Wiseacre
Retired USAF Chief
Many on this board deny the possibility that increasing our domestic production of oil will affect oil prices, yet they'll cheerfully swallow the Obama line that if we reduce demand here that'll lower the price. He said so in an energy speech last week (Feb 23), look it up. But then he says in the same speech that how much oil we produce at home is "not going to set the price of gas world-wide". Does anyone not see the bullshit here, commodity prices are determined by both supply and demand, if demand goes up or supply goes down then the price increases. And the reverse is also true, less demand and/or more supply lowers the price. That's the way it is folks, unless gov'ts intervene somewhere, as they did in the Arab Oil Embargo back in the 70s.
I've got no problem working on reducing the demand for fossil fuels in a number of ways, efficiency and alternative fuels among them. I do expect such efforts to be cost effective however, we are not in a position to be pissing money away by the hundreds of millions, as we did with Solyndra. But my real issue with the President in this post is his refusal to address the supply side of the equation by increasing domestic production. Which has increased under his administration, but not nearly as much as it could have been. Most of the increase is on private land, permits for public lands have been significantly reduced by the Obama admin. In fact, oil production on federal lands is at a 9 year low. Production in the gulf is way down, he dragged his feet forever on granting permits in the gulf even after a federal judge ordered him to. And we're not drilling in ANWAR, or off our continental shelf as some states would like to do.
When Obama says we only have 2% of the world's known reserves, he's talking about proven oil reserves. According to the Institute for Energy Research, when you include oil shale, the U.S. has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil. That is enough to meet all U.S. oil needs for about the next 200 years, without any imports. With the technology revolution in the energy business, including horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking, the old idea of proved oil reserves that Obama keeps using should be replaced with the new concept of recoverable resources. Investor's Business Daily recently did an article that says the U.S. now has 60 times more recoverable oil reserves than Obama claims. And that doesn't even include the natural-gas shale revolution, which has already slashed electricity prices for homes and businesses and will eventually be used more and more in transportation.
We import nearly half of our oil, thereby exporting enormous amounts of U.S. wealth. Almost 60 percent of our trade deficit — $332 billion out of $560 billion — is sent overseas to buy crude, mostly to people who are not our friends. How ridiculous is that, and how many jobs are we NOT creating when we pursue Obama's anti-fossil fuel agenda? Even if there were no savings at the pump, do you really want to be at the mercy of people like Hugo Chavez and the mullahs of Iran?
And then there's this: energy companies from Spain, Russia and Malaysia are lining up to drill for oil in Cuban waters 60 miles from the Florida Keys, U.S. agencies are struggling to cobble together emergency plans to protect fragile reefs, sandy beaches and a multibillion-dollar tourism industry in the event of a spill. The risks are there anyway, but we aren't getting any of the rewards. And you tell me, wouldn't you rather have a US company drilling off our shores, where we can control the compliance with standards? Why is it okay for us to invest in a Brazilian company to drill for oil off shore but not in our own companies?
I got my data from the following links:
Daniel Yergin: What's Behind Rising Gas Prices? - WSJ.com
Institute for Energy Research | Fossil fuel production on federal lands at 9 year low
Institute for Energy Research | Exposing the 2 percent oil reserves myth
I've got no problem working on reducing the demand for fossil fuels in a number of ways, efficiency and alternative fuels among them. I do expect such efforts to be cost effective however, we are not in a position to be pissing money away by the hundreds of millions, as we did with Solyndra. But my real issue with the President in this post is his refusal to address the supply side of the equation by increasing domestic production. Which has increased under his administration, but not nearly as much as it could have been. Most of the increase is on private land, permits for public lands have been significantly reduced by the Obama admin. In fact, oil production on federal lands is at a 9 year low. Production in the gulf is way down, he dragged his feet forever on granting permits in the gulf even after a federal judge ordered him to. And we're not drilling in ANWAR, or off our continental shelf as some states would like to do.
When Obama says we only have 2% of the world's known reserves, he's talking about proven oil reserves. According to the Institute for Energy Research, when you include oil shale, the U.S. has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil. That is enough to meet all U.S. oil needs for about the next 200 years, without any imports. With the technology revolution in the energy business, including horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracking, the old idea of proved oil reserves that Obama keeps using should be replaced with the new concept of recoverable resources. Investor's Business Daily recently did an article that says the U.S. now has 60 times more recoverable oil reserves than Obama claims. And that doesn't even include the natural-gas shale revolution, which has already slashed electricity prices for homes and businesses and will eventually be used more and more in transportation.
We import nearly half of our oil, thereby exporting enormous amounts of U.S. wealth. Almost 60 percent of our trade deficit — $332 billion out of $560 billion — is sent overseas to buy crude, mostly to people who are not our friends. How ridiculous is that, and how many jobs are we NOT creating when we pursue Obama's anti-fossil fuel agenda? Even if there were no savings at the pump, do you really want to be at the mercy of people like Hugo Chavez and the mullahs of Iran?
And then there's this: energy companies from Spain, Russia and Malaysia are lining up to drill for oil in Cuban waters 60 miles from the Florida Keys, U.S. agencies are struggling to cobble together emergency plans to protect fragile reefs, sandy beaches and a multibillion-dollar tourism industry in the event of a spill. The risks are there anyway, but we aren't getting any of the rewards. And you tell me, wouldn't you rather have a US company drilling off our shores, where we can control the compliance with standards? Why is it okay for us to invest in a Brazilian company to drill for oil off shore but not in our own companies?
I got my data from the following links:
Daniel Yergin: What's Behind Rising Gas Prices? - WSJ.com
Institute for Energy Research | Fossil fuel production on federal lands at 9 year low
Institute for Energy Research | Exposing the 2 percent oil reserves myth
Last edited: