With regards to offshore and other drilling

[Stephen W. Stanczyk]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Obama's plan is to have you inflate your tires.

That's it.

No nuclear, no drilling, no coal.

It was in February 1962 we had the first American orbit the earth.

It was in September 1962 that President Kennedy called for a man on the moon in 10 years.

It was July 1969 we landed the first man on the moon. 7 years. 7 frigging years.

We need that same challenge to become energy independent. Big Oil won't help. They would be shooting themselves in the foot.

You don't need government to do it all. But they can make sure others will. Cafe standards? Make it 40 mpg for all gas/diesel burning vehicles in 10 years. Required or $25k fine per vehicle manufactured. Make it so expensive they have no choice. Screw the status quo. It needs a big shake up.

[William J. Decker]

Bob,

Solar and wind will never be enough to completely replace coal and oil. Simple energy calculations.

Sure, if we cover 1/2 the US with solar panels and the other 1/2 with windmills, we can do it, but then you have the problems of storage and transmission losses (what happens at night with no sun. Battery technology is getting MUCH better, but no where near where we need it.

As for fusion, it is very close to being perfected, but lacks the funding. Why throw money at something that we know will not work soon enough while starving development on a technology that is just about to bloom.

And why no nuclear. Dresen (local Illinois nuclear plant, and the oldest commercial plant in the U.S.) is close to 60 years old and still going strong. I worked there, as an intern, in 74. Zion worked fine, but was shut down by the bambiologists. Take down all the political obstacles and nukes would work fine.

If you want to believe in pie-in-the-sky rather than existing solutions, that kinda points to an agenda, does it not?

With regards to Pickins: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...WM4YWM0YWM4MmI=

If technology comes along, technologythat works and does not have to subsidised with my tax money (setting an inaccurate price), I am all for it.

BTW: Solar and wind technology have already been around since the 70s (and earlier). If they have not been perfected, or their energy output efficiency raised that much, what will change that?

[Kenneth Lott]

Originally Posted by ccurrins

Obama’s comprehensive New Energy for America plan will:

• Provide short-term relief to American families facing pain at the pump
• Help create five million new jobs by strategically investing $150 billion over the next ten years to catalyze private efforts to build a clean energy future. To replace the 50 million lost jobs, caused by his stupid plans!
• Within 10 years save more oil than we currently import from the Middle East and Venezuela combined. How, take away Congress's Limo's.
• Put 1 million Plug-In Hybrid cars -- cars that can get up to 150 miles per gallon -- on the road by 2015, cars that we will work to make sure are built here in America. Where is the electricity going to come from, to charge all of theses Batteries? Not to mention the energy to make them?
• Ensure 10 percent of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025. Wasn't this part of his other plan, under green jobs?
• Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050. Turn on your T.V. and look at the air in China, then tell me you really believe we can reduce the amount of greenhouse gases by 80 percent. I bet if we stopped driving and burned no more coal, we could not do this.

ENERGY PLAN OVERVIEW:



Provide Short-term Relief to American Families

• Enact a Windfall Profits Tax to Provide a $1,000 Emergency Energy Rebate to American Families. Chris, you send me $1000 and I will send you $1000
• Crack Down on Excessive Energy Speculation. We could do this somewhat, if careful.
• Swap Oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to Cut Prices. Who or what are we going to swap with? No way, leave it alone, it will have to be replaced later and will cost more, and guess who's going to pay for it! We the people...
Learn More...


Eliminate Our Need for Middle Eastern and Venezuelan Oil within 10 Years

• Increase Fuel Economy Standards.
• Get 1 Million Plug-In Hybrid Cars on the Road by 2015. This will happen anyway, without his help. But it is still a drop in the bucket.
• Create a New $7,000 Tax Credit for Purchasing Advanced Vehicles. Who pays for this? We the People...
• Establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard. We already have more than any other country, one of the reasons why we can't compete in manufacturing now and jobs are going out of the country.
• A “Use it or Lose It” Approach to Existing Oil and Gas Leases. They are waiting for the Enviromental studies and other political roadblocks to drill these now.
• Promote the Responsible Domestic Production of Oil and Natural Gas. Like maybe Offshore drilling?
Learn More...


Create Millions of New Green Jobs

• Ensure 10 percent of Our Electricity Comes from Renewable Sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025. More than that, if we use Nuclear.
• Deploy the Cheapest, Cleanest, Fastest Energy Source – Energy Efficiency. See above.
• Weatherize One Million Homes Annually. Already doing this and more.
• Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology. They are trying too, now.
• Prioritize the Construction of the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline. What, and jeapordize the mating ritual of the Yellow Polk-a-Dotted, Banded Wolf Snails!
Learn More...


Reduce our Greenhouse Gas Emissions 80 Percent by 2050

• Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050. Yeah, we cap, while China gets the trade!
• Make the U.S. a Leader on Climate Change. Oh Great! Now he wants to flaunt our stupidity!



