Gas Prices Coming Down, Why?

I haven't noticed any decrease in gas prices yet. But I do think we need to start doing more off site drilling here in America.. The permitts have already been bought....now use them.

The price hasn't gone down around here yet

We've come down about eight cents a gallon here. I expect the price will fall at the pump in a couple of weeks. We need to pressure the democrats in Congress to open up drilling offshore, to at least give the states the right to open the shores, then we may see more falling prices of oil.

I heard a couple of days ago that the price of oil dropped by about 13 dollars. which is huge. However, with the recent tensions w/ Iran it went up again. Sigh.

I heard just minutes ago on the news that the price of oil per barrel is $127. It went up briefly yesterday on concerns about the storm in the Gulf of Mexico and Iran, but the concern over the storm has abated since it looks like it won't disturb the platforms in the Gulf, it has come back down.
Barbara B., Jul 22, 2008, 3:48pm EDT

It dropped $16 per barrel last week. We were discussing this on another thread a few days ago. Apparently, for every dollar the price of a barrel goes down, that translates to a 2.5 cent reduction at the pump. At a $16.00 decrease that is 40 cents. The problem is that the tankers that are delivering the gas today bought that gas before it was refined at the old price. We won't be seeing the full reduction until the next shipment, but that's also only if the barrel price of the unrefined oil doesn't go up by then.

The prices have been coming down here. Of course they went back up today and closed at $133 a barrel. One of the national stations broadcast that. Sorry I don't remember which one it was.

We don't have an oil supply problem. We've got a bunch of traitorous Republican shills blocking drilling on existing leases, and trying to turn our energy policy over to their oil company masters as a parting gift before the electorate tars and feathers them.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/18cong.html?ref=science

If it were just a supply problem, the Bush gang could release 2 million barrels a day from the strategic oil reserves. But instead their trying to let our energy policies be determined by a bunch of companies who are in no way even guaranteed to sell the oil to us.

The oil companies have us right where they want us, and the Bush gang refuses to do anything about it except to point the other way.

Ir's not just Reoublicans. The problem is that people like to place blame, and they love to choose sides, part of the pack mentality of the average American. The Democrats are just as much to blame. It's just a political game between the parties with the people's interests traded as mere pawns. Until the people stop swallowing what they want them to believe, it's never going to end.

Did you read the article for which you left the URL? "Democrats said they were calling the bluff of Republicans on their persistent demands for more domestic production." That's all this amounts to, and nothing more.
"Republicans say many of those sites have proved to be dry holes or are the subject of lawsuits and disputes over federal permits" The Democrats know this and so they know it's not a viable solution, yet they don't care because all the ignorant public sees is that the Republicans are going to block the proposal. Just a childish, nah nah nanana from them for the Republicans having made the Democrats look bad for blocking off shore drilling.

Sue;

You're trying to tell me that there's no oil on 68 million acres of already leased land. What we've known for years is that new technologies have made many of those acres viable, and many underused leases should be productive. The oil companies have gotten greedier now that they've got prices to where they want them to be, yet they refuse to invest in new refineries, even though the government has offered them land.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47618

http://www.delawareonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080722/BUSINESS/807220333/1003

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html



The more telling part of the remark for me is: "Republicans say many of those sites have proved to be dry holes or are the subject of lawsuits and disputes over federal permits"

When did the Republican go to work for the oil companies? Why aren't they even pretending to represent the American people? Why are they pretending that anything we do now will bring more oil and gas to market immediatelY?

The real ignorance of the public is revealed when the mantra of "drill, drill,drill" is repeated like that will change anything in the abscence of a real energy policy, or a real understanding of what is happening in the world.

Erik, you missed my point and you also missed the point of the article to which you originally referred to make your point. None of which you said in the last comment at 10:18AM is what either my point or the article to which you linked is about. I made that comment knowing full well that you'd probably come back with something like this, since you've previously tried to make a point by using a reference that doesn't even back it.
I made the point I wanted to make and that stands. It's not my wish to engage with you in any discussion.

We had a huge drop here right after Bush's speech on Monday when he said we were drilling off the cost of Florida.

Sue;

Whatever. The shill goes on.

Oh, that's a given, but you and so many others like you, only see it happening from one way, and that's the biggest cause of the demise of the country.

The price of a barrel of oil has fallen today again. It's down to $126 now. That's $21 less than it was last week. The cause according to the news, is because of increased supplies of gasoline and the strengthening of the dollar to the Euro. So, maybe China's ban on half of the vehicles in Bejing is having some affect on the market. But, we should still put pressure on the Democrats to let them know who they work for. Us!! Tell Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi that we want more oil and for them to unblock the off-shore drilling. You have the links above to get in touch with them and all of those in Congress who represent us, the people. We are the ones in charge and we should let them know it. : )

No, the biggest cause of the demise of the country is the clowns in the Whitehouse, dancing to the tune of their oil company masters.

No more drilling until Dick Cheney provides the transcripts of his meetings with the oil company execs, so we can see what he promised them.

Barbara;

The Republicans are the ones blocking drilling. The Republicans are the ones who won't insist that Alaskan oil only be sold to us. Why are you being such a shill? Do you actually ever do any research, or do you always get your news straight from Insanity, Louffa boy and the drug addled comedian?

Sorry Erik, but you are misinformed on the issue of who is blocking who. Pelosi and Reid said yesterday they would block the vote to even bring up the unblocking issue. And, from the way you sound, I think you must be the one listening to the wrong people. You are totally out of the loop.

Actually Barbara, I've presented links to my information, and as usual, you've presented nothing.

Why don't you ask your beloved president why he won't have his vice president release transcripts of his meetings with the oil company execs? And if immediately available oil is your demand, why not have the Repubs release oil from the SSR?

Why are the Republicans not insisting that oil drilled in our territory be sold for use only here? That was a key component of the Democratic bill.

Can you even answer that? Are you capable of any independent thought at all?

Republicans block lowering oil prices again:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/23/congress.oil/index.html

"Are you capable of any independent thought at all?"

Barbara, it's funny he should ask you this when his own independent thought so very obviously just reiterates the same opinions of the left we've heard time and time again.

Guess all those URLs he leaves are links to his writing.

It's called RESEARCH Sue, and I know that you're totally unfamiliar with it.

Nothing wrong with research, Erik, just that, as I've already pointed out, you use articles to back up what you say that actually refute what you say, so your googling, that you call research, is nothing but copy and paste of someone else's opinion, much of which you've proven you don't even understand

Allowing off-shore drilling is a horrendous idea and cannot be allowed to happen. Thank goodness that Congress still has a ban in place, even if Bush has reversed his father's order to ban it.

The oil companies do not need any more government giveaways. They have vast amounts of land already given to them that have not been explored yet.

We cannot risk the environmental damage off-shore drilling has the potential to cause. The short-sighted idea must die.

BTW, ""The Democrats seem to keep saying we need to explore alternative fuels and energy sources."" This can only be opposed by short-sighted, ignorant fools.

Alternative fuels and energy sources should have been looked into as voraciously as they are now before it was so slap you in the face evident that they're needed, and the fact that they weren't is what was shortsighted. It doesn't also mean that offshore drilling shouldn't be employed as well. All measures need to be taken at this point.

Con Job;

Nice points. It's good to see a voice of reason here.

Sue;

I have my own opinons, and use facts to back them up.

In your case, it's all buzz, no sting. You're a lot more impressed with your own opinion than I am.

"You're a lot more impressed with your own opinion than I am."
If you were the least bit impressed with my opinions, Erik, I'd be sure to reconsider them.

"We cannot risk the environmental damage off-shore drilling has the potential to cause. The short-sighted idea must die."
Con Job

Have you forgotten the during the two worst hurricanes in our recent history, Katrina and Rita, we did not have any environmental damage because of off-shore drilling. If you would like to stimulate the economy and put more people to work, drilling is one way to do it. But, if you as most of the liberal democrats on the hill would like to see our economy in the tank, then this isn't an option and will fight it tooth and nail all the way to the poor house.

Erik, you say I have no backup to my statements about Pelosi and Reid blocking the drilling ban lift. If you would just listen to the news, the fair and balanced news, you would have heard it for yourself. Like I said earlier, you are out of the loop on this issue.

Sorry Con Job, I had to remove your last comment because of your foul language. I don't allow that gutter talk in my articles. You may accuse me of censoring, that's ok. I prefer not to have your kind of language on my page.

Now, to the latest news. I heard this afternoon from the News and Talk of Texas radio station, WBAP, that oil has fallen below $125 per barrel. Good news, I think! I hope we get to hear more of it. Contact your representative and let them know if you want the ban on off-shore drilling lifted.
Barbara B., Jul 23, 2008, 5:43pm EDT

"Offshore drilling will do nothing but further line the pockets of the oil companies, it will not make a difference in the price you or I pay for gas. It will, however, open the door to ecological disaster."

Recent DOI estimates put the amount of energy in these off-limits areas at 19.1 billion barrels of oil and 83.9 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—approximately 30 years' worth of imports from Saudi Arabia and enough natural gas to power America's homes for 17 years. It should also be noted that these initial estimates tend to be low.
I think that with the states' power to control the areas off their coastlines that will or will not be drilled will save the areas of most ecological concern while using our natural RESOURCES as they were intended, to man's advantage. It will also provide jobs and make a difference in the pump price while we are still working on alternative sources.

