| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/21/2004 12:53:14 PM · #1 |
Are the democrats just flat out nuts? Now they want to open up the strategic oil reserves to lower gas prices. There's a good idea...NOT! It's the S-T-R-A-T-E-G-I-C oil reserves. Its sole purpose is to ensure national security in a time of crisis. It's not the kind of thing you want to deplete in the middle of a WAR!
Are the democrats just trying to make an issue out of another non-issue? |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 12:57:01 PM · #2 |
Having spoken on the liberal viewpoint many times on this site before, you may be surprised to hear this. But...
Yes, I think they are nuts. On this issue, anyway. With everything going on in the world, I would think that they could find a better argument to mount.
I do agree with not adding a bunch more oil INTO the reserves while prices are so high, but that's just the tightwad in me.
Ah well...
|
|
|
|
05/21/2004 02:15:00 PM · #3 |
I like how Mr John "never seen a gas tax he didn't like" Kerry is leading the charge for this.
It should be noted that if the middle east stopped sending us fuel today, we'd be in serious trouble by Monday. That's why we have a reserve, which should be about 10 years worth of oil if that were to happen.
Okay, to make this a normal rant, someone please proceed to bash GW. |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 02:24:59 PM · #4 |
| We really need to develop the untapped reserves in Northern Alaska. The sandpeople would have far less impact on world economy, if any at all. |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 02:36:49 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by louddog:
I like how Mr John "never seen a gas tax he didn't like" Kerry is leading the charge for this.
It should be noted that if the middle east stopped sending us fuel today, we'd be in serious trouble by Monday. That's why we have a reserve, which should be about 10 years worth of oil if that were to happen.
Okay, to make this a normal rant, someone please proceed to bash GW. |
Uh.. I know that I normally find myself on the non-Kerry side of most rants, but in all fairness Kerry is NOT leading the charge on this. In fact, he is opposed to depleting the Strategic Oil Reserves to buoy the gasoline supply. He HAD indicated that he would stop ADDING oil to the reserves, but has opposed DEPLETING them.
On another note, if all foreign oil were to stop immediately, the Strategic Reserves only hold enough crude oil to last for about 60 days, not 10 years. And it would take quite a while to get it refined and in useful form, to boot.
Ron |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 03:55:32 PM · #6 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Okay, to make this a normal rant, someone please proceed to bash GW. |
Uuhhmmm...
GW is depleting the strategic reserves all the time. Where do you think his family fills up their SUV gas tanks? Not at the local 7-11.
Does that work or do we need a real complaint?
drg |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 04:49:15 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by thelsel:
Are the democrats just flat out nuts? Now they want to open up the strategic oil reserves to lower gas prices. There's a good idea...NOT! It's the S-T-R-A-T-E-G-I-C oil reserves. Its sole purpose is to ensure national security in a time of crisis. It's not the kind of thing you want to deplete in the middle of a WAR!
Are the democrats just trying to make an issue out of another non-issue? |
It does seem that they often have trouble grasping simple and common sense ideas.
Plus, Kerry is asking for such an amount of oil to be released from the reserved that it would only last for something like 2 or 3 days...
Tapping rotted dinosaur juice in Alaska would not only supply a decent oil flow for about 13 years at the rate that you can pump it up, but it would create a TON of good paying jobs. But I know the Democrats would rather only talk about creating jobs instead of actually doing it...
Edit: Besides, we've gotta save that frozen tundra or what ever else it is up there!
Message edited by author 2004-05-21 16:50:26.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2004 04:57:48 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by drgsoell:
GW is depleting the strategic reserves all the time. Where do you think his family fills up their SUV gas tanks? Not at the local 7-11.
|
Now I know GW has a big old Ford F-350, cuz I saw him and Vladimir Putin cursing around in it on the news. I'm not sure if that counts as a SUV but, I do know John Kerry's "family" has a couple SUVs. |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 05:04:00 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by louddog:
I like how Mr John "never seen a gas tax he didn't like" Kerry is leading the charge for this.
It should be noted that if the middle east stopped sending us fuel today, we'd be in serious trouble by Monday. That's why we have a reserve, which should be about 10 years worth of oil if that were to happen.
Okay, to make this a normal rant, someone please proceed to bash GW. |
Uh.. I know that I normally find myself on the non-Kerry side of most rants, but in all fairness Kerry is NOT leading the charge on this. In fact, he is opposed to depleting the Strategic Oil Reserves to buoy the gasoline supply. He HAD indicated that he would stop ADDING oil to the reserves, but has opposed DEPLETING them.
On another note, if all foreign oil were to stop immediately, the Strategic Reserves only hold enough crude oil to last for about 60 days, not 10 years. And it would take quite a while to get it refined and in useful form, to boot.
Ron |
True, my bad. Kerry just wants us to stop adding to them. Also not a good idea right now.
The 10 year thing is an estimate that includes all the wells we have in the US, including those capped and untouched. I heard the number a few years ago so it might be less by now. |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 05:21:13 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by louddog:
Originally posted by RonB:
Originally posted by louddog:
I like how Mr John "never seen a gas tax he didn't like" Kerry is leading the charge for this.
It should be noted that if the middle east stopped sending us fuel today, we'd be in serious trouble by Monday. That's why we have a reserve, which should be about 10 years worth of oil if that were to happen.
Okay, to make this a normal rant, someone please proceed to bash GW. |
Uh.. I know that I normally find myself on the non-Kerry side of most rants, but in all fairness Kerry is NOT leading the charge on this. In fact, he is opposed to depleting the Strategic Oil Reserves to buoy the gasoline supply. He HAD indicated that he would stop ADDING oil to the reserves, but has opposed DEPLETING them.
