• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BP Makes ‘Giant’ Oil Discovery in Gulf of Mexico

winston53660 said:
Well I use to take the subway to work.
Click to expand...

When it was available, I rode in a van, or a bus, or a carpool....and that would be a LOT of my working life. When you work at a nuclear facility, you have a long commute. Can't be having such things in people's back yards...
 
UtahBill said:
Bull, most 4x4 trucks in the USA never even see dirt. IF it wasn't for wet boat ramps, even people in LA wouldn't need them..:2razz: Yes, you are free to pay high prices, and they will get higher, and then you and so many others who can't think ahead will whine about the power companies ripping you off.
Click to expand...


Prove that most people that own 3/4 ton trucks, or bigger, with, or without four-wheel-drive don't need them.

I don't whine about power companies ripping us off. I whine about the government ripping us off, which is the case.
 
UtahBill said:
It should be intuitively obvious to the most casually educated observer that getting to work involves transportation and is necessary.
You are familiar with Marx and Engels? Learn that in home school, did you?
Click to expand...

Actaully, I learned in public school.

IF it wasn't for wet boat ramps, even people in LA wouldn't need them
Click to expand...

BTW, I don't own a FWD. I have a two wheel drive that pulls out of wet boat ramps just fine. It pulls my 21' bay boat like a champ, too.
 
Last edited:
winston53660 said:
Well I use to take the subway to work. And I could walk to the grocery store, butcher green grocer and the pub.
Click to expand...

Good for you. When I was in service and lived on post I rode a bicycle to my unit, unless it was foul weather.
 
Psychoclown said:
They would all quickly become irrelevant (except perhaps Putin given Russia's sheer size and wealth in other resources).
Click to expand...

Pooootun (as his name is properly produced) would need some serious capital expenditures to do that. What I don't get is why so many hypernationalists aren't onboard with getting off oil. We could utterly annihilate our enemies without firing a shot at the same time expanding the American economy. Sound like a simple choice to me.

Let me put it this way, finding new sources of domestic oil certainly isn't going to hurt us. Refusing to tap into newly discovered domestic sources is only going to increase the power and revenues of those hostile regimes listed above.
Click to expand...

Yes and no. New domestic oil more or less keeps us tied as we have some economic stake in the oil business. And that does not help us. And remember, the higher gasoline goes, the more incentive it is to get off it. And the faster we get off it, the faster we can destroy regimes hostile to us without going to war.

Any viable concept that can potentially replace fossil fuels should be researched and funded.
Click to expand...

Indeed, but think about it. Many of our plants exist purely to meet peak demand and do literally nothing during the rest of the time. Imagine if we could run our plants full time (which would lower fixed cost per kilowatt which would act like a tax cut) and store all of that energy in super efficient batteries. Then we could demolish our most polluting plants and open up land for development.

Plus I like the notion of using solar panels as energy directed weapons. :2razz:
 
obvious Child said:
Pooootun (as his name is properly produced) would need some serious capital expenditures to do that. What I don't get is why so many hypernationalists aren't onboard with getting off oil. We could utterly annihilate our enemies without firing a shot at the same time expanding the American economy. Sound like a simple choice to me.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

Yes and no. New domestic oil more or less keeps us tied as we have some economic stake in the oil business. And that does not help us. And remember, the higher gasoline goes, the more incentive it is to get off it. And the faster we get off it, the faster we can destroy regimes hostile to us without going to war.
Click to expand...

Our stake would still be pretty minor in terms of our total economy. But I do agree that higher price drive down demand. That can be achieved by a tax that creates a floor price for gasoline. Say the tax established $4 as the floor, if the market price is $2.50 then the tax is $1.50. If the market price is 3 bucks then the tax is a buck.

The revenues from this tax can be used to address the externality costs of oil (funding hostile regimes, pollution). I'm all for increasing supply and decreasing demand of oil in the here and now as much as we can, while working towards the day we can move past oil as a fuel source.

Indeed, but think about it. Many of our plants exist purely to meet peak demand and do literally nothing during the rest of the time. Imagine if we could run our plants full time (which would lower fixed cost per kilowatt which would act like a tax cut) and store all of that energy in super efficient batteries. Then we could demolish our most polluting plants and open up land for development.

Plus I like the notion of using solar panels as energy directed weapons. :2razz:
Click to expand...

Sounds great.

