"We can't drill our way out of this problem"...

[BamaGrad03 0]

This has become the kneejerk response from Democrats without any explanation as to why.

WHY can't we drill our way out of the problem? If the oil is there, and it will bridge the gap between $130 oil and being dependent upon alternative fuels, WHY can't we drill our way out?

There isn't any other alternative.

Realistically speaking we are at the mercy of the market for the next 20-30 years. So why not change the market structure in the short term so we all don't have to suffer and be poor until things can adapt?

THEY HAVE NO SOLID REASONING AS TO WHY WE SHOULDNT...except for "drilling isn't the answer"...I'm sick and tired of pandering to environmental lobbyist $$. And if you think FOR A SECOND oil companies want us to drill domestically, you're on drugs. They want the status quo. They make way more money with $130 oil than they do with $30 oil.

Saying "we don't need to drill our way out of this problem" is like saying "we don't need to shoot our way out of this gunfight."

[Tigermike 3,046]

Why? Do you realize how much Saudi $$$$$$$$$ is spread around in Washington D.C.? How much Saudi $$$$$$$$$ is spread around in both D & R accounts?

[BamaGrad03 0]

Sure is quiet around here when people are pressed for WHY we can't drill...

Any reason besides "my eco lobby funded democrat leaders told me to say that"...would be gladly embraced.

[AUHonors 0]

I mentioned this in another thread; no one replied.

1. Environment. I know many of you don't care. Many do. It will make a difference.

2. Short-term benefits? Any oil we see is a drop in the, er, barrel. We wouldn't see any oil for a minimum of five years. Fine, but that brings me to my next point....

3. I think we all agree that we should try to eliminate our dependence on oil altogether. There is no incentive for oil companies (who are already making plenty of profit) to invest in this drilling. There is incentive to invest in developments of alternative fuel sources. This is already visible in the sixty-eight million acres of taxpayer-funded land that the oil companies are currently not using.

[TexasTiger 12,992]

Sure is quiet around here when people are pressed for WHY we can't drill...

Any reason besides "my eco lobby funded democrat leaders told me to say that"...would be gladly embraced.

We can drill. We just can't drill our way out of this problem. Quit the knee jerk whining, get off your butt and do a little research-- educate yourself.

[BamaGrad03 0]

I mentioned this in another thread; no one replied.

1. Environment. I know many of you don't care. Many do. It will make a difference.

2. Short-term benefits? Any oil we see is a drop in the, er, barrel. We wouldn't see any oil for a minimum of five years. Fine, but that brings me to my next point....

3. I think we all agree that we should try to eliminate our dependence on oil altogether. There is no incentive for oil companies (who are already making plenty of profit) to invest in this drilling. There is incentive to invest in developments of alternative fuel sources. This is already visible in the sixty-eight million acres of taxpayer-funded land that the oil companies are currently not using.

Environment specifics please. And are you OK with the environment being destroyed in the middle east? Because I assure you they have far fewer eco-friendly mandates and procedures than we do/would for procuring oil.

2. Yes five years. And 10 years ago we were faced with the option and passed. Now look at us. What if 10 years from now gas is 20 bucks a gallon...30 bucks? Then what? Then it's too late. Then you've OK'd all the world major economies to be shoved back into the dark ages as pretty much everyone's current way of life grinds to a screeching hault. No more vacations, no more travel. Half the worlds business are gone.

But hey you MAY have saved a whale or two. Then again, we aren't even sure there would be a massive environmental fallout.

3. Absolutely I think we should go after alternatives. Without a doubt. But the people who think that we are gonna just float along at $4 gas for the next 20 years while we figure it out, are sorely mistaken. Oil companies, and oil speculators will keep pushing the price until it breaks our backs. And then it's too late.

What do we do in the meantime? Who says we can't do both?

We can drill. We just can't drill our way out of this problem. Quit the knee jerk whining, get off your butt and do a little research-- educate yourself.

