FED UP with fuel prices?

[HBarlow]

That has got to be one of the most ignorant posts I've read. If the current president wanted to lower fuel costs he would STOP STOCKPILING OIL RESERVES! He started that as part of the war effort 8yrs ago. the reserve is at RECORD highs and so is what we pay for that same fuel. hmmmmm... must be the tree huggers that make the biodiesel and liberal socialists that know dang well that any oil drilled in anwr will STILL cost the same as now!!!

DCreed:



It is a waste of time and effort to attempt to discuss or explain anything to you so I will not reply to any more of your posts. If you had any understanding of the issues you would know that the tiny quantity of crude that goes into the national oil reserve is miniscule compared to the US daily consumption and has no effect on market prices. The national oil reserves are occasionally a topic brought up by the liberal socialists in congress as a political hot button drug across the screen to rile people like you. They know it is meaningless but their voters often suck it up.



You go ahead and believe what you believe. That is your right.



Educated and informed members who read posts like the one above recognize your lack of understanding.

 

[DCreed]

You go ahead and believe what you believe. That is your right.



Educated and informed members who read posts like the one above recognize your lack of understanding.

those folks know yer full if it!:-laf

 

[HBarlow]

DCreed,



I'm posting this fresh AP news article just for you. If you need help reading or understanding it let me know, I'll explain it to you.



By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 8 minutes ago







WASHINGTON - President Bush plans to make a renewed push Wednesday to get Congress to end a long-standing ban on offshore oil and gas drilling, echoing a call by GOP presidential candidate John McCain.



ADVERTISEMENT



Congressional Democrats have opposed lifting the prohibitions on energy development on nearly all federal Outer Continental Shelf waters for more than a quarter-century, including waters along both the East and West coasts.



With oil prices soaring and motorists paying $4 a gallon for gasoline, political pressures have been growing for more domestic oil and gas production.



"The president believes Congress shouldn't waste any more time," White House press secretary Dana Perino told The Associated Press on Tuesday.



"He will explicitly call on Congress to ... pass legislation lifting the congressional ban on safe, environmentally friendly offshore oil drilling," Perino said. "He wants to work with states to determine where offshore drilling should occur. "



Bush also will reiterate his call for development of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, Perino said. McCain has opposed drilling in the refuge, maintaining that the pristine areas in northeastern Alaska should be protected from energy development.



On Monday, McCain made lifting the federal ban on offshore oil and gas development a key part of his energy plan. The Arizona senator said states should be allowed to pursue energy exploration in waters near their coasts and receive some of the royalty revenue.



Bush has made clear in recent weeks that the drilling moratorium in coastal waters should end to allow for more domestic oil production and help "take the pressure off the price of gasoline. "



Democrats, as well as some Republican senators from coastal states, have opposed lifting the drilling prohibitions, fearful that energy development could harm tourism and raise the risk of oil spills on beaches.



Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, opposes lifting the ban on offshore drilling and says that allowing exploration now wouldn't affect gasoline prices for at least five years.



Congress imposed the drilling moratorium in 1981 and has extended it each year since by prohibiting the Interior Department from spending money on offshore oil or gas leases in virtually all coastal waters outside the western Gulf of Mexico and in some areas off Alaska.



President George H. W. Bush imposed a separate executive drilling ban in 1990, which was extended by President Clinton and then by the current president until 2012.



Bush has been considering lifting the executive ban as a symbolic move to get Congress to take action, but he decided against doing so for the time being, said an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because internal deliberations were involved.



The House Appropriations Committee was scheduled to vote on legislation Wednesday that included a provision that would continue the drilling moratorium into late 2009. Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa. , planned to try to strip that provision from the bill. A proposal Peterson offered last week that would open all federal waters 50 miles from shore to oil and gas development was rejected by an Appropriations subcommittee on a 9-6 party-line vote.

 

[DCreed]

Thank you for putting in the effort to post from a news source. what part of this is new? bush wants to drill (duh) it wont help the cost for at least 5yrs (duh) what was that supposed to prove?

 

[Sled Dog]

YouTube - Who Killed The Electric Car?

 

[Sled Dog]

A Little More

YouTube - "Who Killed the Electric Car?" TRAILER edited in part by me.

 

[HBarlow]

Thank you for putting in the effort to post from a news source. what part of this is new? bush wants to drill (duh) it wont help the cost for at least 5yrs (duh) what was that supposed to prove?