I haven't done a lot of research into the various alternative energy ideas out there, but as I said before, anything viable should be pursued. I really don't care which technology or technologies are used, as long as the end result is ending our dependence on foreign oil.
 
Psychoclown said:
Our stake would still be pretty minor in terms of our total economy. But I do agree that higher price drive down demand. That can be achieved by a tax that creates a floor price for gasoline. Say the tax established $4 as the floor, if the market price is $2.50 then the tax is $1.50. If the market price is 3 bucks then the tax is a buck.
Click to expand...

Well, estimates right now have the global oil consumption market at around 82 million barrels a day. The US consumes about 20 million barrels a day. If 1/4 of the demand fell off of the face of the Earth, prices would drop drastically.

The problem with a tax is that no party has the guts to do what is necessary. Just like Obamacare and the sad pathetic excuse for a bill the GOP has.
 
Hmm, interesting to see how they'll frame this on the Hippie News Network, also known as MSNBC. Considering they are a major sponser of the network and particularly The Rachel Maddow Show, I wonder what tune the "environmentalists" at MSNBC will be singing now. Hmm, stand up for your liberal principles in "news reporting" or bow to the millions of dollars in oil money they get. Let's see how they report it, and if they still have the audacity to go after other news outlets for doing the same thing.
 
obvious Child said:
Pooootun (as his name is properly produced) would need some serious capital expenditures to do that. What I don't get is why so many hypernationalists aren't onboard with getting off oil. We could utterly annihilate our enemies without firing a shot at the same time expanding the American economy. Sound like a simple choice to me.
Click to expand...

The part that I don't get, is why the folks who claim to be smarter than the rest of us don't relize, or won't admit, that we're no where close to being able to go cold turkey on oil. If we were, we'd already be doing it. Hell, the oil companies would lead the charge.


Yes and no. New domestic oil more or less keeps us tied as we have some economic stake in the oil business. And that does not help us. And remember, the higher gasoline goes, the more incentive it is to get off it. And the faster we get off it, the faster we can destroy regimes hostile to us without going to war.
Click to expand...

New oil finds creates new jobs, therefore it is good for us.
 
apdst said:
The part that I don't get, is why the folks who claim to be smarter than the rest of us don't realize, or won't admit, that we're no where close to being able to go cold turkey on oil.
Click to expand...

Where has anyone stated that we are close to getting off oil? Talking out of your rear again eh? No one is talking about cold turkey. This is going to be a long strung out process of gradual reduction. What WOULD be nice would be to instantly drop off which would essentially destroy our enemies without firing a shot, but we're not there.

If we were, we'd already be doing it. Hell, the oil companies would lead the charge.
Click to expand...

What makes you think that the oil companies aren't planning for changes? France's Total is buying up large stakes of nuclear power. Exxon, Chevron, Shell and others have a disturbingly large amount of alternative energy patents and have been hiring engineers to work on that stuff for years.

New oil finds creates new jobs, therefore it is good for us.
Click to expand...

Not if it fund terrorists and keeps anti-American regimes in power. I fail to see how keeping Chavez and Pootun in power is good for America. Care to explain how keeping leaders diametrically opposed to America's goals in power is actually helping America? I'd love to see that argument.
 
obvious Child said:
Where has anyone stated that we are close to getting off oil? Talking out of your rear again eh? No one is talking about cold turkey. This is going to be a long strung out process of gradual reduction. What WOULD be nice would be to instantly drop off which would essentially destroy our enemies without firing a shot, but we're not there.
Click to expand...

You said it right here:

obvious Child said:
What I don't get is why so many hypernationalists aren't onboard with getting off oil.
Click to expand...



What makes you think that the oil companies aren't planning for changes? France's Total is buying up large stakes of nuclear power. Exxon, Chevron, Shell and others have a disturbingly large amount of alternative energy patents and have been hiring engineers to work on that stuff for years.
Click to expand...

I never said they weren't. However, the oil companies are slowing their alternative fuel investment, because they're finding out that it's not cost effective, nor practical at this time. Shell and BP have spent billions on alternative fuels to find out that the technology hasn't matured, yet.



[quoe]Not if it fund terrorists and keeps anti-American regimes in power. I fail to see how keeping Chavez and Pootun in power is good for America. Care to explain how keeping leaders diametrically opposed to America's goals in power is actually helping America? I'd love to see that argument.[/QUOTE]


All the more reason to stop subsidizing foreign oil companies and start subsidizing our own oil exploration. We could combine oil, natural gas, nuke, wind, hydro, solar and bio-fuels, then tell the rest of the oil producing world to blow us, forever. Plus, create untold millions of jobs
 
apdst said:
You said it right here
Click to expand...

