Quantcast
ENERGY

An Oily Mess

Bush's offshore drilling plan splits Florida's GOP

By Catharine Skipp and Arian Campo-Flores | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Updated: 9:15  p.m. ET Jun 19, 2008

« Return to Article

 
Discuss
 
Member Comments
  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 07/09/2008 8:03:40 PM

    Comment: 7,925 gallons of uranium solution spilled at a factory at the Tricastin nuclear site in France. Let us time travel back to Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, or the Incident in Ohio. This is not a good record. Proponents of Nuclear Power like to claim that with modern advances it is very safe to expand its use. Well, two of the four incidents I mentioned both occurred with modern advances in technology. There is no guarantee that even with new technology another Chernobyl would not happen here in the USA. What we do not realize is the fact that even with all the technology in the world Human Error is always a factor. Building more Nuclear Plants is not an answer to the price at the pump. It is not a Renewable Resource. So the price will increase as Uranium becomes scarce. There is the waste issue and potential devastating accident factor, which make it a very unstable source of power with multiple thousand-year storage costs. A lot of people are unaware that some of the same energy companies that deal in oil and gas also deal in Nuclear Power Plants. Solar energy is permanent or renewable, cheap, and can be installed on an individual basis. That is why large energy companies are not in any rush to push that form of energy. We could all be independent of an electric bill if solar technology is funded with the money that would have gone to Nuclear power plant development. But that would leave the electric companies out of business. If we put dollars into producing affordable solar panels or nano-solar technology we could allow each individual citizen the ability to produce their own energy and use as much of it as they wish with no reliance upon any outside monopoly. The proponents of Nuclear are either greedy or blind to the potential in other much safer forms of energy.

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 07/09/2008 8:03:18 PM

    Comment: For all the money we would spend on clean coal or nuclear energy we could develop actual solutions like the multiple renewable forms of energy. The estimated amount of coal in the US is about 250 years. That number was tallied before anyone ever mentioned using coal reserves for gasoline. We use coal mainly for electricity. The use of coal for gasoline would drive up the cost of coal and possible cut the supply for electric use by half. This is not a solution. Instead it is creating a slow moving blood clot that will eventually reach the brain and end in stroke. Nuclear power is not any better. It is another non-renewable energy. Uranium supplies are estimated at around 150 years. The cost will continue to rise just as with coal or oil. Therefore nuclear is not a real solution either. You might ask, ???What are the solutions,??? there have been so many renewable sources of energy. Many are very creative. Like the use of Ocean currents, Ocean wave movement, Tidal movement, Wind, Solar, Biochemical technology and other Biological Engineering concepts show promise or are already in development and production. That is where our money should go. But the real solutions free individuals from being attached to large energy companies. Oh, that is just awful, for them, but liberating for us. Imagine a source of energy that will never go up in price due to the fact that it is renewable. I already have, can you?

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 07/09/2008 8:03:00 PM

    Comment: Cont: We must investigate energy that is renewable, cheap, clean, and put it in the hands of all who require it. There is too much to loose if people can be energy independent, especially if the new technologies allow people to be independent of large energy corporations. Solar, wind, geo-thermal, bio-chemical and many other alternative forms of energy would allow people a freedom from the tyranny of submission to Big Energy. That may be the underlying reason why there are so many who wish to delay energy liberation for as long as possible. If I had invested trillions in oil infrastructure I would want to milk it for all it was worth, it is the bottom line that drives all motivation by any business. Why should it be any different for API and the bottom line they represent?

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 07/09/2008 8:02:39 PM

    Comment: The recent API (American Petroleum Institute) advertising campaign has stated that the USA has enough energy supplies to last for 60 years. That sounds great, at first. This lame public relations operation is slick deception. This deceptions goal is the subversion of resources that hold a greater value than any oil or gas. The food supply that is generated by coastal areas is worth more than 60 odd years of energy. The tourism aspect of coastal areas is worth more than the energy and food supply combined. I ask, is it worth jeopardizing the purity of the coastal areas for a small supply of oil? Consider the way energy is being consumed. Consider the rate of demand and the continuing rise of price. Even if we have 60 years of supply in the US, within 30 years the price will still be sky high due to peak energy supplies and growing international demand. Oil or energy is traded internationally. We would have to have Congress pass legislation for all oil to remain within the boarder of the USA. People seem to forget this and API never mentions it in their advertisements. They only want to shape our opinion so that they can skirt environmental protections, which in reality protect local economic foundations like fishing and tourism. The American Petroleum Institute should tell their viewers that even if they had access to drill where they wished, there would not be any immediate relief in price at the pump for years. People seem to think that there would be an immediate relief if we open up Alaska???s ANWAR. This is not the reality. People do not realize that even if Iraq were at full production, plus OPEC increases in output, and an increase in Alaska???s oil drilling the price on the world market would not move below 100 dollars per barrel. Why? Geo-Political Factors, the Value of the Dollar, Future increase in Demand, and Peak Oil Realities. With 60 years of domestic oil and natural gas there will still be outlandish prices for which consumers will have to deal with. Oil is a dead end energy source. The only way to free ourselves from foreign oil is to free ourselves from oil entirely. We must investigate if the energy companies have shelved renewable energy patents.

  • Posted By: 4carol @ 07/01/2008 3:24:15 PM

    Comment: The prospect of drilling for oil off FL is preposterous!! The amount of oil there will only help fuel (pardon the pun) the oil companies and the cost is not in line with the results. It will do nothing to reduce our price whatsoever; BUT UNFORTUNATELY, IT COULD DESTROY OUR ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME IN FL ...TOURISM!!!!! PERHAPS SOME OF YOU SHOULD THINK ABOUT THAT BEFORE YOU VOTE IN NOVEMBER!!!!

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 06/25/2008 7:43:02 PM

    Comment: Cont: Oil keeps going up, demand keeps going up in the rest of the world while only going down by a few percentage points in the US. The cost of energy is rising while the dollar keeps falling. The Federal Reserve has devalued our dollar further by continuing to print currency and flood the market with loans in order to bail out the US financial market. This has increased inflation and directly devalued the dollar. Oil is traded on the world market in dollars (for now). We are experiencing sticker shock due partly to the fact that it requires twice as many dollars to purchase a gallon of gas while our wages have not increased. Debt and war deficit financing has further devalued the dollar with additional influence from a stagnant or weakening US economy. Supply and Demand is only one of many influences upon why gas is headed to five dollars per gallon. We could subtract over 30 percent of the cost of a gallon of gas by raising the value of our currency, add more percentage points by driving more efficient automobiles, or walking away from gasoline burning engines entirely. Even if we drill off the coast of both coasts and in Alaska, that oil is not required by law to remain in the US for domestic use. All oil ends up on the world market. If we do keep all US oil domestic, it would not be enough to fuel our current or future demand. Has anyone realized that oil, coal, natural gas, even nuclear power is a dead end source of energy (not renewable)? Has anyone thought about the fact that foreign energy suppliers will reduce their output as US companies increase production in order to keep the cost of energy or profit margins elevated? The answer is not more fossil fuel; the answer is the elimination of fossil fuel. We have the technologies now, with more on the way. We need to convert our civilization for compatibility with the new technologies. We must be motivated for the future, our children???s future and act. But we are facing foes that fear change; we face foes that want to continue to profit from antiquated limited forms of energy. We are facing those who wish to use the fear of high-energy costs in order to fuel their businesses need to evade environmental law. This is all about profit motive rather than a genuine concern for the future of energy.

  • Posted By: Johndavidprince @ 06/25/2008 7:42:40 PM

    Comment: Republican war spending, massive national debt, market deregulation, and corporate scandal has devalued the Dollar beyond recognition. Demand for oil has risen faster than the supply of oil even with North Dakota and Alaska included in the supply figures. India, China and the other rapidly developing nations are adding to the demand for oil, including US and European thirst for petrol. We are in an Energy crunch combined with the poor management of government which has been under Republican control for the past 20 too 25 years. (Republicans were in control of Congress during Clinton, while they had massive control during 6 of G.W. Bush???s two terms, there was Regan, and there was also Bush Senior???s term of influence) While the Democrats have won back control of the Congress it is only with a slim majority. This slim majority is not enough to end filibusters, or over ride a Party backed Presidential Veto. As well the Republicans have used the filibuster more in the past 2 years than the entire 10 years prior combined. Blaming Democrats for the price of oil is the art of deception. Blaming Environmentalists as the reason why oil is so expensive is the art of denial of the past and the reality of how oil comes to market. Oil has to be bought or traded on the commodities exchange, which is an International Market. This concept that Domestic oil will go from well to pump is not factual. We would have to alter the way oil comes to market through legislation in order for all Domestic oil to remain within the US. I never hear pundits talk about ending the export of US oil to foreign nations.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/24/2008 11:52:42 PM

    Comment: Honestly, Sharenews, as much as I like you in general, I think your are scraping the bottom of the barrel on this one. Since you asked what I think, I can say that the rally you mention happened almost 2 months ago, so why is this an issue now, if it was not an issue then? The memorial service for the officers happened 5 days before the Obama rally occurred, and that the placement of the porta potties, while regrettable, clearly was not an intentional slight aimed at fallen officers. Do you really think that Obama personally decides where to place the portable toilets at all of his speeches? More likely, the Portland Parks and Recreation Department is to blame. Give it a rest.

  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 06/23/2008 11:17:32 PM

    Comment: Obamamohammeds!!!!!! Hussein's limo ridin' partner is Baaack..........

    Monday, June 23, 2008
    Obama's political prisoner Larry Sinclair freed
    A Capitol Hill source close to Larry Sinclair reports:


    Larry Sinclair is free!

    Sinclair was transfered from DC jail to a Delaware courtroom this morning.

    The Delaware judge immediately released Sinclair on his own recognizance after a perfunctory hearing this afternoon.

    Apparently, the "fugitive warrrant" used was not really issued from Delaware

    But rather the "fugitive warrant" was fabricated in DC -- perhaps likely by the US Attorney's office. This of course suggests high level political corruption.

    Sinclair's blog is exploding...1,500,000 hits and growing fast. More detailed "evidence" to be revealed. NOT GOING AWAY....

    NOBAMA!!!


  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/22/2008 7:39:30 PM

    Comment: Some of you who read my posts about investment banks driving up the price of oil through commodities futures trading did not believe me that this was a real issue, despite the fact that the Senate is investigating it. Well, it really is an issue and an important one, so important the the Department of Justice is going to investigate.

    Today Senator Obama announced a plan today to crack down on excessive energy speculation and fully close the loophole in the CFTC regulations that I referred to in my blog. This loophole is also called the "Enron Loophole" because it was created by McCain Campaign co-chair Phil Gramm at the behest of Enron lobbyists, and exempts most trading on energy commodities from regulation. As a result, the CFTC is unable to oversee the oil futures market or investigate cases where excessive speculation is driving up oil prices. Just last month, John Hofmesiter, President of Shell Oil Company, says that the proper, uninflated production price of a barrel of crude oil is no more than $65.

    http://www.financialpost.com/reports/oil-watch/story.html?id=532747

    Clarence Cazalot, CEO of Marathon Oil, stated in November of 2007 that "$100 oil just isn't justified by the physical demand on the market - it is speculation on the futures market that is driving this."

    http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/12/markets/oil_hundred/index.htm?postversion=2007111216

    Larry Chom, Chief Economist of Platt's, states in a recent Businessweek article that speculation is adding at least $50 to the price of every barrel of oil. You can read this article in the May 13, 2008 edition of Businessweek, but it is no longer available on their website unless you are a member.

    http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/may2008/

    To see what Senator Obama is doing to correct this serious problem and lower the price of gas and oil, go to his website:

    http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stateupdates/gG5Rzb

    Now THAT is my kind of President! Sees the problem, and moves to fix it, while Bush and McCain are sitting on their hands.

    • Posted By: LIKEITIS @ 06/23/2008 08:55:26

      Comment: GREAT IDEA! NOT SURE HOW YOU FEEL, BUT I AM SICK OF BEING TOLD BY SO CALLED ECONOMY EXPERTS THAT THIS OIL THING IS SOMETHING THAT CAME ON US IN A 1 YEAR SPAN AND THAT THERE IS NO WAY OUT SHORT OF 2-3 DECADES OF PIDDLING AROUND THEIR WAYS!


      OBAMA '08! IT'S GONNA BE MUCH BETTER!

  • Posted By: LIKEITIS @ 06/22/2008 10:36:20 AM

    Comment: NATIONALIZE THE OIL FIELDS THAT ARE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY(IT HAS WORKED IN BOLIVIA)!

    THE OIL COMPANIES ARE HARD AT BUYING BACK THEIR STOCK AT THIS MOMENT!

    MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR U.S.A. OIL TO BE SOLD OVERSEAS!

    REMOVE ALL THE TAXE INCENTIVES TO EXPLORE FOR OIL, SINCE IT HAS TURNED INTO A FREE PAYDAY FOR THE OIL COMPANIES THAT ARE NOW AND HAVE HAD THEIR FINGERS ON THE PULSE OF THE OIL MARKETS(THEY KNEW WHAT WAS HAPPENING LONG AGO!

    MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR OIL COMPANY EXECUTIVES TO USE THEIR RIDICULOUS INCETIVE BONUSES TO USE THOSE BONUSES AS AN ARTIFICIAL BOOSTER OF THE COMMODITIES MARKET BY NOT ALLOWINF U.S. OIL TO BE A TRADED COMMODITY!

    ALL THESE THINGS ARE ABLE TO BE DONE, AND DISPITE WHAT NEA SAYERS WIL SAY: DESTROYING THE CAPITALISTIC SYSTEM(PER CHANCE), THE CAPALISTIC SYSTEM WAS DESTROYED THE DAY THAT ANY INDUSTY RECIEVED A SUBSIDY! NOW ALL MAJOR INDUSTIES ARE GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZED!


    OBAMA '08! IT CAN ALL BE CHANGED, AND IN MOST CASES IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED!

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/22/2008 2:36:57 AM

    Comment: WillNotVote, I just love it when you set yourself up to be schooled. You give a web address for the Obama's page on the Senate.gov website. Each Senator sets up their own pages there. You have directed the reader to Obama's page where he prints, for the world to see, his voting record on every bill that comes before the Senate. Here is that address:

    http://obama.senate.gov/votes/index.cfm?start=1

    You sent the reader to this page because it shows that Obama did not vote on many of the recent bills, and you want to make it look like Obama is asleep on the job. It must be mentioned, however, that Clinton, McCain and Obama have all missed many votes during the campaign season. However, if the reader will take the trouble to page through Obama's voting record, they will see that Obama has been present for all of the important votes. Obama has been present and voted on 62 of the 154 bills before Congress in the current session beginning January 2008. Clinton has voted on 56 of these 154 bills. And McCain, who had already won the primary and didn't have to start campaigning against Obama until three weeks ago, McCain voted on only 33 of 154 bills.

    As I have exposed in one of my earlier blogs, McCain missed more than half of his votes, even before he started running for President. In the First Session of the 110th Congress (2007), McCain missed a whopping 56% of his votes. McCain doesn't want you to know this, so when you go to his Senate web page, there is no tab to click to see his voting record (http://mccain.senate.gov). An American who wants to know how McCain votes has to look it up on the Library of Congress website (not user friendly) or go to the Washington Post website:

    http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/votes/

    While you are there, pay special attention to McCain's votes on March 13 and 14, 2008. On those days we know he was present, because he voted on 22 bills. But he refused to vote on 22 other bills. He failed to vote on bills concerning border security, alien removal and English in the workplace, even though he has set himself up as the candidate who wants immigration reform favorable to Hispanics. He also failed to vote on the bills regarding efficient energy production, even though he claims to be in favor of this. He must not be very much in favor of efficient energy and immigration reform since her refused to vote even though he was present. As for Obama and Clinton, they were both present those days, and they both voted on all 44 bills.

    McCain knows that public perception is all that matters, so he gives a news conference and says he supports certain issues, even though he refuses to vote in favor of them. He knows that most Americans never take the time to look up his voting record, and he makes sure that his Senate web page doesn't include this information.

    I find it ironic that your blogger name is "WillNotVote." Did you get that name from John McCain?

  • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 6:54:24 PM

    Comment: Here's the only plan that makes sense:

    1) Set a budget for investing in development in alternatives by anybody but the oil companies. The oil companies have no incentive to develop alternatives, and we are stupid to think they will. Besides, there are so many people who believe the oil companies are evil, there's too much distrust there for the plan to work through the oil companies. This plan must include all technologies, and realistic timelines and milestones for each. This will likely be a 30 to 50 year plan.

    2) The technology development will be funded out of the income produced by releasing 2 million barrels a day into the market from our reserves. We have sufficient reserves to release this amount for 30 years. Releasing this oil will also lower oil costs to help ease the burden people feel at the pump.

    3) We get off of foriegn oil in 10 years by going for our off shore oil, shale oil, and Coal to oil. During the 10 years to production, we further develop the process of recapturing CO2 emissions, and using those emissions to pump into the ground to get the oil out. This will dramatically reduce the amount of CO2 being put into the air.

    4) We begin the process of getting off of virtually all Oil once the technology can support such a move. This will be a rather lengthy process since a great deal of the infrastructure of today's society will need to be replaced.

    So many seem to think that just because GM is testing 100 hydrogen fuel cell cars, that our problems are over, but nothing could be further from the truth. Even if that turns out to be the technology we have been waiting for (which I doubt), it will still take many years to replace our current fleet of vehicles. And then you have to ask, what do we do with all the old cars that are now worthless?

    Then, we have to realize that automobiles only represent a fraction of our oil consumtion. You still have all of our semi trucks, ships, trains, planes, military equipment, farm equipment, manufacturing equipment, shop equipment, manufacturing furnaces, heating/AC equipment, etc, etc, etc. We're talking about replacing nearly the entire infrastructure of society. it's not going to be a quick process.

    Maybe the answer is to divide and conquer since the two parties can't work together anyway. The republicans are responsible to have us off of foriegn oil in 10 years, and the democrats are responsible to have cost effective alternatives developed in 10 years. Then once we are at that point, we can set a corse for implementation into our society.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/21/2008 2:07:32 PM

    Comment: Readers, be informed, and beware! Sam Bodman, US Energy Secretary, is a Bush appointed Yes-man. Bodman states that insufficient production is making oil prices soar. Bush wants you to think that the OPEC countries are responsible for high oil prices, but the truth is, OPEC has been significantly increasing production over the past several months. Where is all that oil going? It's being stockpiled by US investment banks, who are creating a fake shortage to drive up the price. Congress has already started to investigate this criminal practice. Bush, who has deregulated the banking industry, tries to blame it on OPEC. By now you should be familiar with Bush's MO: he says you should be very afraid of Muslims.

    Who you should really be afraid of are investment bankers at Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley and Lehman Brothers. Check this out:

    Michael Masters of Master Capital Management (a global investment manager) testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security & Government Affairs a couple of weeks ago. Quotes from his testimony:

    "Today, Index Speculators are pouring billions of dollars into the commodities futures markets, speculating that commodity prices will increase. In the popular press the explanation given for rising oil prices is the increased demand from China. According to the DOE, China's demand for petroleum has increased in the last five years from 1.88 billion barrels to 2.8 billion barrels, an increase of 920 billion barrels. Over the same five year period, Index Speculators' demand for petroleum futures has increased by 848 million barrels. THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM INDEX SPECULATORS IS ALMOST EQUAL TO THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM CHINA. Index Speculators have now stockpiled, via the futures market, the equivalent of 1.1 billion barrels of petroleum, effectively adding EIGHT TIMES as much oil to their own stockpile as the US Government has added to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over the last five years."

    "The Senate has asked the question "Are Institutional Investors contributing to food and energy price inflation?" And my unequivocal answer is "YES." In this testimony I will explain that investment banks are one of, if not the primary, factors affecting commodities prices today. Clearly, there are many factors that contribute to price determination in the commodities markets; I am here to expose a fast-growing yet virtually unnoticed factor, and one that presents a problem that can be expediently corrected through legislative policy action..."

    The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission is ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL. They're supposed to be protecting us from these kinds of abuses, but Bush allowed loopholes in the CFTC regulations that you can drive a truck through. An oil truck, that is.

    Links to Masters' Senate testimony, and 2 articles:
    http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/052008Masters.pdf
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20011.htm
    http://globalresearch.ca/

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:43:22

      Comment: I agree that a large part of the problem is due to over speculation in the oil futures market. This was made possible in large part by the fact that worldwide demand continues to increase, and production is not increasing. The speculation is not the fundamental problem--it is only exaggerating the inherent problem, and helping to wake us up to the problem before the real problem becomes severe.

      We have always had the ability to control speculation with supply, yet the left side of our government refuses to allow us to produce our own oil. Yes, the oil companies have land to drill on, but this land has been rendered useless by the excessive red tape required to secure permits to actually drill on it.

      For the democrats, it seems that it's always the same answer--blame the oil companies and add more government regulation AKA socialism. When will you people realize that doesn't work. If that's what you want, please go find some land and start your own country. I want to live in a land of freedom.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 15:53:18

      Comment: Since you are obviously so fond of blaming the POTUS for everything bad that happens, the bank deregulation happened during the Clinton administration.

      • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 16:09:02

        Comment: Hey Nins - not sure of the speculation aspect, but definitely agree we need "shock treatment" to move us off oil.

        • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:20:19

          Comment: Let's be clear--By shock treatment, you actually mean a government forced solution. Who do you think will pay for it?

          • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 16:23:26

            Comment: Whala - yep - a governement enforced solution. I know it will cost us more. But if we wait, it will cost even more. I do not want to be beholden to the crazy regimes in the middle east.

            • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:53:29

              Comment: Because our government runs so efficiently?? When is the last time our government actually did anything that didn't turn out to be a disaster? And you would trust them to undertake such a task? You are pretty trusting in an organization that can't do anything right..

            • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:48:00

              Comment: Please elaborate on what your solution actually looks like, and how we are supposed to replace everything that took us a hundred years to build is supposed to be replaced by next year without bankrupting our coulntry

              • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 18:05:50

                Comment: Good night, I can't believe I actually submitted that post with the wording & spelling so screwed up. Anyway, you get the idea.

  • Posted By: ghostcommander @ 06/21/2008 1:44:50 PM

    Comment: How many times in the past has the oil companies capped their oil wells to create a shortage so prices would go up? Do you remember the California Energy Crisis Scam that was used to overthrow a democratically elected government. Yes, create a crisis, attack the government's leader, start a recall and keep the governor off the ballot and dilute the field of candidates and portray your candidate as a strong father figure that will solve tge problem.California tried to recover all the money that was ripped off by the energy companies but the Fascist controlled FERC prevented them from doing so. The citizens of California are still paying the price for that scam. Fast forward to "Thing" cheney and the convening of his energy task force. "Thing" refused to release any information about those meetings and the Fascists in the government went along. The Oil companies have 68,000,000 acres of land and underwater that are not even drilled in. The Fascists always try to create a political issue where they can garner votes. This is nothing but extortion--holding you up at the pumps and blaming the Democrats for the problem they have created. Yes, I said extortion and one can add blackmail to that. The Fascists need to be relegated to the dustbins of history forever. Let your vote say more than just no in November, tell them-"Hell No"

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:08:09

      Comment: They have land leases, yes. Unfortunately, thanks to your environmentalist friends, they cannot secure the permits timely eneough to be able to actually drill on this land before the lease runs out.

      You are obviously a left wing black helicopter theorist who wants to tear down the other side, but has nothing constructive to add.

  • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 1:00:58 PM

    Comment: Drilling anywhere is the US is not going to fix the problem today. The problem is that we are too unwilling to give up our lifestyles to think outside of the box. What if every new home/office building in the sunny areas of the country was built with solar panels(yes - it would add to the initial cost but be recouped quickly through energy savings and by mandating this, it would improve the technology and bring down the price so that existing homes/offices could afford the upgrade)? What if we told Detroit that all new vehicles sold had to have 20% better fuel efficiency in two years (so maybe there are fewer SUVs or V-8s on the road)? Or, even better, require that all new cars sold be hybrids, have hydrogen cells, whatever (yeah - I don't like the selection today but so what? If we're all in the same boat, then we all have ugly cars and over time, the technology will improve). What if we make consumers really start conserving at home (by giving them a monthly base energy usage allowance and then put a prohibitive tax on any usage above the base). There are many other possibilities but they all require us to be part of the solution.

    The point is that we need to move from an oil-based economy and do it now. Thinking we can drill our way out of this mess or rely on the Saudis to increase production just puts off the day of reckoning. The longer we wait, the more drastic impact it will have on the economy, environment, etc.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:02:19

      Comment: Drilling in the US may not fix the problem today, but it will help reduce the impact of it. Continuing to ignore the problem and thinking we are anywhere close to an alternative solution is guaranteed to make the problem much worse for the next 20-30 years until we actually have an alternative in place.

      I agree that we need to move away from an oil based economy now, but you are dillusional if you think that the moving away process will take less than 20 years.

      • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 16:08:01

        Comment: whala - I think it could take less than 20 years. Every generation since the "great generation" has never sacrificed anything for this country. Let's bite the bullet and make US consumers accountable. It's called "sacrifice".

        • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 16:16:48

          Comment: So you're proposing to force consumers to pay even more for their energy right now at a time when many Americans are struggling to get by? Until we figure out how to increase the efficiency of alternative solutions to make them more cost effective than burning fuel, consumers will not buy it on a large scale.

          Even once we figure it out, how long do you think it will take to replace all of our automobiles, semi trucks, trains, airplanes, military vehicles, and all manufacturing plants in America? 20 years is pretty optomistic.

          Can we be realistic please?

          • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 16:25:05

            Comment: whala - no REAL solution comes without sacrifice. Yeah - I know it will cost Americans more today. We can afford it today. In the future, the price tag might totally sink us.

            • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 17:04:15

              Comment: That's where you are mistaken. We can't afford it today. You have no concept of the scale of what you are proposing. We don't even have viable alternatives figured out yet, and once we do, the shear task of setting up factories to produce new equipment for all of America will take years. Even if it could be done in a short time frame, how many americans can afford to take the car they are still making payments on to the landfill, and purchase another one, and replace the heater/AC/water heater in their home, and pay double the price for everything they consume in order to pay for all of the infrastructure that would be required to do what you are talking about.

              As for responsibility, what about all of the excessive trash in landfills due to our short term technology make over? How is that responsible.

              • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 22:00:55

                Comment: whala - I don't think you really read my post. I didn't say to junk everything today. I did give examples where all new cars would be hybrids, use Hydrogen cells, etc. - I never suggested everyone get a new car today. I also suggested all new construction in appropriate areas include solar panels - that doesn't cost people in existing houses anything but will bring down the cost of technology for those in older structures... As for government programs that have worked - try Social Security and Medicare - my parents have a standard of living that my grandparents would envy. Unfortunately, that same government due to mismanagement of so much else has threatened both programs.

  • Posted By: corridorg4 @ 06/21/2008 12:22:57 PM

    Comment: There is a solution that save millions of dollars in gasoline. It's free and would not damage the environment.
    Just reduce the speed limit back to 60.

    Both major parties are too chicken to ask people to drive at a safer, more fuel efficient speed, so we get moronic suggestions like a summer suspension of the gas tax ($30.00 savings WHOOPIE!) and drilling into our natural resources with the hope that in 10 years we might get some oil.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 12:31:55

      Comment: You have got to be joking. The benefit from that is rediculously insignificant. you obviously have no idea of the scale of the energy problem we are facing.

      • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 13:10:35

        Comment: Whala - why dismiss it out of hand? Reducing the speed limit will not solve the entire problem - for sure - but it could be a beginning along with a lot of other lifestyle/technology changes. See my post above.

  • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 11:50:45 AM

    Comment: I say we quit pointing fingers at the oil companies for not developing alternatives. What moron decided to make it the oil companies job to save the planet? They are oil companies. The alternatives are their competition. Do you really expect them to put themselves out of business?

    We need alternatives to be sure, but we need short and intermediate term solutions that alternatives can't provide. Developing and integrating the alternatives are 20-30 years away on a personal scale, and longer on an industrial scale.

    We need to start releasing oil from our reserves to help lower prices in the short term, drill for our oil off shore and harvest our shale oil to get us off of foriegn oil and hold us over for the intermediate term until viable alternatives can be implemented in the long term. But quit blaming the oil companies for not slitting their own throat.

    • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 13:13:21

      Comment: The shareholders of oil companies should demand that oil companies start investing in alternatives. Ultimately, oil companies will be extinct if they fail to have a plan for when we are forced to use other energy sources.

      • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 17:24:17

        Comment: What are you talking about? The shareholders are the oil companies. They invest for profit. If they wanted to put their money in a charitable R&D firm they would.

        You are such a typical democrat. You think that everything can be forced and regulated on people. it doesn't work that way in a free market society.

        If the democrats want alternatives developed now, they need to get off their butts and go develop them, and quit whinig and complaining about the oil companies trying to operate their companies.

        • Posted By: dreffein @ 06/21/2008 22:04:26

          Comment: whala - I wasn't forcing the oil companies to do anything - but the truth remains - ultimately they will become extinct. It's in their best interests to be part of the solution. Otherwise they will go the same way as telegrams, typewriters...

  • Posted By: dlender @ 06/21/2008 11:20:34 AM

    Comment: When the Florida beaches and hence the state's tourism industry are destroyed by an oil spill, dont ask the rest of us to bail you out.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 11:35:16

      Comment: Did you know that it is 13 times more likely to have an oil spill from any one of the hundreds of tankers we bring in to the country than it is from an off shore oil well? Off shore oil wells are much cleaner overall than our current system of importing.

      Did you know that there is many times more natural oil seepage from the ocean floor than an oil spill could ever cause? True, it is spread out, but we are talking about global resonsibility. Harvesting the oil instead of letting it seep into our environment could be the most responsible thing to do.

  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 06/21/2008 10:04:22 AM

    Comment: Iran is very close to being bombed. When it happens, we will get $6/gallon. America will demand relief. Hussein's ideas, would sink the entire nation into an economic depression. He has put himself into a corner.

    NOBAMA!!!

  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 06/21/2008 10:01:06 AM

    Comment: The DNC and Hussein Obama, have put themselves in another corner. Planning high gasoline prices, to anger voters to vote Dem., and opposing drilling as an answer, has left many wondering. What's up with that? Don't believe me? Check Rassmussen. They are a little more credible than the latest NewsWeak poll........AND this was BEFORE Sen McCain announced, his support.

    Tuesday, June 17, 2008 Email to a FriendAdvertisement
    Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John McCain has announced his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their coasts.

    A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey???conducted before McCain announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are more evenly divided (46% of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).

    NOBAMA!!!

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/21/2008 9:19:49 AM

    Comment: TYLER - The price of oil swelled to another record high Monday morning - before dropping back. It almost hit $140 a barrel - but then fell 25 cents. It appears - a recent increase in oil output from Saudi Arabia -- is not driving down crude prices. Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, who started a bipartisan group called "American Solutions for Winning the Future" held little back at the Texas Republican Convention. He wants to use American solutions to change to the U.S. energy policy.

    Simply put - he's fed up with Congress: "The problem is not big oil or the foreigners," said Speaker Gingrich. "The problem is not the Saudis. The problem is getting Congress to do it's job." And that job, he says, is to start using the energy we have. "Congress outlaws every conceivable energy source," said Speaker Gingrich. Gingrich is making his case for domestic drilling by launching a campaign with Actor Chuck Norris, with the slogan: "Drill here, Drill now, Pay less." The campaign is urging Congress to do something now to bring down gas prices. Speaker Gingrich also has thoughts on speculators. "It's people who are betting the U.S. is too dumb to produce (its own oil)."


    He sides with East Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert -- when it comes to speculators and drilling. "If you began selling off two million barrels a day...we can pump out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It would immediately bring down the price of oil." Speaker Gingrich proposes selling off half of the reserve - now. "Do it suddenly..without telling anybody in advance and punish every speculator."The very speculators, he says, that are betting against America."

    GO TO WWW.AMERICANSOLUTIONS.COM AND SIGN THE PETITION !!!

  • Posted By: Jim F @ 06/21/2008 9:10:18 AM

    Comment: Nancy Pelosi and the like campaigned on ending the war in Iraq to get elected. Did they end the war? Have they done anything constructive as a legislative body since assuming their positions after getting elected? Profound-NO !!
    Are they in touch with what is going on with gas prices and the effect it is having on the economy or the destruction of our families of having anything on the table to eat? Profound-NO !!
    Will either Presidential candidate when elected be able to work in harmony with Pelosi and her losers for the betterment of the country? Doubtful.
    Politicians have sit in office since the gas crunch in the 1970's and have done absolutely nothing towards preparing us for this high cost crisis we are in or finding and funding research for alternate fuel.
    "Change" is the campaign mantra Obama preaches but no definition of what those changes include. Politicians are Kingdom Keepers offering anything and everything to get elected and then become tone deaf to job performance and the need of the country.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 09:27:51

      Comment: Well said, except I think Obama has at least pointed the direction of the changes he is talking about--towards socialism (the less offensive synonym for communism). As for any changes to end the gridlock in Washington, he hasn't said a word.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/20/2008 11:34:30 PM

    Comment: Michael Masters of Master Capital Management, LLC (a global investment management company) testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs just a couple of weeks ago. Here are quotes from his testimony:

    "Today, Index Speculators are pouring billions of dollars into the commodities futures markets, speculating that commodity prices will increase. In the popular press the explanation given for rising oil prices is the increased demand from China. According to the DOE, China's demand for petroleum has increasde in the last five years from 1.88 billion barrels to 2.8 billion barrels, an increase of 920 billion barrels. Over the same five year period, Index Speculators' demand for petroleum futures has increased by 848 million barrels. THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM INDEX SPECULATORS IS ALMOST EQUAL TO THE INCREASE IN DEMAND FROM CHINA. Index Speculators have now stockpiled, via the futures market, the equivalent of 1.1 billion barrels of petroleum, effectively adding EIGHT TIMES as much oil to their own stockpile as the US Government has added to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve over the last five years."

    "The Senate has asked the question "Are Institutional Investors contributing to food and energy price inflation?" And my unequivocal answer is "YES." In this testimony I will explain that investment banks are one of, if not the primary, factors affecting commodities prices today. Clearly, there are many factors that contribute to price determination in the commodities markets; I am here to expose a fast-growing yet virtually unnoticed factor, and one that presents a problem that can be expediently corrected through legislative policy action..."

    The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission is ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL. They are supposed to be protecting us form these kinds of abuses, but Bush has allowed loopholes in the CFTC regulations that you can drive a truck through. An oil truck, that is.

    Here is a link to the Michael Masters' testimony before the Senate:
    http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/052008Masters.pdf

    And here are two other articles on the subject:
    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20011.htm
    http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9138

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/21/2008 00:01:27

      Comment: Correction, It's congress's job to enect legislation to close the loopholes, so it's actually Pelosi you should be pointing fingers at. Why do you think that this congress has the lowest approval rating of any in history--even lower than president Bush. Who would of thought they could screw up even worse than him?

      This speculation problem is exactly why we need to go for our own oil. If you think $4 gas is bad, we could be paying $20, and soon if we don't go get our oil--especially if Isreal pulls the trigger on Iran.

      • Posted By: Nins @ 06/21/2008 14:13:09

        Comment: The President has the right to veto ANY legislation that crosses his desk. Just the mere fact of him threatening to do this has killed bills before they ever even get to the floor. The President has MORE power than the Congress. And besides, it was the President who deregulated industry in the first place. Congress is now investigating the aftermath of the President's bad banking policy decisions. I guarantee that Bush will veto their efforts to clean up the mess. So would McCain. But Obama will not.

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/20/2008 10:38:25 PM

    Comment: Hydrogen fuel cells are the answer to our gasoline crisis, not offshore drilling for more oil. Oil is a dirty industry with a very limited fuel supply remaining on the planet. Hydrogen fuel cells use algae to produce energy, and instead of producing CO2 (like oil and gasoline) they emit water and oxygen, which improve the atmosphere and help clean the air that you breathe. Hydrogen fuel cell cars have already been manufactured and work extremely well. General Motors, Honda and BMW all have hydrogen fuel cell cars IN PRODUCTION, not just in development. In five or ten years, we will all be driving them. Unless of course McCain, Gingrich and Geo. W Bush succeed in blocking clean energy technology, and ramming this crazy offshore drilling bill through Congress.

    Want to dominate the global economy? THE FUTURE BELONGS TO THE NATION THAT CAN SUCCESSFULLY BREAK FREE OF FOSSIL FUEL. That is where your tax dollars should be going -- to strengthen America.

    Obama's education plan is unique in the history of America. He wants to train thousands of new scientists and engineers to create the best renewable energy infrastucture on the planet. That way, when the oil runs out, the OPEC countries will be coming to US for their energy needs.

    Obama is not just a tax and spend Democrat. His education program isn't about your kids taking more art classes, or getting a free ride through college. It is about investing in American INDIVIDUALS, to STRENGTHEN the American economy. Why ship jobs overseas when we can create them right here while we break free from our oil dependence. Why pour billions into offshore drilling that will provide less than a decade's worth of oil and gas, when we could put that money into an energy infrastructure that really would free us and is renewable -- you can keep using it forever.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 23:48:17

      Comment: We need to put money into offshore drilling because we need that decade's worth of oil while we are developing the better alternatives. Like it or not, alternative technologies are NOT far enough along that we can switch over to them any time soon. I agree completely that fossil fuels must be replaced with cleaner and safer alternatives, but we are 5-10 years away from having the technology figured out, plus another 10-20 years to get the country converted to it. In the mean time, the world demand for oil continues to grow, and if we don't go after our own oil, we will be bankrupt long before the new technology ever has a chance.

      I like the cleanliness of hydrogen fuel cells, although I'm concerned that these cars, if used on a large scale will begin to diminish the world's water supply. Even if the amount it uses is minor, that could be the biggest environmental concern of all. I know we have lot's of water, but if the earths climate is as fragile as some would have you believe, removing even small amounts of water from the earth's eco system will lead to lower plant growth and higher CO2 levels.

      • Posted By: Nins @ 06/21/2008 14:15:16

        Comment: The lead time on offshore drilling is about 20 years before we get the oil. If I thought it would make a good stop gap, I would be in favor of it.

        And both hybrid cars and hydrogen fuel cell cars are workable solutions right now. It's just a matter of where you want to invest your money.

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 6:34:31 PM

    Comment: hey everyone check this out you think we're in trouble with oil ?? we're not just check this out !! http://orbat.com/site/energy/us%20energy%20independence.htm then go to www.americansolutions.com and sign the petition !! we will be fine in a couple of mths !!!! regaurdless of who is elected !!

  • Posted By: abe4600 @ 06/20/2008 5:53:25 PM

    Comment: First, there is no gurantee that we'll find an oil. Even if we do, it will be 7-10years before we see a drop of oil. Learn the facts and don't let polticians like McBush play on your emotions.

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 18:13:53

      Comment: We have many confirmed oil deposits, and billions of barrels available in shale deposits in the western states. The fact that it will take 7-10 years to get the oil we have doesn't matter. The price of oil is only partially determined by the current supply and demand. Since oil FUTURES determine the price of oil to a huge extent, the fact that supply will increase in the future due to our drilling, the price of oil will immediately begin to fall. The key is not in the harvest, but in the plan to harvest in the future. Going for our own oil will definitely make a difference.

      We claim to be the world leaders, yet when it comes to our energy policy, we cower in the corner for fear of disrupting a couple of polar bears in their environment, or whatever. Can we stop being so over sensitive, and demonstrate to the world that we are the leaders we claim to be? The country that controls energy supply will have the power. With our resources, there is no reason we cannot position ourselves as the predominent energy production leader of all types of energy to meet the ever growing worldwide demands. That includes the development of safer, cleaner alternatives as well as utilizing the fossile fuels until the alternative technologies become viable.

      • Posted By: Nins @ 06/20/2008 22:36:40

        Comment: Whala, we don't have to chose between polar bears and gas in our tanks. We don't have to sacrifice clean water, fresh air and biologic diversity just to keep going. We don't have to keep worsening global warming, and pay for it with floods and storms. WE DON'T HAVE TO CONTINUE TO BE DEPENDENT ON OIL. We could utilize clean renewable resources, have our cake and eat it too. Now THAT would be something to stand up and show the world.

      • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 18:26:24

        Comment: we do have that much but the time frame you spoke of is a little off we can get oil in about 6mths from the shale the only problem is the refineries that we have would be over loaded with product so we need more refineries to handle all we can give them !

        • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 19:56:30

          Comment: From what I understand, the time restriction is not how long it takes to get the facility set up, but rather the 7 years it currently takes to get a permit issued before you can start. There is so much red tape because of environmental regulations, that the whole process takes ten times longer than it would in any other country.