It proves several things that I've been trying to explain for weeks. One, that government leaders clearly understand that it is supply and demand, limited supply and a very high worldwide demand for oil that is responsible for the high prices. Two, that it is the liberal socialist party in congress that prevents drilling and producing our own oil. And three, even the most radical liberal socialist to ever get a nomination for president admits that increasing supply of crude oil will solve the problem although he prefers to demagouge the issue with the same old tired and worn out excuse that slickwillie used 12 years or so ago... ... ... . that beginning production now won't ease prices for five years. That may be true but doing nothing means prices won't be lowered for even longer. If slickwillie had not vetoed the bill to permit drilling years ago we'd have our own oil supplies now.



As I've said repeatedly, many of you, often the ones who whine and rant the loudest about the high gas and diesel fuel prices, have been voting all your lives for the people who keep us dependent upon foreign oil where the prices are high and beyond our control and, who keep gas and diesel prices high.

 

[HBarlow]

And here's another news article posted on my ATT internet service provider's front page. It is by the same writer as last night and based on the same info but another article that reports the same facts and it is the AP which is a liberal biased organization.



"By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer

24 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - For a quarter-century, drilling for oil and gas off nearly all the American coastline has been banned in part to protect tourism and to lessen the chances of beach-blackening spills.



ADVERTISEMENT







Then gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon this summer. Drivers and others began clamoring for federal lawmakers to do something about the record price of oil, much of it produced in foreign countries.



In response, President Bush is renewing his call to open U. S. coastal waters to oil and gas development, arguing that it's high time to battle high prices with increased domestic production. He is planning to ask Congress on Wednesday to lift the drilling moratoria that have been in effect since 1981 in more than 80 percent of the country's Outer Continental Shelf and to let states help to decide where to allow drilling.



"The president believes Congress shouldn't waste any more time," White House press secretary Dana Perino told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "He will explicitly call on Congress to ... pass legislation lifting the congressional ban on safe, environmentally friendly offshore oil drilling. "



For their part, some lawmakers have their own plan: Legislation that would continue the ban into late 2009 was scheduled to be considered Wednesday by the House Appropriations Committee.



Congressional Democrats, joined by some GOP lawmakers from coastal states, have opposed lifting the prohibition that has barred energy companies from waters along both the East and West coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico for 27 years.



On Monday, GOP presidential candidate John McCain made lifting the federal ban on offshore oil and gas development a key part of his energy plan. McCain said states should be allowed to pursue energy exploration in waters near their coasts and get some of the royalty revenue.



Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, opposes lifting the ban on offshore drilling and says that allowing exploration now wouldn't affect gasoline prices for at least five years.



The 574 million acres of federal coastal water that are off-limits are believed to hold nearly 18 billion barrels of undiscovered, recoverable oil and 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, according to the Interior Department. The country each year uses about 7. 6 billion barrels of oil and 21 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.



Perino said Bush also would reiterate his call for giving companies access to oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. McCain has opposed drilling in the refuge, maintaining that the pristine areas in northeastern Alaska should be protected from energy development.



When Republicans held the majority, the House twice voted to lift the ban, only to have the legislation die in the Senate. The Senate last month by a 56-42 vote rejected a GOP energy plan that would have allowed states to avoid the federal ban if they wanted energy development off their coast.



Congress imposed the drilling moratorium in 1981 and has extended it each year since, by prohibiting the Interior Department from spending money on offshore oil or gas leases in virtually all coastal waters outside the western Gulf of Mexico and in some areas off Alaska.



President George H. W. Bush issued a parallel executive drilling ban in 1990, which was extended by President Clinton and then by the current president until 2012.



Bush has been considering lifting the executive ban as a symbolic move to get Congress to take action, but he decided against doing so for the time being, said an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because internal deliberations were involved. "

 

[DCreed]

And here's another news article posted on my ATT internet service provider's front page. It is by the same writer as last night and based on the same info but another article that reports the same facts and it is the AP which is a liberal biased organization.



"By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer

24 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - For a quarter-century, drilling for oil and gas off nearly all the American coastline has been banned in part to protect tourism and to lessen the chances of beach-blackening spills.



Then gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon this summer. Drivers and others began clamoring for federal lawmakers to do something about the record price of oil, much of it produced in foreign countries.



