Attempt to rekindle Domestic Oil Drilling...

uscitizen said:
Yeah oand one of thouse sources is in VA. they are tying to start back up over there. Quite a stink, the area has grown a lot since the mined Uranium there.

check out where Uranium comes from. Canada has a bit, but most from theird world countries. And a good reason for that.

Heck you can't even sell your home if too much Radon gas :D
Click to expand...
I did check. We dropped production, but that doesn't mean it cannot be safely done again. As I said, NIMBY issues can arise, but the reality is if we continue on our current path we really are funding both sides of the war. And if it is presented as part of the war, patriotic people will buck up... sacrifice for the nation and all.
 
Topspin said:
If the price of gas hits $5 gallon before Nov and the dems don't change tunes that may put Mcain over the top.
That's the only long shot I see him having at winning.
Click to expand...

not one bill, opening all moratorium land will change the price to be for gasoline come this november....

but u are probably right, because the American people are IGNORANT on this subject and the GOP is counting on this fact....
 
Yep the repubs are counting on the general stupidity of the US voters.
They will not listen to the war and speculation premium on oil.
 
Care4all said:
not one bill, opening all moratorium land will change the price to be for gasoline come this november....

but u are probably right, because the American people are IGNORANT on this subject and the GOP is counting on this fact....
Click to expand...

that is not necessarily true. One of the factors driving oil prices right now is future speculation. If demand is expected to rise and new sources are not expected to keep pace, the price of oil futures will rise, which will also cause spot prices to rise.

If you show that you are serious about increasing future supply, it will turn speculation from bullish to bearish (from current position) and push spot and future prices back down.
 
Care4all said:
not one bill, opening all moratorium land will change the price to be for gasoline come this november....

but u are probably right, because the American people are IGNORANT on this subject and the GOP is counting on this fact....
Click to expand...
Rejecting all the bills will not change the fact that we fund both sides of the war for the future. We can all slope our heads up and ignore that we can get off the foreign teat, and that the best way to do it is to use all sources available to us while we work on the next gen technology that will get us, finally, off of fossil fuels entirely.
 
Superfreak said:
that is not necessarily true. One of the factors driving oil prices right now is future speculation. If demand is expected to rise and new sources are not expected to keep pace, the price of oil futures will rise, which will also cause spot prices to rise.

If you show that you are serious about increasing future supply, it will turn speculation from bullish to bearish (from current position) and push spot and future prices back down.
Click to expand...
Another way to do that is to open up Natural Gas to use in vehicles, thus reducing the actual demand. If they believe that demand will decrease (or not increase as much) while future supplies will increase speculation will do the same.
 
Damocles said:
Another way to do that is to open up Natural Gas to use in vehicles, thus reducing the actual demand. If they believe that demand will decrease (or not increase as much) while future supplies will increase speculation will do the same.
Click to expand...

That is true, because the above would decrease demand for oil which also would cause speculators to turn bearish from their current positions.
 
Damocles said:
Rejecting all the bills will not change the fact that we fund both sides of the war for the future. We can all slope our heads up and ignore that we can get off the foreign teat, and that the best way to do it is to use all sources available to us while we work on the next gen technology that will get us, finally, off of fossil fuels entirely.
Click to expand...

exactly
 
Damocles said:
Another way to do that is to open up Natural Gas to use in vehicles, thus reducing the actual demand. If they believe that demand will decrease (or not increase as much) while future supplies will increase speculation will do the same.
Click to expand...

LOL just a trade off. Nat gas prices are expected to be up 45% over last winter for the coming heating season.
 
uscitizen said:
LOL just a trade off. Nat gas prices are expected to be up 45% over last winter for the coming heating season.
Click to expand...
Yes, if we continue to use them as the source of electricity. Duh. It's like you can't remember longer than 12 seconds.

There are enough untapped natural gas sources to fuel our nation for 120 years.

It seems all the left has to offer for an "energy plan" is obfuscate, ignore, and fear. There can be no steps between now and totally getting off the fossil drug.
 
Damocles said:
Yes, if we continue to use them as the source of electricity. Duh. It's like you can't remember longer than 12 seconds.

There are enough untapped natural gas sources to fuel our nation for 120 years.

It seems all the left has to offer for an "energy plan" is obfuscate, ignore, and fear. There can be no steps between now and totally getting off the fossil drug.
Click to expand...

so if we have 120 years worth why is the price zooming upwards ?
 
uscitizen said:
so if we have 120 years worth why is the price zooming upwards ?
Click to expand...
Because usage remains limited. Freeing it up by using different sources of electrical energy would drop the price and have cleaner-burning fuel in cars. Instead we're subsidizing fricking corn that uses TONS of water to produce a barrel of fuel and wasting our resources and money increasing prices. Borrowing off of China to subsidize an inefficient fuel for cars....

Jeez. And the left just offers more phail as the answer. We must just keep doing what we are doing and only funding research as an alternative instead of doing what we can while also funding research towards alternatives.

Slope it up, try to make people fear some more.
 
Damocles said:
Because usage remains limited. Freeing it up by using different sources of electrical energy would drop the price and have cleaner-burning fuel in cars. Instead we're subsidizing fricking corn that uses TONS of water to produce a barrel of fuel and wasting our resources and money increasing prices. Borrowing off of China to subsidize an inefficient fuel for cars....

Jeez. And the left just offers more phail as the answer. We must just keep doing what we are doing and only funding research as an alternative instead of doing what we can while also funding research towards alternatives.

Slope it up, try to make people fear some more.
Click to expand...

LOL, I am all for developing new sources. My posts indicate that.

Get off the ethanol fearwagon dude.
 
uscitizen said:
LOL, I am all for developing new sources. My posts indicate that.

