Jump to content

Bush wants natural gas exploration next to Philmont

Recommended Posts

I dont know OGE why it is just now coming up, whatever, I just know that it is.


Here's one. If you'll look around that site, you may find more.




I'll try finding what I orginally saw though. It was something about cutting cables and you have to know which one to cut, etc


I dont know

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

FOG: "And no I am not BW." What makes you think that I'm talking about someone named "XX"? Where's the moderator when someone's dissin' me? Mabye this BackBacker fellow does have a special connection with the moderators . . . maybe he is that fellow who claimed to have left. Interesting, no?


Kind of reminds you of the old multiple personality Zorn Packte/Yaworski trouble maker who used to hang around these parts doesn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hops, so the cable to cut is always orange, or green or polka dotted, its not enough to stop production of a very promising technology. Right now, if everyone drive a Prius, what do you think the price of gas would be? Would rescuers know what cable to cut? Did you know that gasoline is inherently explosive and can pose a danger to rescue personnel, should be remove gas from out vehicles?


I know I am comming on strong on this topic, but it is one I feel very deeply about, the electric car was touted for decades as the answer and as we get very close all of a sudden it has inherent dangers, sorry I dont buy it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gasoline or electric? It seems to me theres no free lunch. It takes energy to move a vehicle from point A to point B. How much oil must be burned to produce the electricity needed to charge a battery? Is it less oil than that needed to produce the gasoline used by a traditional car? Or more?


The Honda hybrid uses an interesting concept that conserves energy by charging the battery through the deceleration of the car. The kinetic energy of the vehicles mass is converted into a charged battery, as opposed to converting brake pads into dust and heat.


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah i learned about the technology of the hybrid in high school physics and from what i understood, it was very promising. i have a question, though about economics. if the country moves towards energy independence, how will our economy react? i think that by creating a new industry, job growth will increase and all that, but what kind of ties does our economy have with mid east oil companies? if we start producing our own energy, how will it affect the economy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well since this thread has wandered sufficiently and I'm too lazy to go back and find OGE's original thread on the cost of gasoline I'll post

this here. Bottom line is world wide energy demand is high and there are no short term ways to meet demand, so prices keep going up.






From Business Week Online


Oil Prices Could Get Even Worse

Tuesday August 10, 8:12 am ET



When will the world get a break from oil prices that seemed unimaginable a few years ago? Not anytime soon, analysts believe. If anything, the upward march seems to be gaining momentum, with U.S. oil prices breaking through $44 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange this week. Paul Horsnell, head of Energy Research at Barclays Capital in London, now says: "The question is not whether $50 (per barrel) will be breached," but whether there will be any pause before the half-century mark is topped.

While there are lots of conspiracy theories about $40-plus barrel prices, a look at the fundamentals goes a long way toward explaining the hike. Growth in demand this year has proved a lot stronger than anyone forecast. The International Energy Agency, the Paris-based consumer group, forecasts that demand will be increase by as much as 2.5 million barrels a day over last year -- about double the increase anticipated.


A WORLD OF WOE. Indeed, the spurt in demand from China, the U.S., India, and elsewhere has caught just about everyone unawares. Governments, most notably the U.S., have done little to encourage conservation.The entire industry -- from OPEC to the international oil companies -- have failed to invest sufficiently in production capacity. Such investments will gradually increase, but it will be years before the effect is felt. As a result, spare production capacity is only about 1 million barrels per day, vs. 6 million barrels per day two years ago, Horsnell reckons. That razor-thin margin has the markets worried about the possibility of a severe crunch, especially when seasonal demand picks up. With the system already under strain, a cold winter in North America could have severe consequences.


There are also geopolitical situations weighing on the markets. Saudi Arabia, the world's most important oil exporter, is fighting Islamic insurgents who have targeted oil workers. Venezuela, another key producer, is seething with political unrest in the leadup to the Aug. 15 recall referendum on President Hugo Chavez. Russia, which not long ago was the best hope for stable new supplies, is now also a question mark thanks to the Kremlin's decision to go after Yukos, one of the country's two biggest oil producers. Iraq, another potentially promising source, has seen its oil infrastructure come under almost daily attack from insurgents.


