Re: Samuelson on OIl Drilling

"Geo" <taxpayer779@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:b9bfd394-c1d4-4962-9490-381c909ee634@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Apr 30, 9:45 am, "Sid9" <s...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> "John Galt" <whoisjohng...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>> news:AgWRj.123983$Tj3.106837@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>>
>> >http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/start_drilling.html
>>
>> > Article Highlights (well, almost all of it is a "highlight"):
>>
>> > (...) The truth is that we're almost powerless to influence today's
>> > prices. We are because we didn't take sensible actions 10 or 20 years

>> > ago.
>> > If we persist, we will be even worse off in a decade or two. The
first
>> > thing to do: Start drilling.
>> > It may surprise Americans to discover that the United States is the
>> > third-largest oil producer, behind Saudi Arabia and Russia. We could
be
>> > producing more, but Congress has put large areas of potential supply
>> > off-limits. These include the Atlantic and Pacific coasts and parts
of
>> > Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. By government estimates, these areas
may
>> > contain 25-30 billion barrels of oil (against about 30 billion of 
>> > proven
>> > U.S. reserves today) and 80 trillion cubic feet or more of natural
gas
>> > (compared with about 200 tcf of proven reserves).
>>
>> > What keeps these areas closed are exaggerated environmental fears, 
>> > strong
>> > prejudice against oil companies, and sheer stupidity. Americans favor

>> > both
>> > "energy independence" and cheap fuel. They deplore im****ts -- who
wants 
>> > to
>> > pay foreigners? -- but oppose more production in the United States.
Got
>> > it? The result is a "no-pain energy agenda that sounds appealing but 
>> > has
>> > no basis in reality," writes Robert Bryce in "Gusher of Lies: The
>> > Dangerous Delusions of 'Energy Independence.'"
>>
>> > Unsurprisingly, all three major presidential candidates tout "energy
>> > independence." This reflects either ignorance (unlikely) or pandering
>> > (probable). The United States now im****ts about 60 percent of its
oil, 
>> > up
>> > from 42 percent in 1990. We'll im****t lots more for the foreseeable
>> > future. The world uses 86 million barrels of oil a day, up from 67
mbd 
>> > in
>> > 1990. (...)
>>
>> > The best we can do is to try to influence the global balance of
supply 
>> > and
>> > demand. Increase our supply. Restrain our demand. (...)
>>
>> > Increasing production also is im****tant. Output from older fields,
>> > including Alaska's North Slope, is declining. Although production
from
>> > restricted areas won't make the U.S. self-sufficient, it might 
>> > stabilize
>> > output or even reduce im****ts. No one knows exactly what's in these 
>> > areas,
>> > because the exploratory work is old. Estimates indicate that
production
>> > from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge might equal almost 5 percent

>> > of
>> > present U.S. oil use.
>>
>> > Members of Congress complain loudly about high oil profits ($40.6 
>> > billion
>> > for ExxonMobil last year) but frustrate those companies from using 
>> > those
>> > profits to explore and produce in the United States. Getting access
to 
>> > oil
>> > elsewhere is increasingly difficult. Governments own three-quarters
or
>> > more of proven reserves. Higher prices perversely discourage other
>> > countries from approving new projects. Flush with oil revenues, 
>> > countries
>> > have less need to expand production. Undersupply and high prices then

>> > feed
>> > on each other.
>>
>> > But it's hard for the United States to complain that other countries 
>> > limit
>> > access to their reserves when we're doing the same. If higher U.S.
>> > production reduced world prices, other countries might expand 
>> > production.
>> > What they couldn't get from prices they'd try to get from greater 
>> > sales.
>>
>> > On environmental grounds, the alternatives to more drilling are
usually
>> > worse. Subsidies to ethanol made from corn have increased food prices

>> > and
>> > used scarce water, with few benefits. If oil is im****ted, it's 
>> > vulnerable
>> > to tanker spills. By contrast, local production is probably safer. 
>> > There
>> > were 4,000 platforms operating in the Gulf of Mexico when hurricanes
>> > Katrina and Rita hit. Despite extensive damage, there were no major
>> > spills, says Robbie Diamond of Securing America's Future Energy, an
>> > advocacy group.
>>
>> > Perhaps oil prices will drop when some long-delayed projects begin
>> > production or if demand slackens. But the basic problem will remain.
>> > Though dependent on foreign oil, we might conceivably curb the power
of
>> > foreign producers. But this is not a task of a month or a year. It is
a
>> > task of decades; new production projects take that long. If we don't 
>> > start
>> > now, our future dependence and its dangers will grow. Count on it.
>>
>> Conservation, alternative energy sources
>> to reduce America's dependence on im****ted
>> oil will have a greater affect on energy supply
>> than more drilling.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the op****tunity was lost 27
>> years ago when Reagan became president
>> and reversed Carter's energy policies to the
>> current "Let the good times roll"
>>
>> Now we pay for Republican short sightedness.
>
> We are not going to conserve our way out of this.  That said, why not
> just open ANWR, coastal regions, tar sands, nuclear development,
> expand coal mining and processing, do away with dumb regulations like
> having to cook up any number of fuel formulas for any given time of
> year.  All this is within our capabilities.  All of it is available.
> We could have started years ago and been in a much better position
> today.  Instead, we let the sky is falling enviro-wacko crowd (Al Gore
> for instance) dictate energy policy that leads to goofy initiative
> like curly lightbulbs and ethanol.  It is truly amazing how common
> sense has taken a back seat to the needs of this nation.  Look where
> environmentalist eco-nuttism has got us: $3.65 for gas where I am, a
> complete reliance on foreign oil, ever growing prices for food - all
> directly as a result of that policy.  Thanks libs.  Thanks a pant load.


We need to conserve,
we need to use and develop
alternate energy sources.

We went to the moon and
back. With real leader****p,
instead of oil company executives
running our government,
we CAN DO do it.