- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
- Messages
- 2,443
- Reaction score
- 733
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Utah takes a stand. …
“… Utah which is a major oil and coal producing state.” — ptif219's article¹
:roll:
Utah takes a stand. …
“… Utah which is a major oil and coal producing state.” — ptif219's article¹
:roll:
Global warming aside, our nation must pursue the use of coal and oil.“… Utah which is a major oil and coal producing state.” — ptif219's article¹
:roll:
We are having record cold temperatures and snowfall in history across the United States so the question begs to be asked...
There are more and more scientists out there every day that might disagree with you.....Just go to google and type in global warming myth and you will see...........
Steven Mcintyre - the man in the middle of the CRU mailings - there is mutual hatred there - I would not take anything from there as being trustworthy
It shows the affect of the lies and fraud being revealed has.
Global warming aside, our nation must pursue the use of coal and oil.
The primary goal must be "energy independence".
I agree with your primary goal, but it ain't gonna happen with oil. We passed peak oil in this country in 1970. The only solution is to get serious about conservation and development of sustainable energy supplies.
I'm not getting it. What's so important about energy independence? Do you think that there will come a time when other oil producing countries won't want to sell their oil? Or that there might come a time when, for example, the OPEC countries hike up the price of their product and the US oil companies will say, "Hey, that's just toooo much, we are going to sell our gas at a specially low, patriotic price for y'all"? Tell me when that's happened in the past.
It seems to me that "Energy Independence" is an empty slogan that would mean absolutely nothing to the US consumer. If I'm wrong, please tell me, what difference would it make in concrete terms to anyone?
It's more of a security issue than an economic issue. Certain oil-rich countries have a nasty tendency to fund terrorism or destabilize their neighbors. And we have a nasty tendency to invade them.
It's more of a security issue than an economic issue. Certain oil-rich countries have a nasty tendency to fund terrorism or destabilize their neighbors. And we have a nasty tendency to invade them.
Most American's want energy independence because hopefully it will lower the price for fuel. It's also a national security issue, we won't have to buy oil from foreign nations like the KSA who fund terrorism. It would also mean that America could possible sell oil/natural gas/coal and use the profits to help pay off the national debt. So, more money would stay in the American economy and less would be exported for oil to the hands of shady nations, fuel would be cheaper and there would be greater global competition with the US as an oil supplier, and America would be able to rely on her resources and not be dependent on others. I believe the Saudi's had an oil price hike during some conflict with Israel, they rationed oil to the US and made it expensive because we supported Israel, it's best to not have to trade with nations like this. Energy independence has no downsides, plus it would mean more jobs being created.
Current estimates are that your reserves will run out in 8 years, the World's in 54.Oil reserves - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Then what will you do because your dependence on fossil fuels will not have changed, you still won't be investing in alternative fuels, you'll still be driving ridiculous gaz-guzzlers? If you (and frankly the rest of the West, especially Canada and Australia) can't begin to wean yourself off your cheap oil products then arguments about GW issues will be irrelevant anyway. Within 100 years, maximum, there will be no more oil.
I'm not getting it. What's so important about energy independence?
Do you think that there will come a time when other oil producing countries won't want to sell their oil? Or that there might come a time when, for example, the OPEC countries hike up the price of their product and the US oil companies will say, "Hey, that's just toooo much, we are going to sell our gas at a specially low, patriotic price for y'all"? Tell me when that's happened in the past.
It seems to me that "Energy Independence" is an empty slogan that would mean absolutely nothing to the US consumer. If I'm wrong, please tell me, what difference would it make in concrete terms to anyone?
Your information is wa-a-ay out of date. See [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_Formation]Bakken Formation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]I agree with your primary goal, but it ain't gonna happen with oil. We passed peak oil in this country in 1970. The only solution is to get serious about conservation and development of sustainable energy supplies.
And this is part of the problem - there are alternatives like biodiesel but until we up the production by factors of thousands we are just whistling in the wind
Your information is wa-a-ay out of date. See Bakken Formation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Your information is wa-a-ay out of date. See Bakken Formation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Biodiesel simply shows the extent to our ridiculous addiction to fuel goes. It is quite tellingthat in a world where nearly nearly 2 billion people are starving we'd take food and use it to run our cars. No. I think the correct method is to pursue nuclear and nitrogen.
So, am I getting this straight? If and when the US achieves Energy Independence, it will cut it's military spending by half,
Andalublue said:cease trading arms with the Saudis
Andalublue said:and return to a Fortress America, isolationist foreign policy? Is that what the EI advocates are expecting?
I doubt it will be that drastic.
Probably. The House of Saud would no longer be of much use to us if they didn't have oil.
Why must you draw the most extreme conclusion possible?