• 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!

Oil rises above $90 amid US crude supply drop

The Prof said:
you sound like the dnc
Click to expand...

Don't pay much attention to the democrats, but I don't blame them for the energy mess. The only president that came up with an energy policy that would wean us off foriegn oil was Carter. It was working so good that Reagan scrapped it when oil profits started to drop. So who really is to blame?
 
ptif219 said:
How can you say when the estimates are wrong. I see you believe the liberal policy it won't last very long so don't do it
Click to expand...

So what is your estimate for the Bakken? How many years of US consumption does it hold? One? Two?
I believe all our oil reserves should be tapped, safely and they will be eventually. I also believe that we can't drill our way to energy independance. The numbers, no matter how inflated prove that.
 
jimmy carter---LOL!

no wonder cap and trade never made it past first base
 
ptif219 said:
Everything so far makes us use more. Ethanol that the government demands we use lowers MPG and cuts performance of a motor.

The big truck I drove in 2004 went 74 miles an hour and got 7.5 miles per gallon today my big truck goes 65 and I struggle to get 5.5 miles per gallon. The government is the problem.
Click to expand...

Actually ethanol increases performance, but does decrease mpg
 
USA_1 said:
I know. So do you really think the Bakken reserve will solve our problem? Do you think they can get three billion bbls a year out of it. For three years? The Bakken is only a year or two of US consumption.
Click to expand...

No single oil field will "solve" our problem. It will help our import problem however. I don't understand why you would think any particular oil find should have to "solve" our oil dependency problem or it is insignificant. That's the same absurd argument against drilling in ANWR.

With every bit of oil we find and recover, that is a little more that we don't have to import. If we get 3 billion barrels of oil from Bakken, that is $300 billion dollars we don't send to another country.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Actually ethanol increases performance, but does decrease mpg
Click to expand...

It does not that is a lie. I have a 2000 GMC Sierra with headers and a computer chip and noticed a big difference in power when I started using ethanol free gas.

The Ethanol Mistake

Meanwhile, evidence is mounting that ethanol is a failure in virtually every way. It takes more energy to produce it than the fuel provides. Food supplies around the world have been disrupted because so much of the corn crop now goes to ethanol. It costs taxpayers billions of dollars in subsidies at a time when our nation is already $12 trillion in debt. Even environmentalists have turned against it; research shows that ethanol production increases the amount of carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere.

Here in Maine, as every motorist knows, the 10 percent mixture of ethanol in our gas has reduced mileage per gallon and decreased engine power. But a more serious issue also has emerged: ethanol is impairing engine performance in boats and older engines of various sorts. It requires expensive additives to keep from damaging older fuel systems, and it breaks down in the presence of moisture. The consequences can include engine failure and potentially life-threatening situations. It is so unstable its use is forbidden in aircraft.
 
Gill said:
No single oil field will "solve" our problem. It will help our import problem however. I don't understand why you would think any particular oil find should have to "solve" our oil dependency problem or it is insignificant. That's the same absurd argument against drilling in ANWR.

With every bit of oil we find and recover, that is a little more that we don't have to import. If we get 3 billion barrels of oil from Bakken, that is $300 billion dollars we don't send to another country.
Click to expand...

All more drilling does is use up our reserves faster. Then what? We have to find alternatives. Soon. Before it's too late. This short term thinking is what got us into this mess.
By the way I am for drilling ANWR and Bakken, but that will not solve anything like the republicans claim. It's just too bad Carters energy policy was scrapped by Reagan. We could be driving cars that get 70 miles to the gallon by now and not importing a drop of oil.
 
ptif219 said:
Because democrats blocked him
Click to expand...

Exactly what bill did they block? Bush was against offshore drilling in Florida before he supported it. The GOP governor blocked offshore oil drilling in California.
 
USA_1 said:
All more drilling does is use up our reserves faster. Then what? We have to find alternatives. Soon. Before it's too late. This short term thinking is what got us into this mess.
By the way I am for drilling ANWR and Bakken, but that will not solve anything like the republicans claim. It's just too bad Carters energy policy was scrapped by Reagan. We could be driving cars that get 70 miles to the gallon by now and not importing a drop of oil.
Click to expand...

Ahhh, so you prefer to prolong the oil shortage and human suffering by creating a shortage now and for the next hundred years, rather than use what we have now and plan on finding alternatives within the next hundred years ???
 
USA_1 said:
All more drilling does is use up our reserves faster. Then what? We have to find alternatives. Soon. Before it's too late. This short term thinking is what got us into this mess.
By the way I am for drilling ANWR and Bakken, but that will not solve anything like the republicans claim. It's just too bad Carters energy policy was scrapped by Reagan. We could be driving cars that get 70 miles to the gallon by now and not importing a drop of oil.
Click to expand...

Not drilling doesn't do anything to help, either.
 
USA_1 said:
Exactly what bill did they block? Bush was against offshore drilling in Florida before he supported it. The GOP governor blocked offshore oil drilling in California.
Click to expand...

On May 18, 2006, Dems blocked a bill to allow offshore drilling off the continental U.S.

On December 21, 2005, Dems blocked a bill to allow drilling in ANWR.

Do I need to go on ??
 
Gill said:
Ahhh, so you prefer to prolong the oil shortage and human suffering by creating a shortage now and for the next hundred years, rather than use what we have now and plan on finding alternatives within the next hundred years ???
Click to expand...

No I want to start developing alternatives now and create an energy policy of conservation and using our resources more efficiently. We have to stop being the country of waste. I just get tired of republicans claiming we can save ourselves and eliminate imports by more drilling. That is just too shortsighted and not even possible.
 
UtahBill said:
Nuclear power does not contribute to transportation fuel needs, except in the rare instance of nuclear power being used to charge a battery powered car. How many of those are on the road? Damn few, is how many. Natural gas is dangerous, any fuel in gaseous form is dangerous. Gasoline will not burn until it is converted to a vapor, likewise diesel. And we don't have the infrastructure to use natural gas for cars.
This last cold snap, so many people with natural gas heating used so much of it, that the line pressure dropped below what is required by Combined Cycle Natural Gas Turbine power plants, and they had to shut down. It was so cold in Texas that even coal plants were shutting down. When it comes to electric power, only nuclear operates well in extreme cold situations.
Neither electric cars or natural gas powered cars are the answer for the forseeable future.
Jimmy Carter was the only president with an engineering degree and thus able to better understand the complexities of our energy needs, and Reagan put a stop to most of the programs that Carter started.
Click to expand...

Regarding Jimmy Carter, most people agree he is a moron who got elected becuase no one knew him. Not sure what your complaint is about nuclear other than it isn't used in transportation. If you want to do what Obama is asking you need electric power for all those electric cars. Natural gas is already used in some trucking. It would be somewhat costly to convert diesel trucks to nat gas but we Obama is looking for areas to invest. If there are other alternatives that work we should be in favor of all of the above.
 
Gill said:
On May 18, 2006, Dems blocked a bill to allow offshore drilling off the continental U.S.

?
Click to expand...

Repealing the same ban that Bush supported a couple years before? The same ban his brother Jeb supported? The same ban the California GOP governor supported? They all supported the ban before they flip flopped.
 
Gill said:
On December 21, 2005, Dems blocked a bill to allow drilling in ANWR.

Do I need to go on ??
Click to expand...

In 89 a drilling bill for ANWR was about to be overwhelmingly passed right up until the Exxon Valdez spill.
 
washunut said:
Regarding Jimmy Carter, most people agree he is a moron who got elected becuase no one knew him. Not sure what your complaint is about nuclear other than it isn't used in transportation. If you want to do what Obama is asking you need electric power for all those electric cars. Natural gas is already used in some trucking. It would be somewhat costly to convert diesel trucks to nat gas but we Obama is looking for areas to invest. If there are other alternatives that work we should be in favor of all of the above.
Click to expand...
Most people think Reagan was a moron too. So what's your point?
 
USA_1 said:
No I want to start developing alternatives now and create an energy policy of conservation and using our resources more efficiently. We have to stop being the country of waste. I just get tired of republicans claiming we can save ourselves and eliminate imports by more drilling. That is just too shortsighted and not even possible.
Click to expand...

No one believes we can drill enough oil to halt foriegn imports. That's just a left wing talking point. There's no reason we can't drill all we can WHILE developing alternatives.
 
USA_1 said:
Repealing the same ban that Bush supported a couple years before? The same ban his brother Jeb supported? The same ban the California GOP governor supported? They all supported the ban before they flip flopped.
Click to expand...

Link ???????
 
USA_1 said:
Most people think Reagan was a moron too. So what's your point?
Click to expand...

Is that why he was recently voted the greatest President in American history by the people ??
 
Gill said:
On May 18, 2006, Dems blocked a bill to allow offshore drilling off the continental U.S.

On December 21, 2005, Dems blocked a bill to allow drilling in ANWR.

Do I need to go on ??
Click to expand...

Senate or Congress?

If congress it was not the dems, if the senate and they used the fillibuster they did?
 
The Prof said:
jimmy carter---LOL!

no wonder cap and trade never made it past first base
Click to expand...

Carter was an engineer, he actually understood the energy issues. Name one politician today who understands any of it, if you can....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom