Bush looks offshore for remedy to high oil prices - Page 2 - Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest

Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!

greatlakes4x4.com is the premier Great Lakes 4x4 Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old June 19th, 2008, 11:31 AM   #21
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,111
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Tapping our own resources is exactly what we need.

There sure is a lot of uninformed people in this thread, try reading some factual information before you spout off.... :miff:

http://www.ibdeditorial.com/IBDArtic...98682401239926

If there's to be a tipping point in the debate over America's energy future, President Bush's speech on Wednesday might just be it.

His remarks amounted to a line in the sand against those who refuse to acknowledge the fundamental reality of America's energy crisis: We need to drill for more oil and now, not later.

"Congress must face a hard reality," Bush said in remarks at the White House. "Unless members are willing to accept gas prices at today's painful levels or even higher, our nation must produce more oil, and we must start now."

Bush on Wednesday proposed a new plan that would essentially decontrol oil exploration and drilling on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf, the 3- to-200-mile band of undersea bed thought to hold a minimum of 18 billion barrels of oil roughly equal to 10 years of current U.S. oil output.

Offshore, Off-Limits

A Democrat-led Congress imposed a moratorium on OCS development in 1981. It was extended by both the first President Bush and by President Clinton.

But since 1981, the U.S. has gone from importing 40% of its oil to about 65% today. From a national policy standpoint, the moratorium has been an abject failure.

Bush's new plan would also open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

As the president noted, the drilling will take place on less than 2,000 of ANWR's 19 million acres roughly 0.1% of the reserve. It would have minimal impact on either the environment or on the animals that live there. But the upside is 10 billion barrels of oil, possibly more.

A million barrels or so of this oil would be flowing today if Clinton hadn't vetoed it in 1995. Now we're paying with higher prices and greater energy insecurity.

Perhaps the biggest element of Bush's plan would exploit our enormous oil shale and tar sand reserves.

Bush uses a conservative estimate of 800 billion barrels of oil in our shale deposits; others, including the Rand Corp., estimate that as much as 1.8 trillion barrels lie under the so-called Green River Formation in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming.

That's more than the total reserves of 970 billion barrels held by the top 10 non-U.S. oil suppliers combined and equals 100 years worth of imports.

Finally, Bush wants to build more oil refineries something we haven't done since 1979.

The president's bold plan caps several days of significant events that appear to mark a major turnaround for U.S. energy policy. They include:

A change of heart by GOP presidential candidate John McCain, who after opposing offshore drilling vowed on Tuesday to go after reserves off the coast. He also says he wants to build at least 45 new nuclear power plants.

A similar reversal by Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, a longtime foe of drilling off his state's coast, who also changed his mind this week because "Florida families are suffering."

A new Rasmussen poll released Tuesday (see chart) showing 67% of Americans now favor drilling for more oil, with 64% believing it will lead to lower prices.

These shifts of opinion are all quite reasonable, given that oil prices have more than doubled to $130-plus per barrel over the last year, while a gallon of gas sells for more than $4 a gallon cutting deeply into U.S. consumers' pocketbooks.

All this is trouble for Democrats. They have positioned themselves going into November's election as a party of high energy prices, rising taxes and slow economic growth that is, the party of former President Jimmy Carter. He tried all those policies, and they were a disaster.

Almost immediately after Bush's remarks, top congressional Democrats stood before the cameras saying things that, if current polls are correct, will likely be damaging to their electoral prospects in November.

For instance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that Bush's plan "was literally written by the oil industry . . . (and would) give away more public resources."

Oilmen didn't write Bush's plan. It was dictated by the unavoidable logic of growing demand, soaring prices and slowing oil output not to mention a growing U.S. reliance on potentially shaky foreign suppliers.

As for the contention that this would "give away" resources, any oil company that explored or drilled on U.S. territory would pay royalties in addition to taxes.

This is important. Since 2002, the 27 largest oil companies have seen their tax bills soar from $15 billion to $90 billion. In 2007, the effective tax rate for oil companies was more than 40% above the top corporate income-tax rate of 35%.

'Obscene' Profits?

It's true, oil company profits have jumped. But as a share of revenue, they still hover around 9 cents per dollar in line with what manufacturers make and below the 18.4 cents per dollar made by drug companies and 13.4 cents by computer makers.

