Will More Drilling Mean Cheaper Gas?

[Dan J 277]

It's out there. There are proven reserves on our coastal areas in addition to ANWR. You know as well as I do that estimates vary wildly and we will not know for sure until we are allowed to look.

There is an even bigger reserve that is there, the Green River oil shale formation. There is more than a trillion barrels of oil in that, more than the ME has. I don't have time to find the US government link as I am getting ready for work. Here is a story about it though.

http://www.stansberryonline.com/PRO/0704OI...OIL-COL-49.html

A quick search will find a more credible source. Look it up.

Despite the argument that refining cost are high, the question becomes why has it been under the radar? Very interesting...

It hasn't been under the radar. Tar sands and oil shale are more expensive to extract. The prices has to remain high for its extraction to be economical. But right now, most of the current price isn't really driven by real demand, so that means the prices will eventually drop.

Also from wikipedia:

Due to the low price of oil and other competitive fuels, oil shale production has ceased in Canada, Scotland, Sweden, France, Australia, Romania, and South Africa, and is stalled in the USA, Belarus, Jordan, and Morocco.^[11] During the oil crisis of the 1970s, there was a widespread perception that oil supplies had peaked. Businesses expected oil prices to be around seventy dollars a barrel for some time to come, and invested considerable sums in refining oil shale — money that they lost. Because of the huge losses last time around, there is considerable reluctance to invest in shale oil production. However, in the early 21st century, USA, Canada and Jordan were planning or had started test projects, and Australia was considering restarting oil shale production.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

I may not be an expert in that field but from what actual miners have stated in one or two Discovery Channel type shows I've seen is that the cost of mining it and the inefficiency in the process reduces the actual yield by orders of magnitude.

Mining for oil

Discovery channel education Fukcin scholar

You are surely a government employee

[dalegg 143]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise? So far I've heard "tax the oil comanies" but I'm not putting "tax oil companies" and lower gas prices together in the same sentence.

Also I've heard "conserve" Yeah, okay. We'll see how Americans go for that. We're all for conserving as long as someone else does it.

But more concerning to me is that what I've heard from some of his more ardent supporters is that they really don't want the price of gas to get lower at all. In fact I've seen some of you guys (you know who you are) even say you hope it goes to 8 or 9 bucks. It'll force us to figure something else out then. Do you think overall this is Obama's opinion or plan? Anybody know without linking me to a 12 page link or saying how Bush and McCain suck? Paraphrase please.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise? So far I've heard "tax the oil comanies" but I'm not putting "tax oil companies" and lower gas prices together in the same sentence.

Also I've heard "conserve" Yeah, okay. We'll see how Americans go for that. We're all for conserving as long as someone else does it.

But more concerning to me is that what I've heard from some of his more ardent supporters is that they really don't want the price of gas to get lower at all. In fact I've seen some of you guys (you know who you are) even say you hope it goes to 8 or 9 bucks. It'll force us to figure something else out then. Do you think overall this is Obama's opinion or plan? Anybody know without linking me to a 12 page link or saying how Bush and McCain suck? Paraphrase please.

Dale its all mish mash!

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

[dalegg 143]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise? So far I've heard "tax the oil comanies" but I'm not putting "tax oil companies" and lower gas prices together in the same sentence.

Also I've heard "conserve" Yeah, okay. We'll see how Americans go for that. We're all for conserving as long as someone else does it.

But more concerning to me is that what I've heard from some of his more ardent supporters is that they really don't want the price of gas to get lower at all. In fact I've seen some of you guys (you know who you are) even say you hope it goes to 8 or 9 bucks. It'll force us to figure something else out then. Do you think overall this is Obama's opinion or plan? Anybody know without linking me to a 12 page link or saying how Bush and McCain suck? Paraphrase please.

Dale its all mish mash!

So far thats what it sounds like. But I'm hoping to hear from someone who knows. Someone must know.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

Whos the POODLE?

Edited June 20, 2008 by ={Rogue}=

[dalegg 143]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

Well you just broke one of the rules, but I'll let it pass. Expand on the issue of attacking the issue on the Demand side. How? Talk to me like I'm a 5 year old.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Language!