I hate it when people do that, Barbara B. You just ruined my whole response to ConJob. That's it for me here.

All I said was that Bush was responsible for the economy being in the can, and McCain is more of the same. Is it foul to call 'em as I see 'em?

So you see the economy in the can Con Job? I don't see it that way at all. I see that lifting the ban on off-shore drilling is a plus to our economy. Drilling is done in a technologically sound way to bring up the oil without disturbing the environment. Where's the problem with that? The dems are in bed with the environmentalist whacko's and that's why they won't open it up to the states to decide what they want to do for their people and state.

Sue, thanks for your input!

It's good news that oil prices are coming down. The Bush administration is taking credit for the price drop because the President lifted the ban on offshore drilling. However, I have to wonder why the mere mention of drilling would drop the price of oil?

The oil that would result from the lifting of drilling restrictions, even if drilling started today, would require years before it is in the "pipeline". If there in no additional supply of oil in the marketplace to drive down the price, the price drop must be due to speculators trading in the oil futures market.

Check out Erik B.'s link. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/23/congress.oil/index.html
The article describes how speculation adds from $40 to $60 to the price of each barrel of oil. These people need some oversight. Limiting trading in oil futures to those those who TAKE DELIVERY could limit the affect of price gouging we have been experiencing.

Let's follow the advice of oilman T.Boone Pickens and not try "...to drill ourselves out of this problem".

Barbara;

You're the one that's out of the loop. You and your cronies are trying to hand our energy future over to a bunch of multi-national corporations that have already shown their eagerness to stab us in the back repeatedly.

I provide evidence, and you provide opinions you get from Faux news.

I'm not even looking at this from an ecological viewpoint, except that I know how disastrous large scale oil shale development would be to parts of my beloved Colorado. Despite Senator Allard's willingness to despoil our state, that simply isn't the answer.

What part about it taking at least 5 years to get any production don't you understand? What part about the oil companies not having any obligation to sell oil that is found here to us don't you understand?
Go listen to the drug addled comedian, and try got get back to me with a logical answer.

Barbara,

You think the economy is in good shape? Really??

BTW, Bush's moronic rescinding of his father's ban on off-shore drilling makes no difference, Congress has it's own ban, so it will not happen. That has nothing to do with the drop in oil prices. The bubble began to burst when they began to look at speculation.

If you think the economy is in great shape, you need to vote for McSame. He will make sure we keep things as they are.

Think about the following:

What was the price of oil on 1/20/01 (when off-shore drilling was still banned via Bush I)?
What is the cost now?

What was the national deficit on 1/20/01? What is it now?

What was the inflation rate on 1/20/01? What is it now?

Just a taste of the great shape we are in.

Yeah, Con Job, Texas is in pretty good shape economically under conservative leadership. Our governor is a Republican and we are doing pretty darn well here in this state compared to other states, California and New York which are pretty much liberally run states. Those states are in deficits, California especially. Employment is up in our state, revenues are up, and that is fact. Check it out for yourself if you can do a search on your computer. I had an article last week or the week before addressing that issue. If we had responsible people in Congress doing what was right before pandering to the environmentalists, we might do better nation wide. Don't you wish you lived in Texas? : )
Barbara B., Jul 24, 2008, 1:23pm EDT

Texas, well Texas is home to the oil industry, the one industry that has done well due to the price of oil. It has nothing to do with local government. Heck, lots of states run by the GOP are in far worse shape than CA or NY, it depends on the local economy.

How are things in Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Utah or Alabama. Aren't these GOP run states.

If you base your analysis of the US on Texas, it is like basing your analysis of a dead dog by nails on his paw. Yes, the nails are in good shape, but the dog is dead.

Analytical thinking is not being used here, now is it?

BTW, I've been to Texas, and you couldn't pay me enough to move there. I turned down a job offer in Houston because it was the most disgusting place I had ever been to.

Perhaps using Houston as a basis for an analysis of Texas is as bad as using Texas as an analysis of the US.

My apologies to Austin.

Wow Barb I live in Texas also and have for almost my entire life (exception only to when my husband was in the Navy) and yet I think you and I are living in two different states.

You do know that California has a GOP Governor right? Just asking because you wrote of their liberal leadership. And NY had GOVERNOR SPITZER (GOP) until he resigned over the ton of money he spent on call girls?

As a matter of fact THIS COUNTRY was in far better shape under the liberal Clinton administration, we were not in debt for the first time in many many decades. The economy was great, we were at peace, unemployment was down. But no lets praise the guy who undid all that and left us at war in a country that all reasons for going into were lies, and yet we are STILL THERE. We are so far in debt I don't know if there is a way out of it. We are in a recession and very few people have the cojones to say it.

