The U.S. Is Poised to Hit a New Oil Gusher

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

Believe me Steven, I really think that the government should subsidize nothing. But that will never happen. Markets work better without interference.

They have been pushing that conserve more line ever since I was a kid in the 70's. Don't you think we are about conserved out?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

God forbid we concentrate on renewable resources.

party pooper.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

DRAAINAAAGEE!!!!

[Cassie 8]

God forbid we concentrate on renewable resources.

party pooper.

what can I say? I never do well in large groups.

[GaryC 7]

Here Steve, I will help you out. Bush has signed every energy bill given him. The latest one is from Dec 2007.

Bush signs energy bill

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Following weeks of negotiation, President Bush signed into law Wednesday the first major increase in vehicle fuel efficiency standards in over three decades.

The law also calls for greater use of biofuels like ethanol and more energy-efficient homes and appliances - but left out some provisions called for by Congressional Democrats.

Automakers will have to make sure the average fuel efficiency level for all vehicles they sell in the U.S. is 35 miles per gallon by 2020, up from 25 miles per gallon currently.

"We make a major step... toward reducing our dependence on oil, fighting global climate change, expanding the production of renewable fuels and giving future generations... a nation that is stronger, cleaner and more secure," said Bush at a signing ceremony at the Energy Department.

The current fuel-economy standards of 27.5 mpg for passenger cars and 22.2 for light trucks were established in 1975. The new bill sets a single average standard for manufacturers.

A 35 mpg future for your car

Automakers had long resisted raising fuel economy standards, saying it would be a costly change that customers didn't want.

But opposition melted away in the last year of so, as high gasoline prices drove sales of foreign cars at the expense of domestic manufactures.

Environmental groups seemed happy with the law.

"This is an extraordinary change from just a little while ago," the National Environmental Trust said in a statement. "Everyone from the auto lobby to one-time Congressional opponents have thrown their support behind it." (See correction at end of story.)

The law also requires refiners to replace 36 billion gallons of gasoline with biofuel by 2022. The U.S. currently consumes about 140 billion gallons of gas annually, and uses about 6 billion gallons of biofuel.

The mandate also says that no more than 15 billion gallons of biofuel can come from corn-based ethanol, in part due to concerns about food prices. The rest must come from "advanced biofuels," like ethanol made from switch grass or other biofuels.

Ethanol bill fuels food costs

But the bill left out two major provisions that Congressional Democrats had pushed for months - over $20 billion in funding for renewable energy, paid for largely by taxes on Big Oil, and a requirement that utilities buy 15 percent of their power from renewable sources.

Debate on the bill in both the House and Senate had been intense for the last few weeks. Ultimately, a likely filibuster from Senate Republicans and a veto threat from the White House left those measures out of the bill.

Critics of the tax provision said taxes on Big Oil would discourage domestic production, increasing costs for consumers.

Southeastern utilities said a federal law mandating the purchases of renewable energy would be an unfair burden on them, as their region has fewer renewable options like wind. About half the states have already passed such a requirement.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the Democrats would continue fighting for those measures, presumably after the holiday recess.

Even the measures signed into law Wednesday - raising vehicle fuel economy standards, home and appliance efficiency standards, and using more biofuels - were not without critics.

House opponents such as Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, complained that the bill will undo many of the efforts made to foster increased production of fossil fuels in an energy bill passed in 2005.

"I understand the consequences of elections. I understand there's a new majority," said Barton, the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. "I do not understand how what made sense two years ago doesn't make sense today."

Barton called the bill a "no-energy" bill and "a recipe for recession," arguing that the conservation measures mandated by the bill would raise prices for fuel, homes and appliances for consumers.

http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/19/news/econo...sion=2007121916

[BishopMnA 0]

I get tired of all the politics regarding energy. Until consumers learn to consume less...nothing is going to change...no matter what fuel source we might tap into...

So perhaps we get an extra 20 years boost from these new oil fields...all that means is that Americans will suck it dry in 5 years.

People have got to change their thinking, and looking to government to lead the way on that is not going to make it happen...unfortunately.

For me, I just ride my bike more, and have a few extra blankets at home. It can be that simple...it has to start at a grassroots level...not a 'government policy level'.

Peace to all,

MarkNAam

[Cassie 8]

I get tired of all the politics regarding energy. Until consumers learn to consume less...nothing is going to change...no matter what fuel source we might tap into...

So perhaps we get an extra 20 years boost from these new oil fields...all that means is that Americans will suck it dry in 5 years.

word

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

The only one that does seem plausible is the nuclear and hydrogen route.

