Bush one vote away from Arctic drilling OK

“Excellent, Marko. Go ahead and start a business building and selling cars with Rudolph Diesels.

There is nothing stopping people with an idea from starting companies to sell their idea. at's the beauty of this society we live in. There are companies that sell conversion kits to burn used cooking oil as fuel. Some are working on converting hydrogen from sewage treatment plants or menthane from landfills.

The beauty of a free market society is that if you build what people want, they will buy it. Why look to government when the market takes care of itself? Right now, hybrids are selling like hotcakes, even though the premium you pay for them won't be paid back at current gas prices for anywhere from 5 to 20 years. Why? Because people want them.”

“�Bush's energy policy was unacceptable to the legislative body.

That's the democratic legislative process for ya.�
MarkO


That's exactly right. And its that same legislative body that is b*tching that we don't have an energy policy.”

“So what's in these great plans dashed by those Dems Dave?

The trouble with Dave's plans there is that we're only getting a guide now to our exposure to global markets.

Our relative properity compared to other nations has protected America up to now, but this is fading.

Your ideas are all well and good in free and fair market conditions Dave - but as you said earlier, the oil market is neither free or fair.

I'd like to hear some specifics about Bush's wide-ranging energy plans please.”

“But again I'll go back to the point of how peverse it seems that we're prepared to invade another country to secure long term energy security, yet it would be wrong to try to enact some legistlation to achieve the same end.”

“There are plenty of sources on the internet about Bush's energy plan. Here are a few.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/05/17/bush.energy.details/

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/energyinit.html

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/06/20010628-6.html

As far as oil market conditions, you are absolutely correct. It is not a free market. The oil market is dominated by oil speculators and the OPEC cartel.

However, the energy market as a whole is freeer. Aside from restrictions (read: government mandates) already in place, anyone who wishes to develop and market an alternative to petroleum-based energy is relatively free to do so, as long as it appeals to the end consumer. Petroleum-based energy became so popular because it better appealed to the consumer than the alternatives at the time (steam, etc). Maybe now that petroleum is so costly and not as plentiful, some other alternative will take its place.”

“Anwr's fate is long sealed.... Most americans have no clue how little real oil is there. In the end the view will be to screw the enviroment to get the last drop of oil out.

This has been coming since the seventies, Carter was in fact the last president to really actually push alternate fuel.

This is really all pointless though.... It is already too late. Because we refused to prepare for this day by building on renewable energy sources we will suffer a severe setback to our economy. Most Americans will suffer and there is nothing that can stop it. We did way too little and now it is too late. It will be decades before this will get straigtened out. The only thing left for the politicians to do is to pick the last remaining dimes out of our dying corpses and move on....

Once again I have to laugh at some of you.... Denial to the bitter end!”

“Dave - there's a lot of talk there and little real action on Alternatives - typical of the lip service paid to weaning America off Saudi Arabia's teet.

Big oil is also a another cartel, not just OPEC. There's effectively no competition on price - so the market is not functioning there either. We're essentially down to a few giants who compete on things other than prices, like operating costs.

We can keep making excuses for them and offering tax breaks until the last drop runs out and the last dime is squeezed from the American consumer (to Oil producers and big oil)

So what because and lengisltation influencing this corrupt market would be wrong then we just let it carry on?”

“If you don't like big oil stop buying their product.”

“Y2, if the oil companies are so corrupt why is it every single time Congress parades them out they never find any collusion or gouging or anything else illegal? They've dragged them out 5 times now and are getting ready to again yet they find nothing.”

““If you don't like big oil stop buying their product.”
bacpac
4:32:41 PM
6/11/08

Yeah - that's the answer - or maybe I have to buy their product directly or indirectly to function in life. The way things are set up oil is an essential to life - which is why it's so important that we reduce our reliance on it.

Although I guess it is easier to portray it as like this or leave it than actually dealing with the problem.

Nigel - they're not really acting illegally, maybe immorally, but not much we can do or complain about there - but they've also essentially bought off the legislators too by working the system.

I'm just not sure how you see these companies as completely innocent parties who have stumbled across these vast profits as oil prices go up. Big oil is involved in every stage of the process of taking it out the ground through to the consumer.