One must wonder if you can read. How is my statement regarding why hypernationalists are not for getting off oil = we're close to getting off oil cold turkey?

I realize you have a tendency for not being able to read properly, especially since you argued that Obama saying swine flu was no cause for concern because he said we are on alert on it, but c'mon man. Seriously.

I never said they weren't. However, the oil companies are slowing their alternative fuel investment, because they're finding out that it's not cost effective, nor practical at this time. Shell and BP have spent billions on alternative fuels to find out that the technology hasn't matured, yet.
Click to expand...

Except you fail to understand what their primary business is. They have billions of dollars of oil based infrastructure. Tell me, why would they want to start competing with that by releasing alternative energy? They'd essentially be undercutting their own balance sheets not to mention eliminating billions in tax deductible depreciation. Only a moron would do that. Big oil is going to milk oil for all that it can before it switches over. They are not stupid people.

All the more reason to stop subsidizing foreign oil companies and start subsidizing our own oil exploration.
Click to expand...

You still don't understand what a commodity exchange is do you? Sad. So many people talk about oil here yet have no understanding at all in any way shape or form about how oil is priced.
 
obvious Child said:
One must wonder if you can read. How is my statement regarding why hypernationalists are not for getting off oil = we're close to getting off oil cold turkey?
Click to expand...

I'll tell ya how: because until the technology is born to in able to fit cars with onbaord nuclear reactors, we'll never stop using petroleum.



Except you fail to understand what their primary business is. They have billions of dollars of oil based infrastructure. Tell me, why would they want to start competing with that by releasing alternative energy? They'd essentially be undercutting their own balance sheets not to mention eliminating billions in tax deductible depreciation. Only a moron would do that. Big oil is going to milk oil for all that it can before it switches over. They are not stupid people.
Click to expand...

Their primary business is to produce energy. If they find a new energy source that will be safer and more cost effective, they're going to be on it like white on rice. They're not in the oil business just because they like drilling for oil; they're in the oil business because it's the most practical and cost effective energy source there is. You're right, they're not stupid people.



You still don't understand what a commodity exchange is do you? Sad. So many people talk about oil here yet have no understanding at all in any way shape or form about how oil is priced.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what a commodity exchange is. Oil is priced the same way that corn id priced: supply and demand. Not that my comment has anything to with that, but you had to redirect it somehow, I reckon.
 
apdst said:
Their primary business is to produce energy. If they find a new energy source that will be safer and more cost effective, they're going to be on it like white on rice. They're not in the oil business just because they like drilling for oil; they're in the oil business because it's the most practical and cost effective energy source there is. You're right, they're not stupid people.
Click to expand...
You have NO idea how long I have been saying this.
You have NO idea how unwilling (some) people are to understand it.
 
Goobieman said:
You have NO idea how long I have been saying this.
You have NO idea how unwilling (some) people are to understand it.
Click to expand...

I have a very good idea! :rofl We can't stop trying to stamp out ignorance.
 
apdst said:
I'll tell ya how: because until the technology is born to in able to fit cars with onbaord nuclear reactors, we'll never stop using petroleum.
Click to expand...

Not really. Fully electric cars or extremely efficient hybrids fueled with biofuels could replace liquid fuel for vehicles. The real question about getting off petroleum is in fertilizers and jet fuels.

Please read posts more carefully.

Their primary business is to produce energy. If they find a new energy source that will be safer and more cost effective, they're going to be on it like white on rice. They're not in the oil business just because they like drilling for oil; they're in the oil business because it's the most practical and cost effective energy source there is. You're right, they're not stupid people.
Click to expand...

And that addresses my point how? While their primary business is providing energy, they are exceptionally invested in oil. And the profits on oil for the foreseeable future are going to be exceptionally high. They will not walk away from that, but at the same time they know the end of the oil era is coming and only a fool does not plan for the end of their gravy train.

I know exactly what a commodity exchange is. Oil is priced the same way that corn id priced: supply and demand. Not that my comment has anything to with that, but you had to redirect it somehow, I reckon.
Click to expand...

Sure you do, keep telling yourself that. Tell me, does adding 50,000 barrels daily to a world consumption of 82.1 million barrels change the price? Furthermore, can that 50,000 barrels per day change the price when the vast majority of that 82.1 million is largely set by a few price setters?