If the spare capacity were greater, none of these situations would seem so threatening. But a repeat of last year's oil workers' strike in Venezuela, for instance, would be a disaster. Even a relatively routine occurrence -- a quickly extinguished fire that shut down a BP (NYSE:BP - News) refinery in Texas -- helped send prices up more than $1 a barrel on Aug. 6.


MORE RESERVES. Another factor: Hedge funds have discovered the oil markets as a volatile asset class that isn't correlated with other securities markets. The presence of these financial investors may add to volatility and accelerate momentum in price runups (see BW Online, 8/6/04, "Hedge Funds Are Everyone's Problem").


Finally, it doesn't help that the Bush Administration lacks an energy policy worthy of the name. In fact, analysts question why the U.S. government will continue adding to the strategic petroleum reserve when the markets are so tight. The Interior Dept. announced on Aug. 6 that it will be adding 100,000 barrels a day for six months, starting Oct. 1.


What will it take to calm worries? A substantial buildup in inventories, which are now well below their 5-year averages. But with little sign of slowing demand, such a change doesn't look likely in the near term. Oil prices are notoriously volatile and unpredictable, but anyone betting on a quick return to cheap gasoline and other oil products is likely to be disappointed.





Link to post
Share on other sites

In the simplest of terms, money spent outside our country does not help our economy. Money spent within our country does help our economy.


The U.S. will never be energy independent as long as it is easier and cheaper to obtain energy from foreign sources than it is to obtain from within. Viable, cost effective new technologies will develop when world oil dries up. Until then, there is insufficient incentive to develop alternatives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fscouter your statement is dead wrong. All economies are interrelated now. The money we spend on goods and services from other countries enable them to spend money here. Your argument would wipe out one the major employers in my area. There is no way the domestic market could keep a company like Boeing Commercial Aircraft going. It needs buyers from overseas. Those countries need to sell their products in a global market to be able to purchase our products.


It is where the idea of fair/free trade is needed and so hard to set up and define. There is no black and white, no easy solutions and we should always be careful not to fall in the trap of trusted ones who claim to have all the answers.


I ask the scout coming to me for the Citizenship in the World Merit Badge: What is better the dollar worth more versus the Yen or less? Then get into the discussion like this.

More, because then my Playstation would cost less.

Then I say, What if you were a wheat grower selling to Japan?


Would not the wheat be more expensive and the Japanese might find wheat from Argentina cheaper and buy it?


The answers is, depends on who you are.

(This message has been edited by NWScouter)

Link to post
Share on other sites

" The money we spend on goods and services from other countries enable them to spend money here."


The problem is that most of what they buy is tickets to Disney World. Quite often other countries buy our products and then get us to build a plant to make them over there.


It is better when we export more than we import but I don't think that's happening now. Well, we're exporting jobs at an incredible rate. Manufacturing jobs, tech jobs. To make life even more interesting, we're importing people to work here because they'll work for cheap.


In any case, we need energy and it is better if we have our own supply. Where would we be now if Sadaam had rolled into Saudi Arabia?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Strip away the politics, and it comes down to accepting the tradeoffs we make, collectively. If you want to cook or heat your home, the gas has to come from somewhere. Want to turn on a light? The electricity has to be generated somewhere. We want cheap gas, but no new drilling. Cheap electricity, but no nuclear plants. We want our trash to "go away", but no new landfill

Link to post
Share on other sites

NW, I dont think I am dead wrong.


In the simplest of terms, money spent here helps our economy a whole lot more than spending it overseas.


If U.S. airlines bought all their aircraft from Airbus, would that help our economy more than if they bought from Boeing?


The money we spend for oil builds palaces for Arab sheiks. If they buy a few U.S. goods in return, our economy benefits to a degree. But if we bought our oil internally, our economy would benefit much more.


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we had pursued a Hydrogen powered economy in 1974 with the first petroleum crisis, we would be well on our way to energy independence now, 30 years later. The byproduct is water.


If we had pursued a conservation policy that increased auto efficiency for improved gas mileage, we would not be importing vast amounts of foreign oil at this time.


But, we are here and it is now. It is interesting to come into this thread late and agree with many aspects of both sides of the argument. It is also nice to be out of the attack loop.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hydrogen is not free. Fuel cell cars would burn no gasoline, but the oil saved would be needed to produce the energy needed to make the hydrogen. It takes more energy to produce hydrogen that is produced when it burns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...