roughly 6kwh per gallon in terms of energy that could be electricity going to CA homes.

With an EV average of 250wh/mile, we could go about 280 billion miles just on the industrial inputs of electricity and NG needed to get gasoline. Or, we could go 300 billion miles on gasoline in vehicles that average 20mpg. Combined efficiency for EVs is around 37%, while ICEs are around 17%. We dump more than twice as much carbon into the atmosphere and god knows what kind of pollutants, compared to NG which is pretty clean in terms of electricity generation, and electricity already being used. I'm surprised we're not using the gasoline to grow ethanol from pine trees... :rolleyes:

[Ted Hart]

Hi, OMGWTF...!
This is just awful! Mother Nature would be right to evict us! Again, thanks for the "eye opener"!

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Np! I couldn't believe it at first when I saw it on Darell's site, and since this CA gov info was in doc form I wanted something more concrete before coming to any conclusions, but then I searched for a line from the doc and came up with that CA gov site... It's just nuts when I think about it, we're trading relatively clean useful energy for about the same about of dirty useful energy, just to make a few bucks.

[The Toecutter]

That's a rather sobering analysis on your part. I never knew that oil required just that much electricity!

When someone tries to figure out how many EVs the electric grid can handle, the amount of oil use displaced and the electricity saved from that certainly merits consideration.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Btw, the last 280 to 300 billion vehicle miles comparison assumes the minimum of ~4.7kwh per gallon, EV efficiency on average of 250wh/mile, and gasoline efficiency of 20mpg average. At the likely 6kwh/gallon of gas compared to 25mpg new car ICE fleet average, it's still practically the same number of vehicle miles per year. What's really horrible is CA may be one of the few states that has the off-peak capacity needed for a significant fleet of EVs, but we just let that extra capacity sit there. And... the DOE has a study stating that we could power over 80% (http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/12/doe_study_offpe.html) of the current fleet off peak! And that's not all, during the summer when states have brown outs and whatnot from lack of peak electricity production/transfer, the EV fleet can serve as a buffer! Two birds one stone deal and all...

[The Toecutter]

The DOE study is a bit flawed though. Not all vehicles will be charged off peak, and that study understates the CO2 reduction by a very large number. A more realistic number of EVs that the grid could handle in its currently dilapidated state would be around 100 million. This is without accounting for the electricity saved by displaced oil use.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

The grid may not be dilapidated so much as not built for deregulated operation, according (http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-9/iss-5/p8.html) to this article anyhoo. Something else is the potential (http://www.udel.edu/V2G/docs/V2G-Cal-ExecSum.html) for rolling reserves of electricity, that can be accessed locally during high demand instead of just pulling more electricity in from across the country.

[The Toecutter]

I could also mention that EVs can be designed to send power back to the grid as well. But the economics would make it very expensive considering battery wear and tear.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I think they would need to be discharged along the same lines as hybrid batteries are charged/discharged in order to maximize battery life. Something like always keeping the pack 40-80% charged, so even if the pack only goes 1000 cycles at 100% DOD, if it also goes 4000 cycles at 60-70% DOD, then pulling a little bit out of each pack can be economically feasible.

[darelldd]

Wow, this is great! (thanks for the pointer, omg). I'm gonna have to ponder these for a bit, and scratch my head some more. For many years now I've come up against the wall of having REAL hard numbers for this, but each time I bang on that wall, I'm at about parity with how far I can drive an EV on the electricity that is used to make gasoline. And your anaysis is right in line. If I can drive 20 miles in my EV on the electricity needed to deliver a gallon of gasoline to the tank of the average car... why are we using gasoline? Oh yeah! Because electricity is so dirty.

I could also mention that EVs can be designed to send power back to the grid as well. But the economics would make it very expensive considering battery wear and tear.
Expensive? Sure. More expensive than building and fueling yet another power plant? I don't think so! The idea is that the power companies would pay EV owners to allow for shallow cycling of their traction packs - and replace the power when the peak has passed. In a perfect world, the value of that peak-shaving power would pay for the entire lease of an EV - or at least the lease of the battery pack! This will require many millions of willing EV owners, of course. The advantages are many: You take the power from a local source to minimize line-losses, and you spread it over many vehicles to minimize the battery cycle of individual packs. And the peak shaving can be INSTANT instead of waiting for a peaker plant to spool up (and maybe never even be needed after it sits there and pollutes, awaiting the call to action).