I'm not even suggesting we start penalizing or taxing them more - they're just working a system our corrupt political system and politicians have set up for them.
They also have a big role to play in the solution - they just haven't worked out yet how they will make enough money out of renewables yet.

We do need to stop handing them tax breaks though.

I think you hit the nail on the head when you said we need to keep going at the problem, and not return to our old ways if and when when prices come down, because it'll bite us in the ass.

The problem with waiting until the the market sets a price that forces changes is that the price can jump quicker than we can react.

I think someone mentioned seven years. We NEED to plan for that. We're not even seeing a significant price shock yet - this is nothing compared to what will happen to prices if there's a supply disruption.
last edited: 6/11/08 7:48:16 PM”

“I don't think they should be getting subsidies and tax breaks either (but then again I don't think anyone should). But they would just pass that along to the consumer.”

“I ride my bicycle to work. Just another excuse to put on a backpack. Oh and the fuel is cheap.”

“Organic rice $31.58 barrel.”

“"Go ahead and start a business building and selling cars with Rudolph Diesels."

Volkswagen, Renault, and many others already do that.”

“House Subcommittee Rejects Plan to Open U.S. Waters to More Oil Exploration (6/11/2008)


Hey, nice far-reaching, forward thinking plan the Democrats have there. How long has this been going on again?”

“Man, this diversion tactic is almost comical. Keep focusing on the few drips avaiable there and we'll keep the cash flow heading to Exxon's pockets and they'll keep funding our campaigns.

So how much of a difference do you think this will make - you think America can drill its way to a solution to this problem?

What's funny is that when you google that headline it's a fox news story - that comes up first, then you see all the right-wing bloggers websites which have gone running over to it like a bunch of sqealing little piggies eager for anything they can blame the dems for.

That's it boys - lets not admit we have a problem and try to find a solution - lets find a way to try to blame the democrats.”

“That's the way Y2, keep crushing your credibility. Talk about comical.”

“Nice going Democrats:


China's Drilling for Oil in America's Backyard, Republicans Say
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Senior Editor
June 11, 2008

(CNSNews.com) - House Republicans want the American people to know that right now -- around 60 miles off the coast of Key West, Fla. -- China is drilling for oil, thanks to a lease issued by Cuba.

But 1,200 miles north of Key West, Democrats in Washington are blocking the United States from conducting its own environmentally-safe oil and gas exploration in similar U.S. coastal areas, said a news release from House Republican leader John Boehner's office. link”

“Drilling more IS part of the solution, particularly short-term”

“lol - yeah, not as though you boys and the rest of the conservatives are looking for a diversion to blame someone else for gas prices huh... too too funny - you really couldn't illustrate what I said any better.”

“like in the six of seven years it'll take to get stuff on tap.

We will end up drilling all over the place sooner or later anyway I guess, but that's really a minor part of the issue. We should be focusing on a much bigger plan than this latest sop to big oil.”

“you really couldn't illustrate what I said any better

Doesn't matter---you have no credibility.”

“environmentally-safe oil and gas exploration

Isn't this an oxymoron?”

“We will end up drilling all over the place sooner or later anyway I guess - y2

The problem is, we need it sooner. We need all the incremental additions to domestic oil we can, until renewables and nuclear can reduce our dependence. It's all linked together.”

“NonC - your opinion on that is worth less than the half-calorie you expended typing it ;op”

“"Doesn't matter---you have no credibility."

That declaration is a perfect example of a diversion.”

“More than half a calorie because I have to use both index fingers and watch which keys I hit.


Call it a diversion or whatever you like; as long as you continue to blame our current energy situation on one person or one party and regularly fail to admit that another party has done nothing but hamstring our efforts at independency (among other things) you have no credibility. Zip.”

“The party in power for the past eight years, controlling congress for six of them - I can see it would be ridiculous to blame them.

But yes, steps should have been taken before then with an aim of enhancing energy securuty - but there's also been huge changes in the energy sector in the past eight years including development in China and India, indications that world oil production have levelled off, an invasion in Iraq, the emergence of Russia as an energy power, the use of energy as a political tool, the weakness in the dollar.

