Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
RE CO2 in the atmosphere -
it has been much higher in the past and much lower in the past,
Yes, and there used to be a glacier covering the midwest.
Why not drill and develop alternatives at the same time? The mere fact that we are seriously committed to exploiting our own natural reserves will immediately impact prices on oil. As we are doing this, we can research and develope alternatives. Winter is coming, and home heating, whether oil or natural gas, is going to become expensive. There can be a marriage of both. Are our elected officials so dense that they cannot see this? Common sense, people.
Interesting article.
You are right, many of the things you say about the republican logic, may well be true.
However, when you come to the second half about giving the benefit of the doubt to the democrats, you have a couple of things that just don't make sense.
One is the issue of how long before we could tap into ANWR, and offshore.
While the timelines are somewhat long, the fundamental flaw in the democrats logic, is ongoing. They've been stopping offshore drilling and new alaskan drilling for at least two decades now.
If it wasn't for their efforts to stop drilling (and yes there are republicans on that list, but mostly it's a democrat thing), and we started just 10 years ago, nevermind 20, we would have that oil flowing freely now, and, we would be supplying about 40% of our requirements, not 20% or so.
In other words, we wouldn't be paying $4.00 today at the pump. I'm not saying we'd be back at $1.50, but life would be much better for everyone in the US.
Next point - yes their could be a spill, but technology keeps improving - when was the last major spill in the gulf? Exactly.
Nevermind that Cuba, with China's help will be doing their offshore thing - and our Florida beaches are far, far more likely to get damaged by their mistakes, than if we were doing it. We can't stop Cuba from drilling, but, BEWARE:
Like w drill in the North Slope, no doubt a lot of those reserves that Cuba gets, is in the same large area we would also be drilling - basically, as things are, Cuba will get most of the oil, and us, none of it.
Lastly, even with the go ahead to do both, ANWR and offshore, the announcement may help, but we definitely won't see the price of gas drop by half, even after production is in place.
So, GM et al, will still kill off their larger SUVs.
And we aren't talking about needing 30 years of supplies or longer. Plug-in electrics, and other technologies (hydrogen?), will start replacing the traditional gas engine vehicles over the next 3- 5 years, and by 10-15 years, we really should need far less oil
Knocking $1.00 off the price of a gallon, at the pump is not going to put a dent into the drive for more efficient vehicles.
IF GM, for example can take their Volt plug in tech and offer that through most of their lineup, we are talking 100+ mpg equivalents (average driving), and the first of those is due in less than a year.
So, let's get off our asses, and stop being held hostage to OPEC. (or at least less so).
BTW, Russia and Canada are energy exporters - because they do drill in the great white north. We choose, instead to be victims - of our own policies.
A reminder - our Big Oil companies now only account for (I think I recently read), only 3% of actually oil recovery outside the US. OPEC and other players are huge by comparison. It's been a long time since they had any significant control over international oil pricing.
Democrats - and Republicans have to stop letting hard core environmentalists run our energy policy. There has to be compromise: Nothing pleases them (environmental groups - no nukes, wind power that might kill birds, large solar arrays that require huge amounts of desert to be "paved" with them. No doubt many major projects will be killed or delayed, or scaled way back, because of this endangered, bug, or that endangered turtle, etc... Even Schwartznegger was complaining on TV about how one of his solar energy proposed projects in the california deserts, is already being delayed by environmentalists.
Those same folks also demand low density housing, which, of course is the least energy efficient. Low density means public transportation isn't practical. Instead of 100,000 - 250,000 homes, etc. on 50,000 acres, they aren't happy, unless it's 4000 homes maximum on that much space. Terribly inefficient!
OK, enough. Mull it over. It's not about democrats vs republicans, it's about energy, and possibly maintaining our economy over the next couple of decades. -art
We need to switch. Oil is cassette tapes. What if we had made a law back in the skinny-tie era about sticking with cassette tapes, rather than switching to CDs, and then moving on to digital downloads and so on?
Makes no sense. Sure, cassette tapes still exist, and so do vinyl records. But music is digital now. The world needs to leave oil behind, and move on. McCain is an old cassette tape guy. He does not get it, or he maybe owns a cassete tape company.
Good night. I am obsessed. Tomorrow, no Salon. Love to all.
I live in Florida and was aghast at our beloved Governors recent flip-flop. I've lost a lot of respect for him.
I'm also an independent, for what its worth.
Here's my question (and some input) about off-shore drilling: if we did decide to do it, how long would it take for these new drills to be built and rigged up to go? I've heard anywhere from 3 to 5 years.
Now I am not paranoid about "spills", even though I live in Florida. But I wonder what the cost of all these new drills would be? Tens of billions? I assume the oil compnaies would be footing the bill, but why waste 5 years and billions of dollars on a temporary solution (oil) if we are genuinely committed to getting OFF oil? And what would consumers do price-wise during those 3-5 years. SOME say that the global market price would DROP but my instincts tell me exactly the opposite. That in anticipation of a glut in 3-5 years, prices woudl actually RISE. That makes more sense to me.
Next, I have heard that the price of oil set in teh open market is to some degree a result of speculators. I'm not expert, but this seems to be an unregulated activity that may be part of the problem. Doesn't it make better sense then (if we want to see a drop in oil prices) to look into the futures market and create some sort of regulation? And if we FAIL to do this, what happens when speculators speculate about our *alternative energy* sources like the hydrogen we'd use or the batteries needed to run cars...I think these questions need to be addressed before we run off the coasts and start drilling. It seems awfully reactionary and to tell the truth the fact that the oil companies are involved... I don't know...it has the feel of a crack dealer giving you a free sample...or your auntie baking a chocolate cake when you're one diet...Sure, its great, but ultimately it derails you from the goal. WE NEED TO BE OFF OIL ALTOGETHER.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
