quote:


I was watching the news today when this story broke. Thought about posting it but wanted to see how long it would take for Brain to do it. Glad it was you :)
Thank you so much, lovely lady. I think Brain must be taking a nap and missed this one. I think he is slipping!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Its the green brigade, mike. Cars are evil, everyone belongs on bicycles or buses.

Global warming is killing the cuddly little polar bear cubs, remember? Or have you already forgotten.

Before that, the wreck of the Exxon Valdez proved that oil companies are evil... 

The bastards even make (gasp!) profits!!!

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Okay Sanity,lets run with this....your point seems to be evil liberal Democrats are stopping us from adopting Sarah(train wreck)Palin's mantra...Drill,Baby Drill....tell us in your own words what nefarious motivation is behind the Democrats reasoning here.You seem to imply in your posts that they(the Democrats) like to see America behind the energy 8-ball so to speak of foreign Oil interests? Is this the point you're driving at?If so explain to me the relationship between Republicans(namely Bush and Cheney) with the Saudis...are they not BFF? If so why are the Dems in cahoots with OPEC ?

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
So It definitley isn't a case of the Dems being in bed with the Saudis....right.
That is still the sole province of Bush and Co.......right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


There is more than enough oil here to affect the global supply and demand, but its all locked up and the mantra we keep hearing is that it will take years to develop the new fields. Over twenty years ago the main reason the Democrats used to block development at  ANWR in Alaska was that we wouldn't see a drop of the oil for twenty years.

Well guess what?

Now the mantra seems to be, some of it might go overseas. But so what if it did? We could use a little help (a lot of help actually) with the trade imbalances we're seeing.

And not all of our our untapped, off limits oil fields are offshore, either. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


See my edit above, "You've already made the point for me how Democrats relentlessly attacked W for all of his efforts to make our energy more affordable."

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
So It definitley isn't a case of the Dems being in bed with the Saudis....right.
That is still the sole province of Bush and Co.......right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

He didn't exactly claim there was a shortage did he? Just suggested we ought to increase production.

And since supply *does* have an effect on prices (Recall OPEC threatening to cut production due to falling oil prices?) it's not a wild leap to think that if we increase production/availability here that it might have an effect on price.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

He didn't exactly claim there was a shortage did he? Just suggested we ought to increase production.

And since supply *does* have an effect on prices (Recall OPEC threatening to cut production due to falling oil prices?) it's not a wild leap to think that if we increase production/availability here that it might have an effect on price.

Obama's Compromise on Offshore Drilling Pleases Exactly No One - TIME

Conservatives argue that Obama has left too much oil in the ground, but it should be noted that even greatly expanded offshore drilling is unlikely to make much of a dent in U.S. dependence on foreign oil, or to impact gas prices.

Last year the U.S. Energy Information Agency estimated that reversing the former Bush Administration's decision to expand offshore drilling — policies similar to those proposed by Obama — would increase oil prices by $0.11 per barrel in 2020, and $1.33 a barrel in 2030.

Those increases would raise gas prices by less than a tenth of a penny in 2020 and just three cents a gallon by 2030.

Obama acknowledged this in his announcement. "With less than 2% of oil reserves, but more than 20% of world consumption, drilling alone cannot come close to meeting our long-term energy needs," he said.

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

There is more than enough oil here to affect the global supply and demand, but its all locked up and the mantra we keep hearing is that it will take years to develop the new fields. Over twenty years ago the main reason the Democrats used to block development at  ANWR in Alaska was that we wouldn't see a drop of the oil for twenty years.

Well guess what?

Now the mantra seems to be, some of it might go overseas. But so what if it did? We could use a little help (a lot of help actually) with the trade imbalances we're seeing.

And not all of our our untapped, off limits oil fields are offshore, either. 

Have to disagree with you on this one. Any expert worth their salt will tell you that only about 2% of worlds remaining oil reserves are in the US. Obama saw this is a short term solution to our near term energy needs, but I have to agree with MM - this was low hanging fruit to get political support from the Republicans for a broader energy policy.

Time will certainly tell, and it is certainly better than taking no action,...{which has been the case for the past 20 years}.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity



Funny how the Obama administration seems to be of two or three minds about this though:

quote:


Obama Transportation Secretary: ‘This Is the End of Favoring Motorized Transportation at the Expense of Non-Motorized’


On May 21, LaHood told reporters at the National Press Club that the “Partnership for Sustainable Communities’ his department had formed with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Housing—sometimes known as the “livability initiative”--was designed to “coerce” people out of their cars.

...“Some in the highway-supporters motorist groups have been concerned by your livability initiative,” said the moderator at the National Press Club event. “Is this an effort to make driving more torturous and to coerce people out of their cars?”

“It is a way to coerce people out of their cars,” said LaHood.
 
The moderator later asked: “Some conservative groups are wary of the livable communities program, saying it's an example of government intrusion into people's lives. How do you respond?”

“About everything we do around here is government intrusion in people's lives,” said LaHood. “So have at it.”

Another one who thinks it's his job to *dictate* to The People. Oh nice, "Coerce."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Thadius

Oh and before I get asked where I get the 75 year figure... The Congressional Research Service has reported that according to the U.S. Geological Survey and the Minerals Management Service, that we actually have 167 BILLION barrels of recoverable oil.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Did they run it by the CBO?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

mike, ramping up alternative energy and alternative reusable fuel sources,  is included
in President Obama's plan.
 
Drilling for oil on our own shores, is a short term solution, while we focus on alternative energy
solutions for the long term future. 
 
I think the point was to enable us to become a little less dependent of foreign oil sources, while
we work towards effective, efficient, long term alternative energy solutions.

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

mike, ramping up alternative energy and alternative reusable fuel sources,  is included
in President Obama's plan.
 
Drilling for oil on our own shores, is a short term solution, while we focus on alternative energy
solutions for the long term future. 
 
I think the point was to enable us to become a little less dependent of foreign oil sources, while
we work towards effective, efficient, long term alternative energy solutions.

Agreed Marini,my point was directed more towards the Palinophiles....like Sanity who seem to think all we need do is punch enough holes in the earth and all will be good.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval

This is a political compromise. And the oft repeated saying of, "If you try to please everyone, no one will like it", comes to mind.