Do you remember how good the state was under the governorship of Anne Richards, because I do and it was very good. Now only so much is actually influenced in Texas by the Governor. Now when W ran against her (and she did not wish to run for re-election to begin with) he slandered her and painted her as a gun hating, lesbian, baby-killer. So he won. Sad day indeed. It hasn't improved much since then either. I can NOT offer any praise for a governor (Rick Perry) who when informed that a lab that handles some 80+% of death row forensic testing became aware of some errors made during a certain time span denied outright any stay (not a pardon just a delay to make sure all is up and up) of executions that would allow this lab to review and if need be retest anything that might have led to the conviction of these people. Now in Dallas alone the last several months has seen a HUGE number of people in jail being released based on DNA evidence. Even one on death row (and he is scum but...) has had his sentence commuted to life without parole since it turns out he didn't kill the child they accused him of. Again he is still in jail due to other crimes but still...............I have no good words for this "Conservative leadership of Texas"

Now the questions you pose regarding oil, fuel, congress etc. are well I believe they are in need of being tabled for the time being. After all we are talking about something that we will not see have an effect in the price of gas until as late as 2030. So in the interest of all that matters, table it until next spring. W is NOTORIOUS for insisting that big oil not be regulated in any way by the government. Remember his hair brained idea for addressing the pollution of these refineries in Texas was? If not, he told all the big CEOs of these companies to meet and decided amongst themselves how they wished to address it. Which was to draft a plan that grandfathered existing refineries and allowed for voluntary upgrades at their will or lack there of it. And he claimed when he left Texas that the air was better then than when he entered office. It WASN'T.

Then we need to realize that oil, big business of oil, drilling, gasoline, refineries all this...is not as partisan as you paint it. After all they dont charge different prices to Republicans than they do to Democrats do they?

What needs to be addressed is this:
Is there a shortage of crude oil in this country? - No there is not.
Are refineries working at full capacity to convert the oil into gas? - No they are not
Why? Maybe they are doing it to manipulate the price of gas and keep raking in billions in profits, maybe they have too much equipment that is too old and is causing delays, fix it, replace it, whatever.
Should the futures market be better regulated? YES
Should the sub prime market have been regulated? YES
Now before returning to address the new drilling sites that big oil wants we need to ask some more questions:

Why do these same companies hold leases and drilling rights free and clear on over 60 million acres that they are currently ignoring while requesting the opening of these protected areas?

How much regulation will be placed on these drilling rights if these areas are opened up?

My guess is the reason W is pushing so hard to get them to pass the opening of these areas to big oil drilling, is because just like everything else, there will be no regulation. So prove me wrong W prove me wrong. Go ahead and draft a compromise that allows a certain amount of drilling but is still so well regulated that it keeps our cost down and our environment safe. He wont do that and we all know that. Why? Because he looks at the environment like he does homosexuals. Remember when he refused to sign the hate crime bill because it included sexuality along with race and religion and he said he would NOT sign any law that allowed for any protection of homosexuals. And this is the great leadership you admire? Do you have kids in school here? Public school? I do and this leadership you admire is scaring the heck out of me when it comes to something as basic as their education.

As for the state and living here. I love it. I am not always happy with decisions of others and often embarassed by them. But it is where I was born, it is rich in history, and it is where my family is. Con - I wouldn't want to live in Houston either, so you are not alone there. But Austin....wow what an experience. KEEP AUSTIN WEIRD!

Oh and one last thing. You wrote of congress as pandering to the environmentalist? Um, when was the last time the environmentalist paid the members of congress well over 6 figures a year, took them on extravagent vacations, sent them expensive gifts, or even big expensive dinners? Compare that to the pandering to big business, especially oil and see it what it is for.

remember if you do what is best for the environment - everyone benefits, clean air, clean water.

if you do what is best for Exxon then Exxon benefits, and not the guy who is working all night long for 5.50 an hour, the head honchos who take BILLION DOLLAR RETIREMENT PACKAGES.

New York and California have Democrats in their legislative houses. Yes, Arnie is a Republican, sort of, but he's had to deal with more Dems than other Republicans. New York is the same. If you want to lay all of our troubles on the feet of Bush, that's ok. It's your choice. But, here in Texas, we have large technological companies who employ many people at a pretty decent wage. We also have the beef industry, farming, tourism. All of these things work to bring our state a pretty good economy compared to many. Like I said before, this state is a conservative one for the most part. Conservatism works.

Barb;

No answer? Rush didn't get back to you yet?

I'm still waiting.

Larry;

Sorry we don't all have a private jet like McCain. Everything else you wrote is moronic BS.

