Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG;438509]Theoretically though economics would say that as thise "day of reckoning" approaches the costs of oil will become untenable driving a major movement towards alternative fuel.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I agree and that's what is likely to happen. The problem is that we will have a painful adjustment period while we try to figure things out. And I don't mean painful as in having to eat out less, I mean major global instability. That's the worst case scenario, but I don't think an implausible one. It's not as if countries have never gone to war over oil before.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

Let me add FRPLG, that's assuming that there aren't any tenable renewable alternatives ready at the time, and right now we are light years away.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=FRPLG;438508]I suspect we don't agree on much but I completely get what you're saying here. Unfortunately this is the kind of extended thinking that most Americans seem to not grasp. Or at least it is the type of thinking that never gets into the media cycle because media types don't think we understand it and politicians think we're even dumber than that.


I'd love to know what a "Big Oil candidate" is though. If it means you think he thinks Big Oil is probably the best driver then I agree with him and don't care if he is a Big Oil candidate. On the other hand if it means to leave Big Oil alone and let it happen normally then I say fugetaboutit! We can incentivise it to happen and make it worth it to them. Win/win baby.[/QUOTE]

Not sure what you're suspicious about. Anyway, Cheney's energy ceo roundtable that wrote the initial Bush energy policy is classic Big Oil candidate stuff. Way too coincidental that he spends the first years of the term: working w/ oil execs to write a policy, backing an idiotic coup in Venezuela because its government refused to "cooperate" w/ our energy needs, then invading and occupying the most oil rich country in the world that could not possibly defend itself. It was especially amusing when the energy firms out of Texas were caught red-handed cutting supply to California to spike prices (remember the tapes of "Yeah, fuck 'em), after Cheney had spent months defending his buddies and touring the country to tell everyone that the real problem is that we weren't subsidizing oil/gas/coal enough.

Anyway, the real point is that McCain has been right there w/ hardliners like Cheney. The difference is McCain says otherwise, which really makes no sense whatsoever to me because if he talked like other hardliners he'd probably be much more popular w/ the conservative base IMO. I'm just saying I am confused about his positioning. What is he going for?

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=djnemo65;438507]I don't think people adequately understand the paucity of oil that remains in this world. If you are familiar with peak oil theory (which isn't so much a theory as a geoligical fact) then you know oil will reach a peak point of production after which the quality of oil will be reduced and it will be increasingly more difficult to extract. Increasing oil consumption in the developing world, particularily in China but really everywhere, is only quickening this inevitability. Now some argue that oil production peaked last year, but when it peaks is really irrelevant. What matters is that it will.

That means that at some point we are going to face a major day of reckoning, since not only transportation but the world's entire industrial infrastructure is predicated on access to relatively cheap oil. My point is that a major technological project is needed to avert what will likely be an extremely unstable period, as the world's 3 powers - Europe, America, China, and their respective allies - fight over the remaining scraps.

I think all 3 candidates fall short in doing enough on this and I wish someone would speak to the people honestly about the poisonous effect that increased consumption in a world of declining oil production will have on the stability of the global economic system.[/QUOTE]

I'm starting to really question if we're anywhere near peak production. I mentioned in an earlier post that geologists are finding huge deposits off the coast of Brazil and other places that were previously out of reach but can now be drilled.

Not that I'm arguing w/ you, cause I don't really know the science, but I suspect that environmental damage will become critical [B]before[/B] oil supply becomes critical.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=The Goat;438515]I'm starting to really question if we're anywhere near peak production. I mentioned in an earlier post that geologists are finding huge deposits off the coast of Brazil and other places that were previously out of reach but can now be drilled.

Not that I'm arguing w/ you, cause I don't really know the science, but I suspect that environmental damage will become critical [B]before[/B] oil supply becomes critical.[/QUOTE]

Yeah i've heard stuff like that and I am really in no position to judge when oil production will peak. I just think it makes more sense to start preparing for it now, if for no other reason then to put America in a position to technologically dominate the next century the way it did the last.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=The Goat;438514]Not sure what you're suspicious about. Anyway, Cheney's energy ceo roundtable that wrote the initial Bush energy policy is classic Big Oil candidate stuff. Way too coincidental that he spends the first years of the term: working w/ oil execs to write a policy, backing an idiotic coup in Venezuela because its government refused to "cooperate" w/ our energy needs, then invading and occupying the most oil rich country in the world that could not possibly defend itself. It was especially amusing when the energy firms out of Texas were caught red-handed cutting supply to California to spike prices (remember the tapes of "Yeah, fuck 'em), after Cheney had spent months defending his buddies and touring the country to tell everyone that the real problem is that we weren't subsidizing oil/gas/coal enough.

Anyway, the real point is that McCain has been right there w/ hardliners like Cheney. The difference is McCain says otherwise, which really makes no sense whatsoever to me because if he talked like other hardliners he'd probably be much more popular w/ the conservative base IMO. I'm just saying I am confused about his positioning. What is he going for?[/quote]
Well if that was the case then Obama & Hillary would know this and they could just add that to their platform and promise that gas prices would drop if they were elected. They know that is not the case so they are not using this as a means to get elected. Also if Cheney is to blame for our high gas prices why is gas going up all over the world?

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

For what it's worth, crude oil is now $110.74 per barrel.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

$4/gallon here we come!

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=Mattyk72;438566]$4/gallon here we come![/quote]

We're definitely on our way.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

The energy that matters to me is the fuel I put in my car, and the fuel that heats my home and runs my appliances...

And while I yearn for the day of $0.79/gallon (Junior year in college, several gas stations in and around Salisbury, MD hit this mark), I'd just like to see gas and heating oil back to relatively user-friendly levels. We're all used to seeing $3+ that $2 would be a relief, but I'd love to see it cheaper than that.

It was a huge mistake allowing companies like Exxon and Mobil, BP and Amoco, and Chevron and Texaco to merge and limit refinery production. It's a matter of another big hurricane to bust through the Gulf of Mexico before we see $5/gallon nationwide.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=BDBohnzie;438576]The energy that matters to me is the fuel I put in my car, and the fuel that heats my home and runs my appliances...

And while I yearn for the day of $0.79/gallon (Junior year in college, several gas stations in and around Salisbury, MD hit this mark), I'd just like to see gas and heating oil back to relatively user-friendly levels. We're all used to seeing $3+ that $2 would be a relief, but I'd love to see it cheaper than that.

It was a huge mistake allowing companies like Exxon and Mobil, BP and Amoco, and Chevron and Texaco to merge and limit refinery production. It's a matter of another big hurricane to bust through the Gulf of Mexico before we see $5/gallon nationwide.[/QUOTE]

Ahh, I too long for the days where I could pay for a gallon of gas with a few quarters and a dime. But, the silver lining in the skyrocketing price of oil/gas is it's starting to make the search for alternative fuels make sense in the short-term. As others have noted, the only thing that is going to force our country to kick it's addiction to oil is money.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=SmootSmack;438395]Well, that wasn't really my question, but I guess the answer then is yes I should. And yes you're right.

1=Hillary Clinton
2=John McCain
3=Barack Obama

Again, the points I listed does not cover the full range of their agenda but their major points. I gathered this from various sources, including their own official sites.

Overall, I tend to be a McCain guy but if Energy was a major issue for me I don't know that he would be my guy. For one thing he makes hardly any mention of it on his own site which tells me it's not a huge priority for him (could be wrong though) and his solutions were somewhat vague. He spoke more about the will and creativity of the American people to solve this problem, without much in terms of actual plans and benchmarks.[/quote]

Gee...#1 and #3 sounded so similar, why? :D

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=firstdown;438545]Well if that was the case then Obama & Hillary would know this and they could just add that to their platform and promise that gas prices would drop if they were elected. They know that is not the case so they are not using this as a means to get elected. Also if Cheney is to blame for our high gas prices why is gas going up all over the world?[/quote]

Also, why have gas prices REALLY dramatically increased since Democrats took over Congress?

Just some fuel for thought. :D

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=Buster;438598]Also, why have gas prices REALLY dramatically increased since Democrats took over Congress?

Just some fuel for thought. :D[/quote]

I don't know if it's a Democratic thing...or even a Republican for that matter. But I'll say for one, and take this how you want, but our occupation in Iraq has most definitely played a role in the price of oil and it's trickle down affect on gas prices.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=Buster;438598]Also, why have gas prices REALLY dramatically increased [B]since Democrats took over Congress[/B]?

Just some fuel for thought. :D[/quote]
if it were that simple, old W. would have just vetoed. like he has every other democratic proposal:(

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=12thMan;438600]I don't know if it's a Democratic thing...or even a Republican for that matter. But I'll say for one, and take this how you want, but our occupation in Iraq has most definitely played a role in the price of oil and it's trickle down affect on gas prices.[/quote]

And frankly who cares who's fault it is just get the damn problem fixed.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=12thMan;438600]I don't know if it's a Democratic thing...or even a Republican for that matter. But I'll say for one, and take this how you want, but our occupation in Iraq has most definitely played a role in the price of oil and it's trickle down affect on gas prices.[/QUOTE]

Yeah it has nothing to do with Dems or Reps but it also has little to do with the war in Iraq. I dislike the war as much as the next person but let's not buy into the political babble about that.

Crude oil prices are what they are because:

OPEC has decided that's what they are going to cost. OPEC is a cartel which means they collude to set a price. They usually actually use some metrics to set this price but by no means is it a true market price. The types of things that drive their raising prices are:

Increased demand in Asia. With the increase in demand from China and India(Growing 10%a year for 6 years now) the needed crude oil has risen 40% in a decade.

