Democrats War To Kill Oil Exploration and Dicoveries

[elektra]

In another blow to the American Citizens standard of living as well as our future position as a First World Country the Democrats as led by President Obama are killing all attempts to find vast reserves of Oil in Alaska.

Everything the Democrats do is designed to make Oil scarse, punishing Americans, driving up the cost of food. Today food has never been more expensive. Hamburger here in California is now 5.65$, our economy and our lives are governed by the cost of energy. The more expensive energy is the more we are dependent on government welfare programs.

In Connecticut, household electric bills are as much as 600$ a month and higher, this winter.

In California we have seen the largest 1 month increase in the cost of Oil in history.

It is apparent now, that the Democrats plan (with the help of RINO's) is to destroy this great nation by making energy a luxury.

Obama administration proposes making ANWR Coastal Plain wilderness - Oil Gas Journal

Obama administration proposes making ANWR Coastal Plain wilderness
WASHINGTON, DC, Jan. 26
01/26/2015
By Nick Snow
The Obama administration said it will propose managing more of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, including its Coastal Plain, as wilderness. Alaska’s governor and congressional delegation immediately expressed their outrage at the Jan. 25 announcement as conservation and indigenous groups applauded it.

The US Department of the Interior’s Fish & Wildlife Service released a revised ANWR Comprehensive Conservation Plan that would be the largest ever wilderness designation since Congress passed the Wilderness Act more than 50 years ago.

An unprecedented assault

Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) and its congressional delegation immediately denounced Obama and Interior Sec. Sally Jewell for what the Alaskan officials considered an unprecedented assault on the state that would have long-lasting impacts on its economy and the nation’s energy security.

 

[Shikica]

God you are stupid. This isn't a democrat thing, this is a bipartisan pro-corporate greed thing.

We are still draining the middle east. South America and the rest of northern africa is next.

When the rest of the planet has no oil, then we will tap into all of our reserves. In the mean time we can double up on the profits we make from wars/enslaving countries by helping out oil corporate overlords.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'Democrats War To Kill Oil Exploration and Dicoveries"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, in addition to being a lie.

 

[Mr. H.]

God you are stupid. This isn't a democrat thing, this is a bipartisan pro-corporate greed thing.

We are still draining the middle east. South America and the rest of northern africa is next.

When the rest of the planet has no oil, then we will tap into all of our reserves. In the mean time we can double up on the profits we make from wars/enslaving countries by helping out oil corporate overlords.

You do realize that it takes about 10 years for a discovery to hit midstream?

Go away, snookies.

 

[Mr. H.]

It should also be noted the over $40 billion in new oil and gas industry taxes that reside in Obama's budget. Couple that with drilling bans in ANWR, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and the east and west OCS (not to mention severe restrictions on lower 48 federal lands), and you've got Obama's recipe for a national disaster. Oh yeah- throw in the over 40 year old ban on crude exports.

Goddamn flunky in da White House.

 

[HenryBHough]

Developing American energy resources would be death to Our Kenyan Emperor's beloved plan to make our energy costs skyrocket. He can't afford to have THAT fail. There's so little left he has promised at which he hasn't already failed in spectacular fashion.

Paid your Obamacare fines yet?

 

[elektra]

'Democrats War To Kill Oil Exploration and Dicoveries"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, in addition to being a lie.

It is a fact, no fallacy, the Obama administration is banning the exploration of oil.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Democrats as led by President Obama are killing all attempts to find vast reserves of Oil in Alaska.

Now I am confused , I thought you were a conservationist.
While I find nuclear reactors acceptable in the mid term ( here I am expecting we finally nail fusion in the next 50 years), I am sure the world can do without any more co2 spewing.

 

[elektra]

Democrats as led by President Obama are killing all attempts to find vast reserves of Oil in Alaska.

Now I am confused , I thought you were a conservationist.
While I find nuclear reactors acceptable in the mid term ( here I am expecting we finally nail fusion in the next 50 years), I am sure the world can do without any more co2 spewing.

If you are sure we can do without more CO2, why do you support increasing the consumption of Oil to produce Wind and Solar which fail to produce electricity economically, which does damage the environment.

Yes if the World can do without increased CO2, we must stop building millions and millions of Solar and Wind Turbines.

Why use a thousand cars to go to the supermarket when one works fine? That is an accurate analogy.

 

[elektra]

'Democrats War To Kill Oil Exploration and Dicoveries"

This fails as a straw man fallacy, in addition to being a lie.

Actually, its just a spelling error, its discoveries, not dicoveries.

 

[elektra]

God you are stupid. This isn't a democrat thing, this is a bipartisan pro-corporate greed thing.

We are still draining the middle east. South America and the rest of northern africa is next.

When the rest of the planet has no oil, then we will tap into all of our reserves. In the mean time we can double up on the profits we make from wars/enslaving countries by helping out oil corporate overlords.

Peak Oil? How many times have we seen that date change?