Lots is difficult hurdles, but far from impossible or too expensive.

[darelldd]

OK, you guys finally shamed me into updating a few links on my emissions page. Now you can see the Word Doc OR the HTML page. Just like magic this internet stuff!

I also added omg's great bit at the bottom of that page. Maybe one day I'll organize it all so it makes sense. For now it is a reference repository until we truly get to the bottom of all this nonsense.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I was thinking of someone could clean it up and link key terms, maybe send to to Tesla motors. Might be of interest if it was concise and accurate.

[darelldd]

From what I've seen from the Tesla folks, they could probably do the research AND make it look all pretty for publication. Man, they've got some nice docs on their site. I hope they're putting as much effort into the car (my lateast monitor background) as they put into their site. :)

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Better yet, see if we can find hard documentation to make photocopies of, preferably from multiple sources, and send in the whole kitten kaboodle. I mean, websites can go down fast, and documents a little slower, but if someone has hard copies of both, it'd lend way more credibility.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

And here we go (http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/08/energy-alberta-.html#more). Using nuclear power to help extract oil. I'm guessing it's not so great from the perspective of energy efficiency, but probably wonderful from an economic POV. Trade cheap on site nuclear energy for expensive oil, and to hell with the GHG emissions and pollution. It's a win/win situation, except for the consumer, who has to deal with more crap in the air and the ever increasing cost of personal transportation.

[Telco]

If I can drive 20 miles in my EV on the electricity needed to deliver a gallon of gasoline to the tank of the average car... why are we using gasoline? Oh yeah! Because electricity is so dirty.

Because gasoline is a portable energy source, and the infrastructure to support gasoline automobiles has been in place far longer than the infrastructure necessary to support electric automobiles. At the infancy of electricity as a useful power source, it was limited to city lights and the houses of rich folks, along with factory use. When you are starting a new company and it takes a long time to make appropriate wire, it's going to get run where the big money is first. On the other hand, all it took back then to set up a gas station was putting a metal barrel on an elevated platform with a hose coming out the bottom. It didn't take long to make a pump that could measure in gallons, hand operated and hand powered.

To go all electric cars we'd need an infrastructure to support it. We'd also need some way to quickly recharge batteries, taking no more than 10 minutes to go from no charge to full charge. True, for 90 percent of your driving you'd be able to recharge every night at home, but there also needs to be a way to get a refill when not at home. Otherwise the public simply won't accept it. Battery tech also needs to come a ways further, until it can push a large family car at highway speeds. In short, to get the public to accept it electric cars will need to have the same capability as gasoline cars.

While this is being worked on, I still say we should be working on improving the electrical infrastructure altogether, and eliminating the use of any motive fuel in a non-motive source, ie requiring anything that doesn't move to use electricity which will save gasoline and like products for things that can't be plugged in, like cars and planes. This would let us extend crude supplies and cut pollution enormously.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

Because gasoline is a portable energy source, and the infrastructure has been in place longer than any real electrical infrastructure.Lemme see, the Pearl Street Station was switched on September 4th, 1882, and the first gasoline powered car was built in 1885? No way no how the network of gas stations has been in place longer than the electric grid.

To go all electric cars we'd need an infrastructure to support it. We'd also need some way to quickly recharge batteries, taking no more than 10 minutes to go from no charge to full charge. True, for 90 percent of your driving you'd be able to recharge every night at home, but there also needs to be a way to get a refill when not at home.I don't think anyone here is advocating going all electric cars. That'd be silly considering there are situations where a gasoline vehicle is fine. It's just that some people at least want a decent EV on the table as an option, and in that context, we don't need anything except for a decent EV itself. There are quick charging stations btw, but they aren't common and after the ZEV mandate was abandoned by CA after the Bush administration joined in the suite against CA by several automakers, there weren't any additional stations made IIRC.