Get off the ethanol fearwagon dude.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with "fearwagons" other than your NIMBY fears. It is inefficient and if it wasn't subsidized would cost far more than the gasoline we use to fuel our cars while getting only 80% of the mileage out of it, all while using more water than shale extraction uses by about 25 times the amount.

The sources remain untapped for Natural Gas because the market for it is much smaller than it would be if we began to use it as we could.

I haven't yet told anybody they should be scared of Corn Ethanol. Just that it wastes their dollar.

Each "other source" offered is jumped on by you in your fear and your one-step plan ignoring the bridge of time between now and the magic source we'll discover later.
 
Superfreak said:
that is not necessarily true. One of the factors driving oil prices right now is future speculation. If demand is expected to rise and new sources are not expected to keep pace, the price of oil futures will rise, which will also cause spot prices to rise.

If you show that you are serious about increasing future supply, it will turn speculation from bullish to bearish (from current position) and push spot and future prices back down.
Click to expand...

super,

there have been SEVERAL MEGA oil finds through out the world that have shocked the oil industry with their estimated quantities....labling some the biggest oil find in the last hundred years....a couple just recently....mexico, and brazil both had some huge finds....with BIG oil companies scrambling to get their stakes in them.....

the price of oil, EVEN WITH THIS NEWS, continued to sore up in price!

Why do you keep saying it would bring down the price of oil when on the foot of every one of these huge world wide oil MEGA FINDS, the price of oil continued to rise?

I think you said once before when i asked this that it had to do with future demand that is expected to rise rapidly from all the people in China and India buying cars?
-------------------------------
We had a HUGE, MEGA deep water oil find in the gulf, of lite sweet crude, and Shell I believe signed a lease with us for this offshore area back in 1998....it is a difficult drill to extract the oil and alot is involved which i do understand, but not a drop of this oil has yet to be retrieved and it is 10 years later....?

$40 dollars a barrel is what they estimated they would need for the world oil price, to be profitable extracting this oil....

All I am saying is that this will not affect our gasoline prices of today....

releasing some of the reserves, about 10% of them would affect prices today...after all...they are OUR RESERVES, we paid for them and we will be able to rebuy them at a cheaper price...

EVERY SINGLE TIME we have released our oil reserves we HAVE GOTTEN temporary relief...all the farmer's associations, and truck drivers, and the airplane industry ALL SUPPORT the immediate relief releasing a small percentage of our reserves will give us...

I am not even against opening up some additional moratorium areas if vetted thoroughly...ALL the pros need to be weighted against ALL the cons...if pros come out ahead, by all means, go for it! :D
-----------------------------------------

going back to shale....sounds terribly complicated, takes alot of electricity to run the heaters for 3 straight years before they can get one drop of oil out of it....

they would need to set up their own nuke or natural gas electric plants to keep it clean and would have to be certain they did not allow any ground drinking water which is in very little supply in our country, to not get contaminated.....Shale, in any quantities will take 20 years MINIMUM to make any kind of impact on oil supply....


care
 
Damocles said:
It has nothing to do with "fearwagons" other than your NIMBY fears. It is inefficient and if it wasn't subsidized would cost far more than the gasoline we use to fuel our cars while getting only 80% of the mileage out of it, all while using more water than shale extraction uses by about 25 times the amount.

The sources remain untapped for Natural Gas because the market for it is much smaller than it would be if we began to use it as we could.

I haven't yet told anybody they should be scared of Corn Ethanol. Just that it wastes their dollar.

Each "other source" offered is jumped on by you in your fear and your one-step plan ignoring the bridge of time between now and the magic source we'll discover later.
Click to expand...

AS SAID, in the article i posted on shale, it is not the water USED to extract the oil from shale, but it is the underground waters that can be contaminated by the process that we extract the oil from shale....

I would say flowing ground water would be ALOT MORE water at stake than what is even used for Corn ethanol...

Though I do agree with you Damo, Corn ethanol was an extremely FOOLISH decision on congress's part....there are other crops that would have sufficed and used alot less of our natural resources and food for goodness sakes!
 
Only one or two of those big finds are in the U.S., if it were opened up about a dozen moster finds would drive it down.
What the economic illiterate don't get is that $700billion a year that would stay here and insource jobs is killing the dollar and our economy.
 
Topspin said:
Only one or two of those big finds are in the U.S., if it were opened up about a dozen moster finds would drive it down.
What the economic illiterate don't get is that $700billion a year that would stay here and insource jobs is killing the dollar and our economy.
Click to expand...

How do you figure the $700 billion will stay here and what time period are you speaking about?

Will $700 billion be saved and put here this year, or next year or in 10 years or in 30 years or in 50 years when we have all of these untapped areas tapped? by then it could be a couple of trillion saved yearly if our consumption of oil continues to rise, I suppose....?

What year do we get to oil independence Toppy, and not have to buy any from foreigners? Do you even know? Do we as a country even know?

Or are you just taking Picken's word for it without any scrutiny?
 
Care4all said:
AS SAID, in the article i posted on shale, it is not the water USED to extract the oil from shale, but it is the underground waters that can be contaminated by the process that we extract the oil from shale....

I would say flowing ground water would be ALOT MORE water at stake than what is even used for Corn ethanol...

Though I do agree with you Damo, Corn ethanol was an extremely FOOLISH decision on congress's part....there are other crops that would have sufficed and used alot less of our natural resources and food for goodness sakes!
Click to expand...
It also said in your article that there are more modern methods like a freeze wall to prevent ground water contamination. Instead we just pound on as if technology has not and cannot improve reducing the impact. In situ extraction uses far less water that ex situ extraction and has less impact on the air and ground of the area of extraction, and with new technologies even the fear of ground water contamination will be just more fear mongering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top