So you're going on record as saying there is no oil off the coast, or in the gulf, and no oil in the rockies?...no oil in Alaska?

Here's a side question I would love for you all to answer...

What if gas was $20 a gallon. What if it cost you $300/week to fill up your car (assuming one tank a week)...then what do we do? Because it's going to also triple your grocery bill. And it will triple your power bill. So now you're spending...what $4000 a month on essentials?

THEN can we talk about drilling? Why does EVERYONE have to be punished just because you guys believe in the global warming MYTH?

[Tigermike 3,046]

Sure is quiet around here when people are pressed for WHY we can't drill...

Any reason besides "my eco lobby funded democrat leaders told me to say that"...would be gladly embraced.

We can drill. We just can't drill our way out of this problem. Quit the knee jerk whining, get off your butt and do a little research-- educate yourself.

Then I will ask you the same question I asked Obama Boy. Why do you think Obama and the House leadership think they can tax their way out of this?

[TexasTiger 12,992]

I mentioned this in another thread; no one replied.

1. Environment. I know many of you don't care. Many do. It will make a difference.

2. Short-term benefits? Any oil we see is a drop in the, er, barrel. We wouldn't see any oil for a minimum of five years. Fine, but that brings me to my next point....

3. I think we all agree that we should try to eliminate our dependence on oil altogether. There is no incentive for oil companies (who are already making plenty of profit) to invest in this drilling. There is incentive to invest in developments of alternative fuel sources. This is already visible in the sixty-eight million acres of taxpayer-funded land that the oil companies are currently not using.

Environment specifics please. And are you OK with the environment being destroyed in the middle east? Because I assure you they have far fewer eco-friendly mandates and procedures than we do/would for procuring oil.

2. Yes five years. And 10 years ago we were faced with the option and passed. Now look at us. What if 10 years from now gas is 20 bucks a gallon...30 bucks? Then what? Then it's too late. Then you've OK'd all the world major economies to be shoved back into the dark ages as pretty much everyone's current way of life grinds to a screeching hault. No more vacations, no more travel. Half the worlds business are gone.

But hey you MAY have saved a whale or two. Then again, we aren't even sure there would be a massive environmental fallout.

3. Absolutely I think we should go after alternatives. Without a doubt. But the people who think that we are gonna just float along at $4 gas for the next 20 years while we figure it out, are sorely mistaken. Oil companies, and oil speculators will keep pushing the price until it breaks our backs. And then it's too late.

What do we do in the meantime? Who says we can't do both?

We can drill. We just can't drill our way out of this problem. Quit the knee jerk whining, get off your butt and do a little research-- educate yourself.

So you're going on record as saying there is no oil off the coast, or in the gulf, and no oil in the rockies?...no oil in Alaska?

Here's a side question I would love for you all to answer...

What if gas was $20 a gallon. What if it cost you $300/week to fill up your car (assuming one tank a week)...then what do we do? Because it's going to also triple your grocery bill. And it will triple your power bill. So now you're spending...what $4000 a month on essentials?

THEN can we talk about drilling? Why does EVERYONE have to be punished just because you guys believe in the global warming MYTH?

You can't think. You won't stop long enough to allow it. Just the same old knee jerk crap. Why do you think oil prices went so high so fast?

And BTW, your boy McCain talks a lot more about global warming than I do. Not my issue. Check the forum, since I know you have no memory.

[MDM4AU 336]

Short-term benefits? Any oil we see is a drop in the, er, barrel. We wouldn't see any oil for a minimum of five years.

The Government estimates that the outer continental shelf has 76 billion barrels of oil in it that are recoverable and that's with today's technology. 76 billion barrels is enough to replace every single barrel of oil that we import from everywhere outside of North America for the next 34 years at our current pace.

I'm not one that thinks we can drill our way out of the problem but we can absolutely help ourselves with our own resources until adequate alternatives are established and get us off of Middle East oil where they have us, er, over a barrel.