The notion that a small producer can radically change the market prices in an industry dominated by a few players is like saying a mom and pop grocery can take down a Walmart Super Center.

The ignorance this place has in regards to commodity exchanges is insane.
 
PeteEU said:
It will take at least 10 years to get a single drop out ... at least.
Click to expand...

It took over 100 years to build the great cathedrals of the middle ages, and then hundreds more years to complete the finishing touches.

Modern man expects, however, instant results... :rolleyes:
 
PeteEU said:
It will take at least 10 years to get a single drop out ... at least.
Click to expand...
You are so jealous, it's eating you alive. Just because Spain is an oil loser. Come on, this is important.
 
American said:
You are so jealous, it's eating you alive. Just because Spain is an oil loser. Come on, this is important.
Click to expand...

Jealous of exactly what? That a UK company makes a supposed giant oil discovery in International waters? You do know that BP is a British company right?

As for Spain being an "oil loser"? Okay..I guess Repsol is just a 2 bit company and not the 15th biggest in the world with extensive holdings in South America..... And if being an "oil loser" is being less dependant on oil over time because they are investing heavily in alternative energy.. sure by all means call Spain losers..
 
obvious Child said:
Not really. Fully electric cars or extremely efficient hybrids fueled with biofuels could replace liquid fuel for vehicles. The real question about getting off petroleum is in fertilizers and jet fuels.
Click to expand...

Electric cars will, someday replace petroleum engines, however that's a few decades away. That's my whole point, the technology hasn't matured. It will take even longer to invent ways to power trucks, boats and aircraft with anything other than petroleum fuels. Switching to bio-fuels is a terrible plan. We don't want to turn our food and water supply into our fuel supply.





And that addresses my point how? While their primary business is providing energy, they are exceptionally invested in oil. And the profits on oil for the foreseeable future are going to be exceptionally high. They will not walk away from that, but at the same time they know the end of the oil era is coming and only a fool does not plan for the end of their gravy train.
Click to expand...

That's right, they're invested in oil, because it's more practical and cost effective than any other source. Until some new technology comes along that will be as practical and cost effective, oil is going to be the spearhead of our energy sources.



Sure you do, keep telling yourself that. Tell me, does adding 50,000 barrels daily to a world consumption of 82.1 million barrels change the price? Furthermore, can that 50,000 barrels per day change the price when the vast majority of that 82.1 million is largely set by a few price setters?
Click to expand...

An increase in supply, when there's no increase in demand will cause prices to go down. That's how supply and demand works.

The notion that a small producer can radically change the market prices in an industry dominated by a few players is like saying a mom and pop grocery can take down a Walmart Super Center.

The ignorance this place has in regards to commodity exchanges is insane.
Click to expand...


Grocery stores aren't commodity exchanges. Wal Mart pays the same amount for corn that Bob's Stop-n-Shop does. Speaking of ignorance of commodity exchanges.
 
apdst said:
Electric cars will, someday replace petroleum engines, however that's a few decades away. That's my whole point, the technology hasn't matured. It will take even longer to invent ways to power trucks, boats and aircraft with anything other than petroleum fuels. Switching to bio-fuels is a terrible plan. We don't want to turn our food and water supply into our fuel supply.







That's right, they're invested in oil, because it's more practical and cost effective than any other source. Until some new technology comes along that will be as practical and cost effective, oil is going to be the spearhead of our energy sources.





An increase in supply, when there's no increase in demand will cause prices to go down. That's how supply and demand works.




Grocery stores aren't commodity exchanges. Wal Mart pays the same amount for corn that Bob's Stop-n-Shop does. Speaking of ignorance of commodity exchanges.
Click to expand...

Price isn't the major issue, cost is.....
The hidden costs accrued from buying oil from our enemies is far beyond the piddling issue of price...
 
UtahBill said:
Price isn't the major issue, cost is.....
The hidden costs accrued from buying oil from our enemies is far beyond the piddling issue of price...
Click to expand...


All the more reason to drill here, drill now. Combine our oil, natural gas, hydro, wind, solar and bio-fuels and tell the rest of the oil producing world to eat **** and die.
 
apdst said:
All the more reason to drill here, drill now. Combine our oil, natural gas, hydro, wind, solar and bio-fuels and tell the rest of the oil producing world to eat **** and die.
Click to expand...
To be more accurate, eat your sand, drink your oil, then die....:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom