Re: F... gas prices
 

and why we are on the subject, is finding oil in Alaska a sure thing? because if it is, its about time to make that move. im for protecting whats beautiful, and right about America. but this very quickly could become a national crisis, if something isn't done. oil is driving up the price of everything. i really feel for the truckers

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;448900]I don't that is entirely correct. The U.S. government has a great deal of influence over middle eastern countries and, by extension, OPEC. For example, many middle eastern countries rely on the U.S. to supply their militaries with arms. Guess who gets to approve or reject the sale of those weapons? The United States Congress. Moreover, if the U.S. ever manages to create a semi-stable security environment in Iraq, the U.S. could pressure the Iraqis to flip the bird to OPEC and start pumping out boatloads of oil. Obviously our influence over OPEC's member countries wasn't great enough to convince them to up their oil quotas, but I think it's inaccurate to say that we don't have any negotiating power.[/quote]

OK point taken, change it from "none" to "very little".

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=dmek25;448906]and why we are on the subject, is finding oil in Alaska a sure thing? because if it is, its about time to make that move. im for protecting whats beautiful, and right about America. but this very quickly could become a national crisis, if something isn't done. oil is driving up the price of everything. i really feel for the truckers[/quote]

Further embarassment...

It's a well-known fact that Alaska is home to a huge oil reserve, one that would nearly double our supply of domestic oil if we tapped into it.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=Schneed10;448908][B]Further embarassment...[/B]

It's a well-known fact that Alaska is home to a huge oil reserve, one that would nearly double our supply of domestic oil if we tapped into it.[/quote]
quit being a dick. i ask a question, because i didnt know. sorry for being so mis- informed

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=70Chip;448898]I doubt that increased demand is soley to blame for oil quadrupling in price. I think speculation is driving the increase as well. Hedge fund managers are now into oil big time. Even individuals are getting in for the ride. A friend of mine justified it by saying he had to recoup the losses he was experiencing at the pump. Money chases money. As more and more people are seeing the possibility of making money in commodities rather than stocks and bonds, the price only increases. Imagine if a bunch of moneyed investors suddenly all decided that baseball cards were a sure thing. Their sudden entry into the market would necessarily force the price of a Clemente rookie card through the roof. The question is, is this a permanent thing or at some point will gravity have it's affect. We need a crash badly. As quickly as the money went in, it will run for the exits if the price falls fast enough.

I think there are a few simple steps that could be taken to at least discourage new money from forcing up the price any further. The Democrats may serve useful here as their penchant for regulation would surely be helpful. Maria Cantwell of Washington is making this a pet issue. She's kind of a butter face but she has nice hair and seems relatively bright. It would be worth a try at any rate.[/QUOTE]

Just recently read an article on the "oil bubble" comparing it to the "housing bubble". While there is speculation driving the price, there is an underlying increased demand from developing countries (particurlarly, as Schneed has repeatedly pointed out, India and China). Thus, while there may be some easing in the future as the market cools down, it is unlikely to "burst".

IMO, it appears to be a confluence of events and market forces that is making a resource, that had been vastly underpriced, reach its market price. It will probably overshoot and then ease back (my guess it ends up around 4.50). Prior to this latest spike, how many people (other than those who drove for a living) actually budgeted their weekly gas expenses? Doesn't that suggest to you that it may have been a bit underpriced?

The price now is beginning effect people and changing their habits - to me, that is an indication that it is reaching a price close to its free market level.

[BTW - Just to indicate how the gas prices are affecting us - now, b/c of our driving needs for commutes and such, we have actually added "gas" as a separate line item in our budget where previously it was part of discretionary spending.]

Re: F... gas prices
 

Expensive gas is here, more expensive gas in the future as that is the result of supply and demand.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=dmek25;448909]quit being a dick. i ask a question, because i didnt know. sorry for being so mis- informed[/quote]

Dude I was just attacking the post, not you. Now you're calling names.

You called my first post the stupidest thing posted on this site. There was no problem with that.

Maybe I should PM the mods and whine about it to have you warned.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=dmek25;448905]schneed, i didnt mean to attack you personally. but we definitely look at this differently. you think its fine for gas to be $5.00- $6.00, or whatever, a gallon so the companies can maintain record profits. [B]we disagree on that. we disagree on how they go about it. we definitely disagree on the governments place in this problem. you see this as capitalism at is finest. i see this as raping the American public[/B]. the government can control anything it wants to. why not oil? because of the Saudis influence with the American government. and yes, i understand who O.P.E.C is. and i also understand the military's involvement in the middle east. the little bit of stability they have comes from an American influence/ presence. we Americans are always more then willing to aid any country that asks. how about someone scratching our backs every once in a while?[/quote]

The bolded part seems to say something along the lines of "we just disagree."

That's great, but you still haven't posted one single argument that holds any water.

Can I ask you something? Why is it wrong for companies like Exxon to make boatloads of money?

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;448908]Further embarassment...

It's a well-known fact that Alaska is home to a huge oil reserve, one that would nearly double our supply of domestic oil if we tapped into it.[/QUOTE]

The estimates are that there are between 5-16 billion barrels in ANWR

[url=http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm]Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 1002 Area, Petroleum Assessment, 1998, Including Economic Analysis[/url] (it's an old survey, 1996 so with newer methods more recoverable oil may exist).

By using this resource in a measured way, the US could reduce its dependence on [I]foreign[/I] oil by 5-10% for the next 12-15 years.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;448057]Overnight the price of gas at my local station went from $3.76 to $3.85

WTF![/QUOTE]

Yesterday, gas prices rose .10 [I]while I was at work[/I]. I feel like I should top off every morning (I have 70 mile round trip commute) b/c the longer I wait to fill up, the more the prices go up.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;448913]Can I ask you something? Why is it wrong for companies like Exxon to make boatloads of money?[/QUOTE]

B/c they're making at my expense [j/k].

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;448916]B/c they're making at my expense [j/k].[/quote]

Even though you're joking, that's pretty much the crux of their argument.

Why do middle class citizens (and poor and affluent citizens for that matter) have more right to pay low gas prices than Exxon does to charge higher ones?

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;448900]I don't that is entirely correct. The U.S. government has a great deal of influence over middle eastern countries and, by extension, OPEC. For example, many middle eastern countries rely on the U.S. to supply their militaries with arms. Guess who gets to approve or reject the sale of those weapons? The United States Congress. Moreover, if the U.S. ever manages to create a semi-stable security environment in Iraq, the U.S. could pressure the Iraqis to flip the bird to OPEC and start pumping out boatloads of oil. Obviously our influence over OPEC's member countries wasn't great enough to convince them to up their oil quotas, but I think it's inaccurate to say that we don't have any negotiating power.[/QUOTE]

All true and all examples of things that would bring even greater hatred of America in the middle east unfortunately. Our power there is directly offset by their unreasonableness(word?) towards our actons and their willingness to do awful things when we piss them off.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;448917]Even though you're joking, that's pretty much the crux of their argument.

Why do middle class citizens (and poor and affluent citizens for that matter) have more right to pay low gas prices than Exxon does to charge higher ones?[/QUOTE]

Well, I think oil is one of those resources where gov. may have some legitimate involvement (not just in taxing its use). To the extent there are monopolistic tendencies or market collusion among the companies, these should be regulated.

I haven't seen any allegations of collusion among oil companies other than "they are charging more, therefore they must be colluding".

In order to work, the free market does require everyone to "play fair", and govt. can legitimately investigate the oil companies actions to determine if they are indeed doing so. I agree, however, that the mere fact that they are making profits does not, in and of itself, mean they are cheating the system. (In a fight, does the fact I won mean I started it?)

While I haven't fully thought through this next point, given the nature of the US economy, some level of govt oversight of oil/gas prices may be appropriate. The US economy, given the size of the country, is reliant on the transport of items over long distances. Radical increases in oil/prices effect markets well beyond oil/gas as an individual commodity. In this way, and even though sold through multiple companies, oil seems to me to have similar market characteristics of a monopoly (i.e. electric, phone and BGE). In such situations, even if no collusion is shown, govt has a role in ensuring that the pricing and profit levels are "fair". (I guess, however, that if Exxon attempted set its price way over market, then everyone would buy from one of the other providers - That appears to me to be the crux of the question - is there enough competition between oil providers to ensure that the price is a true market price).

Also, I think 70Chips point of regulating speculation in the oil/gas market is appropriate. Again, given the effect that increases in oil prices have on other markets, it seems to me speculation in the oil market should be pretty much prohibited. Removing specualation from the picture may ease the growth, hopefully create a more straight forward "supply/demand" equation, and limit the effect of radical price increases on other markets.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=Schneed10;448913]The bolded part seems to say something along the lines of "we just disagree."