[Telco]

omgwtfbyobbq - I said REAL infrastructure. [previous post adjusted to remove the slang usage of the word "real"] I didn't say gasoline was first, I said it was the first of the two to be usable for transportation. For the first 20-30 years electricity was used pretty much to provide a few city streets with light, and so a few rich folks could have a light bulb. By the time the electric infrastructure was strong enough to start maybe managing a few electric cars, the gasoline infrastructure was firmly in place.

"I don't think anyone here is advocating going all electric cars."

Why not? I think its silly to depend on petroleum indefinitely. It's doubtful that I'll see the end of the gasoline engine, but I'm hoping my kids or grandkids will.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

That power generating station was plenty real. Likely more real than you are. ;)
In the early 1900s the electric infrastructure was responsible for shuttling 80 million around southern CA alone. The electric infrastructure has always been suitable for EVs because we need tons of capacity during the day and very little at night. Because of this we can handle a significant number of plug-ins off-peak. As for why we don't need to go all electric, it's not suitable for all situations. Trucking and high speed long distance auto travel still need the energy density of liquid fuels.

[Telco]

I think I see the problem here. Different definitions of real. You are thinking of real vs imagined, I was using as a slang reference to usefulness. :D I'll edit my post to clarify.


As for why we don't need to go all electric, it's not suitable for all situations. Trucking and high speed long distance auto travel still need the energy density of liquid fuels.

I still see no reason to not do away with all petroleum use, eventually. Where there is a will there is a way. Unfortunately, trucking and long distance auto travel would be the last to go.

[trebuchet03]

I still see no reason to not do away with all petroleum use, eventually. Where there is a will there is a way. Unfortunately, trucking and long distance auto travel would be the last to go.

Luckily, while hauling, long distance trucking is pretty efficient per pound. However, a series hybrid is a completely feasible option as of right now (was first prototyped for diesel electric locomotives in 1895 by GE). This would also solve any potential problems with overloading current infrastructure.

I'm a big fan of transition technology - especially when the public labels things. Ideally, we don't want EVs to be the "green option," we want it to be the normal :thumbup:

[Telco]

Luckily, while hauling, long distance trucking is pretty efficient per pound. However, a series hybrid is a completely feasible option as of right now (was first prototyped for diesel electric locomotives in 1895 by GE). This would also solve any potential problems with overloading current infrastructure.

I'm a big fan of transition technology - especially when the public labels things. Ideally, we don't want EVs to be the "green option," we want it to be the normal :thumbup:

I wish they'd look at doing an actual hybrid setup for smaller vehicles than trains where an ICE is used strictly to power a generator, and said generator is used to power electric motors. I think it would prove to be a bigger savings than the current idea of using an electric motor to boost an ICE. The ICE would only run at the optimal RPM to produce power, and could be fine tuned to that specific RPM, and with an electric motor having 100 percent torque available at 0RPM, it would be able to move the load just fine. A diesel electric train does this every day, and according to the GE site I looked at on this a DE train gets about 3 gallons per mile while pulling the same load as 150 semis, or more. If this is accurate, then this means that you would need 150 semis getting 50MPG to match the mileage of one train getting 3 gallons per mile. Semis are normally seeing anywhere from 6-12MPG when fully loaded. Since DE trains are so much more efficient than semis, can't help but wonder how well the same concept with updated technology would do in a semi, or even a passenger car. Been keeping this in the back of my head for a possible project in a few years. :thumbup:

Math:
3 gallons used by a train to go 1 mile divided by 150 trucks = .02 gallons per truck. Each truck would have to burn .02 gallons to go the same mile to be as efficient as the train.
1 gallon divided by .02 = 50MPG

[Bill in Houston]

A DE train has a lot of rolling resistance and aero resistance advantages over a truck, so it may not be apples-to-apples.

