We cant drill ourselves out of this?

[Bob]

Drilling IS part of fixing this problem, but global warming religionists are in control of the doctrine we are hearing every damn time one turns on the TV -- all you hear is about how "green" we need to be -- and every roll of TP is green, or detergent, when half the time they are only concerned about the marketing angle. We are not allowed to drill anywhere, or build nukes -- while China is geraing up to drill just outside Cuba? They are going to be VERY careful I am sure, much more so than the evil oil companies. What is the total death toll of nuke power in the US? (that would be 0) If you are a global warming religionist -- I say at least get on that bandwagon of nuke power before we get into true freakout mode.

If Obama has one weakpoint point (he has like a million) I would say his weakest, and tacticly his most stupid positions are on the almost non-existant production side of the energy problem as costs go through the roof -- and it increasingly seems like he wants high prices so we all "change" Did he recently do an about face on nuke power? I thought he flipped on that -- but dont know if you can believe what either idiot is saying now.

Let me see if I have this straight... Obama's 3 commandments:

1. Thou shalt live in recycled bio-degradable huts powered by solar power during the day, and cooled by star power or rain at night.

2. Thou shalt eat all the nuts and twigs you can find on the ground only after the trees have "given them to you", (and those less fortunate than us have eaten first.)

3. Thou shalt only eat meat "harvested" from conservative unrepentant white males, who will be conviently located in special re-education camps.

Now that's the Wright plan for America!

[TheDave]

Originally Posted by Bob

Drilling IS part of fixing this problem, but global warming religionists are in control of the doctrine we are hearing every damn time one turns on the TV -- all you hear is about how "green" we need to be -- and every roll of TP is green, or detergent, when half the time they are only concerned about the marketing angle. We are not allowed to drill anywhere, or build nukes -- while China is geraing up to drill just outside Cuba? They are going to be VERY careful I am sure, much more so than the evil oil companies. What is the total death toll of nuke power in the US? (that would be 0) If you are a global warming religionist -- I say at least get on that bandwagon of nuke power before we get into true freakout mode.

If Obama has one weakpoint point (he has like a million) I would say his weakest, and tacticly his most stupid positions are on the almost non-existant production side of the energy problem as costs go through the roof -- and it increasingly seems like he wants high prices so we all "change" Did he recently do an about face on nuke power? I thought he flipped on that -- but dont know if you can believe what either idiot is saying now.

Let me see if I have this straight... Obama's 3 commandments:

1. Thou shalt live in recycled bio-degradable huts powered by solar power during the day, and cooled by star power or rain at night.

2. Thou shalt eat all the nuts and twigs you can find on the ground only after the trees have "given them to you", (and those less fortunate than us have eaten first.)

3. Thou shalt only eat meat "harvested" from conservative unrepentant white males, who will be conviently located in special re-education camps.

Now that's the Wright plan for America!

Let me guess... You didn't get enough of a response to the bold in the other thread so you figured you would start your own. Yawn...

Has it ever occurred to you that both offshore drilling and nuke power would take at least a decade to show results from? I'm not saying these ideas were without merit (not much but they are at least worthy of discussion), but maybe it is time to look for better long term solutions. Maybe the "Global Warming Religionists" are on the right track and we need to look for better solutions. Maybe it has come time to lessen the impact that oil rich countries have on us by creating new technologies to deal with the worlds ever increasing power needs. Becoming a leader in solar, hydro, wind and any other new sources that this research finds could create 1,000's of jobs and potentially unlimited sources of revenue.

Fortunately not everyone is as afraid of change as you are.

[cutthemdown]

it's funny to me when I hear it will take 5-10 yrs for new drilling or nuclear power to help. That is true but if we do it now in 5-10 yrs we will have cheaper energy.

We will be using oil for the next 75 yrs at least so get over thinking it's right around the corner giving it up.

Alternative energy, more drilling, more nuclear power we should do it all.

[Bob]

Originally Posted by TheDave

Let me guess... You didn't get enough of a response to the bold in the other thread so you figured you would start your own. Yawn...

Has it ever occurred to you that both offshore drilling and nuke power would take at least a decade to show results from? I'm not saying these ideas were without merit (not much but they are at least worthy of discussion), but maybe it is time to look for better long term solutions. Maybe the "Global Warming Religionists" are on the right track and we need to look for better solutions. Maybe it has come time to lessen the impact that oil rich countries have on us by creating new technologies to deal with the worlds ever increasing power needs. Becoming a leader in solar, hydro, wind and any other new sources that this research finds could create 1,000's of jobs and potentially unlimited sources of revenue.

Fortunately not everyone is as afraid of change as you are.

When the economy implodes waiting for all of these neat ideas, at lesat we will have plenty of virgin resources to sell to China (like our land.)

[TheDave]

Originally Posted by Bob

When the economy implodes waiting for all of these neat ideas, at lesat we will have plenty of virgin resources to sell to China (like our land.)

I guess i have a little more faith in American ingenuity than you do.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Today's stupid oil prices are more the result of another bullsh*t speculative bubble like the housing bubble than supply/demand issues (although I'm not claiming supply/demand issues don't exist.)

