Politics – President George Bush said on Saturday that a hike in oil output by Saudi Arabia wouldn't solve American energy problems. "It's not enough, it's something but it doesn't solve our problem."
If this dern thing posts.When I saw this on the news the first thought I had wasn't this a snub of the U.S. politically?
I think it more likely was a matter of: It's our [Saudi] oil, and we'll do as we please. They have a limited supply, and many Middle east nations will run out in the next couple decades.
I wouldn't increase it, either, if I were Saudi -- especially when we have vast, untapped reserves here in the U.S. We should expand domestic drilling, refinery operations and pipeline placement. That would help a great deal.
If we are making a push for alternative energy, which we are and need to do, makes no sense not to boost domestic drilling and refining in the interim. ANWR has billions of barrels of oil yet to be tapped. So does the Gulf of Mexico and the Great Lakes.
"I wouldn't increase it, either, if I were Saudi -- especially when we have vast, untapped reserves here in the U.S. We should expand domestic drilling, refinery operations and pipeline placement. That would help a great deal."
--But even if we started drilling today, we wouldn't see the results of our efforts for up to ten years. How will that help us now? And how will increased supply help if nothing else is changed (and we continue to give Big Oil billions in subsidies)? When have you known ExxonMobil to turn down a buck? Why would they? Also what about Americans who are struggling to pay their energy bills and put food on the table today? Is Bush hoping that if they simply dream about the lower fuel prices to come several years from now that this will make their kids' hunger pangs disappear?
The hike in output will not be enough. Democrats need to get out of the way of drilling for domestic oil, and building new refineries. There is as much oil under Colroado, and Utah as they have in Saudi Arabia. If you don't like $4. gas you will hate $7. a gallon gas. Just remember if we had been permitted to dig in the ANWR, and the U S west 10 years ago Saudis would be drinking their oil. Ask your candidates up for election in November how they feel about Domestic drilling. If they are against it, vote them out no matter what party they represent.
You're right, the hike in output WON'T be enough, so the answer isn't to go drilling for oil in wildlife refuges, the answer is to make SERIOUS effort toward alternative fuels. Peak oil is here, today! Prices aren't going down they're just beginning to go up. The post cheap oil world (that would be today) is going to have us all making hard decisions. (And yes, aniokly, one of those decisions will CERTAINLY involve increased use of public transportation, no matter WHAT that day is coming, and coming soon).If we want to avoid the nightmare that comes when oil REALLY runs out we'll start weaning ourselves off it right now, not casting about for every spare drop we can siphon out of the tundra or blaming the whole thing on Democrats or Republicans.
The vehicles of private citizens in the US use ~2.5 million barrels of oil out of the 20 million consumed on a daily basis here
"weaning ourselves off it right now" by concentrating on public transportation, increased CAFE standards etc represents a drop in the bucket. Transportation needs to be included in the mix but will never get us near the goal of energy independence
Congress in not addressing where the major areas of consumption occur - electricty generation being a large one
Congress has no plan! Corn/ethanol is a boondoggle
They were successful in stopping the transfer into the petroleum reserve and what happened - the commodities traders bid the price of oil to a new high.
The longer Congress waits and fiddles are the edges, the problem is only going to get worse.
Wait until electricity prices go up this summer and heating costs next winter
All you will see is more hand wringing by Congress and a failure to act in any meaningful way
I don't CARE about Congress, Congress responds to public opinion like a whipped dog and if the public decides we need to focus on alternate energy sources then Congress jumps through that hoop. In Florida a plant has been built that burns garbage to create electricity, why aren't there five zillion garbage burning electricity generating stations all across the country? Sen. Kennedy blocks the construction of wind turbines that would "ruin his view" which makes about as much sense as saying a sailboat on the water ruins the view, the sailboat IS the view! And we're ignoring wave generators and continue to ignore thermonuclear power and clean coal. We need to find alternative ways to make plastic and push for solar as well. A concentrated push for all of these things gets us off the Mid East teat and has the added positive effect of removing our national interests from an area of the world that is NOT stable and is only going to get worse when their wells start running dry.
You better care about Congress because they are afraid of offending any powerful group who funds their campaigns
You think they are going to listen to the average Joe Blow?? They pay attention to the people who contribute the big bucks
At election time they will promise the average voter the moon then forget the promises once re-elected and make one excuse after the other
They attempted to make it look like they were doing something - ethanol from corn and stop filling the petroleum reserve. They are absolutely clueless about what is going to work
Some states are moving ahead - through private enterprise NOT government action. The entrepreneurs in this country will save us - not government. Even an oil billionaire like T. Boone Pickens sees the light. He just spent 2 billion dollars to start a wind farm in Texas.
The problem with oil shale is the HUGE cost of extracting the oil. Even at the current price of crude it just does not make sense economically.
For the past 30 years, people have been doing dollar stock scams promoting schemes to get this oil. Do you wonder why they are called scams, or do you just "invest" in them, ani?
Democrats will try to tell you they feel your pain at the pump. They don't. They want you on public transportation
Why is it a Dem fault ? Oil was $28/Bbl in 2001 now it is almost 5 times higher, all under a Rep watch.
It thought that was a promise Pelosi made:
April 24, 2006
Pelosi: 'With Skyrocketing Gas Prices, Americans Can No Longer Afford Rubber Stamp Congress'
With skyrocketing gas prices, it is clear that the American people can no longer afford the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress and its failure to stand up to Republican big oil and gas company cronies. Americans this week are paying $2.91 a gallon on average for regular gasoline รข;; 33 cents higher than last month, and double the price than when President Bush first came to office.
"Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices by cracking down on price gouging, rolling back the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks and royalty relief given to big oil and gas companies, and increasing production of alternative fuels."
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/press/releases/Apri...
They did pass corn/ethanol but what happened - increased food prices
They addressed that in the Farm bill - increase food stamps and aid to food banks.
The amendments to increase domestic exploration and drilling - voted down
So how high do prices have to go before Pelosi puts her plan in action?
I guess till it also hurts the Reps in the senate and then they to will pass some bills that come their way instead of oppose, mind you shrub still has his veto right, and again this is all Rep
I believe that the farm bill and the legislation to stop filling the reserve was bipartisan and passed with veto proof majorities
Ain't bipartisanship grand!
Congress doesn't have the guts to do what needs to be done
They are clueless about how the economy really works or they wouldn't be making these stupid mistakes
All they are doing is trying to convince the voters they are "trying to do SOMETHING"
They can't figure out how to bring gas prices down BUT they have a plan for universal medical care. The boondoggle over oil prices and ethanol should give everyone pause about letting Congress even touch medical care!
Not a member? Sign-up today!
KobraJeedai
dondukdun
cptnkrk
Apinyas
MaryLynn_
shawnmartinez1960
pericles
daviant701973
starskii
permanentrich
morush
ccnatraining
Artofid
swajn
dailynewsus
click331207w
rabbitbebe
OhDear
kokoaloha
archetipo
slashup67
adrielh791966
complicious
pawfoots
Dex_84
Sandra_honestly
Iris-Iris
alamala
real-estate
bizexpert
2jojoyo
tanglang
Monte G
loupdargent
103)
Bush said he was "pleased" with a Saudi decision taken on May 10 to increase its oil production by 300,000 barrels per day in response to customers, but said that he was "also realistic" about what the Americans should do.
"Our problem in America gets solved when we aggressively go for domestic exploration. Our problem in America gets solved if we expand our refining capacity, promote nuclear energy and continue our strategy for the advancing of alternative energies as well as conservation," he said.
"One interesting thing about American politics these days is those who are screaming the loudest for increased production from Saudi Arabia are the very same people who are fighting the fiercest against domestic exploration, against the development of nuclear power and against expanding refining capacity."
Right on, right on. Finally!
Glad to hear him talking about the "elephant" in the room that no one seems to want to mention.
Whole-hearted and re-phrased agreement:
Aggressively capture our domestic resources, i.e. oil.