Read the full version of Barack Obama's New Energy for America plan

[Kenneth Lott]

Solar and Wind are viable means to produce electricity, and the more it is developed and used, the more the price will come down.Those combined with Nuclear and Hydroelectric could easily handle all of our needs. I also wish there were more Motorcycles and Bicycles in use. Harley is hurting right now, but the companies that make smaller bikes and Scooters can't keep up with the demand. The argument by the Tree Huggers, about large windmills killing birds is ridiculous. The Dodo bird has been exinct for quite a while now, and any bird stupid enough to fly into one, needs to go the same way.

[Kenneth Lott]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Ya right.

Read This

T. Boone is counting on government subsidies.

Yeah, he is into the green plan alright! Green money!

[Peter C. Russell]

Well my personal solution is this. My oil company wanted $4600.00 up front for this heating season, since I have a full tank of oil and can burn wood I told them no thanks!!! I'll take my chances. I am also installing some electric baseboard heat to replace the propane stove I have in on section of my house. I live in a 175 year old farm house and can heat it solely on wood for about $1500.00. So I'm sending a message to my own oil company and hopefully many other people will too.

By the way, I'm with Will on this too, more Nuke plants are needed, this is not the only solution but one of many this country needs to adopt in the future.

[relliott]

Will
Sorry had to work.
At this point you are right that wind alone or solar alone may not be enough.
Nuclear fusion or fission for that matter are not the perfect answer either, unless you are into the high tech idea of shooting spent urainium into space with magnetic rails.
As stated before I think all of these ideas need to be used , investigated and researched , yet for some reason you Republicans all march in lockstep that drilling and Nuke are the only way.

It is like a horror movie .

Ok guys , wear your jammies , get a blank look on your face , start drooling ,walk into the street without bending your knees and repeat after me.

Brains.....Brains......oppp I mean drill.......dril.....drill...we love Shell, we love BP.....we love Citco......Brains is what we need .

[Michael Larson]

The trouble is Bob that the drilling and the Nuclear plants should have happened years ago. We would not be in the mess we are in now.

Now go read some history and find out why we didn't drill and build nuclear plants.

If you want someone to blame, at least find out who is the guilty party.

[ccurrins]

Chevron Data Shows Industry Lag in Producing New Oil from U.S. Sources


Lower Production Shows Failure of Investment, Not Lack of Oil, Says Watchdog

SANTA MONICA, Calif., Aug. 1 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Chevron Corp. reaped
another record quarterly profit of $6 billion dollars, despite producing less
oil than projected and losing money on its refining of oil into gasoline. The
results illustrate an industry with plenty of resources to produce more oil in
the U.S., but slow to spend the money to develop them, said Consumer Watchdog.

"The most striking thing about Chevron's report was its executives' webcast
discussion of its available new oil and its progress, or lack of it, in
producing that oil," said Judy Dugan, research director of the nonprofit,
nonpartisan Consumer Watchdog. "Its most immediate project is a Nigerian
oilfield expected to 'turn a handsome profit,' as one executive acknowledged,
while costlier projects in the Gulf of Mexico merited only vague predictions."


"These economic choices show the pointlessness of President Bush's demand that
currently off-limits coastal areas be handed on a platter to oil companies,
while known large discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico go undrilled," said Dugan.
"The 'drill now, drill everywhere' campaign is a hoax on Americans."

Chevron alone has four large areas being developed in the Gulf of Mexico, two
of which -- leases named Blind Faith and Tahiti -- are projected to produce
oil by the end of 2009. Two others, known as Jack and St. Malo, are years
behind schedule -- put off because of cost and the lack of drilling rigs,
according to a recent Bloomberg report. The fields are each likely to produce
at least several hundred millions of barrels of oil.
(See the Bloomberg report here)


"Chevron's laggard production of U.S.-based oil shows a company intent on
assuring the highest profit from top-quality Nigerian oil, while costlier U.S.
production takes a back seat," said Dugan. "Later, when Chevron's new Nigerian
production is hampered by political violence, it'll be another excuse for
traders to jack up the price of crude oil."

Chevron, like all the other major oil companies, also continued buying back
its own stock rather than putting the money into producing new oil. The stock
buybacks in this and the two previous quarters totaled more than $6 billion.

The company also revealed that its losses in the refining end of its business
were largely due to its own derivative trading in futures markets rather than
actual losses on producing fuel. Under pressure from questioning analysts,
executives sheepishly acknowledged that they were cutting back on such trades.


http://www.reuters.com/article/press...08+PRN20080801



The big boys do not want to drill in America. They want to continue making record profits and operate the same way they are now.

[relliott]

Originally Posted by mlarson

The trouble is Bob that the drilling and the Nuclear plants should have happened years ago. We would not be in the mess we are in now.

Now go read some history and find out why we didn't drill and build nuclear plants.

If you want someone to blame, at least find out who is the guilty party.

See what I mean as you can't stop talking about them as the only possible solution.

Please show me where on this forum you kept mentioning the need to drill before 2008.

You can"t because you never even bothered to think of it till the Republican overlords of Oil told you to.

[Michael Larson]

Bob, you're wrong again.

It is the most cost effective solution. Way ahead of wind and PV alternative energy solution.

I've been pushing for more drilling and more nuclear for over 5 years.

[ccurrins]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Bob, you're wrong again.

It is the most cost effective solution. Way ahead of wind and PV alternative energy solution.

I've been pushing for more drilling and more nuclear for over 5 years.

Chevron, like all the other major oil companies, also continued buying back
its own stock rather than putting the money into producing new oil.



You need to tell them.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by ccurrins

Chevron, like all the other major oil companies, also continued buying back
its own stock rather than putting the money into producing new oil.



You need to tell them.

So?
Happens all the time to numerous companies.

[ccurrins]

Originally Posted by mlarson

So?
Happens all the time to numerous companies.

So, it will not matter WHO gets elected President, the oil companies can, and will, do what ever the f##k they want.

[William J. Decker]

Bob,

You know me. And you know that I am not ideology driven.

It's not that I need and opinion and that I get it from the conservative "cabal". It's that I read, inform myself and make up my own mind, then I find out that the conservative position is in keeping with my own.

If you are looking for lock-step, ideology driven thinking, well, that is pretty much one of the definitions of socialism (giving up individual freedom and ideas for the good of the collective).

Funny how leftists continue to project their methodology, critically, onto conservatives.

In any case, here are some facts:

1) If President Clinton had not vetoed drilling in ANWAR (which was twice approved by Congress) we would not have the oil problem we have now (at least in part. The biggest reason seems to be the uncertainty of the supply from the Middle East. The U.S. only gets 13% or our oil from there, but oil is now such a commodity that a decrease in supply, anywhere, affects prices anywhere.)

2) If the "Bambiologists" had not scared (and lawsuited) the Nuclear industry (BTW, Bob, Nuclear plants have been around, commercially, since the 60s. Dresenn, down by Morris, IL, is the oldest one in the U.S., and the first commercial plant. Nukes use "fission", which is not new.) we would have many more nukes and get most of our electrical energy from them. That dang "China Syndrome" movie, by Ms. Fonda, scared the heck out of the public, even though it was full of lies and innacuracies. The U.S. Navy runs some 480, very high efficiency plants, high performance plants, much more complex than most commercial plants, and has had no problems. There have been nuke plans in Navy ships since the late 1950s, and on Carriers since the 60s.

3) I played around with photovoltaic panels in high school (early 70s) and since then, their efficiency has only grown by about 35%. To run a typical house, totally on solar cells, you would need to cover an area, with cells, about 3 times the total square footage of the house, use special 12 volt lighting and have storage batteries about the size of a hummer (for night). Such a system would add about $40,000 to the cost of the house, not to mention having to have two electrical systems (12 and 120 volt). We are talking almost 40 years of research and this is as far as they have come. I do not think it is logical to simply assume that some sort of technological break through will just magically happen.

4) One reallt promising technology, and a proven one, is tidal hydroelectric. It is in very extensive usage in Holland, Belgium and other countries with large estuaries. It has been tried in the U.S., but no one wants to invest in it (not a lot of payback) and the government has not subsidized it like the Europeans have (They are socialist, we are free market).

5) WInd, likewise, has been around for a long time. But, the amount of power produced by each turbine is low. There is also a large need for storage batteries. Lithium battery technology has improved, and will probably get better, but there is a cost involved.

6) It is very telling to see who is financially involved with the various schemes that are now being offered. Gore stands to make a LOT of money by selling carbon futures, if the cap and trade law passes (BTW: This law would mean that if you used more energy (carbon footprint) than the powers that be (leftist bambiologists) allow you, you would have to pay a big tax. Most HIs have trucks and drive them alot. Think about it). Pelosi stands to make a lot from Mr. Pickin's scheme. And, she is in a position to make natural gas powered cars, used by the federal government, manditory. Mr. Pickin's other company has the most natural gas to sell. BTW: Mr. Pickins is also working hard to get a law passed, in California, granting big government subsidies to wind and natural gas producers, like him.

7) Fusion power is not yet there, but could be if more money was put into it. The big efforts on fusion stopped when the dept of energy chose to go the laser fusion route, rather than the magnetic bottle (Tokomak) method. Laser fusion got all the funding (and it was, really, just a way of developing high energy laser technology outside of the Defense dept budget). The big problem with laser fusion is the conversion of the energy to electricity, which is not a problem with the tokomak method.

I would urge everyone to check out the history, and the technology, behind these arguements. I am sure that you will find it very interesting and telling. I find, every day, these politicians pronouncing, as fact, stuff that is just plain not true. And their lap dogs in the msm just, uncritically, eat it up and never bother to check it out, like reporters used to do.

Hope this helps;