BUT, I think that your idea already exists in the Tzero (when the trailer-generator is attached), and that it will allegedly exist in the Volt. I personally don't think the Volt will ever see production in a meaningful way, though. I don't think that either one of those vehicles claims to have especially good MPG while running on gasoline as a series hybrid, though.

[cfg83]

Telco -

I wish they'd look at doing an actual hybrid setup for smaller vehicles than trains where an ICE is used strictly to power a generator, and said generator is used to power electric motors. I think it would prove to be a bigger savings than the current idea of using an electric motor to boost an ICE. The ICE would only run at the optimal RPM to produce power, and could be fine tuned to that specific RPM, and with an electric motor having 100 percent torque available at 0RPM, it would be able to move the load just fine. A diesel electric train does this every day, and according to the GE site I looked at on this a DE train gets about 3 gallons per mile while pulling the same load as 150 semis, or more. If this is accurate, then this means that you would need 150 semis getting 50MPG to match the mileage of one train getting 3 gallons per mile. Semis are normally seeing anywhere from 6-12MPG when fully loaded. Since DE trains are so much more efficient than semis, can't help but wonder how well the same concept with updated technology would do in a semi, or even a passenger car. Been keeping this in the back of my head for a possible project in a few years. :thumbup:

Math:
3 gallons used by a train to go 1 mile divided by 150 trucks = .02 gallons per truck. Each truck would have to burn .02 gallons to go the same mile to be as efficient as the train.
1 gallon divided by .02 = 50MPG

Just like Bill said, the "series hybrid" is what I consider to be the original definition of a hybrid. I look at the Prius/Insight as "hybrid-hybrids" so to speak.

I think that isolating the ICE also allows you to optimize the emissions, in addition to the RPM, so you can get a two for one.

CarloSW2

[cfg83]

Bill -

A DE train has a lot of rolling resistance and aero resistance advantages over a truck, so it may not be apples-to-apples.

BUT, I think that your idea already exists in the Tzero (when the trailer-generator is attached), and that it will allegedly exist in the Volt. I personally don't think the Volt will ever see production in a meaningful way, though. I don't think that either one of those vehicles claims to have especially good MPG while running on gasoline as a series hybrid, though.

My understanding is that the Volt claims 50 MPG if you *never* plug it in. If that ends up being true, then it really becomes comparable to the current non plug-in hybrids.

Chevrolet Volt Electric Concept Plug-In Vehicle
http://www.soultek.com/clean_energy/hybrid_cars/hybrid_car_types/gm_chevrolet_volt_electric_concept_vehicle.htm
As a result the Chevrolet Volt is powered completely by electricity. While lithium-ion batteries fuel the vehicle with electricity, a 1-liter, 3 cylinder turbocharged engine - again using multiple fuels - can create electricity to fuel the batteries. This combination of fuel and batteries gives the Volt an extended road trip range of 640 miles averaging an impressive 50 mpg.


CarloSW2

[bowtieguy]

I think I see the problem here. Different definitions of real. You are thinking of real vs imagined, I was using as a slang reference to usefulness. :D I'll edit my post to clarify.




I still see no reason to not do away with all petroleum use, eventually. Where there is a will there is a way. Unfortunately, trucking and long distance auto travel would be the last to go.

Hey T. same nuts, different subject. i AM more evil than most because i go to work to make a profit[OIL IS ALL ABOUT CASH BABY]. also, you ready? i,gasp!, drive a truck for a living(with TWO pollution emitting motors--the truck and the refer unit). last avg taken was 4-7 mpg diesel.

[skewbe]

i,gasp!, drive a truck for a living

Yah, we know, no big deal, it would take 72 metros (and 72 drivers) getting a combined .7mpg to carry the same load by my last reconing.

That is if you believe in math and we agree on what the terms mile and gallon mean ;)

[omgwtfbyobbq]

last avg taken was 4-7 mpg diesel.That's an interesting average... :D Anyway, why would a trucker be concerned about fuel prices? If oil and auto companies inflate demand/cut refined supply and diesel goes up some more, you'll still get paid. I wonder if it'll break $4/gal this winter... Gotta move stuff anyway, rail is *** slow and at capacity. Besides, who cares if those poor schmucks in and around places like the LA harbor and Inland Empire have increased lung and prostate cancer risk from the extremely high levels of diesel exhaust? Y'all are in your air conditioned cabs, out of the heat and pollution 99% of the time. Hell, I imagine you could even get away with running a car or two down directly every now and then if you wanted to... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mrrLT6wGhI

Edit- Not that a car couldn't get away with the same thing to a two wheeled vehicle. Provided there's no way to prove it wasn't an accident, the open road is the easiest place to get away with murder.

[skewbe]

I don't mean to imply that I'm wild about our consumption habits or that we couldn't do a better job of minimizing our need to drive crap all over the world (buy locally grown foods!!)

And yes, it is the poor schmucks, always the poor schmucks, that pay for it. The guys that made their money are long gone or crying that they used to make money.

[trebuchet03]

I think it would prove to be a bigger savings than the current idea of using an electric motor to boost an ICE.

So here's the biggest problem... Currently, your ICE typically lives around 10-30% of it's maximum power output potential. A series hybrid, to be most efficient, has it's ICE living at 90-100% power output. This takes your 5,000 hour engine - and drastically reduces it's expected lifespan (bugger). This, as I've been told by those in industry (attempting to bring this into production), is the biggest problem they are facing when it comes to gas. I wonder what %tage of power output the DE locos run....

A DE train has a lot of rolling resistance and aero resistance advantages over a truck, so it may not be apples-to-apples.

For powertrain efficiency -- you're absolutely right... That's why I focused on consumption per pound.

While I haven't verified this (yet), on my cross country trip - it looked like the railways were pretty clogged. I saw a LARGE train (10-20 locomotives) every 10-15 minutes coming my way (headed in opposite direction). That's about a train every 18 miles. That's likely the minimum complete stopping distance in case of emergency (with some factor of safety of course). This was the BNSF line. Does this mean we need more rail?

I don't mean to imply that I'm wild about our consumption habits or that we couldn't do a better job of minimizing our need to drive crap all over the world (buy locally grown foods!!)

Har Har :thumbup: And make your own too :D I recently discovered how to culture my own yogurt - I consume quite a bit in smoothies :thumbup: One less thing I have to buy from the store, and now it's considered locally grown as the milk comes from "local" farms :thumbup: :thumbup:

... open road is the easiest place to get away with murder.

According to the speeding ticket my father got in Texas (he rode back with me on my crossing back home) :rolleyes: 80% of all traffic accidents, in Texas, happen in rural areas....

Hey T. same nuts, different subject...

c'mon man - now you're just trolling.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

According to the speeding ticket my father got in Texas (he rode back with me on my crossing back home) :rolleyes: 80% of all traffic accidents, in Texas, happen in rural areas....I don't mean the open road as in streets compared to highways/freeways, I mean someone can't go all George Weller and expect to get away with it. Otoh, as long as someone stays on the road... they tend not to be convicted of anything and will only get a slap on the wrist if it appears to be an accident. I wish automobiles were regulated as strictly as firearms, but I suppose that would put a dampener on bidness as usual. :rolleyes:

[Telco]

Heheh... so how you like them hazelnut eating squirrels? Do they make Nutella when you squeeze them? :D

On the series hybrid thing, didn't realize that that is what you were calling a diesel electric train style setup.

Also just realized my math was off. I've seen trains carrying multiple semi trailers on one car before, so that makes the train that much more efficient. I was figuring on one semi load per train car, but that estimate was way too small. And if heavy moving were moved back to trains, imagine how much less congested the roadways would be. You'd still need local trucking (so no loss of actual truck driving jobs) since you obviously can't put train tracks to every business, but that would be local traffic with no long distance truck traffic mixed in with it.