Erik, oil field people say it would be more like two years or less, to get a well in and bringing in the oil to the refineries. Any more questions? : )

Barbara, two years seems a little optimistic. Here's an article that says 10 to 12 years. It also mentions that because oil is traded as a global commodity, the price won't decline because it is pumped in the US.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/06/20/new_offshore_drilling_not_a_quick_fix_analysts_say/

Barbara get away from fixed news:

Oil came down another buck today. It's running about $123 per barrel. Wonder what it would do if the liberals, Pelosi and Reid would let them have an up or down vote on whether to open up the off-shore drilling debate. It might go even lower.

Barbara;

If it were really a supply problem, then refineries wouldn't be running at full capacity. And if it was a supply problem, Bush could fix it by simply releasing oil from the SPR. But he won't do it. You know why? Because the Republicans aren't interested in lowering oil prices. Their Big Oil masters don't give a damn about the American public. Bush just wants to hand our energy future over to them by locking up the oil leases. If they won't drill now, what makes you think they'll drill when they've got total control over our resources?


Here's the way the market works, written in a way that I hope you can understand it.

http://iowaliberal.com/?p=1081

Erik, you call Big Oil probably referring to our nation's oil companies. But, did you know they are not that big? In the world market, our oil companies are small potatoes. And, if our refineries are running at full tilt, as you say, then it's probably because they have to put in all of those additives the enviromentalists say we have to have in our gas tanks, and it's slowing down the works. I used to live in a town with a lot of refineries, and there's time down for what they call in the biz, "turnarounds". That's maintenance for those of you who don't know what it is. They work around the clock to get the job done and the refinery doesn't start back up again until they finish. We need more refineries, more drilling so we can once again be independent of foreign oil.

Since the advent of the auto, spanning nearly 100 years, the cost of a gallon of Petrol reached $2.40/gallon. In the TWO YEARS since Pelosi, Reid, et al., have enjoyed control of Congress, that price has nearly doubled.

Not a drop of oil was spilled, as pointed out earlier, during two of the most severe Hurricanes in History; offshore drilling is safer than Nature herself.

FACT: More oil is leached, naturally, from beneath the ocean floor, than we have EVER spilled, whether via drilling or transport.

FACT: The "leased lands" liberal B.S. is a canard; those lands don't produce, and Pelosi knows it. Why are they so desperate to prevent us from drilling where we KNOW the oil is?

Fact: From the moment that drilling equipment is brought to a site, to the time oil begins being pumped from the ground, is approximately 10-12 months. and the mere knowledge that more oil will be brought to market LOWERS the price.

Wake UP!

By the way...there are a KNOWN 2 Trillion barrels of oil in the Rockies. Access to it is being BLOCKED...by Pelosi, Reid and the Dem. Shame to them.

Let's go get it...

Mark-John -- interesting "Facts". Care to back them up with some links? I'm willing to flip-flop.

Barbara -- there has only been ONE refinery permit REQUEST from the oil industry
since 1975 to 2000. Domestic refining (83%) is concentrated in the hands of only
ten refiners.

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concluded in March 2001 that oil companies
had intentionally withheld supplies of gasoline from the market as a tactic to drive
up prices. A congressional investigation uncovered internal oil companies memos
showing the industry intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up
prices. Read the memo.

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_Internal_memos_show_oil_companies_limited_refineries_to_drive_up__0907.html

Checkout the: Myths and Facts about Oil Refineries in the United States
http://www.citizen.org/print_article.cfm?ID=11829

Baby-

There were no "permit requests" during the period you "cited," because petrol was $1.50/gal. We didn't need more refining capacity. Currently, India and China are using, which has since driven up World-Wide competition and consumption. We need to drill and refine our own.

The "opinion" of a blogger from a Liberal site shouldn't hold water with you. There was nothing factual cited to support the "opinions" stated there. As for my statements, you can research them yourself. However, I hope you will look further afield than Left-Wing propaganda pages.

Baby,I appreciate your opinion, and your words. Thanks for the exchange.

Mark-John,

Shell closed its 70,000-barrel-a-day refinery in Bakersfield California refinery in 2004. At the time California gas prices were at a record high price of $2.19/gal -- a price that we would gladly pay now -- and US demand for gasoline was increasing each year.
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/wgfupus24.htm
The refinery was closed at a time of record prices and increasing demand.

In fact, in 2005 the US imported 10% of its gasoline because it lacked sufficient refining capacity. Refinery capacity is also taxed by requirements to provide different blends for different states. It appears that we have a refinery bottleneck, yet oil companies are CLOSING refineries.

Now we are hearing cries that increasing domestic oil production will drive prices at the pump down. If we don't have the capacity to make it into gasoline will an increased supply of crude oil equate to lower prices at the pump in the long term? This is the mess we get when we have the oils companies set our energy policies.

I wonder if those refineries closed due to increasing demands by the environmentalists to change how they refine the products, or the product itself. Or could it be that California, which is in financial troubles, added fees or taxes to those companies. It might be both. Also, there have been no new refineries built in this country since the late seventies. Getting a refinery built is a challenge with all of the hoops companies must jump through. The added costs of getting to ground-breaking are astronomical as well.

I agree with Mark-John that too many of us who use computers look at pages that are written by liberals who do not put out correct information and take it to heart. There are people who write these articles and have sites who's main goal is to destroy our nation. We should be more aware of what's happening and take to heart only those sites where we know the truth can be found.

The public has demanded that many governments place restrictions on contaminants that refineries release, and most refineries have installed the equipment needed to comply with the requirements of the pertinent environmental protection regulatory agencies. In the United States, there is strong pressure to prevent the development of new refineries, and no major refinery has been built in the country since Marathon's Garyville, Louisiana facility in 1976. However, many existing refineries have been expanded during that time. Environmental restrictions and pressure to prevent construction of new refineries may have also contributed to rising fuel prices in the United States.[8] Additionally, many refineries (over 100 since the 1980s) have closed due to obsolescence and/or merger activity within the industry itself. This activity has been reported to Congress and in specialized studies not widely publicised.

The above quote came from Wikipedia the free online encyclopedia. If you have any questions about that, you can do a search and find just about all of the information you care to find. And, it's legitimate! : )

Barbara;

What sites are those?

Newsmax? I prefer the Onion, it's funnier.

Faux News? Home of Insantity, Coltergeist and Louffa boy?

RNC.org?

http://resourcescommittee.house.gov/images/stories/Documents/truth_about_americas_energy.pdf

And Barbara;

Since when is shilling for Big Oil patriotic?

The article from the Committee on Natural Resources has some interesting statistics that make the calls for increased domestic drilling appear as nothing more than a political red-herring. Here are the main points:

"
_ On the Outer Continental Shelf, 82% of federal natural gas and 79% of
federal oil is located in areas that are currently open for leasing.

_ Onshore, 62% of oil and 84% of natural gas resources are either fully
accessible under standard lease stipulations designed to protect lands
and wildlife, or will be accessible pending the completion of land-use
planning or environmental reviews.

_ Between 1999 and 2007, drilling permits for oil and gas development on
public lands increased more than 361%.

_ Since 2004, the Bureau of Land Management has issued 28,776 permits
to drill on public land; in that same time, only 18,954 wells were actually
drilled.

_ Oil and gas companies have stockpiled nearly 10,000 extra permits to
drill that they are not using to increase domestic production.

_ Onshore, of the 47.5 million acres of federal lands leased by oil and
gas companies, only about 13 million acres are actually producing oil
and gas.

_ Offshore, only 10.5 million of the 44 million leased acres are currently
producing oil or gas.
_ Combined, oil and gas companies hold leases to nearly 68 million acres
of federal land that are not producing oil and gas.

_ The 68 million acres of leased, inactive federal land could produce an
additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural
gas each day.

_ That would nearly double total U.S. oil production, and increase natural
gas production by 75%.

_ 4.8 million barrels of oil equals more than six times the estimated peak
production from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

_ Development of and production from the 68 million acres currently
under lease but not in production would cut US imports of oil by onethird. "

Baby-

As Barbara pointed out, it was Schwarzenegger, environmentalists and the Dem that caused the shutdown in California.

There are Trillions of known barrels in the Rockies, as well, but you refuse to get "the picture;" Dem's will not allow drilling there. The Governor's of both Utah and Colorado have been putting forth petitions for over SIX MONTHS; Pelosi and Congress have used it as a "political football," and rejected their pleas.

There are no usable reserves on the land "permitted." Hence, there is no drilling.

Mark;

You can loudly proclaim your opinions as facts, but even basic research reveals you to be FOS.

First of all, the aforementioned report refutes your finding of no oil on the 68 million currently leased. You've got no substantive proof,.

You don't live in Colorado (and I do): we've been through the boom and bust cycle of oil shale development. Simply put, there's not enough water, what water we have is too valuable, and the environmental impact would be tremendous. There's hope for less damaging technology in the future, but is isn't feasible for large scale development.

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/915351-0AdXs8/915351.PDF

And what you said about the Governor of Colorado using this is simply a bold faced lie:

http://www.colorado.gov/cs/Satellite/GovRitter/GOVR/1210842794693

Mark-John,

That is simply inaccurate.

