Congress, get off your gas, and drill!

ScreamingEagle

Gold Member
Jul 5, 2004
13,399
1,707
245
June 9, 2008
by Chuck Norris

Look at the energy chaos that our government has allowed. While we remain at the mercy of oil companies, cartels and OPEC, our government has tied the hands of states and citizens to tap even temporary energy relief from our own land. Here are a few key vistas on the oil and energy landscape at the moment:

  • Though we have more oil in the shale of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming than combined in the Middle East (800 billion barrels), liberals and environmentalists have made it illegal to touch it.
  • It's illegal to drill in northern Alaska (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge), or off the coasts of Florida or California.
  • Oil fields in Colorado are being shut down.
  • We won't develop shale oil fields in the Western states
  • It's illegal to explore in the Atlantic.
  • It's illegal to explore in the Pacific
  • It's illegal to explore in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico
  • We're not receiving any more leases to drill in the Gulf of Mexico, while China, Venezuela and Cuba are.
  • We haven't built an oil refinery in 25 years and reduced in half those we have
  • There's enough natural gas beneath America (406 trillion cube feet) to heat every home in America for the next 150 years, but we can't tap it all.
  • We have the largest supply of coal in the world, but it's Germany who is planning to build 27 coal-fired electrical plants by 2020.
  • American airlines are in danger of going out of business.
  • American truckers are being stranded on the sides of the road.
  • American commuters are going bankrupt trying to travel back and forth to work, and are being forced to work locally for lower wages.

If there isn't a conspiracy going on here, someone needs to make a movie about one!

Bill Clinton once said, "We just have to slow down our economy and cut back our greenhouse emissions because we've got to save the planet for our grandchildren." That is the type of mentality that got us in this trouble. I'm all for doing our best to preserve our planet, but not at the price of losing our nation in the process. Bill's words just might come true, but not as he or Al Gore might expect. We might save the planet for our grandchildren, and lose America at the same time, unless we turn around this energy crisis now.

Instead of whining and blaming, Congress needs to take some practical steps now to stop the insanity at the pumps, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, open up some temporary energy production avenues for economic relief (like shale development) and focus more of their taxpayer work time into establishing further alternative ways of producing energy for everything (from coal, electrical, natural gas, hydrogen, solar, nuclear, wind, etc.) Being the wealthiest nation on Earth, there is simply no reason or justification for us to be dependent on fuels that we can't produce in our country.

If you're sick and tired of giving away $2 of every gallon of gas to foreign dictators, making other oil-producing countries, cartels and tycoons rich beyond their imagination, and watching the federal government flail for energy solutions and bow to international powers –all of whom are sucking the very life out of the American people, economy and threatening national security – I implore you to sign and pass along the petition, "Drill here, drill now, pay less" at Newt Gingrich's American Solutions website. We're hoping to send millions of signatures to Congress demanding an immediate emergency session and resolution to our economic and national security crisis revolving around soaring oil and gas prices.

Our message: It's time to drill here and drill now! The petition is simple. It states: "We therefore the undersigned citizens of the United States petition the U.S. Congress to act immediately to lower gas prices by authorizing exploration of proven energy reserves and reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries."

Speaking of unstable countries, did I mention that the Iraq oil minister just reported that oil production is at pre-war levels (2.5 million barrels a day), yielding earnings for Iraq of $28.5 billion in just the first five months of this year? What that means is, we'll likely soon be dependent and in debt to yet another Middle Eastern oil-producing country that we've helped stabilize and become wealthy while ours is going straight down the tubes.

Congratulations Congress – you're completely failing us.

Congress, get off your gas, and drill!
 
The US govt owns approx 70-75 percent of all oil shale reserves. Most are found in Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, and some in Utah. A few years ago there were only a few oil leases in Wyoming, now there are several hundred with most backed up to the Wind River Range and the Wind River Indian Reservation, some are found down near Rock Springs. The costs to extract range anywhere from 60-100 dollars per barrel. The conventional way of extracting originally required huge amounts of water but now they can be extracted by in-situ conversion which heats the oil out of the shales by sending electric resistance heaters into the holes and achieving temps of 700 degrees. This, in effect, takes three to four years. My concerns would be to monitor the water above and below the sites. This could be our future if we could just drill. I've talked to a couple of oil guys in Houston who are doing some work in this area and they've told me that this dwarfs the proven Saudi fields and could sustain us for 60 or more years. If our politicians have any brains, now would be a good time to show it. If they do open up, I'll invest.
 
Would you allow the states to have any say in the matter? For instance, if they wanted to say no...

The only two states I'm really familiar with are Florida and Alaska. I've no idea how much oil can be gotten off the coast of Florida without turning Florida into the sewer that we've turned New Orleans and the state of LA into. And I also understand that Alaska would take about 10 years to come online and would produce about one and a half years of oil. I can't even understand how it's worth the bother.
 
Would you allow the states to have any say in the matter? For instance, if they wanted to say no...

The only two states I'm really familiar with are Florida and Alaska. I've no idea how much oil can be gotten off the coast of Florida without turning Florida into the sewer that we've turned New Orleans and the state of LA into. And I also understand that Alaska would take about 10 years to come online and would produce about one and a half years of oil. I can't even understand how it's worth the bother.

Most Floridians don't want any drilling off the coasts.

Here in Florida, the biggest industry is tourism. There is a real fear across the political spectrum that the energy business will drive tourists away. It is a highly polluting industry. We're not sure why we should risk our livelihoods for the rest of the country.

As for ANWR, drill in it.
 