The oil oligopoly wants you to think the current oil shock is ALL about supply/demand in order to garner your support for more drilling and oil profit-driven foreign policy.

Here's the evidence that you are being conned:

There Is No Gas Shortage

There Is No Gas Shortage

But Washington, Wall Street, and ethanol and oil and gas companies want you to think there is, says automotive expert Ed Wallace

[enjolras]

#1: That article (while overall consistent with what I've seen) seems to blithely ignore global demand (which is up significantly). That only accounts for a small percentage of what we've seen in terms of price increases. Analysts here in Denver that I've talked to seem to think we are about double the 'actual' valuation of oil at this point.

#2: There is a significant refinery shortage. That's something we can fix.

Really the whole mess is a sneak preview of what we'll be seeing in 10-15 years as South America and Asia all continue to grow economically. In the long term we don't have the available supply to stave off these types of increases in the future. Hopefully we'll take advantage of this opportunity to change how we live and how we get around in favor of more sustainable alternatives.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by enjolras

#1: That article (while overall consistent with what I've seen) seems to blithely ignore global demand (which is up significantly).

Did you read the whole article?

2. Demand Is DOWN, Yet Prices Are UP

Just so we can all get on the same page, here are the verifiable facts on oil supplies, production, and gasoline demand.

In January of this year, the U.S. used 4% less petroleum than we did a year ago. (Oil demand was down 3.2% in February.) Furthermore, demand has been falling slowly since July of last year. Ronald Bailey of Reason Online has pointed out that worldwide production of oil has risen 2.5% in the first quarter, while worldwide demand has grown by only 2%.

Production is expected to increase by 3.3% in the second quarter, and by as much as 4.1% by the third quarter. The net result is that the U.S. daily buffer for oil production against demand, which was a paltry 1.5 million barrels as recently as 2005, is now up to 3 million barrels in excess capacity today.

Continues: http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...564_page_2.htm

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

On the same day the President and our Energy Secretary made those foolish comments, no less an authority than ExxonMobil (XOM) Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson was quoted by Marketwatch as saying, "The record run in oil prices is related more to speculation and a weakening dollar than supply and demand in the market." He added, "In terms of fundamentals, fear of supply reliability is overblown."
As for the speculators, in 2000 approximately $9 billion was invested in oil futures, while today that number has gone up to $250 billion. Now, if any publicly traded company had an additional $241 billion put into its stock in the same period, its stock would rise out of sight too—even if the company was not worth anywhere near that amount of market capitalization.


http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...564_page_2.htm

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by cutthemdown

it's funny to me when I hear it will take 5-10 yrs for new drilling or nuclear power to help. That is true but if we do it now in 5-10 yrs we will have cheaper energy.

Explain how nuclear power will help with our oil addiction and show me your numbers on how punching hundreds of thousnads of holes in the U.S. will alleviate our oil addiction in ANY significant way...

Originally Posted by enjolras

#2: There is a significant refinery shortage. That's something we can fix.

Incorrect, we have no problem refining enough oil for this country. There is always ongoing refinery expansion throughout the country to meet our needs.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Today's stupid oil prices are more the result of another bullsh*t speculative bubble like the housing bubble than supply/demand issues (although I'm not claiming supply/demand issues don't exist.)

That's good because that is the overwhelming reason for speculation.

----------------------------------------------------------
Total World Oil Production (2005)
82,532,000 barrels/day
Total World Petroleum Consumption (2005)
83,607,000 barrels/day

-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html

[Pseudofool]

Drilling IS part of fixing this problem

Only in the short term. And it will delay any hope we have of reducing our dependence on Oil. Sure, there's lots of oil; but it will run our sooner rather than later with China and India modernizing very, very quickly. Our best bet is to lead in innovation and to solidify energy infrastructure with windmills and solar panels wherever we can freaking put them.
Fossil fuels will probably run out before global warming becomes a lethal threat to the human population, but is that really the race we want to run? It's stupid on both fronts.

BTW: Refinery capacity is about maxed out; so it's not just oil, but plant to produce oil into a consumable good.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

That's good because that is the overwhelming reason for speculation.

Actually, unrest in the Middle East is the "overwhelming reason" if you follow the business and financial news.

Two of the largest recent price spikes have been responses to Ahmadinejad doing or saying something stupid, e.g., talking about attacking Israel, test firing a missle, etc.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Production is expected to increase by 3.3% in the second quarter, and by as much as 4.1% by the third quarter. The net result is that the U.S. daily buffer for oil production against demand, which was a paltry 1.5 million barrels as recently as 2005, is now up to 3 million barrels in excess capacity today.

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...564_page_2.htm

On the same day the President and our Energy Secretary made those foolish comments, no less an authority than ExxonMobil (XOM) Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson was quoted by Marketwatch as saying, "The record run in oil prices is related more to speculation and a weakening dollar than supply and demand in the market." He added, "In terms of fundamentals, fear of supply reliability is overblown."
As for the speculators, in 2000 approximately $9 billion was invested in oil futures, while today that number has gone up to $250 billion. Now, if any publicly traded company had an additional $241 billion put into its stock in the same period, its stock would rise out of sight too—even if the company was not worth anywhere near that amount of market capitalization.

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...564_page_2.htm

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Actually, unrest in the Middle East is the "overwhelming reason" if you follow the business and financial news.

If I follow the business and financial news? But back to what I said, supply is so tight that any hint of any disruption will drive speculation which of course, only makes sense.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

If I follow the business and financial news? But back to what I said, supply is so tight that any hint of any disruption will drive speculation which of course, only makes sense.

The Business Week article I just posted shows that supplies are NOT tight (even the CEO of Exxon affirms this) and that Bush's energy secretary is a liar (what a surprise.)

[Bronco Jamus]

Originally Posted by Pseudofool

Only in the short term.

Exactly. A short term solution. BHO has no short term energy solution. His long term ones are great, but we need to get a short term solution to lower transportation costs.

[Pseudofool]

BHO has no short term energy solution. His long term ones are great, but we need to get a short term solution to lower transportation costs.

Don't be fooled there are no short term solutions. And the ones that are being peddled to us MAKE IT WORSE IN THE LONG TERM.

[elsid13]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Actually, unrest in the Middle East is the "overwhelming reason" if you follow the business and financial news.

Two of the largest recent price spikes have been responses to Ahmadinejad doing or saying something stupid, e.g., talking about attacking Israel, test firing a missle, etc.

The other problem - which started the market move for increase oil prices based on perceived risk - was that Nigeria at began of the year was/is experience strong civil unrest in the delta area were most of the oil come from.

[Bronco Jamus]

Originally Posted by Pseudofool

Don't be fooled there are no short term solutions. And the ones that are being peddled to us MAKE IT WORSE IN THE LONG TERM.

That's flawed. Of course there are short term solutions. It's all about intent. They have to be short term solutions and they are certainly available. Part of what I do is project management. Trust me. There is always a stop gap to get you over the hump until the better solution is ready. Otherwise, our economy is going to have a hard time. So what would you rather have? Environmental friendly coal burning plants, or massive food costs and transportation costs? Nuclear power or no power? 7 dollar/gallon gas or 3 dollar per gallon gas? Obama's long term goals don't come to bear until 2020 or 2030. And it's just research. It's not an actual solution. John McCain has the better short term energy policy.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by elsid13

The other problem - which was started the market move for increase oil prices based on perceived risk - was that Nigeria at began of the year was/is experience strong civil unrest in the delta area were most of the oil come from.

Yep - I forgot that one.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

The Business Week article I just posted shows that supplies are NOT tight (even the CEO of Exxon affirms this) and that Bush's energy secretary is a liar (what a surprise.)

If supplies weren't tight (crude was plentiful) news of possible supply woes wouldn't drive prices the way it does. Does that make sense?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Bronco_Beerslug

If supplies weren't tight (crude was plentiful) news of possible supply woes wouldn't drive prices the way it does. Does that make sense?

Thanks for making my point for me.

It's not that supplies are actually tight - it's the news of possible supply woes that drives speculation.

And, as we know, the news isn't exactly trustworthy these days.

(Case in point: The article I posted called BS on Bush's energy secretary's statements to the press.)

The "news" is all too often nothing more than a bunch of talking heads delivering the propaganda they've been spoonfed by the Bush administration.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

One more time:

Production is expected to increase by 3.3% in the second quarter, and by as much as 4.1% by the third quarter. The net result is that the U.S. daily buffer for oil production against demand, which was a paltry 1.5 million barrels as recently as 2005, is now up to 3 million barrels in excess capacity today.

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...564_page_2.htm

On the same day the President and our Energy Secretary made those foolish comments, no less an authority than ExxonMobil (XOM) Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson was quoted by Marketwatch as saying, "The record run in oil prices is related more to speculation and a weakening dollar than supply and demand in the market." He added, "In terms of fundamentals, fear of supply reliability is overblown."
As for the speculators, in 2000 approximately $9 billion was invested in oil futures, while today that number has gone up to $250 billion. Now, if any publicly traded company had an additional $241 billion put into its stock in the same period, its stock would rise out of sight too—even if the company was not worth anywhere near that amount of market capitalization.

http://www.businessweek.com/lifestyl...564_page_2.htm

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by L.A. BRONCOS FAN

Thanks for making my point for me.
It's not that supplies are actually tight - it's the news of possible supply woes that drives speculation.
And, as we know, the news isn't exactly trustworthy these days.
.

I disagree completely. World oil supplies are about as tight as you can get as the numbers I posted for 2006 show. Our own oil supplies are most definitely tight (watch the fossil fuels report on Wednesday mornings on CNBC for the exact numbers every week).

For the previous week...

The Energy Department's Energy Information Administration said crude oil supplies fell by 2 million barrels last week, or about 800,000 barrels more than analysts surveyed by the energy research firm Platts predicted.