Build new refineries.
Replace old worn out power plants with nuclear energy.
Most importantly, aggressively promote Technology Transfer, especially in areas of hydrogen power, solar power, wind power, nano-tech batteries, etc.
Well said, Annie.
I could just dive right into your avatar! :D
Thanks Alpha!
Come on in, the water's fine, liquid trophies for the winners...
Cactus & Alpha, if you make that Nuclear Fusion, I'll concur 100% !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Done. :D
Unanimous!
...lemme find my SCUBA gear...
I think it's great the Saudi's have turned us down for additional oil...makes us think and provide for ourselves instead of relying on others. We have a lot of good thinkers in the US (but not in government)...we should be able to solve the problem ourselves.
Too bad the Saudi's didn't do this 15-20 years ago...
Short-term savings for individuals (within the next 2-5 years) can be achieved by: conservation;
Long-term results can be achieved by further exploratory missions for oil in our country, updating and building of new nuclear plants, and last, but certainly not least, more investment and use of solar and wind power.
I'd like to see the US use only solar, wind and nuclear power within the next 100 years. I know we can do it...cleaner, safer, and by then less expensive (hopefully).
I mostly agree with you. My one concern about nuclear power is the waste--how we keep track of it and how we dispose of it. The water quality where I live has gotten worse and worse under this administration (we don't dare drink from a tap anymore) and if we continue to elect people who are hostile to government, regulatory measures, and oversight in numbers as large as we have over the past 8 years, it's just a matter of time before we start seeing more Erin Brockovich-like cases throughout the country. Obviously it can be managed responsibly (because many of our allies manage their nuclear waste without being sloppy, lazy and stingy when it comes to safety) but with the current crop of Republicans still in office, I'm TERRIFIED of what is happening to our environment. They talk a good game but how many times have we caught them cutting corners over the years?
Meso...
I agree about the nuclear waste; keeping track of it, and more importantly, storing it some place isn't easy.
It's not that I like nuclear energy, but being a realist I know it's here to stay, at least until solar and wind take its place (centuries from now).
What scares me is a show I saw on National Geographic last month, which showed that if a nuclear power plant is left without being attended to for any length of time, say, longer than a week or so, it will overheat and spew out radiation for decades. If we were in a war, and several nuclear plants were hit, that's what would happen. That what scares me about nuclear power.
US, there are some very scary stories out there. Although I Iean way left, I actually support gun rights and I'm even cool with nuclear power. The punch line is that I don't support gun rights for AMERICANS and it's for the same reason I would hesitate to go dotting our country's landscape with nuke plants--Americans, in general, are too violent and too poorly educated to be trusted with guns.
Our military burns through 60% of the domestic oil we consume every year. There's the solution right there under our noses. Take some of that money we spend shooting and blowing up anything that moves and use it to give all our kids a free college education. But wait...If we had smarter Americans, we might find REAL solutions to our energy problems faster. Oh no...
I'd be very willing to do that. Unfortunately, Americans in general don't trust the rest of the world to keep its affairs in order. Good reason actually exists for this from sixty years ago, but we need to realize that the rest of the world has changed alot since then... Europe isn't going to start tearing out each other's throats and Japan isn't about ready to bomb us. Spending .5% of our GDP on military spending would build an army "big" enough and "bad" enough to scare off virtually any nation on the planet for years to come.
ITA with you on the military spending and I realize that there will always be conflicts between and among nations. I don't want or expect us to be "isolationists" but I think we would have fewer fights to referee in the world if we were less hypocritical and less calculating and more evenhanded in our approach to foreign policy. It often seems as if we do things (some of our work in Africa, for example) oblivious to how obviously we are behaving in our self-interest. People see that we always seem to have a goal of cashing in (oil usually) on our investment in the not-too-distant future and this, understandably, p!sses a lot of them off. Iraq shouldn't have happened but once we invaded, we deliberately did things to make it seem as if we were there to conquer which ultimately made things worse.
Bush boy needs to invite them to crawford again,hold hands and give them a few more kisses,maybe that will help.
Cold fusion!
I wish I could high-five you and all but the water in my area is polluted with lead and prescription medicine. ;-( Bush is a very simple-minded person and makes it all sound so easy and simple. When the blind, radiation-poisoned, two-fingered, three-legged babies start appearing (because Republicans wanted companies like Halliburton to manage and monitor America's nuclear power plants--the wunnerful fweeee market), robber baron Republicans will have long ago cashed in and gotten out of Dodge.
"Aggressively capture our domestic resources, i.e. oil."
--How precisely will that help? Did I miss the part where Bush told us he could order the oil companies to stop gouging us if we allow them to drill to their hearts' content?
MORE BUSH NONSENSE
The IDIOT Bush can't even distinguish between oil imports and refining capacity.
Refining capacity is limited by U.S. OIL COMPANIES. According to 2007 congressional testimony by oil executives, new refineries have not been build because it is believed that the demand for gasoline will decrease druing the next years.
Note how he places conservation
--below exploration (more profit for oil companies)
--below nuclear energy (profit for large companies that build the reactors)
--below alternative sources of energy (companies that mine coal)
The lame duck Bush truly has no shame.
Do you find it funny that the very same people who pretend to be earnest, thoughtful, and critical thinkers when it comes to electing political candidates one moment ("Duhhh...Obama speaks real purty but I wanna hear the specifics of his plans...blah blah...") are the ones who eagerly suck up every bit of crap Bush dishes out? Americans are having trouble feeding, clothing and educating their kids TODAY. None of the "solutions" he's mentioned (but provided no specifics on) will benefit Americans until YEARS into the future.
Ah a neg from the Bush fluff girl - how cute,
But, why not a rational reply or rebuttal to serious comments, Alpha?
Although you do fall short just when facts get in you way, I'll give you a nice hug in return.
I don't have to explain my negs; you just lost me after I saw yet another BLAME BUSH excuse. It's old and tired and I would actually like to hear something constructive like UnusualSuspest's post (he got a positive, btw), not something biased and partisan.
And I'll gladly hug you back. : )
Thanks, alpha!
The constructive aspect is the part about conservation, and I'll add to it:
--Rethinking car size
--Rethinking the increased cost of energy efficient auto designs
--Rethinking the distance between work and home
--Rethinking mass transit options
--Rethinking the Nation's rail system vs highway system for hauling goods
--Rethinking temperatures inside of buldings (why do executives need to wear coats in the summer?)
--Rethinking the cost of improving energy conservation in older as well as new buildings.
The slam against Bush's FALSE statement is entirely justified as substantiated in the comment.
Loved it until I got to the last line. You would have gotten a positive from me otherwise but since I'm feeling generous today I'll refrain from giving you a neg. ; )
"But, why not a rational reply or rebuttal to serious comments, Alpha?"
--My guess would be because she's a Bush cheerleader who probably doesn't have a thought in her head about our government that wasn't put there by some shout radio talk show host. Wait...That was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? Dohhhh... ;-x
"One interesting thing about American politics these days is those who are screaming the loudest for increased production from Saudi Arabia are the very same people who are fighting the fiercest against domestic exploration, against the development of nuclear power and against expanding refining capacity"
--Bush, you filthy, filthy creature...Why shouldn't we fight you fiercely when you've repeatedly demonstrated your contempt for our laws, and all things regulatory and you and Republican tax wh0res co-conspire with energy companies to write energy policy that serves their interests more than it does ours ?
Chimp, you can't stop the oil companies from charging us as much as they want now so exactly HOW will giving them greater access to our planet guarantee that they'll be any less greedy? You can't assure us that more drilling will definitely benefit consumers in the long run because you'd be lying and you know that even a toddler wouldn't believe you.
"Bush said he was "pleased" with a Saudi decision taken on May 10 to increase its oil production by 300,000 barrels per day in response to customers,"..
With bush boys lack of reasoning powers,if he says he is pleased then it can only be something that is beneficial to the Saudi's,his oil buddy's,or himself.It certainly won't be anything that helps the country.