The US govt owns approx 70-75 percent of all oil shale reserves. Most are found in Wyoming, Montana, Colorado, and some in Utah. A few years ago there were only a few oil leases in Wyoming, now there are several hundred with most backed up to the Wind River Range and the Wind River Indian Reservation, some are found down near Rock Springs. The costs to extract range anywhere from 60-100 dollars per barrel. The conventional way of extracting originally required huge amounts of water but now they can be extracted by in-situ conversion which heats the oil out of the shales by sending electric resistance heaters into the holes and achieving temps of 700 degrees. This, in effect, takes three to four years. My concerns would be to monitor the water above and below the sites. This could be our future if we could just drill. I've talked to a couple of oil guys in Houston who are doing some work in this area and they've told me that this dwarfs the proven Saudi fields and could sustain us for 60 or more years. If our politicians have any brains, now would be a good time to show it. If they do open up, I'll invest.

Gas is being extracted from shale, but large quantities of oil extraction, similar to the Canadian Tar Sands, is still decades away. We've always known about shale but have never had the technology to exploit it in a massive way.
 
Would you allow the states to have any say in the matter? For instance, if they wanted to say no...

The only two states I'm really familiar with are Florida and Alaska. I've no idea how much oil can be gotten off the coast of Florida without turning Florida into the sewer that we've turned New Orleans and the state of LA into. And I also understand that Alaska would take about 10 years to come online and would produce about one and a half years of oil. I can't even understand how it's worth the bother.


You're correct on Alaska. The right to drill in Alaska was denied in 96 by congress. It would have taken 10 years to come online which would have put us real close to present. ANWR has good reserves but nothing compared to the oil shales. Florida presents somewhat of a problem due to it's rich ecological system. I highly doubt that it will be drilled. I do know that China is drilling pretty close though.


By asking the states are you saying ask the state reps and such? This endeavor would create huge job growth for the states.
 
Gas is being extracted from shale, but large quantities of oil extraction, similar to the Canadian Tar Sands, is still decades away. We've always known about shale but have never had the technology to exploit it in a massive way.


At least back to Taft. Now that we have in-situ conversion which has been tested and approved, it is feasible now to extract it.
 
Most Floridians don't want any drilling off the coasts.

Here in Florida, the biggest industry is tourism. There is a real fear across the political spectrum that the energy business will drive tourists away. It is a highly polluting industry. We're not sure why we should risk our livelihoods for the rest of the country.

As for ANWR, drill in it.

Sunshine patriots. Make tourism out of oil drilling. If anybody can do it, it should be Florida. Build a theme park around oil drilling.
 
Most Floridians don't want any drilling off the coasts.

Here in Florida, the biggest industry is tourism. There is a real fear across the political spectrum that the energy business will drive tourists away. It is a highly polluting industry. We're not sure why we should risk our livelihoods for the rest of the country.

As for ANWR, drill in it.

I live in Florida, too, and what you say is true.

As for Alaska, don't you think the people in the state have the same right of refusal?
 
I live in Florida, too, and what you say is true.

As for Alaska, don't you think the people in the state have the same right of refusal?

This is one time that I think the fed has to come in and say, 'drill & refine' sort of like when a draft is a necessity. There are times the good of the whole trumps the good of the few.
 
You're correct on Alaska. The right to drill in Alaska was denied in 96 by congress. It would have taken 10 years to come online which would have put us real close to present. ANWR has good reserves but nothing compared to the oil shales. Florida presents somewhat of a problem due to it's rich ecological system. I highly doubt that it will be drilled. I do know that China is drilling pretty close though.


By asking the states are you saying ask the state reps and such? This endeavor would create huge job growth for the states.

I have my doubts about the jobs since it would probably produce jobs for people out of state and some for bottom of the barrel type employment. Plus, a few screw ups could cause just as many jobs to be lost.

Not just ask the state reps, but bring it to a vote. I mean, people are either for state's rights or not and to me this is a pretty big state's right.
 
This is one time that I think the fed has to come in and say, 'drill & refine' sort of like when a draft is a necessity. There are times the good of the whole trumps the good of the few.

But you can't even make a compelling case that it is for the good of the whole.
 
But you can't even make a compelling case that it is for the good of the whole.



I don't see why it wouldnt be a compelling case when we're sitting on over a trillion barrels of oil. This could decrease our dependence on foreign oil, sustain us for 60 or more years and allow other technologies to become cheaper to obtain. Taxing the windfall profits, continuing to buy foreign oil, all the while bitching, when we do have solutions, solves no problems. We need solutions in this country, not a bunch of hacks who love to form wedge issues. Believe me, I like wind and solar technologies but they are supplemental at best, at least for the next 20 to 30 years. And our current path is only gonna lead to more problems in the ME.
 
That's what your side says. But you haven't made a case compelling enough to make the majority believe it. At best, it's a band aide approach that does nothing but by us time while raping the country in a similar fashion to LA.
 
That's what your side says. But you haven't made a case compelling enough to make the majority believe it. At best, it's a band aide approach that does nothing but by us time while raping the country in a similar fashion to LA.

What is it you are saying? In English.
 
At least back to Taft. Now that we have in-situ conversion which has been tested and approved, it is feasible now to extract it.

Yes, but not in large enough quantities.

I had read a few years ago that in two decades, we may be able to get 3 million barrels of oil per day out of it. That's significant enough but America currently consumers 26 million barrels.

As for ANWR, though I support drilling, it is estimated that at best we can get 300,000 barrels per day out.
 

Forum List

Back
Top