[Bill in Houston]

According to the speeding ticket my father got in Texas (he rode back with me on my crossing back home) :rolleyes: 80% of all traffic accidents, in Texas, happen in rural areas...If not 80% of accidents, then at least 80% of fatalities... People falling asleep, driving 100 mph, hitting cows, etc. BTW, we also lead the nation in accidents at train crossings. Bow up, Texas! :-)

[Bill in Houston]

I was figuring on one semi load per train car, but that estimate was way too small.It's at least three trucks per train car, and probably more like five. For lquids I know we get about 40k gallons on a car, and 8k in a truck.

[skewbe]

Heheh... so how you like them hazelnut eating squirrels? Do they make Nutella when you squeeze them? :D.

I'm glad you enjoy the squirrel poo so much :)

[bowtieguy]

That's an interesting average... :D Anyway, why would a trucker be concerned about fuel prices? If oil and auto companies inflate demand/cut refined supply and diesel goes up some more, you'll still get paid. I wonder if it'll break $4/gal this winter... Gotta move stuff anyway, rail is *** slow and at capacity. Besides, who cares if those poor schmucks in and around places like the LA harbor and Inland Empire have increased lung and prostate cancer risk from the extremely high levels of diesel exhaust? Y'all are in your air conditioned cabs, out of the heat and pollution 99% of the time. Hell, I imagine you could even get away with running a car or two down directly every now and then if you wanted to... ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mrrLT6wGhI

Edit- Not that a car couldn't get away with the same thing to a two wheeled vehicle. Provided there's no way to prove it wasn't an accident, the open road is the easiest place to get away with murder.
you libs have called me "insane and confused." take a look at these two word: DILDO and MURDER. hmm, who is insane? by the way, i do labor(unload by hand in the HEAT and POLLUTION). and select my own afternoon deliveries. also,fuel prices do affect me adversely--people tend to eat-out less when prices go up.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

you libs have called me "insane and confused." take a look at these two word: DILDO and MURDER. hmm, who is insane? by the way, i do labor(unload by hand in the HEAT and POLLUTION). and select my own afternoon deliveries. also,fuel prices do affect me adversely--people tend to eat-out less when prices go up.What libs? And wtf are you talking about, dildo and murder? Hey Nutty McNuster, you're insane! :p

P.s. I worked for a LTL in 30-110F temperatures loading and unloading to help get through sk00l. I went on more than a few delivery runs, and lemme tell you, they were a cake walk compared to the crap we had to do on the dock. The driver's didn't do **** compared to what the dock workers did. But they also didn't brag about moving a pallet or two like you do... ;)

[bowtieguy]

What libs? And wtf are you talking about, dildo and murder? hey hutty McNuster, you're insane! :p

P.s. I worked for a LTL in 30-110F temperatures loading and unloading to help get through sk00l. I went on more than a few delivery runs, and lemme tell you, they were a cake walk compared to the crap we had to do on the dock. The driver's didn't do **** compared to what the dock workers did. But they also didn't brag about moving a pallet or two like you do... ;)

talking out of the side of your mouth AGAIN. i too have labored in hot and cold warehouses(some during college). apparently you've never seen foodservice delivery. so please(AGAIN YOU'VE NOT CONSIDERED MY POINT OF VIEW),think before you respond. didn't BRAG about anything, just responded to your illconcieved comment about drivers not working in the heat/pollution. in my work, we don't "drop and go." during summer, i get wet EVERYDAY via rain or sweat! you know, unload by hand in the heat/pollution! as far as "dildo and murder," if you can't remember what YOU say/type, i truly feel for you. realized drivers made more $, so i became one. some would say that makes me smart, not lazy. oh yes, forgot, PROFIT is EVIL! anyone else like to serve as an arbitrator? who's sane and who is not?

[skewbe]

...anyone else like to serve as an arbitrator? who's sane and who is not?

