- Joined
- Apr 8, 2008
- Messages
- 19,883
- Reaction score
- 5,120
- Location
- 0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
Vote Maggots!
Vote Maggots!
Absolutely not, until we reduce our dependence on oil, it won't matter what the source is, since the spike in price of crude is mostly controlled by speculaters on the commodities markets. The purpose of these markets were so businesses could plan their future costs and the assumption they would take delivery of them. Today's speculators use these markets as a casino - the never taking delivery.Vote Maggots!
I say we move away from oil all together, and focus on new energy sources.
Barbbtx;1059469449[B said:]Speculation accounts for about a third of the price of oil.[/B] If we get serious about drilling more and becoming energy independent, speculation will be that there will be more oil in the future. The price will drop.
Alternative energy investment is far too expensive and still has many unknowns. It will take a long time to even harness that energy and when it is I can only imagine how expensive it will be. We have enough oil for another 100+ years and need to depend on that as to not hurt families and businesses. An economic recession is a horrible time to begin a transfer in energy production.
Sure we can work on it, but lets make sure we are in a situation where it can be done.
Speculation accounts for about a third of the price of oil.
If we get serious about drilling more and becoming energy independent, speculation will be that there will be more oil in the future. The price will drop.
Alternative energy investment is far too expensive and still has many unknowns. It will take a long time to even harness that energy and when it is I can only imagine how expensive it will be. We have enough oil for another 100+ years and need to depend on that as to not hurt families and businesses. An economic recession is a horrible time to begin a transfer in energy production.
Sure we can work on it, but lets make sure we are in a situation where it can be done.
It's something we should strive for, space exploration was damn expensive, and there were many unknowns with that as well, but we got to the moon in under 10 years. I agree it might not be the best idea to do it in a recession, but it's something we need to start as soon as we are over this. You wanna bring America back to the forefront of technological expansion, you wanna take political, economic power away from the middle east? You invent a new energy source that everyone wants. I believe America can do it, we just need to commit to it, and not clamor for the last bits of oil left.
The Stimulus Green by the Numbers: Where the Money Will Go
And here's what's got everyone so excited: (from NRDC)
• $6 billion for clean and safe water, creating more than 200,000 jobs
• $4.5 billion for greening federal buildings
• State energy grants, issued through the Treasury Department, that will fund renewable energy projects that are eligible for the available tax credits
• Funding for the state energy program, which includes important utility reforms and building code conditions
• $2.5 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy Research and Development
• $5 billion for the Weatherization Assistance Program, creating approximately 90,000 jobs
• A multi-year extension of the renewable production tax credit
• A more effective tax credit for home efficiency upgrades
• $6 billion in loan guarantees for renewables, transmission and leading edge biofuels
• $2 billion for advanced batteries
• $9.3 billion for intercity rail, including high-speed rail
• $27.5 billion for highways (this large pot of money is not exclusively for highways, and states and cities must use this flexibility to invest in fuel-efficient public transportation)
• $8.4 billion for transit
• $1.5 billion in competitive grants for transportation investments (which could be used for public transportation)
Even some of the smaller numbers are encouraging: (from previous TreeHugger post)
* $125 million to restore trails and abandoned mines
* $146 million for trail maintenance at National Park Service sites
* $140 million for volcano monitoring systems
* $600 million for the Environmental Protection Agency Superfund environmental cleanup program
* $200 million to clean up leaking underground storage tanks
* $500 million for forest health and wildfire prevention
I say we move away from oil all together, and focus on new energy sources.
It could, over time, if refining capacity is increased and the amount of oil on the world market increases in proportion, to the increase in consumption.
I'm under the impression all the drilling we could muster would likely barely increase the amount of oil in our country by a double digit percentage and in a decade.
Hey, nothing wrong with that, Chavez did it all to the legal dot.
Uh...depends how you define "wrong." Venezeula is facing a decline in oil production for a number of reasons directly tied to nationalization.
Anyways, I think the majority of people have this asinine notion that domestic driling can reduce oil prices largely because they don't understand how commodity markets work.
Trading volume was light in Asia as markets in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Malaysia and Singapore will closed for international Labor Day. Markets in Japan were open Monday but will be closed the next three days for Golden Week holiday.
We need to start at some point, starting in 100 years when we are out of oil is much worse prospect than starting now while we have time.
Vote Maggots!
Pointless to do and too environmentally risky. The Gov should lease more public land for solar energy.
It may reduce prices in the short run, but after about, I don't know, 3-5 years it will be right back to where it is now. Global demand + weak dollar = $$$ gas