Senate vote for ANWR drilling

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

"Do you think I should sell off some of my Haliburton Stock, or keep it?"

KBR will be sold this year, I reckon this will increase the value of your Halli stock
So I'm knocking my pan in to make you richer, oh the delicious irony...

Sweeeeet........ you have my complete and utter thanks for your efforts.

[newsstand 0]

See the post above yours for how long before it begins to flow and how little a difference it will make. China is also coming on strong when it comes to sucking up oil and I would guess that in 10 years India will be doing a pretty good job of it too. There will be plenty of markets for the Middle East to sell its oil.

Saudis are not just friends of the Bushes but the U.S. government going back to the end of WWII. See Sleeping With the Devil.

Because of the way fuel is taxed in most other countries the percent change in price is much smaller and less noticeable than here. Fuel prices would have to go up much much more to make other countries hurt enough to start looking alternate fuel sources. Hell look at us. Our solution is to drill for more oil instead of look at alternatives.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[jdhill 0]

Quote

Is it worth spending god knows how much money and man hours on reducing our dependence in 10-20 years by 2 percent?

Seeing as it will be the oil companies that will be spending the bulk of money... with mostly US firms, who employ mostly US citizens... the economic impact goes beyond just the oil... on top of that, those companies will have to pay the government for the access... With oil prices where they are now, and the likelihood of them staying well above $30, you will also see companies moving resources in to shale oil exploration and extraction... again this is the oil companies' money and they are likely to spend it on producing oil, not looking at alternative sources... that's what they do.

As far as the government's (our) money and policy goes, it should be put toward researching alternatives, clean renewable energy sources, and higher efficiency vehicles...

I don't think allowing drilling in ANWR and alternate sources are mutually exclusive.

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[TheBachelor 5]

The demand for oil is going to continue growing at a fast pace, and prices will continue to go up. We do need to work on alternative/reneable fuels, but those technologies will take years before they get to the consumer. Until we can reduce our dependency on oil, we need to keep finding more, even if it means drilling in ANWR, or off of he coasts of California and Florida.

Chrysler just announced they will have a hydrogen-powered car by 2012. Honda already has several hydrogen cars on the roads of America and Canada, and has a natural gas Civic that has been on the market for a few years. Governor Arnold here in California is pushing hydrogen also. The problem with hydrogen is it takes burning fossil fuels to generate it. People seem to forget that. There's no panacea.

There are battered women? I've been eating 'em plain all of these years...

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

The problem with hydrogen is it takes burning fossil fuels to generate it. People seem to forget that.

That's why they are marketed as Zero Emission Vehicles. They'd rather let it slide that it takes ecologically damaging fossil fuels, or ecologically damaging hydroelectric power, or nuclear power or visibly undesirable windmills...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Caribou aside.

Quote

Is it worth spending god knows how much money and man hours on reducing our dependence in 10-20 years by 2 percent?

Yes. In fact, we need to be building more refineries too. This country hasn't built a new refinery in over 15 years or more. Our infrastructure is based on 70s era consumption. We need to process oil more efficiently, and faster to meet demand. Our current infrastructure cannot manage that.

Quote

We need solutions within a few years not in 2020.

No we don't. There is no crisis. There is no shortage. We need to continue to import the majority of our oil now. Oil prices will fall from their highs. Our supply is up, production is up. The activity in the middle east and Chinas growing demands are going to be a challenge of major proportions by 2020.

Quote

This admin wants to put a man on Mars and have station on the moon

Fine with me. We put a man on the moon while we were fighting in Vietnam, fighting the Cold War and dealing with Civil Rights. Our culture thrives through overcoming challenges and our pioneering spirit must continue. This "lax" attitude of "ho-hum" big deal I'm going to turn on my TV again and watch Springer or "Real Life xxxx" is BS.

Quote

, yet all Ive heard about reducing consumption is a few lines in a speech. If we lifted the SUV tax on manufactures like GM that would increase tax rev by 10 billion a year.

What would you do with the tax money? It's not the governments, it's ours. We paid GM for a truck, we already paid a sales tax, property tax, registration tax, fee-this-fee-that at a state level. Throwing money does not solve a problem.

Quote

If GM had to pay a few billion a year in taxes because they make gas guzzling engines they sure as hell would have an incentive to produce more fuel efficient ones.

They don't get penalized that way. Learn about CAFE standards and you'll understand. GM is already building a hybrid-full-size-truck (though the system is not designed as a fuel saver, it allows utility with less reliance on the engine), Ford has the first small SUV in hybrid form (Escape Hybrid), Toyota/Lexus has its set, Prius and RX400h. Honda has its venerable Insight, Civic and Accord hybrids and a natural gas powered Civic too.

The industry is doing the right thing, smartly I might add too. They are taking the most efficient personal transportation (engines) and making them better. Batteries aren't the answer. Hydrogen isn't there yet (and won't be for a long time) and NG isn't getting wide support because, while it's clean as a whistle, it isn't as efficient.

SUVs are not the problem. Before there were SUVs being the rave, it was cars with big engines, before that, it was big cars with big engines with no technology to burn the fuel efficiently.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billvon 3,119]

>No we don't. There is no crisis. There is no shortage.

In 1956, Marion King Hubbert, a Shell Oil geologist, predicted that US crude production would peak between 1966-1971. Everyone laughed. "There is no crisis! There is no shortage! The US will never run out of oil!" After all, every day new wells were being dug every day. How could we possibly run out? "Cornucopiaism" was the order of the day; there would be plenty forever.

In 1970 production began to drop in Pennsyvlania and Texas. Today the US supplies a mere trickle compared to our demand.

There are three problems with your belief that there is no shortage:

1. The largest oil fields on the planet are running out of oil. Drilling new ones as rapidly as possible will not be sufficient to make up for the ones running dry.

2. Even if we could somehow maintain our current output, it _still_ wouldn't be enough. China is poised to become the #1 consumer of oil, leaving ever-smaller amounts for us even if we _could_ somehow maintain the current supply forever.

3. We are so oil dependent that any drop in supply will be perceived as a crisis, and will affect our markets accordingly.

So the only scenario in which we don't have a crisis is one where the amount of oil we pump increases exponentially. That means it can't just stay steady; that would be a disaster for the US. It can't just rise linearly; China will take all the increase in production. It has to rise exponentially.

Now, if you have a way to make a resource that's disappearing start increasing exponentially, then by all means get it working and you'll make Bill Gates look like a lower middle class poser.

Or start working on alternative-energy systems. The payoff will take longer, but your success will be pretty much guaranteed (if you can get them to work well, of course) since our demand for energy will rapidly outstrip our ability to get cheap oil.

[skydyvr 0]

Quote

1. The largest oil fields on the planet are running out of oil.

No they aren't -- there is vastly more oil left than has been pumped out in most abandoned wells. The oil left behind simply costs too much to extract. When the "easy" supplies around the world diminish enough, we'll either pay more or develop new technology to get at the more difficult supplies. Either way, we'll have oil on hand for a long time to come.

. . =(_8^(1)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Good article (very long).

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

[billvon 3,119]

>There is no crisis. There is no shortage.

A few more news tidbits:

* ConocoPhillips, the Houston-based amalgam of Continental Oil and Phillips Petroleum, announced in January that new additions to its oil reserves in 2004 amounted to only about 60-65% of all the oil it produced that year, entailing a significant depletion of those existing reserves.

* ChevronTexaco, the second largest U.S. energy firm after ExxonMobil, also reported a significant imbalance between oil production and replacement. Although not willing to disclose the precise nature of the company's shortfall, chief executive Dave O'Reilly told analysts that he expects "our 2004 reserves-replacement rate to be low."

* Royal Dutch/Shell, already reeling from admissions last year that it had over-stated its oil and natural gas reserves by 20%, recently lowered its estimated holdings by another 10%, bringing its net loss to the equivalent of 5.3 billion barrels of oil. Even more worrisome, Shell announced in February that it had replaced only about 45-55% of the oil and gas it produced in 2004, an unexpectedly disappointing figure.


http://www.tomdispatch.com/index.mhtml?emx=x&pid=2277

[GTAVercetti 0]

Funy quote from the Onion about this:

"If I may be allowed to pursue the idea of 'addiction to oil,' I think the nation just reached the point where we sold our wedding ring for one night's fix."

Why yes, my license number is a palindrome. Thank you for noticing.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

>There is no crisis. There is no shortage.

A few more news tidbits:

23 Mar 2005
"...energy companies' shares took a hit after oil prices slid, following government inventory data that showed a big rise in U.S. crude stockpiles. Dow component Exxon Mobil Corp. (XOM) fell 1.3 percent to $60.09, and ConocoPhillips (COP) lost 1.8 percent to $105.10."

That rise in stockpiles is the highest it's been in three years.

There is no shortage of oil on this planet.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Gravitymaster 0]

I understand the Swiss are going to wrap mountain glaciers with tin foil to prevent them from melting.

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=29&art_id=vn20050322074859348C684645


Can Swiss foil the big meltdown?

March 22 2005 at 09:58AM

Switzerland - Swiss authorities are planning to wrap mountain glaciers with tin foil this summer in an effort to stop them melting.

Carlo Danioth, head of mountain rescue services in Andermatt, said: "We will initially cover around 30 000 square feet (2 800 square metres) on the upper Gurschen glacier at the beginning of May as a test."

Scientists hope that the high-tech foil will prevent the sun's rays from melting the ice in popular ski resorts during the summer months.

Glacier expert Martin Funk said: "The foil reflects almost all the sun's rays. That will sharply reduce the rate of melting."

And other resorts like Saas-Fee and Titlis and some Austrian glaciers have said that they plan to test similar schemes this summer.

Environmental groups have criticised the £45 000 (about R360 000) plan at Andermatt as "absurd".

Raimund Rosewald, head of a landscape protection foundation, said: "We cannot stop the glaciers melting using foil. - ananova.com

[billvon 3,119]

>government inventory data that showed a big rise in U.S. crude stockpiles.

Ah! Thank god the government thinks we have plenty of oil somewhere. No doubt that will make up for the lack of oil to replenish oil company stockpiles.

So buy that SUV, and invest in companies making large, inefficient vehicles, secure in your knowledge that endless reserves of cheap oil will make them the best investment out there. Heck, you could even invest all your retirement savings in such a company - you'd be sure to clean up.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

I understand the Swiss are going to wrap mountain glaciers with tin foil to prevent them from melting.

Not tin. Too expensive and wrong properties.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

I understand the Swiss are going to wrap mountain glaciers with tin foil to prevent them from melting.

Not tin. Too expensive and wrong properties.

Maybe galvanized aluminum? Wonder if they will make foil hats out of it after this experiment? Gotta do something about those mind control microwave beams.

[Gawain 0]

Either way, it is better for the US to continue to import the majority of its oil while prudently expanding its search for domestic sources. If there really were a shortage, this position would be even better, thus securing domestic sources and, in tandem with other technologies, allowing the importation to be phased out, allowing the rest of the world to squabble over whatever is left.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!