Couple that with an extreme loss of production from Venzuela and the supply and demand intersection(price) has gone way up.

Other factors are increased environmental regulations, especially in the summer months. Deman in the US skyrockets in the summer months because of AC but prices go up even further because the blends needed per regulations mean greater production costs. Plus the fact that twice a year refineries have to retrofit to mix the proper blends.

On top of all that(crude oil rpices in general) our refinery capacity is still hurting after the Summer of '06's hurricane hell trip that really killed that facet of the industry. Even before Katrina I think we were down capacity wise like 50%. Katrina just put the last 10 nails in the coffin.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;438622]And frankly who cares who's fault it is just get the damn problem fixed.[/QUOTE]

I agree and the one question I'd love for this country to start examining is why everything HAS to be someone's fault. Can't sh*t just happen and it not be Clinton's or Bush's fault or whoever? I know I don't much care.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=FRPLG;438627]I agree and the one question I'd love for this country to start examining is why everything HAS to be someone's fault. Can't sh*t just happen and it not be Clinton's or Bush's fault or whoever? I know I don't much care.[/quote]

Yep, everyone is too caught up in playing the blame game rather than addressing the issues at hand.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

I don't want a Candidate that has a hard and fast plan before are even elected to the office. I want a candidate that will take the office, and use the additional Top Secret information, that only the executive branch and intelligence agencies are privy to, to re-evaluate our current energy plan, and apply the necessary resources to fix it.

I don't think either Hillary or Obama is capable of that. I'm not sure McCain is either, but he does seem like he would have the best chance to stave off economic collapse.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=GTripp0012;438643]I don't want a Candidate that has a hard and fast plan before are even elected to the office. I want a candidate that will take the office, and use the additional Top Secret information, that only the executive branch and intelligence agencies are privy to, to re-evaluate our current energy plan, and apply the necessary resources to fix it.

I don't think either Hillary or Obama is capable of that. I'm not sure McCain is either, but he does seem like he would have the best chance to stave off economic collapse.[/quote]

Really? McCain seems best suited for that? To a great extent the candidates have to show their hand in terms of how they plan to deal with the current economic woes. That's all the voters really have to go; the candidate's promises. And while they are all privy to top secret information, if what they've revealed thus far is an indicator of how they plan to deal with the economy, I would simply beg to differ on your statement about John McCain.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

Just to be clear, GTripp, I'm in no way trying to spark a debate over whether or not John McCain is good candidate, because I think he is. I just have my doubts about whether he can right the ship and get us back on track. Personally, I think he's a good man.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;438643]I don't want a Candidate that has a hard and fast plan before are even elected to the office. I want a candidate that will take the office, and use the additional Top Secret information, that only the executive branch and intelligence agencies are privy to, to re-evaluate our current energy plan, and apply the necessary resources to fix it.

I don't think either Hillary or Obama is capable of that. I'm not sure McCain is either, but he does seem like he would have the best chance to stave off economic collapse.[/QUOTE]

Like 12th, I like McCain and will likely vote for him if Hillary somehow secures the nomination. But, I'm not sure that the economy is McCain's strong suit. McCain admitted as much. Moreover, during the debates, McCain often skirted questions about the economy and managed to turn them into how he supported the surge. I'd say McCain's ability to stave off economic collapse largely rests on the competence of his economic advisors.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=12thMan;438646]Really? McCain seems best suited for that? To a great extent the candidates have to show their hand in terms of how they plan to deal with the current economic woes. [B]That's all the voters really have to go; the candidate's promises.[/B] And while they are all privy to top secret information, if what they've revealed thus far is an indicator of how they plan to deal with the economy, I would simply beg to differ on your statement about John McCain.[/quote]Inherith lies the problem. Campaign promises are made on a hypothetical scale based on a lack of information (because as Senators, they aren't necessarily privy to the Top Secret level of information, stuff that could ultimately make or break any plan), and therefore are really not meant to be kept. I don't believe them to be an indicator of anything, and if they are, I would probably vote against all those plans.

The problem is that the voters aren't electing a set of issues, they are electing a man (or woman).

My personal intuition believes that McCain's experience and relatively bipartisan voting record gives him an advantage over the other two, but again, it's really just my intuition...and I of course have no facts to defend that with.

I think you did hit the problem on the head, is that, [U]these Campaign Promises are all the voters have to work with when deciding who to align with, and that really isn't worth anything at all.[/U] Ultimately, when voting, we are pledging semi-blind alligence to our candidate. I know some Bush voters feel spurned by their allegiance to him, as is reflected in his approval rating, but that doesn't mean they voted stupid, it means they picked what seemed like the better candidate at the time--which in no way assures a positive result.

You can look at their voting record, but once a person is elected to the presidency, it seems like a lot of their beliefs change. Bush, for example, certainly adopted policies that were more to the left of traditional conservative once in office, and he beat McCain in the 2000 primaries because he ran as the more conservative of the two candidates.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;438652]I'd say McCain's ability to stave off economic collapse largely rests on the competence of his economic advisors.[/quote]This is certainly true, and I believe it's an underpublicized point. However, I would argue it's the same way for either of the Democratic Candidates also.

Side point: I do think a lot of people though a lumping McCain in with the far right who prefer to be blissfully ignorant to environmental issues. McCain has drawn the ire of these people [I]because [/I]he understands those issues as well as anyone, and disagrees with them on politics of the sort.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=GTripp0012;438653]Inherith lies the problem. Campaign promises are made on a hypothetical scale based on a lack of information (because as Senators, they aren't necessarily privy to the Top Secret level of information, stuff that could ultimately make or break any plan), and therefore are really not meant to be kept. I don't believe them to be an indicator of anything, and if they are, I would probably vote against all those plans.

The problem is that the voters aren't electing a set of issues, they are electing a man (or woman).

My personal intuition believes that McCain's experience and relatively bipartisan voting record gives him an advantage over the other two, but again, it's really just my intuition...and I of course have no facts to defend that with.

I think you did hit the problem on the head, is that, [U]these Campaign Promises are all the voters have to work with when deciding who to align with, and that really isn't worth anything at all.[/U] Ultimately, when voting, we are pledging semi-blind alligence to our candidate. I know some Bush voters feel spurned by their allegiance to him, as is reflected in his approval rating, but that doesn't mean they voted stupid, it means they picked what seemed like the better candidate at the time--which in no way assures a positive result.

You can look at their voting record, but once a person is elected to the presidency, it seems like a lot of their beliefs change. Bush, for example, certainly adopted policies that were more to the left of traditional conservative once in office, and he beat McCain in the 2000 primaries because he ran as the more conservative of the two candidates.[/quote]

Well, honestly I don't know what level of Top Secret information one needs or is even privy to regarding domestic economic issues. It's no secret we're teetering on the brink of an economic recession. It's no secret that foreclosures are as high as they've been in recent years. Every time the Fed cuts rates, it chips away at the value of our beloved dollar. There's no end in sight to the current credit crisis, and prices of every day needs are rising. It's no secret that umployment just hit a 5 year high. This is very common information.

I'll take it a step further, in terms of secret information, all three candidates sit on various Senate Committees, which no doubt provide them great insight as to what's ailing the nation, but at the end of the day it's what they do with that available information is what will make the the difference. I would say the only area where "secret information" is THAT valuable is shaping foreign policy, and I'm not sure that's what we're talking about here.

In terms of McCain's voting record, again I beg to slighly differ. I don't think people will look at his voting record as that much of an indicator. Simply because he's changed his tone on a few issues since he ran the first time. Since then, many, even in his own party have aligned him with Bush's policies. But as it was mentioned in another thread (I forgot by whom), McCain has been in the Senate for so long, it's really unfair to nit-pick his voting record and come to any reasonble concuclusion about whether he's a viable candidate or not. Often times, in politics, your opponents use your voting record against you as a tool to make you look bad rather than what you are actually good at.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[QUOTE=djnemo65;438516]Yeah i've heard stuff like that and I am really in no position to judge when oil production will peak. I just think it makes more sense to start preparing for it now, if for no other reason then to put America in a position to technologically dominate the next century the way it did the last.[/QUOTE]

That is the kind of forward-thinking/leadership this country needs!!! I can't see fossil fuels being the "energy of the future" either and totally wish we could get ahead of the curve in the energy sector.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=12thMan;438600]I don't know if it's a Democratic thing...or even a Republican for that matter. But I'll say for one, and take this how you want, but our occupation in Iraq has most definitely played a role in the price of oil and it's trickle down affect on gas prices.[/quote]

I wasn't saying it was either, but with all of the "Rich Oil-thirsty Republicans" and "War for Oil" statements that fly around...thought it would be fun to point that out. :D

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

Hillary's energy seems to be very negative. I can't get a good read on BHO's energy because the dark side of the force is casting a shroud over everything.

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=70Chip;439284]Hillary's energy seems to be very negative. I can't get a good read on BHO's energy because the dark side of the force is casting a shroud over everything.[/quote]

I noticed you had posted something and thought, okay, here come's a deep one. Nice job:)

Re: Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy
 

[quote=12thMan;439294]I noticed you had posted something and thought, okay, here come's a deep one. Nice job:)[/quote]

Deep like Thomas Carlyle deep? Or deep as in "Watch your step!"?