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 5:24:34 PM

    Comment: TYLER - The price of oil swelled to another record high Monday morning - before dropping back. It almost hit $140 a barrel - but then fell 25 cents. It appears - a recent increase in oil output from Saudi Arabia -- is not driving down crude prices. Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, who started a bipartisan group called "American Solutions for Winning the Future" held little back at the Texas Republican Convention. He wants to use American solutions to change to the U.S. energy policy.

    Simply put - he's fed up with Congress: "The problem is not big oil or the foreigners," said Speaker Gingrich. "The problem is not the Saudis. The problem is getting Congress to do it's job." And that job, he says, is to start using the energy we have. "Congress outlaws every conceivable energy source," said Speaker Gingrich. Gingrich is making his case for domestic drilling by launching a campaign with Actor Chuck Norris, with the slogan: "Drill here, Drill now, Pay less." The campaign is urging Congress to do something now to bring down gas prices. Speaker Gingrich also has thoughts on speculators. "It's people who are betting the U.S. is too dumb to produce (its own oil)."


    He sides with East Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert -- when it comes to speculators and drilling. "If you began selling off two million barrels a day...we can pump out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It would immediately bring down the price of oil." Speaker Gingrich proposes selling off half of the reserve - now. "Do it suddenly..without telling anybody in advance and punish every speculator."The very speculators, he says, that are betting against America."

    GO TO WWW.AMERICANSOLUTIONS.COM AND SIGN THE PETITION !!!

  • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 5:21:23 PM

    Comment: It amazes me how partisan we, the people, have become. 10 years ago, I hated how partisanship among politicians made progress very slow. Today, that partisanship is infecting the general public, including me. The Democrats believe all our problems are due to the evil Oil companies stealing our fortunes, and the Republicans believe the Democrats want us to live under Socialism. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

    The concept of having two parties is to look at both sides of issues to come up with common solutions that work for all. Unfortunately, we are allowing partisanship to polarize our positions, and are growing ever more deadlocked--so much so that nothing can or will

    The reality is that as humans, we all have the same basic needs. Working together, common solutions can be found that will work for all. Unless America can break free from this partisan deadlock, the world will soon pass us by, and we will cease to be the world leaders in anything.

    The reality is that neither side is clean in any of this, and our current government programs are excessively wasteful. If the government we have ran efficiently, maybe the conservatives would be less opposed to adding more programs. Before we go and create more screwed up programs, why don't we work on fixing the programs we have. Here are couple of thoughts:

    With the price of gas increasing at a record pace, instead of trying to force oil companies to lower prices, find the cause of the problem, and fix it. The reality is that the price of oil is determined by the cost of oil FUTURES, not the actual cost of the oil. If you regulate the trading of oil futures, you could prevent price bubbles like we are currently seeing. This is a place where more government regulation would be appropriate.

    Another example, when hospitals are charging $100 for a tylenol, there's a problem with that system. If we fix the problems in the healthcare & insurance industries, we wouldn't need a government program to provide health insurance to be able to afford healthcare. Government healthcare is a band aid. Let's fix the real problem.

    No matter what we do, none of it matters much unless we can come together as a people to work together for the common good. United we stand, Divided we fall. That will forever be true, and it's up to us to decide whether we stand or fall.

    • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 17:27:58

      Comment: THE PETITION IS FOR ALL AMERICANS ( NO PARTY ) IT IS BI-PARTISAN !!!! AS FOR ME NO-OBAMA !!

    • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 17:25:23

      Comment: THEN SIGN THE NON-PARTISAN PETITION !!!!

      • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 17:42:38

        Comment: I have signed it. I definitely want some action on this

        • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 18:17:30

          Comment: THANK YOU YOUR A GREAT AMERICAN !!!

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 4:37:11 PM

    Comment: CHECK OBAMA'S VOTING RECORD HE IS AGAINST HYDROGEN !!! THATS THE CLEANEST FUEL THERE IS !!!http://obama.senate.gov/votes/index.cfm?start=1

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 17:35:52

      Comment: Ya, it seems that for the democrats, it's more about making sure the solution comes from their side of the isle than it is about finding the best solution.

  • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 4:33:46 PM

    Comment: TYLER - The price of oil swelled to another record high Monday morning - before dropping back. It almost hit $140 a barrel - but then fell 25 cents. It appears - a recent increase in oil output from Saudi Arabia -- is not driving down crude prices. Former Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, who started a bipartisan group called "American Solutions for Winning the Future" held little back at the Texas Republican Convention. He wants to use American solutions to change to the U.S. energy policy.

    Simply put - he's fed up with Congress: "The problem is not big oil or the foreigners," said Speaker Gingrich. "The problem is not the Saudis. The problem is getting Congress to do it's job." And that job, he says, is to start using the energy we have. "Congress outlaws every conceivable energy source," said Speaker Gingrich. Gingrich is making his case for domestic drilling by launching a campaign with Actor Chuck Norris, with the slogan: "Drill here, Drill now, Pay less." The campaign is urging Congress to do something now to bring down gas prices. Speaker Gingrich also has thoughts on speculators. "It's people who are betting the U.S. is too dumb to produce (its own oil)."


    He sides with East Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert -- when it comes to speculators and drilling. "If you began selling off two million barrels a day...we can pump out of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It would immediately bring down the price of oil." Speaker Gingrich proposes selling off half of the reserve - now. "Do it suddenly..without telling anybody in advance and punish every speculator."The very speculators, he says, that are betting against America."

    GO TO WWW.AMERICANSOLUTIONS.COM AND SIGN THE PETITION !!!

    • Posted By: whala @ 06/20/2008 17:31:54

      Comment: That's a great idea. That together with a solid plan to drill, and get our shale oil would dramatically reduce the cost of oil. If we reduce the cost enough, we could take a portion of the savings to invest in developing future technologies. How much do we have in reserve?

      • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 18:21:10

        Comment: FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC 300 MILLION BARRELS AND FOR THE MILITARY IT IS 450 MILLION BARRELS ,...........THIS IS IN CASE OF ATTACKS ON OUR SOIL BUT THE PRESIDENT CAN AND WILL RELEASE THE PUBLICS PART LIKE CARTER DID IN THE 1970'S .....BUT IF SUPPLIES ARE GOOD THEN WE CAN REPLENISH ALL 750 MILLION BARRELS IN ABOUT 3 WEEKS BUT IT COST ALOT OF $$$$

        • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 18:23:00

          Comment: P.S. THIS IS JUST WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT AND IN CASE OF ATTACK THAT WOULD BE IF ALL SUPPLIES WERE CUT OFF !

  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 06/20/2008 3:06:58 PM

    Comment: More info from SinclairPC/arrest.......looks like PUMA may get involved.......

    At the Press Club, Avi also ran into Will Bower, a sometimes-Huffington Post blogger who founded ???Party Unity, My Ass??? ??? a group for die-hard Clinton supporters that are now backing McCain ??? and was invited by the McCain campaign last weekend to meet with the presumptive Republican nominee, and called Sinclair's story "worth exploring."