Edited June 20, 2008 by ={Rogue}=

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

Well you just broke one of the rules, but I'll let it pass. Expand on the issue of attacking the issue on the Demand side. How? Talk to me like I'm a 5 year old.

I won't talk to you like a 5 year old 'cause you're not. You approach it from all angles: Invest in the development of alternate energy sources, push for better fuel efficiency (something we've neglected for far too long), set aggressive targets for renewable energy production, etc. Again, read about here. And to all the doubters out there: Germany did it. German companies and consumers slashed their use of so-called primary energy -- defined as energy generated by oil, gas, coal, nuclear and hydropower -- by 18.5 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007, a 5.6-percent reduction. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to work on America becoming the leader on that front? Or are you suggesting that America can't do it?

[dalegg 143]

I won't talk to you like a 5 year old 'cause you're not. You approach it from all angles: Invest in the development of alternate energy sources, push for better fuel efficiency (something we've neglected for far too long), set aggressive targets for renewable energy production, etc. Again, read about here. And to all the doubters out there: Germany did it. German companies and consumers slashed their use of so-called primary energy -- defined as energy generated by oil, gas, coal, nuclear and hydropower -- by 18.5 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007, a 5.6-percent reduction. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to work on America becoming the leader on that front? Or are you suggesting that America can't do it?

Do you see any of this resulting in lower energy costs within the next 3 to 4 years, or would you say that this is basically going to take a long term commitment by the citizens of the US and patience to grit out possibly a continuing of the rise in energy costs until our alternative energy research investments pay out?

[GaryC 7]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

Well you just broke one of the rules, but I'll let it pass. Expand on the issue of attacking the issue on the Demand side. How? Talk to me like I'm a 5 year old.

I won't talk to you like a 5 year old 'cause you're not. You approach it from all angles: Invest in the development of alternate energy sources, push for better fuel efficiency (something we've neglected for far too long), set aggressive targets for renewable energy production, etc. Again, read about here. And to all the doubters out there: Germany did it. German companies and consumers slashed their use of so-called primary energy -- defined as energy generated by oil, gas, coal, nuclear and hydropower -- by 18.5 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007, a 5.6-percent reduction. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to work on America becoming the leader on that front? Or are you suggesting that America can't do it?

That talks about their electricity generation. The use of oil for transportation is much different. Tell me, just how are we to conserve oil enough to make any difference in relation to transportation? If you say things like mass transit then take into account that not everyone lives in big cities. If you say making the cars more efficent then take into account that the cars we have now must be replaced before these savings are seen. Not everyone can afford to replace their cars. If you say that we need to find alternative fuels for the cars we have take into account that new distrobution systems need to be developed, the cars must be retrofitted ect. Now tell me how this is going to be done before the country goes broke from the anticipated $10/gal gas. All those things must be done, no argument here. But it cannot be done before great harm comes to our economy. The wise thing to do is to grab every drop of domestic oil we can, wherever it may be WHILE we are doing the things that need to be done. Those that think we can drill our way out of this mess and those that think we can conserve our way out of this mess are both only half right. We must do both at the same time.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I won't talk to you like a 5 year old 'cause you're not. You approach it from all angles: Invest in the development of alternate energy sources, push for better fuel efficiency (something we've neglected for far too long), set aggressive targets for renewable energy production, etc. Again, read about here. And to all the doubters out there: Germany did it. German companies and consumers slashed their use of so-called primary energy -- defined as energy generated by oil, gas, coal, nuclear and hydropower -- by 18.5 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007, a 5.6-percent reduction. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to work on America becoming the leader on that front? Or are you suggesting that America can't do it?

Do you see any of this resulting in lower energy costs within the next 3 to 4 years, or would you say that this is basically going to take a long term commitment by the citizens of the US and patience to grit out possibly a continuing of the rise in energy costs until our alternative energy research investments pay out?