I mean what is the earth going to look like with it being one big solar panel. I mean come on talk about ugly and plants convert the sun's energy more efficiently then any solar panel could ever do. Or maybe wind mills chopping up all the birds, just great!

Oh yeah, oil spills are just nature's fingerpaint sessions

Do you understand how ridiculous you sound?

Yes, I do know how ridiculous YOU sound. Let's use our technology to go forward, not reduce the world to burning trees for fuel again. Oil is the most efficient and concentrated energy source we have the others are so wasteful and inefficient, but I know it makes you feel good about yourself and superior that it doesn't matter.

If the solar powered house is the way to go, which it may be, then the market will deliver it without the government wasting all of our money. I live in Portland so it will never work 100% for me. Too much rain.

[Tyrobe 1]

Even though this is a good news, but it will be years and years before the production comes online. In any case, the oil and gas industry looks great as this boom will last for a while!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

He can stop being a shill to the oil companies and sign into law whatever energy bills get passed...that'd be a start.

What has he vetoed??????? Name it!

Here's just some examples of his disregard for claiming that he wants to reduce our consumption of oil. I'm not sure how more to make it clear there's no substance to what he said...he just pays lip service to it...feel good sound bites.

Bush Threatens to Veto Energy Bill, No Likey CAFE Standards

http://jalopnik.com/cars/news/bush-threate...ards-329641.php

House passes sweeping energy bill

WASHINGTON: The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a wide-ranging energy bill that will require most utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources like wind and solar power.

President George W. Bush has vowed to veto the bill because it does nothing to encourage increased domestic production of oil and gas.

"It's a big, big deal," said Representative Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, a longtime member of the energy committee. "There has been no legislation like this for a generation."

The energy measure passed by a vote of 241-172 on Saturday, with 26 Republicans voting in favor and nine Democrats opposed. Speaker Nancy Pelosi had made the bill one of her top legislative priorities for her first year as leader of the House Democrats.

The bill allots money for the development of alternative fuels and for increased efficiency of appliances and buildings. It is also meant to spur research on methods to capture the carbon dioxide emissions that scientists say are largely responsible for global warming.

The utilities provision, the so-called renewable electricity standard amendment, was among the most contested measures in the energy bill. Sponsored by Representative Tom Udall, a Democrat from New Mexico, and several others, it will force utilities to make a significant share of their electricity from solar, wind, geothermal, water and other nonfossil fuel sources, although they can meet part of the requirement through conservation measures.

The standard applies only to investor-owned utilities and exempts rural electric cooperatives, municipal utilities, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the state of Hawaii from the mandate.

"I think this was a great victory for the planet," Udall said. He noted that more than 30 Republicans had voted for the amendment and predicted that it would be part of any energy bill that reaches the president's desk later this year.

Thomas Kuhn, president of the Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned utilities, called the House vote "very disappointing" and said it would bring big rate increases to electricity customers.

The 786-page House energy bill does not include an increase in fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks that supporters called the single most effective way of cutting oil consumption and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Sponsors vowed to bring it up again when Congress reconvenes in September.

The Senate passed energy legislation in June with numerous differences from the House package. The Senate version requires that cars and light trucks sold in the United States achieve a fleet average of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, or 6.7 liters per 100 kilometers, or 15 kilometers per liter.

Democrats said if the bill that emerged from conference contained both the renewable electricity standard and the mandate for higher corporate average fuel economy, it would be the most significant energy legislation ever enacted.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/05/business/energy.php

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Here Steve, I will help you out. Bush has signed every energy bill given him. The latest one is from Dec 2007.

Good for him...he did the right thing.

[GaryC 7]

He can stop being a shill to the oil companies and sign into law whatever energy bills get passed...that'd be a start.

What has he vetoed??????? Name it!

Here's just some examples of his disregard for claiming that he wants to reduce our consumption of oil. I'm not sure how more to make it clear there's no substance to what he said...he just pays lip service to it...feel good sound bites.

Bush Threatens to Veto Energy Bill, No Likey CAFE Standards

http://jalopnik.com/cars/news/bush-threate...ards-329641.php

House passes sweeping energy bill

WASHINGTON: The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a wide-ranging energy bill that will require most utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources like wind and solar power.

President George W. Bush has vowed to veto the bill because it does nothing to encourage increased domestic production of oil and gas.

"It's a big, big deal," said Representative Edward Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, a longtime member of the energy committee. "There has been no legislation like this for a generation."