"Despite what President Bush, John McCain and their friends in the oil industry claim, we cannot drill our way out of the problem," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. "The math is simple: America has just 3% of the world's oil reserves, but Americans use a quarter of its oil."

But Reid's math is way off as we've already showed. The U.S., potentially anyway, has more oil reserves than any nation. As for using a quarter of the world's oil, that is now declining, due to higher prices. It isn't falling in China or India.

No Alternative

Foes of drilling have pushed their own notion that alternative energy solar, wind, biomass will be a silver-bullet fix and will replace crude oil in fueling our economy.

This is a pipe dream. Every major forecast of future oil use through the middle of this century including those of the Energy Department and the International Energy Agency expect crude oil to make up at least 75% of energy supplies.

Today, the U.S. uses 21 million barrels of oil a day, but we supply just 8.5 million barrels ourselves. That's not enough.

The world uses 85 million barrels. This is growing by a million barrels a day each year thanks to soaring demand in China, India and the Mideast, which account for about 40% of the world's population.

The U.S. is competing head-to-head with those countries for resources, leading inevitably to both price and political pressures.

Given our thirst for oil, it's criminal to leave our ample resources untapped.

By 2050, the world will add 2 billion people, and the U.S. at least 100 million more, census estimates show. More people means more energy. But how much?

The Energy Information Administration estimates that energy demand will rise more than 40% by 2030. This is a tall order.

The IEA forecasts that the world's oil companies will have to invest at least $8.2 trillion between now and then to keep the world economy growing.

Yet, with Democrats calling for windfall profits taxes, pushing nationalization of oil companies (as two Democrats already have), and forcing oil company CEOs to appear before Congress seemingly every month, it's a wonder we have any oil at all.

When you demonize profits, you also demonize investments in the very companies that produce the profits. That means less oil, not more, in the future.

Put into perspective, from 1990 to 2006, U.S. oil companies invested $1.2 trillion compared with profits of $900 billion. Those who accuse them of "gouging" or "profiteering" are perpetrating a lie.

If nothing else, rebuilding our oil reserves will lead to a favorable decline in the huge number of dollars we send overseas for oil.

At current prices, the U.S. will spend $600 billion over the next year on foreign oil an amount only slightly less than our $700 billion trade deficit.

All told, the world is handing over a startling $1.8 trillion to oil producers a massive amount that's become a huge burden.

Thanks to our need for oil, the U.S. by default has become the No. 1 supporter of many of the world's most questionable petrotyrannies some of which are avid supporters of terrorism.

We do ourselves no favors by refusing to drill on our own soil.
3-foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old June 19th, 2008, 01:54 PM   #22
SilverDollar
Semper Paratus
 
SilverDollar's Avatar
 
Join Date: 10-05-07
Location: East-sieeed, MI
Posts: 356
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

REgardless of who's numbers you believe, the prices on the comodities market has gone crazy. One was to fix the issue is to allow new drilling. But I think we should nationalize the company that can get the oil from our soil. Yes - this would have the appearance of gov't regulation and socialism, but sometimes "we need to keep the honest people, honest".
SilverDollar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2008, 01:57 PM   #23
Rockstar
sɐƃǝʌ sɐן
 
Rockstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-25-07
Location: Taylor,Mi
Posts: 8,504
iTrader: (11)
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Default

When Gas is $10.00 a Gallon then i would worry
Rockstar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2008, 06:57 PM   #24
Spork
rapid city recovery team
 
Spork's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-04-07
Location: rapid city mi
Posts: 1,049
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

many people dont realize that cuba with the help of china is already drilling 50 miles off the florida coast. Our own regulations are only penalizing ourselves.

It really doesnt matter what the US does to limit usage will only provide more oil for china and india.

Brazil just drilled a well off there coast that will provide enough oil for the that country for years.

Conservation is noble but to extremes it is not very realistic
Spork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2008, 08:30 PM   #25
XXXJ
Desert Rat
 
XXXJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-09-07
Location: Memphis, Mi
Posts: 5,577
iTrader: (13)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Default

OPEC sells oil for $136.00 a barrel.
OPEC nations buy U.S. grain at $7.00 a bushel.
Solution: Sell grain for $136.00 a bushel.
Can't buy it? Tough! Eat your oil!
Ought to go well with a nice thick grilled filet of camel ass!!!
XXXJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2008, 09:34 PM   #26
smasheromalley
Senior Member
 
smasheromalley's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Michigan
Posts: 3,038
iTrader: (15)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverDollar View Post
REgardless of who's numbers you believe, the prices on the comodities market has gone crazy. One was to fix the issue is to allow new drilling. But I think we should nationalize the company that can get the oil from our soil. Yes - this would have the appearance of gov't regulation and socialism, but sometimes "we need to keep the honest people, honest".

If theres one thing just about everyone on this board agrees with, it is that government cant do anything right. A state run oil company would be no different.
smasheromalley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 19th, 2008, 10:01 PM   #27
newdodge
jeep life
 
newdodge's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-18-06
Location: newport mi
Posts: 4,273
iTrader: (55)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

do u no that we have oil wells here in michigan that we can use
newdodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 10:45 AM   #28
mikesova
My 4x4 is a Subaru.
 
mikesova's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Gladwin, MI
Posts: 7,784
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to mikesova
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by newdodge View Post
do u no that we have oil wells here in michigan that we can use
um, hi, we do. go to Mount Pleasant or Oil City. Drive along 127, you'll notice a funny smell.
mikesova is online now   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 10:52 AM   #29
KartRacer
Blowd up
 
KartRacer's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-16-05
Location: Riverside, MI 49084
Posts: 6,335
iTrader: (4)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to KartRacer
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by newdodge View Post
do u no that we have oil wells here in michigan that we can use
I don't "no" anything.
KartRacer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 11:00 AM   #30
3-foot
Senior Member
 
3-foot's Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-21-06
Location: Springfield Township, Mi
Posts: 1,111
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverDollar View Post
REgardless of who's numbers you believe, the prices on the comodities market has gone crazy. One was to fix the issue is to allow new drilling. But I think we should nationalize the company that can get the oil from our soil. Yes - this would have the appearance of gov't regulation and socialism, but sometimes "we need to keep the honest people, honest".
Free markets always work better than government control. Socialism doesn't solve anything it only gives politicians more control over your life. Who do you think is being dishonest? Hugo Chavez would love you comrade.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spork View Post
many people dont realize that cuba with the help of china is already drilling 50 miles off the florida coast. Our own regulations are only penalizing ourselves.

It really doesnt matter what the US does to limit usage will only provide more oil for china and india.

Brazil just drilled a well off there coast that will provide enough oil for the that country for years.

Conservation is noble but to extremes it is not very realistic
I agree with what your saying, but to pick a nit, China isn't drilling off of Cuba yet. They are still exploring the area for drilling.

We need to follow Brazil's example. We have proven oil reserves that would last us many years too and with zero imports but we have to start developing those resources now, it could take years to come on line.

Quote:
Originally Posted by XXXJ View Post
OPEC sells oil for $136.00 a barrel.
OPEC nations buy U.S. grain at $7.00 a bushel.
Solution: Sell grain for $136.00 a bushel.
Can't buy it? Tough! Eat your oil!
Ought to go well with a nice thick grilled filet of camel ass!!!

This is the dumbest thing I have heard in a long time. Please go back to school and learn something, anything, about economics.
3-foot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 11:09 AM   #31
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesova View Post
um, hi, we do. go to Mount Pleasant or Oil City. Drive along 127, you'll notice a funny smell.
my grandpa and my cousin drilled several wells in oil city. there are thousands of oil wells all over mi. my dad and uncle are drilling near evart right now.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 11:27 AM   #32
dodger889
Senior Member
 
dodger889's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-12-08
Location: north of ann arbor, mi
Posts: 1,109
iTrader: (8)
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Default

Sometimes I wonder at people.

Here is a question how many of you been around an oilfield and talk to the people that work in them.??

How many of you has done any studies on the oil in the US????

There are wells that where capped at the peak of there production level in the Midland-Odesa area back in the 70's and no I'm not talking about 10 or less I'm talking about 100s
So we still have a large reserves in the gtound in known area of oil production that is still there
dodger889 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 01:28 PM   #33
clint357
Web Wheeler Extraordinair
 
clint357's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-13-07
Location: grand rapids
Posts: 2,278
iTrader: (4)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

How much does it cost to start a small oil drilling and refinement program?
clint357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 01:48 PM   #34
DocRamcharger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 03-09-08
Location: MI
Posts: 232
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikesova View Post
um, hi, we do. go to Mount Pleasant or Oil City. Drive along 127, you'll notice a funny smell.
Oil City isn't bad, but just north of Rosebush can get really bad, to the point of tasting it. I want to know why they are still burning the natural gas off instead of harvesting it.

I know gas prices have affected my routine pretty good. I still like to wheel, but now I ride my bike to work when I can. Its only 2 miles, so I would have burnt more gas starting my car twice than the actual drive. Now I just need to fab up a bike rack over the rear tire that will be able to hold a cooler and possibly small loads of groceries, and I will be able to cut at least a tank a month out of my budget, saving me about $40-50 a month, not to mention the physical benefits of riding about 5-10 miles a day.
DocRamcharger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 02:02 PM   #35
Mr Toes - R.I.P.
November 7, 1958 - July 22, 2011
 
Mr Toes - R.I.P.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: 07-29-07
Location: Belleville Mi
Posts: 4,727
iTrader: (1)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

The bitchy thing about all these remedies is they will take several years to help.

Too bad nobody suggested someting earlier.

Oh shit I forgot George Bush has been warning about this since he took office.
Mr Toes - R.I.P. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 02:40 PM   #36
roll-bar Bob
Senior Member
 
roll-bar Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: 01-20-06
Location: M CITY
Posts: 2,737
iTrader: (3)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XXXJ View Post
OPEC sells oil for $136.00 a barrel.
OPEC nations buy U.S. grain at $7.00 a bushel.
Solution: Sell grain for $136.00 a bushel.
Can't buy it? Tough! Eat your oil!
Ought to go well with a nice thick grilled filet of camel ass!!!
X100000000000000000000000000000000000

roll-bar Bob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 04:04 PM   #37
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocRamcharger View Post
Oil City isn't bad, but just north of Rosebush can get really bad, to the point of tasting it. I want to know why they are still burning the natural gas off instead of harvesting it.
how would you harvest the gas? you cant bottle natural gas like propane. you need to put in a pipeline to get it where you need it, and unless there is a high population density its not cost effective.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 07:31 PM   #38
DocRamcharger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 03-09-08
Location: MI
Posts: 232
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo View Post
how would you harvest the gas? you cant bottle natural gas like propane. you need to put in a pipeline to get it where you need it, and unless there is a high population density its not cost effective.
I understand that it is one of the more difficult fuels to harvest, but given the situation, I think it could probably be done in the area. Mt. Pleasant could use the extra natural gas, although I am not really sure what type of piping system they have set up in the city.

It can be transported by truck as well, over short distances, as either Compressed or Liquified natural gas. In fact, just now I was reading a wiki article on natural gas, I noticed that the burning off as waste is illegal in many countries. It is under Natural Gas - Storage and Transport.

With propane prices soaring, like my parent's price per gallon of $2.29 locked in, compared to $1.79 locked in last year, many would gladly do the simple switching of a few orfices and pipes for a pocketbook break. They are thinking about switching back to a wood burning stove this year.
DocRamcharger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 07:35 PM   #39
DocRamcharger
Senior Member
 
Join Date: 03-09-08
Location: MI
Posts: 232
iTrader: (0)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

Reading a little more in depth, natural gas can be used to power automobiles, but lower piston compressions hurt power. Octane rating of 120-130, so.....most of us would be okay since we already run high compression engines anyways. Just a few other modifications would be needed.
DocRamcharger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 20th, 2008, 07:54 PM   #40
steveo
In the band!
 
Join Date: 03-30-07
Location: montana/wyoming
Posts: 20,293
iTrader: (6)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Default

it would cost A LOT to build the pipelines, and the facilities to bottle it. it would cut any potential saving out of the picture.
steveo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Page generated in 0.45786 seconds with 80 queries