That's great, but you still haven't posted one single argument that holds any water.

Can I ask you something? [B]Why is it wrong for companies like Exxon to[/B] [B]make boatloads of money[/B]?[/quote]
if its fair, then why does the government regulate the price of milk, or cigarettes? when is enough, enough?

Re: F... gas prices
 

the given in this whole thing is, we need gas. this pretty much constitutes a monopoly. until there are other choices, this should be semi controlled/ watched by the government. this is a big difference between the Dem's and the G.O.P the republicans think that big business is above playing fair. while the Dem's think there is a point where you have enough of a profit margin

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=dmek25;448924]the given in this whole thing is, we need gas. this pretty much constitutes a monopoly[/QUOTE]

No. By definition, the universal need for a product does not create a monoply. It is the control of the production [I]by a single source[/I] that creates the monopoly. If multiple oil companies are in competition with one another, and lacking collusion, then oil will find its market value.

[QUOTE=dmek25;448924]until there are other choices, this should be semi controlled/ watched by the government. [/QUOTE]

They are regulated out the wazoo which is one of the reasons gas prices are high.

[QUOTE=dmek25;448924]this is a big difference between the Dem's and the G.O.P the republicans think that big business is above playing fair. while the Dem's think there is a point where you have enough of a profit margin[/QUOTE]

That's a pretty sweeping indictment and one that goes to the fundamental aspects of both the free market system and of our form of government. I also think it is pretty naive. "Playing fair", in my mind, means don't collude - compete. It does not mean - "Gosh jeepers don't make too much money."

You don't like how much the oil companies make? Buy a prius - get a job closer to your home, work with one car, ride mass transit. When those options are not practically available, work towards having the government create incentives to create alternative energy choices, increase mass transit, etc. Telling oil companies to stop profiting avoids [I]your[/I] responsibility in the market system and in the democratic republican (i.e. government by popularly elected officials) form of government we have.

When you start injecting socialist controls into the free market based solely on the concept that some group is profiting too much from the system, you inject artificial elements into that system which are fundamentally opposed to and work against the system's basic structure, i.e. incentive to maximize your own gain - whether you be buyer or seller. In doing so, you destroy not just the incentive for oil companies to compete with one another, you also destroy the incentive for alternative energy forms to compete with oil.

Oversight is fine, but destruction of incentive by artificially capping profits is not the answer. In our government/economic system, you, I and others have the power, if we mobilize, to almost completely destroy the oil industry profits in the US economy by both decreasing demand and by finding alternatives to the internal combustion engine. But it OUR responsibility to do so.

Re: F... gas prices
 

Looks like I won't be driving to work much longer. My employer just jacked our monthly parking fee to $175. When you add gas into the mix that's almost $275 a month just to drive to and from work. Compare that to a subsidized $50 flex bus pass for an entire year taking the bus is no brainer.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=saden1;448934]Looks like I won't be driving to work much longer. My employer just jacked our monthly parking fee to $175. When you add gas into the mix that's almost $275 a month just to drive to and from work. Compare that to a subsidized $50 flex bus pass for an entire year taking the bus is no brainer.[/QUOTE]

Less oil needed. JoeRedskins argument in action. If we all took the bus more we'd be better off in so many ways in our country.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;448927]No. By definition, the universal need for a product does not create a monoply. It is the control of the production [I]by a single source[/I] that creates the monopoly. If multiple oil companies are in competition with one another, and lacking collusion, then oil will find its market value.



They are regulated out the wazoo which is one of the reasons gas prices are high.



That's a pretty sweeping indictment and one that goes to the fundamental aspects of both the free market system and of our form of government. I also think it is pretty naive. "Playing fair", in my mind, means don't collude - compete. It does not mean - "Gosh jeepers don't make too much money."

You don't like how much the oil companies make? Buy a prius - get a job closer to your home, work with one car, ride mass transit. When those options are not practically available, work towards having the government create incentives to create alternative energy choices, increase mass transit, etc. Telling oil companies to stop profiting avoids [I]your[/I] responsibility in the market system and in the democratic republican (i.e. government by popularly elected officials) form of government we have.