The energy measure passed by a vote of 241-172 on Saturday, with 26 Republicans voting in favor and nine Democrats opposed. Speaker Nancy Pelosi had made the bill one of her top legislative priorities for her first year as leader of the House Democrats.

The bill allots money for the development of alternative fuels and for increased efficiency of appliances and buildings. It is also meant to spur research on methods to capture the carbon dioxide emissions that scientists say are largely responsible for global warming.

The utilities provision, the so-called renewable electricity standard amendment, was among the most contested measures in the energy bill. Sponsored by Representative Tom Udall, a Democrat from New Mexico, and several others, it will force utilities to make a significant share of their electricity from solar, wind, geothermal, water and other nonfossil fuel sources, although they can meet part of the requirement through conservation measures.

The standard applies only to investor-owned utilities and exempts rural electric cooperatives, municipal utilities, the Tennessee Valley Authority and the state of Hawaii from the mandate.

"I think this was a great victory for the planet," Udall said. He noted that more than 30 Republicans had voted for the amendment and predicted that it would be part of any energy bill that reaches the president's desk later this year.

Thomas Kuhn, president of the Edison Electric Institute, which represents investor-owned utilities, called the House vote "very disappointing" and said it would bring big rate increases to electricity customers.

The 786-page House energy bill does not include an increase in fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks that supporters called the single most effective way of cutting oil consumption and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Sponsors vowed to bring it up again when Congress reconvenes in September.

The Senate passed energy legislation in June with numerous differences from the House package. The Senate version requires that cars and light trucks sold in the United States achieve a fleet average of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, or 6.7 liters per 100 kilometers, or 15 kilometers per liter.

Democrats said if the bill that emerged from conference contained both the renewable electricity standard and the mandate for higher corporate average fuel economy, it would be the most significant energy legislation ever enacted.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/08/05/business/energy.php

See my post above. He signed it and it included the CAFE standards. There is nothing wrong with him disagreeing with elements of certain bills that he thinks are wrong. It's called compromise and it's how things get done.

[Heracles 417]

WASHINGTON: The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a wide-ranging energy bill that will require most utilities to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources like wind and solar power.

See my post above. He signed it and it included the CAFE standards. There is nothing wrong with him disagreeing with elements of certain bills that he thinks are wrong. It's called compromise and it's how things get done.

I wonder if Steve has ever seen how ugly Wind Power farms are. They also waste a hell of a lot of land.

Why not look at what his ultra left buddies in France are doing. Yes Nuclear power.. Solar power :rofl: Enough with the jokes congress. Solar power would not even work in a sun belt like Australia, which only has 21 mill people, let alone here.

Which party again does not want to drill Alaska or any other offshore wells.

[HAL 9000 96]

God forbid we concentrate on renewable resources.

I am all for that. But it isn't gonna happen anytime soon. In the mean time this will help us keep the price of oil from going to $200/barrel. It will also help our security because we will not be as dependant on mid-east oil.

Lets hope that's the case.

[kaydee457 13]

God forbid we concentrate on renewable resources.

I am all for that. But it isn't gonna happen anytime soon. In the mean time this will help us keep the price of oil from going to $200/barrel. It will also help our security because we will not be as dependant on mid-east oil.

Why not? You give a perfectly good reason why we should.

The research is going on right now. New forms of energy are being explored. But none of them will make any difference any time soon. It takes time to develope and to make the infrastructure to deliver it. Bio fuels made from grain isn't the answer and that is the only one that is close to fruition.

Right. Gary, there are existing technologies and strategies that would greatly reduce our crude oil consumption, but Bush won't take any meaningful step to invest in such a strategy.

Well, I as an engineer would like you to name some of these "existing technologies"......I suspect that you, and others that aren't technically inclined, are ignorant of the fact that these technologies that you're referring to simply displace energy and aren't viable alternatives at all.

Many of your ilk tout Hybrid cars (feel good cars as they are sometimes referred to) but the simple fact is that for every one produced, a lot of smoke goes out the factory stack........Batteries are not yet as efficient as they need to be. Again, more energy is expended in their manufacter than you will ever recover at the gas pump. Lastly, they have a disposal problem yet to be resolved......

Windpower- ask ted kennedy about that, he's the expert.

Solar power- prohibitively expensive to manufacture without govt. subsidies- requires lots of real estate- can cause Global "cooling" if used en masse. It absorbes energy from the sun. This is not without consequence.

These are the cold facts about "alternative energy"......... It just isn't there yet! If there were a viable alternative we'd be putting in our freek'n tanks!

Edited April 3, 2008 by kaydee457