In response, President Bush is renewing his call to open U. S. coastal waters to oil and gas development, arguing that it's high time to battle high prices with increased domestic production. He is planning to ask Congress on Wednesday to lift the drilling moratoria that have been in effect since 1981 in more than 80 percent of the country's Outer Continental Shelf and to let states help to decide where to allow drilling.



"The president believes Congress shouldn't waste any more time," White House press secretary Dana Perino told The Associated Press on Tuesday. "He will explicitly call on Congress to ... pass legislation lifting the congressional ban on safe, environmentally friendly offshore oil drilling. "



For their part, some lawmakers have their own plan: Legislation that would continue the ban into late 2009 was scheduled to be considered Wednesday by the House Appropriations Committee.



Congressional Democrats, joined by some GOP lawmakers from coastal states, have opposed lifting the prohibition that has barred energy companies from waters along both the East and West coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico for 27 years.



On Monday, GOP presidential candidate John McCain made lifting the federal ban on offshore oil and gas development a key part of his energy plan. McCain said states should be allowed to pursue energy exploration in waters near their coasts and get some of the royalty revenue.



Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate for president, opposes lifting the ban on offshore drilling and says that allowing exploration now wouldn't affect gasoline prices for at least five years.



The 574 million acres of federal coastal water that are off-limits are believed to hold nearly 18 billion barrels of undiscovered, recoverable oil and 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, according to the Interior Department. The country each year uses about 7. 6 billion barrels of oil and 21 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.



Perino said Bush also would reiterate his call for giving companies access to oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska. McCain has opposed drilling in the refuge, maintaining that the pristine areas in northeastern Alaska should be protected from energy development.



When Republicans held the majority, the House twice voted to lift the ban, only to have the legislation die in the Senate. The Senate last month by a 56-42 vote rejected a GOP energy plan that would have allowed states to avoid the federal ban if they wanted energy development off their coast.



Congress imposed the drilling moratorium in 1981 and has extended it each year since, by prohibiting the Interior Department from spending money on offshore oil or gas leases in virtually all coastal waters outside the western Gulf of Mexico and in some areas off Alaska.



President George H. W. Bush issued a parallel executive drilling ban in 1990, which was extended by President Clinton and then by the current president until 2012.



Bush has been considering lifting the executive ban as a symbolic move to get Congress to take action, but he decided against doing so for the time being, said an official who spoke on condition of anonymity because internal deliberations were involved. "

OK, tourism is a multi BILLION dollar industry and a chief source of revenue for many states.



"Safe ,enviro friendly?" what did they do before? honestly its only a disaster WHEN we make a mistake!, ... and that NEVER happens!



CEOs from big oil have said the SAME THING! They will have to charge the SAME high prices to off-set the investment because the oil is lesser quality and harder to extract.



Simple math says we're talking about THREE YEARS of supply TOTAL. So say we go ahead and put drill rigs everywhere and get every barrel out there. If it only takes two years to get to market, and we supplement supply by 25% in 12 years we'll be out again and OPEC will know that we truly have no alternative but ANWR and when thats gone... ?

McCain is a walking contradiction. He supports drilling of our front porch but not in our back yard, yet!

Bush doesnt want the blood on HIS hands. Spineless. :-laf



The FACTS contained in many of the links in this thread show that the oil prices have been inflated NOT by lack of supply but by reckless stockmarket manipulation and speculation. The inflated market mirrors our housing market 10yrs ago and will crash in about the same manner taking countless investors with it. They are being allowed to buy oil @ 6% a barrel and borrow the rest interest free, then re-sell the same way and keep the difference. They make money on the hysteria that oil prices will continue to climb and people scramble to buy ,which forces up the price. a self fulfilling prophecy and a good example of capitalism running amuck. Capitalism is a great system in principal but it is based on greed and is easily corruptable without appropriate restrictions. A bill passed in 2006 that made oil futures available for trade on the open market then the world bank made it avail @6% and now here we are. The saudis are still producing the same amount of oil we are consuming LESS and the price is skyrocketing. supply and demand is NOT the reason for this, or mexican fuel would be more than $2. 20 per gallon.