When you start injecting socialist controls into the free market based solely on the concept that some group is profiting too much from the system, you inject artificial elements into that system which are fundamentally opposed to and work against the system's basic structure, i.e. incentive to maximize your own gain - whether you be buyer or seller. In doing so, you destroy not just the incentive for oil companies to compete with one another, you also destroy the incentive for alternative energy forms to compete with oil.

Oversight is fine, but destruction of incentive by artificially capping profits is not the answer. In our government/economic system, you, I and others have the power, if we mobilize, to almost completely destroy the oil industry profits in the US economy by both decreasing demand and by finding alternatives to the internal combustion engine. But it OUR responsibility to do so.[/quote]

The energy market is free market? That's news to me. These guys have very deep pockets and will crush anyone that attempts to subvert their flow of income. If the government won't step in no one can because they have too many people in their pockets and any new startup/ventures will get crushed ala Microsoft style (bought and shelved, blacklisted, undercut, or pounded into nebulous existence). Anyone that really thinks the "free market" can solve our problems is either naive or utterly stupid.

As for mass transit being an alternative, it could but only if the government actually invested in a decent transit infrastructure. As it stands, it takes way too long to catch a bus and we don't have any trains to speak off. If we actually invested money like the Europeans have we'll be in a good shape. Alas, their is no interest from our political leaders to do anything meaningful, and why should they, their money comes from lobbyists whose sole job is to fuck you over.

Re: F... gas prices
 

Vive le Revolution!

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;448910]Just recently read an article on the "oil bubble" comparing it to the "housing bubble". While there is speculation driving the price, there is an underlying increased demand from developing countries (particurlarly, as Schneed has repeatedly pointed out, India and China). Thus, while there may be some easing in the future as the market cools down, it is unlikely to "burst".

IMO, it appears to be a confluence of events and market forces that is making a resource, that had been vastly underpriced, reach its market price. It will probably overshoot and then ease back (my guess it ends up around 4.50). Prior to this latest spike, how many people (other than those who drove for a living) actually budgeted their weekly gas expenses? Doesn't that suggest to you that it may have been a bit underpriced?

The price now is beginning effect people and changing their habits - to me, that is an indication that it is reaching a price close to its free market level.

[BTW - Just to indicate how the gas prices are affecting us - now, b/c of our driving needs for commutes and such, we have actually added "gas" as a separate line item in our budget where previously it was part of discretionary spending.][/quote]

I think it was definitely underpriced in the 90s when it was under a dollar. When you figure in Fed and State taxes, it was practically free. (I think oil was around $13 a barrel.) So, that was never going to last, but I don't think demand has increased proprtionately with the increase in price. I think there are other factors at work.

Wether or not to extract oil from ANWR has reminded me of a joke that the late Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama told on Ted Kennedy some while ago. Senator Kennedy was photographed on his boat with some young women and Heflin remarked, "I guess Senator Kennedy has changed his position on offshore drilling." Hilarious. Get well soon Ted. We want you live to be at least 100.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=70Chip;448961][B]I think it was definitely underpriced in the 90s when it was under a dollar.[/B] When you figure in Fed and State taxes, it was practically free. (I think oil was around $13 a barrel.) So, that was never going to last, but I don't think demand has increased proprtionately with the increase in price. I think there are other factors at work.[/quote]

Did you just make the case for oil being overpriced or that it's [URL="http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport/videos.jhtml?videoId=167611&rsspartner=rssFeedfetcherGoogle"]practically free and possibly profitless[/URL]?

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;448914]The estimates are that there are between 5-16 billion barrels in ANWR

[URL="http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm"]Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, 1002 Area, Petroleum Assessment, 1998, Including Economic Analysis[/URL] (it's an old survey, 1996 so with newer methods more recoverable oil may exist).

By using this resource in a measured way, the US could reduce its dependence on [I]foreign[/I] oil by 5-10% for the next 12-15 years.[/quote]

It would also IMMEDIATELY begin to lower prices because speaculators price the oil on the market by looking into the future. By opening up ANWR and/or any of our other oil deposits, it would help clear up some of the uncertainty about our future oil. Then, when we actually begun using it, a more substantial price drop.

But yet again, Congress (mostly Democrats) said no.