There's also been a rolling back of legislation and enforcement of energy sector legislation, a bid to turn America to greater reliance on oil.

The Bush administration has been a huge boon to big energy, while offering very little in terms of conservation or alternatives - that's why they are rightfully being criticized. This has been promoted at the expense of serious persuit of alternatives.

You offer nothing concrete for your argument and just blame it all on those crazy democrats attacking Bush - yet you accuse me of lacking credibility - right!
last edited: 6/12/08 9:00:52 AM”

“...just blame it all on those crazy democrats attacking Bush....

Umm.....no I didn't.


- yet you accuse me of lacking credibility - right!

See above. :P”

“I guess the economic fact that an increase in supply reduces prices is lost on you. You keep saying that ANWR and coastal drilling would produce almost no oil, but you haven't said compared to what? I've read that ANWR would produce millions of barrels of oil a day. At this point, any little bit will help to ease the supply strain and allow us some time to develop alternatives.

The problem I see is that there is a definate difference in what we view is the "problem". I view the problem as an almost total dependence on foreign sources, many of whom want to kill us, for our energy needs. I view the problem as a permit for an oil refinery in the US has not been issued in almost 30 years and a nuclear power permit in almost as long. I view the problem as being that the majority of the price of oil has to do with the cost to refine it overseas and transport it into the US. I believe that the solution is to have a comprehensive energy plan in place that includes drilling for domestic sources of oil as well as incentives for research, development, and production of alternative fuels. Such plans have been proposed and defeated outright.

It appears that others view the problem as the oil companies making too much money.

Having formerly worked in the fuel industry (distribution, not production), I know how much profits the oil companies make on fuel. We're talking pennies to the dollar per gallon of fuel. But think, as world-wide consumption of fuel has exponentially increased over the past decade (India, China, etc), doesn't it make sense that (assuming profit margin remains the same) the oil companies' total profits will increase as well?

As far as the environmental impact is concerned, technology has advanced enough in recent years that the impact of drilling has decreased substantially.”

“I hope you guys aren't posting from your cars.”

“Drilling into his cranium to let the demons out would probably be more helpful.”

“Hmmm, you then might run into danger from your-cranium radiation sickness.”

“From 2004

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/”

“�I guess the economic fact that an increase in supply reduces prices is lost on you. You keep saying that ANWR and coastal drilling would produce almost no oil, but you haven't said compared to what? I've read that ANWR would produce millions of barrels of oil a day. At this point, any little bit will help to ease the supply strain and allow us some time to develop alternatives.

It's not lost on me at all Dave - the effect of this small reserve of oil will be insignificant when compared to increasing global demand for oil, and the tapering off of production in many of the world's more productive fields. As I've already said several times I think we'll end up drilling there - but you seem to want to make this the focus rather than confronting the problem you talk about next.


The problem I see is that there is a definate difference in what we view is the "problem". I view the problem as an almost total dependence on foreign sources, many of whom want to kill us, for our energy needs. I view the problem as a permit for an oil refinery in the US has not been issued in almost 30 years and a nuclear power permit in almost as long. I view the problem as being that the majority of the price of oil has to do with the cost to refine it overseas and transport it into the US. I believe that the solution is to have a comprehensive energy plan in place that includes drilling for domestic sources of oil as well as incentives for research, development, and production of alternative fuels. Such plans have been proposed and defeated outright.
Permits have not been sounght because there's been a desire to refine at total capacity, rather than wasting resources on additional capacity. The markets you hold such store in have only just started indicating we need more capacity. Big oil companies have even sought to divest itself from the refining process as it saw little profit there.

As for nuclear permits none have been issued because of justified safety fears following two high profile nuclear accidents. Nuclear is now on the table once again with fairly broad support.



It appears that others view the problem as the oil companies making too much money.