 

[DHayden]

US oil shale three times larger than Saudi Arabia , But Nancy would rather we buy oil from the country that gave us 9/11



The largest known oil shale deposits in the world are in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Estimates of the oil resource in place within the Green River Formation range from 1. 5 to 1. 8 trillion barrels. Not all resources in place are recoverable. For potentially recoverable oil shale resources, we roughly derive an upper bound of 1. 1 trillion barrels of oil and a lower bound of about 500 billion barrels. For policy planning purposes, it is enough to know that any amount in this range is very high. For example, the midpoint in our estimate range, 800 billion barrels, is more than triple the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U. S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day. If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, 800 billion barrels of recoverable resources would last for more than 400 years.



This is hot off of MSNBC for those who dont trust FOX. The whole story can be read here: Message boards



Of course this doesnt consider the HUGE supply available in Alaska (not just ANWR) The HUGE deposits in N. Dakota, South Dakota and E. Montana or the deposits off of Florida. Nor the huge coal supplies all over the country. It may not help us right away, but if peaple would not have had this attitude over the last 20 years we would not be having this discussion. Do nothing. . get nothing. Except America on its knees from here on out.

 

[DCreed]

US oil shale three times larger than Saudi Arabia , But Nancy would rather we buy oil from the country that gave us 9/11

The largest known oil shale deposits in the world are in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Estimates of the oil resource in place within the Green River Formation range from 1. 5 to 1. 8 trillion barrels. Not all resources in place are recoverable. For potentially recoverable oil shale resources, we roughly derive an upper bound of 1. 1 trillion barrels of oil and a lower bound of about 500 billion barrels. For policy planning purposes, it is enough to know that any amount in this range is very high. For example, the midpoint in our estimate range, 800 billion barrels, is more than triple the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U. S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day. If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, 800 billion barrels of recoverable resources would last for more than 400 years.

This is hot off of MSNBC for those who dont trust FOX. The whole story can be read here: Message boards

Of course this doesnt consider the HUGE supply available in Alaska (not just ANWR) The HUGE deposits in N. Dakota, South Dakota and E. Montana or the deposits off of Florida. Nor the huge coal supplies all over the country. It may not help us right away, but if peaple would not have had this attitude over the last 20 years we would not be having this discussion. Do nothing. . get nothing. Except America on its knees from here on out.

bin laden was 9/11
oil shale hasn't been used because of the low cost to yield ratio which now @135+ per barrel is feasible.
extraction of shale is destructive and we cant turn ALL of that area to wasteland.
we stopped running everything on coal for a reason!
We cannot allow ourselves to ecologically destroy this great nation to relieve a short term problem related to the ever rediculous happenings on the stockmarket. Fuel has been sold to us for a semi-steady cost since the embargo of the 70's so why the sudden spike?
must be world demand has tripled in 2yrs? NOPE.
supply suddenly dwindle to a trickle? NOPE.
wild speculation and unhindered trade on the world stock exchange fueled by hype and off-set costs brought about by manipulation of the governing bodies? now your getting it!
Why is GM STILL trying to sell me a gas guzzling giant SUV instead of the electric car it already made if this is a real and long term fuel shortage. most of us remember the 70's when there REALLY was a shortage. I dont see lines @ the pumps or any other indication of short supply. Only high cost and only in the US and UK.

 

[BenMorgan]

Only high cost and only in the US and UK.

Uh... no. .



Turkey Think gas prices are high? Try $11 in Turkey - World business - MSNBC.com



Bulgaria Bulgaria: High Fuel Prices Drive up Donkey Prices in Turkey



Russia RIA Novosti - Opinion & analysis - Should Russia raise domestic gas prices?

 

[DCreed]

Ben,
the first story has a wealth of info the second one is a joke and the third is about natual gas not crude oil. but no one yet has stated the cost of oil directly from Saudi ?!?

 

[DHayden]

bin laden was 9/11

That was the articles words not mine, but for some more quick education Bin Laden is from Saudi Arabia and so were most of the hijackers (duh, as you would say)

we stopped running everything on coal for a reason!

You need to read up on new coal processing, also you might familiarize yourself with how many coal plants China is bringing on line PER MONTH, if you dont think those will impact global environment think again.

OK, tourism is a multi BILLION dollar industry and a chief source of revenue for many states.

which is why oil is hurting them all so badly, people arent vacationing, staying in hotels, going out to eat or going to the movies like before. People will be getting laid off and have even more negative effect.