 

[CultureCitizen]

If you are sure we can do without more CO2, why do you support increasing the consumption of Oil to produce Wind and Solar which fail to produce electricity economically, which does damage the environment.

Yes if the World can do without increased CO2, we must stop building millions and millions of Solar and Wind Turbines.

Why use a thousand cars to go to the supermarket when one works fine? That is an accurate analogy.

We've already gone through this. Solar produces net energy gains.
Lately I've been toying with the idea of experimenting with a fresnel lense made out of water and a stirling engine.
Not very efficient but ultra cheap.

Finally , I found a CSP solution with a price that is competitive with gas/oil.

Solutions - Cleanergy
At 0.06 Euros per kwh it seems a real deal ( that's really close to the 0.05 USD per kwh wich can be achieved with nuclear).
Ah , yes, I forgot, storage. Those darn polluting batteries.
I just hope this startup's compressed gas solutions starts selling its devices during the next year.

Technology - LightSail Energy
Opportunity - LightSail Energy

 

[elektra]

If you are sure we can do without more CO2, why do you support increasing the consumption of Oil to produce Wind and Solar which fail to produce electricity economically, which does damage the environment.

Yes if the World can do without increased CO2, we must stop building millions and millions of Solar and Wind Turbines.

Why use a thousand cars to go to the supermarket when one works fine? That is an accurate analogy.

We've already gone through this. Solar produces net energy gains.
Lately I've been toying with the idea of experimenting with a fresnel lense made out of water and a stirling engine.
Not very efficient but ultra cheap.

Finally , I found a CSP solution with a price that is competitive with gas/oil.

Solutions - Cleanergy
At 0.06 Euros per kwh it seems a real deal ( that's really close to the 0.05 USD per kwh wich can be achieved with nuclear).

Net energy gains from Solar? Yet in over a 1000 years of development Solar accounts for about nothing, World wide as well as here in the USA. Solar does use millions of gallons of water a year though, and water is pumped with fossil fuel, not Solar energy.

How many more birds will these systems kill? How much Coal is used to produce them, lets talk about the economics of scale, which you believe are attained by each individual having an extremely expensive power plant of their own.

You should start a thread on this great technology, the modern day magnifying glass, right.

 

[Mr. H.]

Solar energy has a mighty big carbon footprint.

Fucking joker.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Net energy gains from Solar? Yet in over a 1000 years of development Solar accounts for about nothing, World wide as well as here in the USA. Solar does use millions of gallons of water a year though, and water is pumped with fossil fuel, not Solar energy.

How many more birds will these systems kill? How much Coal is used to produce them, lets talk about the economics of scale, which you believe are attained by each individual having an extremely expensive power plant of their own.

You should start a thread on this great technology, the modern day magnifying glass, right.

Get serious Elektra.
Solar has only started to become economically feasible in the last 20 years.
We've already discussed how cheaply water can be recycled. That is no technological feat ( though its probably a business oportunity).
It is unlikely that parabolic concentrators kill any birds at all: they are not big enough. The focal point is at a maximum distance of 10 meters, and it will only kill a bird if it passes through the focal point which is the part where the Stirling engine is located.
Economics of scale still play a role as mass production will make each parabolic mirror cheaper and more efficient. A group of 5-10 houses can share one unit.

 

[BULLDOG]

It should also be noted the over $40 billion in new oil and gas industry taxes that reside in Obama's budget. Couple that with drilling bans in ANWR, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and the east and west OCS (not to mention severe restrictions on lower 48 federal lands), and you've got Obama's recipe for a national disaster. Oh yeah- throw in the over 40 year old ban on crude exports.

Goddamn flunky in da White House.

All that doesn't seem to be bothering the oil companies much. The price of gas is lower than it has been in a long time, and the oil companies profits haven't been hurt a bit. Sounds like they are doing pretty well. Get back with me when the oil companies aren't making record profits.

 

[elektra]

Net energy gains from Solar? Yet in over a 1000 years of development Solar accounts for about nothing, World wide as well as here in the USA. Solar does use millions of gallons of water a year though, and water is pumped with fossil fuel, not Solar energy.

How many more birds will these systems kill? How much Coal is used to produce them, lets talk about the economics of scale, which you believe are attained by each individual having an extremely expensive power plant of their own.

You should start a thread on this great technology, the modern day magnifying glass, right.

Get serious Elektra.
Solar has only started to become economically feasible in the last 20 years.
We've already discussed how cheaply water can be recycled. That is no technological feat ( though its probably a business oportunity).
It is unlikely that parabolic concentrators kill any birds at all: they are not big enough. The focal point is at a maximum distance of 10 meters, and it will only kill a bird if it passes through the focal point which is the part where the Stirling engine is located.
Economics of scale still play a role as mass production will make each parabolic mirror cheaper and more efficient. A group of 5-10 houses can share one unit.

Yea, we have been through this, and your responses were all wrong, nice of you to ignore the facts and start over in unrelated threads.