Having formerly worked in the fuel industry (distribution, not production), I know how much profits the oil companies make on fuel. We're talking pennies to the dollar per gallon of fuel. But think, as world-wide consumption of fuel has exponentially increased over the past decade (India, China, etc), doesn't it make sense that (assuming profit margin remains the same) the oil companies' total profits will increase as well? Presently working in the energy sector I can tell you that big oil companies are involved in all stages of the production process and even make up some of the speculators you seem to want to shift all the blame onto.

As far as the environmental impact is concerned, technology has advanced enough in recent years that the impact of drilling has decreased substantially. As I said reality will dictate that we'll end up drilling sooner or later - but this is a side issue to bigger problems which confront America - ie - the foundations of the country are built on a resource which we don't have enough of.

TO go back a bit

I believe that the solution is to have a comprehensive energy plan in place that includes drilling for domestic sources of oil as well as incentives for research, development, and production of alternative fuels. Such plans have been proposed and defeated outright. - Bingo - though there have been little or no serious attempts to promote alternatives and reduce consumption when compared to the effortsput into trying to secure oil supplies. I'm not sure where you get the idea that this administration has seriously been persuing an altenative fuels agenda, or taking significant steps to reduce consumption - it hasn't.

the only place where we seem to differ is that you think this administration has made substantial efforts to persue a multi-ended energy policy - it hasn't.

Almost all effort have been put towards fossil fuel with only lip service paid to alternatives. And realistically they've only started to pay this lip service to others when they find out that people aren't happy with the price of oil.
last edited: 6/12/08 12:48:14 PM”

“You see what the agenda is by what's going on here.

Instead of pushing for a drive on alternatives and reducing consumption - the conservatives here want to make it about drilling. Fine, drill in ANWR - we'll have to at some point seeing we're reacting too late - but lets see some serious initiatives to push for another answer.

This should be a top priority - and lets not see Bush going to Saudi Arabia - holding hands and being treated like a beyatch because they don't need us any more.
last edited: 6/12/08 12:52:21 PM”

“Permits have not been sounght because there's been a desire to refine at total capacity, rather than wasting resources on additional capacity. The markets you hold such store in have only just started indicating we need more capacity. Big oil companies have even sought to divest itself from the refining process as it saw little profit there.

As for nuclear permits none have been issued because of justified safety fears following two high profile nuclear accidents. Nuclear is now on the table once again with fairly broad support.

Actually, permits have not been sought because the amount of legislation and regulation involved in this sector has made it almost cost prohibitive to operate either a refinery or a nuclear power plant. Accidents happen, but just like everything else, Big Brother decides to stick its finger into everything and we are now seeing the results.

Bingo - though there have been little or no serious attempts to promote alternatives and reduce consumption when compared to the effortsput into trying to secure oil supplies. I'm not sure where you get the idea that this administration has seriously been persuing an altenative fuels agenda, or taking significant steps to reduce consumption - it hasn't.

the only place where we seem to differ is that you think this administration has made substantial efforts to persue a multi-ended energy policy - it hasn't.

Almost all effort have been put towards fossil fuel with only lip service paid to alternatives. And realistically they've only started to pay this lip service to others when they find out that people aren't happy with the price of oil.

I'm not sure how much more proof you want. You asked for where the current administration has proposed a multi-faceted energy plan and I have shown you Bush's 2001 energy plan, that was clearly multi-faceted, and shot down by Congress. As that doesn't seem to be enough proof:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/energy/

This web page shows many initiatives that have been enacted during the current administration. It also contains links to pressers and transcripts of speeches from the beginning of the current administration.

Understand, I don't think this current President has been perfect. There are many issues I disagree with him. However, to blame the current energy problem on George W. Bush as lefties seem to want to do only diverts attention from the real issues.
last edited: 6/12/08 4:24:55 PM”

“Libbies are SO silly.”

“Is it even worth breaking down that stuff -an over reliance on bio fuels and a list of other measures designed not to offend anyone in the big energy companies.

Like I said, weak - half-hearted and ineffective.
Lets have a look at what appears to be an impressive headline figure from Whitehouse.gov

Since President Bush took office, the Federal Government has spent more than $12 billion to research, develop, and promote alternative energy sources. - so what we looking at here. $12 billion, 7 years - about 1.75 billion a year.