[RunInRed 16,454]

Is it even worth responding..what the hell...I'll play along...and defend my position of reducing demand vs. your position of increasing supply.

1) Adding 1 (or even 5) million barrels of oil per day (from Alaska or anywhere else) won't do much of anything to the price/demand curve when 86 million barrels of oil are used worldwide each day

2) Just because oil is gathered in Alaska or anywhere else doesn't mean it will be priced less than oil gathered in Saudi Arabia. New oil will hit the world market at the going rate, like any other commodity.

3) There is no shortage of supply right now. People have all the gasoline they need; it is demand that is driving the increase in price.

4) The cost of oil will never decline, no matter how large the supply, as long as the demand for it keeps increasing exponentially. Simple math tells us that reducing the current growth rate of consumption by half will be more effective than doubling the supply of oil.

Of course, as long as consumption rates continue to grow we will never climb out of this rut. The answer to our oil problem, therefore, is not to find more oil; it is a poor short-term solution and absolutely doomed to failure in the long run. The answer to our oil problem is to stop using so much oil.

Or we could just drill, drill, drill ,drill...or something like that.

[RunInRed 16,454]

One other thing to consider...and I've raised these in several other threads (we need some serious consolidation):

Production/Refining

Current US Oil Consumption = 20.7 million barrels/day

Current US Refining Capacity = 17.4 million barrels/day

And yet, we have fewer refineries now than we did in 1982 (149 today compared to 301 in 1982) and we have not built any new refineries since 1976. Why? Simple. They are too expensive. Refineries can take 10+ years to get permitted and built and can cost upwards of $3.5 Billion to build. With this type of time and capital expenditure, it could take 13+ years for a single refinery to become profitable. Companies just aren't wiling to do this.

With this being said, I would love for BamaGrad to explain to me how we are going to refine all this "new oil" that we pull out of ANWR and other areas, when we already can not refine enough gasoline to meet our current needs. We are already importing refined oil as well as unrefined oil. Do they just want us to drill for more oil here in the US so we can then ship it to another country to be refined and then ship it back to the US for public use? Wouldn't this be costly as well?

[BamaGrad03 0]

Wow, where to start.

1) Adding 1 (or even 5) million barrels of oil per day (from Alaska or anywhere else) won’t do much of anything to the price/demand curve when 86 million barrels of oil are used worldwide each day

Who says it's only gonna be 5 million?

2) Just because oil is gathered in Alaska or anywhere else doesn’t mean it will be priced less than oil gathered in Saudi Arabia. New oil will hit the world market at the going rate, like any other commodity.

Uh...ok. Skipped economics class did ya? What happens to price when demand stays the same, and supply increases?

3) There is no shortage of supply right now. People have all the gasoline they need; it is demand that is driving the increase in price.

Increased demand = decrease in finite supply. Find a way to increase supply...and well..see number 2.

4) The cost of oil will never decline, no matter how large the supply, as long as the demand for it keeps increasing exponentially. Simple math tells us that reducing the current growth rate of consumption by half will be more effective than doubling the supply of oil.

Sure, reduce current rate of consumption by half...and kill all major world economic powers, and live in grass huts.

Of course, as long as consumption rates continue to grow we will never climb out of this rut. The answer to our oil problem, therefore, is not to find more oil; it is a poor short-term solution and absolutely doomed to failure in the long run. The answer to our oil problem is to stop using so much oil.

But in the short term if consumption increases, and supply doesn't increase (when it otherwise could if we drill)...where does the price go?

One other thing to consider...and I've raised these in several other threads (we need some serious consolidation):

Production/Refining

Current US Oil Consumption = 20.7 million barrels/day

Current US Refining Capacity = 17.4 million barrels/day

And yet, we have fewer refineries now than we did in 1982 (149 today compared to 301 in 1982) and we have not built any new refineries since 1976. Why? Simple. They are too expensive. Refineries can take 10+ years to get permitted and built and can cost upwards of $3.5 Billion to build. With this type of time and capital expenditure, it could take 13+ years for a single refinery to become profitable. Companies just aren't wiling to do this.