Re: F... gas prices
 

I really hope this limits the amount of huge SUVs and trucks on the road. I've noticed that a) most people can't drive those vehicles. and b) I hate trying to see when someone has a car the size of a small yacht when they simply don't need that space.

On the other hand, I get 20 minutes of enjoyment every day watching the woman with the Suburban try to park it every evening. One day she'll even get it straight.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=dmek25;448905]schneed, i didnt mean to attack you personally. but we definitely look at this differently. you think its fine for gas to be $5.00- $6.00, or whatever, a gallon so the companies can maintain record profits. we disagree on that. we disagree on how they go about it. we definitely disagree on the governments place in this problem. you see this as capitalism at is finest. i see this as raping the American public. the government can control anything it wants to. why not oil? because of the Saudis influence with the American government. and yes, i understand who O.P.E.C is. and i also understand the military's involvement in the middle east. the little bit of stability they have comes from an American influence/ presence. we Americans are always more then willing to aid any country that asks. how about someone scratching our backs every once in a while?[/quote]


These "record profits" are only because usage is at an all-time high. Most big companies, like Coca Cola, operate at a 20% profit. Oil companies operate at a 2-7% profit rate. The various levels of Government make 10 times the profit as oil companies in the form of taxes, which they have done zero work to earn. Also, environmental restrictions and regulations force prices and production costs WAY up. The oil companies are NOT the enemy OR the reason for prices being high and moving even higher. The government and Congress has the majority of the guilt and yet, we still listen to them when they want to investigate and tax oil companies into oblivion to please the uninformed sector of the population. Oil companies are ALREADY operating on substandard profit rates and if they're squeezed any more, they will have to begin offering lower quality fuels, forcing us to use more.

Yes, total profits may be records, but you have to look at their profit % which is nothing compared to the Governments'. Also, inflation must be figured into it.

Re: F... gas prices
 

I'm pretty "pro-environment," but I have to wonder what harm would it do to drill in Alaska. Supposing we drilled in some remote forest and there was a spill, would it be that hard to clean up? I would think that a oil spill on land would be pretty contained.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=dmek25;448905]schneed, i didnt mean to attack you personally. but we definitely look at this differently. you think its fine for gas to be $5.00- $6.00, or whatever, a gallon so the companies can maintain record profits. we disagree on that. we disagree on how they go about it. we definitely disagree on the governments place in this problem. you see this as capitalism at is finest. i see this as raping the American public. the government can control anything it wants to. why not oil? because of the Saudis influence with the American government. and yes, i understand who O.P.E.C is. and i also understand the military's involvement in the middle east. the little bit of stability they have comes from an American influence/ presence. we Americans are always more then willing to aid any country that asks. how about someone scratching our backs every once in a while?[/quote]
So are you saying that the Saudis have influence over the entire American goverment? The just one party in general and which party? How about their influence over the Clinton, Obama, or McCain?

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;449046]I'm pretty "pro-environment," but I have to wonder what harm would it do to drill in Alaska. Supposing we drilled in some remote forest and there was a spill, would it be that hard to clean up? I would think that a oil spill on land would be pretty contained.[/quote]

After you sucked Alaska dry what's the game plan? If people referred to drilling ANWR as a short term solution I'd have less of a problem but people act like it's a viable solution which solves the fundamental problem. What happens 10-15 years from now? Drilling ANWR is a hack just like the gas tax relief being flaunted.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=firstdown;449048]So are you saying that the Saudis have influence over the entire American goverment? The just one party in general and which party? How about their influence over the Clinton, Obama, or McCain?[/quote]

The Saudis have America by the balls, period. Democrats, republicans, it doesn't matter. That's why the president was begging them to increase their production and reduce prices last week.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;449046]I'm pretty "pro-environment," but I have to wonder what harm would it do to drill in Alaska. Supposing we drilled in some remote forest and there was a spill, would it be that hard to clean up? I would think that a oil spill on land would be pretty contained.[/quote]
I'm pretty sure that there are no forests where they want to drill. I think it is too far north for there to be any trees. I do know that drilling for oil has become a lot more environmentally friendly and that spills are very rare. Also, where they drill for oil will only take up 2000 acres out of ANWR's total area of 1.5 million acres, so it won't really have that big of an affect on the area.
[FONT=Arial][QUOTE]
[FONT=Arial]Only 8% of ANWR Would Be Considered for Exploration Only the 1.5 million acre or 8% on the northern coast of ANWR is being considered for development. The remaining 17.5 million acres or 92% of ANWR will remain permanently closed to any kind of development. If oil is discovered, less than 2000 acres of the over 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain would be affected. That¹s less than half of one percent of ANWR that would be affected by production activity.[/FONT]
[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/alaska-oil-anwar.html]Alaska Oil Anwar[/url][/FONT]

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=saden1;449054]After you sucked Alaska dry what's the game plan? If people referred to drilling ANWR as a short term solution I'd have less of a problem but people act like it's a viable solution which solves the fundamental problem. What happens 10-15 years from now? Drilling ANWR is a hack just like the gas tax relief being flaunted.[/quote]
Who ever said this was a long term solution? This is something that will help us NOW, which is what we need. The future plan is some kind of alternative energy, but right now, none of them are economically feasible. Right now we need more oil and the only way to do that is to drill for more.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=saden1;449054]After you sucked Alaska dry what's the game plan? If people referred to drilling ANWR as a short term solution I'd have less of a problem but people act like it's a viable solution which solves the fundamental problem. What happens 10-15 years from now? Drilling ANWR is a hack just like the gas tax relief being flaunted.[/QUOTE]

I think it is pretty evident that our oil addiction is a big problem. I also believe that drilling in Alaska isn't a cure-all. However, I think it's an option we should pursue, given that will buy us time to find more permanent solutions.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;449061]I think it is pretty evident that our oil addiction is a big problem. I also believe that drilling in Alaska isn't a cure-all. However, I think it's an option we should pursue, given that will buy us time to find more permanent solutions.[/quote]

Suppose ANWR is depleted, where is your emergency/strategic reserve going to come from?

Re: F... gas prices
 

Good luck safely towing a 30 foot long 10,000 lb trailer down the highway at the proper speed limit with anything but an SUV.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=saden1;449075]Suppose ANWR is depleted, where is your emergency/strategic reserve going to come from?[/QUOTE]

Good point. I guess we should forget drilling in ANWR because it will run it too.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=saden1;449075]Suppose ANWR is depleted, where is your emergency/strategic reserve going to come from?[/quote]
Drilling offshore in the Atlantic and the Pacific, the Bakken oil field in Montana and North Dakota, the 1.5 trillion barrels of oil shale under Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. The technology to extract the oil from the shale has improved greatly, so we can get that oil if we really need it.

What do you suggest we do about our huge oil problem? I know that you probably want to find alternative energy sources, but we need a lot more time to develop them. This will buy us that time.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[QUOTE=saden1;449075]Suppose ANWR is depleted, where is your emergency/strategic reserve going to come from?[/QUOTE]

Did you mean to imply that ANWR is our current emergency/strategic reserve? If so, ANWR is pretty crappy strategic reserve. I'm no oilman, but I think it's safe to say that it would take months or even years to set up rigs and pipelines for us to start getting oil from ANWR. So, if you're concerned about having an emergency/strategic reserve, don't you think we should get moving on drilling in ANWR asap? Currently, ANWR isn't a resource we can rely on to effectively deal with crises.

Re: F... gas prices
 

[quote=steveo395;449094]Drilling offshore in the Atlantic and the Pacific, the Bakken oil field in Montana and North Dakota, the 1.5 trillion barrels of oil shale under Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. The technology to extract the oil from the shale has improved greatly, so we can get that oil if we really need it. [/quote]

Umm, why aren't the energy companies drilling these supposed bountiful locations in the Atlantic and Pacific? And why aren't they investing in drilling these oil shells? Maybe the government should be helping them out? Get real, if it's clean and viable you bet your ass it would be happening right now. Oil companies are happy where they are and could [URL="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7403989.stm"]care less about the environment[/URL].

[quote=steveo395;449094] What do you suggest we do about our huge oil problem? I know that you probably want to find alternative energy sources, but we need a lot more time to develop them. This will buy us that time.[/quote]

Massive government funded, academia centered research into alternative fuel (water based solution in particular). Real investment in mass transit.

Re: F... gas prices
 

Exactly, if we just get more oil, it won't solve any issues. We'll continue to put big oil in charge of finding alternative energy sources (Hell, they might have an engine that runs on water, but they would never tell us -- they're looking for energy they can charge a high premium for.). Go to MIT, give them a boat ton of money, and we'll have ideas within years.