    ???I don???t think he should be written off without consideration,??? he said when asked about Sinclair. ???I think it's worth exploring.???

    NOBAMA!!!

    • Posted By: the-commish @ 06/20/2008 23:52:37

      Comment:
      Obama's nomination....GOOD!

      Obama's election....GREAT!

      Unholy Roller's heart attack when Obama is inaugurated....PRICELESS!


    • Posted By: sjpersonal @ 06/20/2008 16:41:47

      Comment: What elses would you expect from these people? Seriously they are probably salivating and praying that this is true. Thank God they will be sorely disappointed. NEXT!!

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/20/2008 2:59:37 PM

    Comment: Hydrogen fuel cells are the answer to our gasoline crisis, not offshore drilling for more oil. Oil is a dirty industry with a very limited fuel supply remaining on the planet. Hydrogen fuel cells use algae to produce energy, and instead of producing CO2 (like oil and gasoline) they emit water and oxygen, which improve the atmosphere and help clean the air that you breathe. Hydrogen fuel cell cars have already been manufactured and work extremely well. General Motors, Honda and BMW all have hydrogen fuel cell cars IN PRODUCTION, not just in development. In five or ten years, we will all be driving them. Unless of course Newt Gingrich and Geo. W Bush succeed in blocking clean energy technology, and ramming this crazy offshore drilling bill through Congress.

    Want to dominate the global economy? THE FUTURE BELONGS TO THE NATION THAT CAN SUCCESSFULLY BREAK FREE OF FOSSIL FUEL. That is where your tax dollars should be going -- to strengthen America.

    Obama's education plan is unique in the history of America. He wants to train thousands of new scientists and engineers to create the best renewable energy infrastucture on the planet. That way, when the oil runs out, the OPEC countries will be coming to US for their energy needs.

    Obama is not just a tax and spend Democrat. His education program isn't about your kids taking more art classes, or getting a free ride through college. It is about investing iN American INDIVIDUALS, to STRENGTHEN the American economy. Why ship jobs overseas when we can create them right here while we break free from our oil dependence. Why pour billions into offshore drilling that will provide less than a decade's worth of oil and gas, when we could put that money into an energy infrastructure that really would free us and is renewable -- it would last forever.

    • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 06/20/2008 17:43:10

      Comment: Iran is very close to being bombed. When it happens, we will get $6/gallon. America will demand relief. Hussein's ideas, would sink the entire nation into an economic depression. He has put himself into a corner.

      NOBAMA!!!

    • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 16:17:28

      Comment: IT WAS NOT OBAMA'S IDEA BUSH DID IT FIRST !!

    • Posted By: willnotvoteobama @ 06/20/2008 16:16:50

      Comment: About the President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative
      It Will Overcome Key Technical and Cost Barriers
      ??? Lowering the cost of hydrogen: Currently, hydrogen is more expensive to produce than conventional gasoline. The President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative seeks to lower that cost enough to make hydrogen cost-competitive with other fuels and technologies, and to advance the methods of producing hydrogen from renewable resources, nuclear energy, and coal (with carbon capture and sequestration).
      ??? Creating effective hydrogen storage: Current hydrogen storage systems are inadequate for use in the wide range of vehicles that consumers demand. The President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative supports the research and development needed to overcome the grand challenge for hydrogen storage: to store the amount of hydrogen required for a conventional driving range (>300 miles), within the vehicular constraints of weight, volume, efficiency, safety, and cost.
      ??? Creating affordable hydrogen fuel cells: Currently, fuel cells are more expensive than internal combustion engines. The President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative is working to reduce the cost and improve durability of fuel cells.
      It Will Help Ensure America's Energy Independence
      ??? Through the President's Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, the Federal government, automotive and energy industries, universities, national laboratories, and others are working together to overcome the technological and financial barriers to the successful development of commercially viable, emissions-free fuel cell vehicles that require no foreign oil.
      Federal Support Can Accelerate Development
      ??? Additional research and development is needed to meet consumer requirements and enable rapid commercialization so that hydrogen and fuel cell technologies can provide clean domestically-produced energy for transportation and other uses.
      ??? The DOE Hydrogen Program has made significant progress toward achieving R&D goals. As of 2007, the Program has:
      ??? Reduced the cost of producing hydrogen from natural gas from $5.00/gge in 2003 to $3.00/gge (2015 goal: $2.00/gge).
      ??? Reduced high-volume cost of fuel cells from $275/kW in 2002 to $107/kW (2015 goal: $30/kW).
      ??? Identified new materials with potential for high storage capacity (2015 goal: 300-mile range).
      ??? 77 fuel cell vehicles and 12 hydrogen fueling stations demonstrated 53???58% fuel cell efficiency, 103- to 190-mile range, and 1350-hr durability (~40,000 miles) in 2007 (2015 goals: 60%, 300 miles, 5000 hours).
      For more information on the President's initiatives, please visit the White House Web site.

  • Posted By: HolyRoller @ 06/20/2008 2:31:05 PM

    Comment: JERUSALEM ??? The board of a nonprofit organization on which Sen. Barack Obama served as a paid director alongside a confessed domestic terrorist granted funding to a controversial Arab group that mourns the establishment of Israel as a "catastrophe" and supports intense immigration reform, including providing drivers licenses and education to illegal aliens.

    The co-founder of the Arab group in question, Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi, also has held a fundraiser for Obama. Khalidi is a harsh critic of Israel, has made statements supportive of Palestinian terror and reportedly has worked on behalf of the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was involved in anti-Western terrorism and was labeled by the State Department as a terror group.

    In 2001, the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based nonprofit that describes itself as a group helping the disadvantaged, provided a $40,000 grant to the Arab American Action Network, or AAAN, for which Khalidi's wife, Mona, serves as president. The Fund provided a second grant to the AAAN for $35,000 in 2002.

    NOBAMA!!!

  • Posted By: Nins @ 06/20/2008 2:25:47 PM

    Comment: Dear WillNotVote, lots of people don't know that the largest stockpile of oil IN THE WORLD is owned by the US investment banks, with Merrill Lynch having the biggest share and other banking houses like Morgan Stanley also holding large reserves. They are holding way more oil than the US govenrment has in reserve, and they are withholding their oil from the market, purposely driving up prices and CRUCIFYING the American public. Congress has already started hearings to investigate this heinous crime.

    Meanwhile, oil industry insiders (including Geo. W Bush) are pushing to open up offshore drilling in the United States. The are promising us that this will lower oil prices, but I disagree. First of all, the US Geological Survey scientists say that the amount of oil and gas available off shore is so small that in most cases the cost of drilling and building wells is more than the value of the resources. Secondly, guess who is going to foot the bill for the offshore exploration and drilling... you guessed it... THE TAXPAYERS, so even if it did drop the price of gas briefly, you would have already more than paid the difference in another way. Thirdly, most of these costal states depend heavily on beach tourism to keep their economies viable, and tourists don't want to look at offshore wells, smell natural gas, or bathe at a beach which has little globs of oil a