With this being said, I would love for BamaGrad to explain to me how we are going to refine all this "new oil" that we pull out of ANWR and other areas, when we already can not refine enough gasoline to meet our current needs. We are already importing refined oil as well as unrefined oil. Do they just want us to drill for more oil here in the US so we can then ship it to another country to be refined and then ship it back to the US for public use? Wouldn't this be costly as well?

Please just stop. Your ignorance or stubborn nature is really killing your position. We don't have more refineries because they are too expensive? Or because, again, eco-nazi politics WONT ALLOW NEW REFINERIES TO BE BUILT?

[Tigermike 3,046]

Is it even worth responding..what the hell...I'll play along...and defend my position of reducing demand vs. your position of increasing supply.

1) Adding 1 (or even 5) million barrels of oil per day (from Alaska or anywhere else) won’t do much of anything to the price/demand curve when 86 million barrels of oil are used worldwide each day. (You are mixing world supply with theoretical potential domestic supply. IF the US added 5 million barrels per day to the domestic supply, that would be 5 million barrels we did not have to purchase from elsewhere.)

2) Just because oil is gathered in Alaska or anywhere else doesn’t mean it will be priced less than oil gathered in Saudi Arabia. New oil will hit the world market at the going rate, like any other commodity. (What happens to those commodity prices when the supply increases?)

3) There is no shortage of supply right now. People have all the gasoline they need; it is demand that is driving the increase in price. (Months ago we were arguing the same point and you were trying to dispute it.)

4) The cost of oil will never decline, no matter how large the supply, as long as the demand for it keeps increasing exponentially. Simple math tells us that reducing the current growth rate of consumption by half will be more effective than doubling the supply of oil. (You are assuming that oil demand will increase exponentially but supply cannot increase exponentially. Supply can increase.)

Of course, as long as consumption rates continue to grow we will never climb out of this rut. The answer to our oil problem, therefore, is not to find more oil; it is a poor short-term solution and absolutely doomed to failure in the long run. The answer to our oil problem is to stop using so much oil. (You sanctimonious little socialist SOB - The answer is not one or the other it is a combination of all.)

Or we could just drill, drill, drill ,drill...or something like that. (We could sit on our butts like the government has been doing for years without a policy. We could block any and all initiatives to cut dependence on foreign oil like the dims or do nothing like the republicans. Or we could demand that our elected officials do what is right and good for the entire country and not just their special interest groups.)

“Refiners are managing the crude supply they have on hand because they are worried about weak product demand,’’ said Tim Evans, an energy analyst for Citi Futures Perspective in New York. “Both gasoline and distillate demand over the last four weeks are down from a year ago.’’

Fuel consumption averaged 20.4 million barrels a day in the four weeks ended June 6, down 1.3 percent from a year earlier, the department said.

http://cdobs.com/archive/blogs/the-demand-...bout-that,1248/

What were you saying?

[RunInRed 16,454]

Please just stop. Your ignorance or stubborn nature is really killing your position. We don't have more refineries because they are too expensive? Or because, again, eco-nazi politics WONT ALLOW NEW REFINERIES TO BE BUILT?

Soooo how are we going to refine this new oil?

[BamaGrad03 0]

Side note. Even if it's just 5 million barrels per day...

At the current price of oil, thats $675,000,000 less PER FREAKING DAY that goes into the coffers of people trying to kill you.

And $675,000,000 per freakin day that goes DIRECTLY back into our economy.

To put it better in line with what you democrats like to argue...the taxes on that 5 million barrels per day could have funded the ENTIRE Iraq war.

Soooo how are we going to refine this new oil?

1) You don't have to refine any NEW oil. You just refine 5 million fewer barrels per day of imported saudi terrorist oil

2) Build more refineries.