2007 The US imported 3.67 billion barrels of oil - lets take todays' closing NYMEX price of just under $137 a barrel as an indication of the costs for this - I know it represents nearly a peak, but it is the middle of the year and prices look likely to go higher so we'll use that.

So that's about $502 billion of American wealth that will leave these shores this year. A bunch goes to Canada and Mexico.

Saudi Arabia gets about 14% of that, so $70 billion - this year, cha-ching.
Venezuela 12% - that's what $60 odd billion - viva la revolution Hugo.

We're also spending more on oil than on defense. $439 billion base pentagon budget.

Suplemental spending on Iraq and Afganistan takes that higher, and Social security tops it at about $586 billion, but you get the idea.”

“Anwr at best will produce 800,000 barrels per day in about ten years. Current US usage is over 20,000,000 barrels per day. At best ANWR will add 4 percent to total production. The simple fact is supply is shrinking and we simply cannot drill fast enough to stop it in part because there really are not that many new oil fields left to drill.


The reason the oil companies did not build more refineries is because they have known that gas prices would go up this way since the seventies.


And as I said before, China is increasing its demand for oil by about 10 percent per year thanks to thier new industrial economy that has been driven by.... US.


PS. If you really want to have a few nightmares check out just how fragile the banking industry is right now and how much it is tied to .... oil.”

“Lumberjack. There are more known oil reserves today than there were thirty years ago and that includes all the oil used since then.”

“Is it even worth breaking down that stuff -an over reliance on bio fuels and a list of other measures designed not to offend anyone in the big energy companies.

Like I said, weak - half-hearted and ineffective.

Y2
8:12:35 PM
6/12/08


Seems you have your mind made up regardless of what's put in front of you. You say it's not worth reading, then you say the content is half hearted. Which is it? You read it and you think it's half hearted, or you didn't read it, but it's half hearted regardless?
last edited: 6/13/08 6:02:12 AM”

“Ground Hog Day is here to stay.”

“Wow bacpac.... actually we have been burning oil faster then we find it for the last twenty years... The increase in reserves is actually a bookkeeping change. the original reserve figures were made using more conservative numbers (p90) but because quotas and bank loans are based on the stated reserves it became convenient to use less conservative numbers (p10).

You do know we can only recover 30 percent of the oil in a field dont you? When you read about a 30 billion barrel find, you should know that we will only get 10 billion out of it and thats over a period of about 30 years. Also the faster a site is pumped the less oil you end up recovering. This is one of several reasons why the saudis are actually slowing production....

To get a grasp of the relative size of things Ghanwar is about 300 trillion barrels and we have pumped about 15 percent of the total oil out. This means we have in fact pumped half of the oil that can be recovered. Of course no one except the saudis knows for sure how the field is doing but they do admit the water cut has reached 50 percent and that is a rather bad sign. The field's production has in fact declined for the last 3 years inspite of their promises to increase production....

The overall decline of oil production was predicted back in the fifties by shell geologist Hubbard and the peak he predicted was reached in 2005. While I dont subscribe to all the doomsday stuff that normally goes with his predictions many of the behaviors we are seeing right now are in fact consistant with a moderate collapse of the US economy...

Oh and the only field left that has a large amount of oil we can get is located in....

IRAQ.”

“Who gives a hoot, just poloot.”

“Not to mention that most of the oil reserves being discussed are shale oil, a completely different and expensive refining process from the light, sweet crude we currently import. While this may create a mild supply cushion, it is going to be more expensive to mine and refine and won't soften the cost of gas.”

“Seems you have your mind made up regardless of what's put in front of you. You say it's not worth reading, then you say the content is half hearted. Which is it? You read it and you think it's half hearted, or you didn't read it, but it's half hearted regardless?
last edited: 6/13/08 6:02:12 AM�
dayhiker
6:01:42 AM
6/13/08

Well no Dayhiker - you read on and you can see I tackled the official administration 'spin'. It's not tough to put that in perspective when you see what we're paying for oil.”

“Ya gotta admit, y2 brings meat to the table. It may be mutten and it may come from suspect butchers but he brings it. The amount of time and energy you spend to explain your views is comendable.”