1. Schwarzenegger, environmentalists and the Dem's had nothing to do with the Bakersfield refinery shutdown in California. Shell Oil officials contended that an FTC order reducing Shell’s access to a certain type of crude oil caused the "planned shutdown" -- although Chevron Texaco and State of California officials estimated refinery had a 20-25 year supply of crude oil remaining.
http://wyden.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=263339


2. Oil companies are not sure how to extract the oil shale in Colorado and Utah. U.S. Sen. Ken "Salazar noted that in recent testimony before the Senate, one of Bush's top Interior Department officials, C. Stephen Allred, said it could be 2015 before technology to develop oil shale has arrived."
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/jun/18/bushs-oil-shale-call-draws-critics/

3. The claim that there are no usable reserves on the land "permitted." is nonsense.
The statistics compiled from the Committee on Natural Resources (the link provided by Erik B.) clearly states that 82% of federal natural gas and 79% of federal oil is located in areas that are currently open for leasing. "Development of and production from the 68 million acres currently under lease but not in production would cut US imports of oil by onethird. "

So Americans are paying excessive prices because oil companies have chosen to develop only 21% of the land that they leased? Ridiculous.

I'll say it again; the calls for increased domestic drilling are nothing more than a political red-herring.

Rubbish. The "editorial staff" at The Rocky Mountain News can't put down the hash pipe long enough to see through the smoke.

Baby, read Erik's post, above. Erik, thank you for your honesty. It is as I have said...ENVIRONMENTALISTS and the Dem are obstructing the drilling in Colorado.

And, Baby, it is also as I have said; Arnold and the Dem are the obstructionists in "Colly-FO-nya.

Environmental restrictions and pressure to prevent construction of new refineries may have also contributed to rising fuel prices in the United States.[8] Additionally, many refineries (over 100 since the 1980s) have closed due to obsolescence and/or merger activity within the industry itself. This activity has been reported to Congress and in specialized studies not widely publicised.

The above quote from Wikipedia as I posted earlier, is one reason we have an oil crisis. We have all been impacted by radical environmentalists on this issue.

Mark;

There must be a crack epidemic wherever you are, because you refuse to admit facts.

Barbara;

I'm still waiting for you to answer two simple questions, and you keeping evading them.

1. Why aren't you calling for the release of Dick Cheney's transcripts of his meetings with the oil companies?

2. If we can't get the oil companies to exploit the leases they have now, how are we going to get them to exploit the leases when they control all of our resources?

Still waiting. Contact the comedian and get back to me.

Mark- John,

The Rocky Mountain News editorial staff had no part in the the quote regarding U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar and Bush's top Interior Department officials, C. Stephen Allred. My point was to demonstrate that the Interior Department itself observed that the technology to develop oil shale is not ready and may not be ready for production until 2015.

It's easy to blame Dems and Republican Governor Schwartenegger for obstructing drilling in California, lets see some support for your opinion.

-------------------------
Barbara,

If only one refinery permit has been applied for in 30 years, the oil industry must not WANT more refineries very badly. Here is some interesting information about refineries that came to light in in a 2006 Senate hearing:

"... BP’s chief executive officer explained that “[refinery] margins over the last 10 to 15 years have not been high enough on average to justify building a new refinery.” And in a recent closed-door briefing with congressional aides, an Exxon Mobil official said that company foresees no need to build new refineries at least through the year 2030. "

At the risk of having you reject the information because it is from a "liberal" source, I am providing the link:

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2006/06/06/no_new_refineries.php

Did you understand what you wrote Baby J.? Your quote says that British Petroleum explained that margins weren't high enough to validate building new refineries. By blocking the drilling and getting more product to those refineries, there probably won't be any new ones built any time soon either. Without the product to refine, why build?

And, from what I understand, Schwartzenegger is working with a democrat majority in his legislature. I don't recall blaming the governor for blocking oil drilling. It's as plain as the nose on one's face to see that it's democrats such as Pelosi and Reid who will not allow this issue to come up for discussion or debate or a vote. They are both democrats who are tight with the environmentalists and they will go against their constituent's wishes because they value power over what they were elected to do, and that is represent their majority from their home states. It's a sad day when people in office do that to their constituents. But, it's happening now. It should be left to the states to decide when and where they allow drilling, not the federal government unless it's on federal land.

Barbara, that's my point. Opening up ANWR and lifting the ban for off-shore drilling may increase OIL production, but it won't lower the price of GASOLINE if demand remains constant. Opening up ANWR may score political points, but most of that oil will be sold on the world market and most likely go to China and India.

Without additional refining facilities, the supply of gasoline will remain fixed. The oil companies have no intention of increasing capacity. In fact, they are decommissioning refineries (Bakersfield CA refinery) until they get the profit margin they want. Get used to $4 and $5 gas.

It's kind of like the chicken and the egg when it comes to whether more refineries will be built in the future. If the price remains high on oil, then more people will not drive as much, putting more oil on the market at a lower price. If the price of oil goes down then more people will drive thus creating a shortage and the price goes up. It's cyclical then. So, at what point would more refineries be built? If we open up our own resources, and we bring more oil to the market and keep our money here in the U.S. then perhaps we will see more refining done here. That would create more jobs, we would be more secure because that money would be staying here rather than going to those who hate us and would spend that money to bring us harm. Again, Pelosi thinks she's saving the planet by not listening to the majority and she's holding the House of Representatives hostage again by not bringing this issue up for a vote. Reid is doing the same thing in the Senate. The votes are there to open our own resources to our oil companies to drill and bring us our oil! 78% of Americans want to drill here, drill now, and keep our money here.Why are they not acting on our behalf and our will? Pelosi and Reid are tight with the radical environmentalists, that's why. They don't believe they are working for us, apparently, but to keep their own power they are beholden to those environmentalist groups who fund them. It's sad to say, but I think Obama is in that group as well. He's opposed to drilling and you can hear that any day of the week if you just listen.
Barbara B., Jul 29, 2008, 10:56am EDT

Barbara, blaming environmentalists and congress for blocking domestic drilling is Republican spin. Of all the oil and gas believed to exist on the Outer Continental Shelf, 79% of oil and 82% of the natural gas is located in areas that are currently open for leasing. Resources beneath National Parks and wilderness areas that have significant scenic, recreational, and wildlife value -- only 38% of the oil and 16% of the natural gas -- are excluded from leasing. Oil and gas companies have millions of acres available for production if they chose to drill.

As is, oil companies can not keep up with the number of drilling permits that they already hold. Drilling permits have increased from 3,802 in 2002, to 7,561 in 2007. From 2004 to present, the Bureau of Land Management has issued 28,776 permits to drill on public land. Of the 28,776 permits issued, only 18,954 wells were actually drilled. Oil companies are sitting on 10,000 unused drilling permits. They are sitting on 68 million acres that they have leased but have not put into the production oil and gas. They CAN DRILL HERE AND DRILL NOW, now.

To keep up with demand, domestic oil production would have to produce (21 million barrels of oil per day) the equivalent of 2.2 Saudi Arabias. Our country runs on cheap energy. Oil is part of the energy mix, but we should be looking for alternatives. Solar farms, wind power, bio-fuels, geothermal and conservation would go a long way toward making this country energy independent. These technologies are sustainable, and would reduce our carbon footprint. In addition, migrating our economy to these alternate forms of energy would create thousands of jobs for Americans.

I am providing a link from another post on Gather about solar energy. "The area required for a plant that would supply the energy needs of the US energy demands 24/7 was a square of land 92 miles on a side."

http://www.ausra.com/technology/myths.html

Let's take wind farms as an example of new energy Baby J. Here in my state we have the largest wind farms in the nation, but they can't get the energy to the cities where it's needed. Our state has taken steps to get it there in the future and we will be oil free for our energy needs. But, we have to do something now. We aren't there yet. Talking about drilling for oil is not doing us any good right now. We need to do all of the things to be free of oil in the future. We have to conserve, which we are trying to do, we need to explore alternative fuels, which we're doing and we need to get our oil and Congress needs to vote on the issue and open our off-shore drilling. I don't know what that has to do with "Republican spin". That's just a line from CNN or MSNBC. It's a shame people have lost their common sense.

Ten years ago, the bill passed the Congress to open ANWR and Bill Clinton, bless his little heart, vetoed it. If he had signed the bill, we would not be in the mess we're in right now. Now there's Republican spin! : )

We'd still be in the mess we're in now. We have no energy policy, and a couple of renegage oilmen are in charge of the White House. ANWR doesn't have enough oil to provide nearly as much as we use. Of course, if the oil companies would exploit what they already have under lease it would cut our dependency by 1/3.

I ask you again, Barbara, why aren't you patriotic Republicans screaming to see what Dick Cheney promised the oil companies? Why won't you answer the question?

Call the comedian and get back to me.

http://www.pubrecord.org/nationworld/179-eager-to-tap-iraqs-oil-industry-execs-suggested-military-intervention-.html

"...we need to get our oil and Congress needs to vote on the issue and open our off-shore drilling. "

Barbara congress isn't stopping oil companies from drilling. Of all the oil and gas believed to exist on the Outer Continental Shelf, 79% of oil and 82% of the natural gas is located in areas that are currently open for leasing. Oil companies can not keep up with the number of drilling permits that they already hold. Oil and gas companies have millions of acres available for production if they chose to drill.

If you think there is an oil shortage, checkout this link: "Al-Attiyah Says Ships Laden With Oil Have 'No Buyers'"

http://www.blinkx.com/video/al-attiyah-says-ships-laden-with-oil-have-no-buyers/5mtVUrPQGaM2hn7XXP695w

The price of oil isn't being driven by supply. Domestic drilling won't fix this problem.