Oil is apparently overpriced right now. Some predict that the bubble will burst and oil will be in the $70-$80 range following the correction. That'll ease things a bit in the short term. Drilling, no drilling won't have any effect on that correction. Yet if we focus on drilling rather than alternatives then we'll leave our kids to wonder a decade or two down the road what the ####### we were thinking not to develop a long term strategy and get busy towards realizing that strategy. Look at Detroit. You know where they are going right now for help with immediate fixes for more fuel efficient cars that they can actually sell? To their European subsidiaries who've been developing those models for decades. Say bye-bye to those R+D dollars and those well paid jobs. We could have had them if we had taken the warning signs seriously last time around. We didn't. Do we really want to make the same mistake twice?

[dalegg 143]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

Well you just broke one of the rules, but I'll let it pass. Expand on the issue of attacking the issue on the Demand side. How? Talk to me like I'm a 5 year old.

I won't talk to you like a 5 year old 'cause you're not. You approach it from all angles: Invest in the development of alternate energy sources, push for better fuel efficiency (something we've neglected for far too long), set aggressive targets for renewable energy production, etc. Again, read about here. And to all the doubters out there: Germany did it. German companies and consumers slashed their use of so-called primary energy -- defined as energy generated by oil, gas, coal, nuclear and hydropower -- by 18.5 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007, a 5.6-percent reduction. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to work on America becoming the leader on that front? Or are you suggesting that America can't do it?

That talks about their electricity generation. The use of oil for transportation is much different. Tell me, just how are we to conserve oil enough to make any difference in relation to transportation? If you say things like mass transit then take into account that not everyone lives in big cities. If you say making the cars more efficent then take into account that the cars we have now must be replaced before these savings are seen. Not everyone can afford to replace their cars. If you say that we need to find alternative fuels for the cars we have take into account that new distrobution systems need to be developed, the cars must be retrofitted ect. Now tell me how this is going to be done before the country goes broke from the anticipated $10/gal gas. All those things must be done, no argument here. But it cannot be done before great harm comes to our economy. The wise thing to do is to grab every drop of domestic oil we can, wherever it may be WHILE we are doing the things that need to be done. Those that think we can drill our way out of this mess and those that think we can conserve our way out of this mess are both only half right. We must do both at the same time.

To me everything Gary says is what I believe to be true. I'm not saying this to be partisan. It all seems like common sense, but I'm honestly trying to see the otherside, since I believe there is an extremely good chance we are going to have to live under the control of the other side. I'm trying to size up what we are up against without guessing, but I am failing to see how good times are just around the corner.

I suppose the simple question to start with is that- is it wrong to think that Obama's plan is to bring good times to us in the short term? Is it his underlying goal to sort of "gut" the current system and rebuild better, brighter future in the coming decades?

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Though Democratic Senator Barack Obama and most of his party are against the proposed expansion, McCain and his supporters may have the public on their side:

Hey I don't mean to pry, but what exactly is Senator Obama's plan to reduce the price of oil or at least stop it from continuing to rise?

He's the one planning to attack the issue where we can control it - on the demand side. You can look it up on his website. That said, what's McCain's plan to lower the price of oil? Drill off shore? To produce 7-10 years down the road an amount of oil that won't even make a dent - the mosquitopiss worth of oil as I like to call it? That's the plan? And you believe that will bring prices down anytime soon and / or by any significant measure? If so, I've got a few bridges to sell...

Well you just broke one of the rules, but I'll let it pass. Expand on the issue of attacking the issue on the Demand side. How? Talk to me like I'm a 5 year old.

I won't talk to you like a 5 year old 'cause you're not. You approach it from all angles: Invest in the development of alternate energy sources, push for better fuel efficiency (something we've neglected for far too long), set aggressive targets for renewable energy production, etc. Again, read about here. And to all the doubters out there: Germany did it. German companies and consumers slashed their use of so-called primary energy -- defined as energy generated by oil, gas, coal, nuclear and hydropower -- by 18.5 million tons of oil equivalent in 2007, a 5.6-percent reduction. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to work on America becoming the leader on that front? Or are you suggesting that America can't do it?

Hey big dog you gotta price for all that? Baracks wbsite doesnt mention a price!

Edited June 20, 2008 by ={Rogue}=