[RunInRed 16,454]

1) You don't have to refine any NEW oil. You just refine 5 million fewer barrels per day of imported saudi terrorist oil

2) Build more refineries.

1) Wait..I thought we didn't have enough refining capacity now...you guys need to get your story straight. One minute we don't have enough oil, the next we don't have enough refining capacity. Which is it?

2) How long will that take? About as long as it will take to get all this new oil out of the ground? By then I'll be cruising around in my alternate energy supplied vehicle and all your new refined oil will be worthless

[BamaGrad03 0]

1) Wait..I thought we didn't have enough refining capacity now...you guys need to get your story straight. One minute we don't have enough oil, the next we don't have enough refining capacity. Which is it?

I don't think we have enough refining capacity. But id rather NOT be able to refine 5 million bpd of our own oil...not the oil we are buying off of some UAE terrorist.

[TexasTiger 12,992]

1) Wait..I thought we didn't have enough refining capacity now...you guys need to get your story straight. One minute we don't have enough oil, the next we don't have enough refining capacity. Which is it?

I don't think we have enough refining capacity. But id rather NOT be able to refine 5 million bpd of our own oil...not the oil we are buying off of some UAE terrorist.

Park your Vette, BG. Quit supporting the terrorists!

[BamaGrad03 0]

Park your Vette, BG. Quit supporting the terrorists!

Nice. My BMW gets 31 on the interstate and 24 around town.

And you'd be surprised about Corvettes. The LS6 can be quite a fuel effecient V8.

[TexasTiger 12,992]

All this hysteria on the Right isn't supported by the facts:

The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030.

… any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html

[AURaptor 1,126]

More D.C. shenanigans. Yes, we CAN drill our way out of this, and that's the dirty secret that the corrupt Congress, led by Nancy Pelosi, doesn't want us to know.

Opening up ANWR, the coast of FL and CA would increase the number of sources where we get oil. It would lessen the likelyhood that a single event ( war, weather, etc... ) could interrupt the flow of oil, which is what the speculators are all hot and bothered about now.

[TexasTiger 12,992]

More D.C. shenanigans. Yes, we CAN drill our way out of this, and that's the dirty secret that the corrupt Congress, led by Nancy Pelosi, doesn't want us to know.

Opening up ANWR, the coast of FL and CA would increase the number of sources where we get oil. It would lessen the likelyhood that a single event ( war, weather, etc... ) could interrupt the flow of oil, which is what the speculators are all hot and bothered about now.

"It's Nancy Pelosi's fault!"

This is Bush's Energy department's report.

[AURaptor 1,126]

It is Pelosi's fault. Her congress won't open up ANWR. Laugh all you want, but you're just looking like a fool for doing so.

And I wasn't commenting on any " report ", that came after the lead post of this thread. I was commenting on the spin job the Dems are doing w/ the survey group's favorable response to the crafted " drilling our way out of this mess " phrase.

[TexasTiger 12,992]

It is Pelosi's fault. Her congress won't open up ANWR. Laugh all you want, but you're just looking like a fool for doing so.

You calling someone a "fool" is like a frog calling someone "ugly."

[BamaGrad03 0]

Anyone care to address my question:

Here's a side question I would love for you all to answer...

What if gas was $20 a gallon? What if it cost you $300/week to fill up your car (assuming one tank a week)...then what do we do? Because it's going to also triple your grocery bill. And it will triple your power bill. So now you're spending...what $4000 a month on essentials?

Or this note:

Side note. Even if it's just 5 million barrels per day...

At the current price of oil, thats $675,000,000 less PER FREAKING DAY that goes into the coffers of people trying to kill you.

And $675,000,000 per freakin day that goes DIRECTLY back into our economy.

To put it better in line with what you democrats like to argue...the taxes on that 5 million barrels per day could have funded the ENTIRE Iraq war.