Simple math says we're talking about THREE YEARS of supply TOTAL

Simple indeed, but more importantly SO WRONG

so why the sudden spike?

must be world demand has tripled in 2yrs? NOPE.

supply suddenly dwindle to a trickle? NOPE.

wild speculation and unhindered trade on the world stock exchange fueled by hype and off-set costs brought about by manipulation of the governing bodies? now your getting it!

Glad to see you caught up, I can see that plain as day and have written about in a few other threads months ago. That does not mean that:



1. Increasing supply will not lower prices ( its not like were running at 60% capacity)



2. Increasing our own oil will not put more money in the American economy instead of Saudi, venezuela and other countries who detest us.



3. will not help keep prices from sky rocketing everytime there is a terror attack or plot exposed in the middle east.



Just to name a few.

 

[HBarlow]

DCreed,



You guys continue believing the slick distortions and lies and voting for the liberal socialists who stand between us and use of our own oil and be sure to post to let us know when fuel prices decline.

 

[DCreed]

Harvey,



You guys continue believing the slick distortions and lies and voting for the idiots who stand between us and use of our own money and be sure to post to let us know when fuel prices decline.

 

[TAbbott]

Drill here. Drill now. Pay less. You can all sign a petition on Newt.org to that effect. Here's the URL:



Half a Million Americans Petition Congress to Drill for Oil Now > Newt.org > Newt News and Opinion DB



So far, more than half a million signators in just a few weeks. They're hoping to have 3 million by the time the policitical parites have their conventions. If enough people sign up, maybe the powers that be will finally start listening to the people. I'd say that those who don't ... well for sure they don't deserve our votes. We can vote these people back into paying for their own fuel instead of riding around in government limos!



All it will take is for those folks to see the writing on the wall and they'll come around real fast. Get on line and sign the petition now!

 

[RGardner]

I believe in developing our own resources as much as possible, but I do not think that there are enough rigs available not to mention hands, pipe etc, to significantly affect the supply of oil if we open up ANWAR right now.

 

[BenMorgan]

and the third is about natual gas not crude oil.

I guess you missed this sentence...



Gasoline prices in Russia, one of the largest oil producers and exporters, are among the highest in the world. A liter of gasoline in Russia costs almost as much as in the United States, which is the largest oil importer.



Now... back to my original point... . Energy prices; be it gasoline, diesel (in its many forms), natural gas, etc... , are high world wide. Not just in the US and UK as you stated.

 

[HBarlow]

... ... ... ... ... .....

Why is GM STILL trying to sell me a gas guzzling giant SUV instead of the electric car it already made if this is a real and long term fuel shortage. most of us remember the 70's when there REALLY was a shortage. I dont see lines @ the pumps or any other indication of short supply. Only high cost and only in the US and UK.

DCreed,



Your question above reveals your typical liberal socialist union democrat point of view. "Blame America first and American business second. " Most importantly, it reveals your total lack of understanding of America, capitalism, the free market, the foundation of our economy, and your lack of fundamental education.



The answer to your question is very simple. GM, like every other manufacturer who wants to stay in business, builds what the consumers will buy. Large manufacturers like GM are constantly monitoring sales figures and adjusting their production number where needed. Overproduction is a costly mistake for them. Americans, except for a small handful of twinkle-toed libs in San Francisco driving to a Gay Pride parade, don't buy electric cars. Americans buy large, powerful SUVs, sedans, and trucks. GM and the other large manufacturers have recently slowed production of large SUVs and light trucks because consumers, right now, have slowed their purchases of them. If and when American consumers grow accustomed to the current high fuel prices or if and when the prices recede to more affordable levels, the demand for large SUVs and pickups will resume and so will production.



Any dim bulb knows that first, an auto manufacturer is not a social services agency operated by the government with a liberal environmental agenda. An automobile manufacturer is in business to make a profit. Nothing more, nothing less. Their goal is always, to the best of their ability and within their operating limitations, to build products that consumers will buy at a profit.



GM could build 10,000 silly little electric cars per month and they would sit on lots, unsold. Dealers, except in San Francisco, would not order them and buyers would not buy them.



Your comment explains why you also do not understand the oil industry or the reasons for the high price of oil.



The "shortage" that drives the prices up, as I have already explained several times, stems from the limited production of crude oil worldwide and the high and rising demand for crude oil around the world which currently exceeds supply. The shortage at the pump in the '70s was an actual inadequate supply of gasoline at the pump.