Ooohh Ooohh Ooohh!!! Choose me!! Choose me!! <hand waiving frantically in the air>

:D

[omgwtfbyobbq]

talking out of the side of your mouth AGAIN. i too have labored in hot and cold warehouses(some during college). apparently you've never seen foodservice delivery. so please(AGAIN YOU'VE NOT CONSIDERED MY POINT OF VIEW),think before you respond. didn't BRAG about anything, just responded to your illconcieved comment about drivers not working in the heat/pollution. in my work, we don't "drop and go." during summer, i get wet EVERYDAY via rain or sweat! you know, unload by hand in the heat/pollution! as far as "dildo and murder," if you can't remember what YOU say/type, i truly feel for you. realized drivers made more $, so i became one. some would say that makes me smart, not lazy. oh yes, forgot, PROFIT is EVIL! anyone else like to serve as an arbitrator? who's sane and who is not?Until you go through an entire shift breaking and loading thousands of pounds of crap crawling through a long box with pallets stacked two high in 100+ degree weather, so lord knows what in the trailer, I don't think you've seen a fraction of the crap dockworkers put up with. Drivers don't do crap compared to dock workers. If they did, they would be dock workers, not drivers! What a concept... :eek: ;) That being said, I searched the thread and found no reference to dildo and murder in the same post Nutty McNuster, or anything about profit being evil, aside from your posts of course... So yeah, yer pretty loco pendejo.

[bowtieguy]

Until you go through an entire shift breaking and loading thousands of pounds of crap crawling through a long box with pallets stacked two high in 100+ degree weather, so lord knows what in the trailer, I don't think you've seen a fraction of the crap dockworkers put up with. Drivers don't do crap compared to dock workers. If they did, they would be dock workers, not drivers! What a concept... :eek: ;) That being said, I searched the thread and found no reference to dildo and murder in the same post Nutty McNuster, or anything about profit being evil, aside from your posts of course... So yeah, yer pretty loco pendejo.

thank you for verifying that YOU are in fact the "crack pot." where to begin? you must have missed the part where i mentioned working hot/cold warehousing(and docks as well by the way). working in florida is the hottest/most humid around. you also missed the line about drivers making more money! let me think...harder work or more money? did i say dildo and murder were together? I MISSED that one! your post(murder) and your signature(dildo). may i call you "crack" or "mr. pot?" quite the foul mouth you have there--are you okay? seriously? a lot of issues you have; so leave you alone i will. abusive language can mean instability.

[skewbe]

Maybe you mean:
... And I feel sorry for Obama if he shares a ticket with Clinton, because if they win I see Obama choking to death or slipping on a bar of soap or something. I just can't see Clinton letting him live once she is either in office as #1 or #2, especially if she's #2...

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I'm not saying you never worked on a dock before. I'm saying that as a driver, you don't get exposed to nearly the same amount of crap, in terms of air pollution, or labor, that a dock worker does.

by the way, i do labor(unload by hand in the HEAT and POLLUTION). and select my own afternoon deliveriesI went on more than a few delivery runs, and lemme tell you, they were a cake walk compared to the crap we had to do on the dock. The driver's didn't do **** compared to what the dock workers did.This is where you start talking about how you have worked on a dock and/or warehouse. Which is fine, but not what I was talking about.i too have labored in hot and cold warehouses(some during college).Drivers don't do crap compared to dock workers. If they did, they would be dock workers, not drivers!
Etc... So, uh, yeah Nutty McNuster. If you want to talk about something that I'm not talking about, that's fine. But I was talking about how dock workers have it harder than drivers in terms of labor and air pollution, and you replied by saying you were there in the past, which is fine, but I don't see what it has to do with my point el guerito loco. :thumbup:

did i say dildo and murder were together? I MISSED that one! your post(murder) and your signature(dildo).Ah, I gotcha. Well, generally, in a thread, we talk about what the thread is about. I mean, if you want to talk about my sig, that's fine. But not exactly OT. You could talk about Professor Farnsworth too (skewbe's icon), but I don't see you doing that, so I do wonder about your mental stability. With the whole fixating on my sig instead of the thread, and lack of coherence in general. ;)

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I http://host48.hrwebservices.net/~totalli/forum/images/smilies/heart.gif trolling! :D

[rh77]

Enough is enough guys.

This site is about modifying vehicles and technique for better fuel economy.

These posts have degraded into nothing but a shouting match...

Thread *CLOSED*

-Rick/RH77, Moderator