On another note, if all foreign oil were to stop immediately, the Strategic Reserves only hold enough crude oil to last for about 60 days, not 10 years. And it would take quite a while to get it refined and in useful form, to boot.
Ron |
True, my bad. Kerry just wants us to stop adding to them. Also not a good idea right now.
The 10 year thing is an estimate that includes all the wells we have in the US, including those capped and untouched. I heard the number a few years ago so it might be less by now. |
As to the Strategic Reserves, I agree that it's not a good idea to stop the effort to bring the reserves up to it's full capacity of 700 million barrels. We currently have 592 million, still down from the 600 million we had before Clinton released 30 million barrels back in 2000.
The real reason for the high prices is not supply, however - it is a combination of demand and refinery capacity. No new refineries have been built in the U.S. since 1976, and several have been shut down due to their age. Why? Environmental policies have made building new refineries financially foolish. Now, when the price of gasoline gets high enough, and stays high enough long enough, then it will become economically feasible to add refining capacity once again. A second impact is that refineries are in the spring/summer switchover between winter fuel and summer fuel formulae. Many states mandate certain "summer" additives to reduce vapors in the hotter seasons, so many refining processes have been taken offline to make the switchover - hence further reducing capacity. Why switch formulae? Environmental policies, yet again. Hey, you can't have it both ways. Clean air? or expensive gas? Take your pick.
Ron |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 05:38:21 PM · #11 |
The U.S. imports about two fifths of all its oil from OPEC nations (one fifth from the Persian Gulf); the U.S. produces considerably more than this (about 50% more) domestically. However, if you break it down by individual country, the top three non-OPEC nations account for two fifths of imports as well. The leading supplier of oil to the U.S. is your friendly giant neighbour to the north.
The U.S. reserves (over 22 billion barrels) account for a little more than three years' worth of domestic consumption (20 million barrels per day). If OPEC nation oil were to stop flowing to the U.S. the reserves could handle over 11 years of it, assuming production levels remain at their 2003 levels (on average). If you take into account average reserves decline, it would last nearly 9 years.
American domestic auto fuel consumption accounts for nearly half of its oil use. Gas consumption is expected to rise nearly three percent next year.
The numbers for China would be interesting to see.
The bronze age did not end because they ran out of bronze. How will this age of oil end? |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 05:54:07 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by dwoolridge:
The U.S. imports about two fifths of all its oil from OPEC nations (one fifth from the Persian Gulf); the U.S. produces considerably more than this (about 50% more) domestically. However, if you break it down by individual country, the top three non-OPEC nations account for two fifths of imports as well. The leading supplier of oil to the U.S. is your friendly giant neighbour to the north.
The U.S. reserves (over 22 billion barrels) account for a little more than three years' worth of domestic consumption (20 million barrels per day). If OPEC nation oil were to stop flowing to the U.S. the reserves could handle over 11 years of it, assuming production levels remain at their 2003 levels (on average). If you take into account average reserves decline, it would last nearly 9 years.
American domestic auto fuel consumption accounts for nearly half of its oil use. Gas consumption is expected to rise nearly three percent next year.
The numbers for China would be interesting to see.
The bronze age did not end because they ran out of bronze. How will this age of oil end? |
The fly in the ointment is that the U.S., although it HAS enough oil in its reserves to last 9-11 years, does not have the ability to pump it out of the ground fast enough to meet the demand. Production has been declining for a number of years. In 2003, the U.S only produced around 6 million barrels of crude oil a day domestically, down from the 8 million barrels a day produced back in the mid-to-late 1980's. It appears that if we had to rely on domestic production alone, we would encounter a net shortage of some 10-12 million barrels a day. Taking that out of the Strategic Reserve would only make up the difference for around two months.
Ron |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 05:59:15 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by RonB:
Hey, you can't have it both ways. Clean air? or expensive gas? Take your pick.
Ron |
I still find this 'expensive gas' idea funny in the context of the US.
Some more context:
//money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/price.html
|
|
|
|
05/21/2004 06:02:15 PM · #14 |
Guess we should pack up the ol' Suburban and truck down to Venezuela...
LOL :o)
|
|
|
|
05/21/2004 06:10:29 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by RonB:
As to the Strategic Reserves, I agree that it's not a good idea to stop the effort to bring the reserves up to it's full capacity of 700 million barrels. We currently have 592 million, still down from the 600 million we had before Clinton released 30 million barrels back in 2000.
The real reason for the high prices is not supply, however - it is a combination of demand and refinery capacity. No new refineries have been built in the U.S. since 1976, and several have been shut down due to their age. Why? Environmental policies have made building new refineries financially foolish. Now, when the price of gasoline gets high enough, and stays high enough long enough, then it will become economically feasible to add refining capacity once again. A second impact is that refineries are in the spring/summer switchover between winter fuel and summer fuel formulae. Many states mandate certain "summer" additives to reduce vapors in the hotter seasons, so many refining processes have been taken offline to make the switchover - hence further reducing capacity. Why switch formulae? Environmental policies, yet again. Hey, you can't have it both ways. Clean air? or expensive gas? Take your pick.
Ron |
Ron, you are absolutely right as usual. We've been paying $2+ a gallon here in California for a couple of years now. From what I understand it has nothing to do with oil prices or oil supply. It has to do with:
1. Too few refineries producing the "California" grade gas.
2. Too few refineries controlled too few oil companies.(i.e. Monopoly)
3. Current environmental laws restrict building new refineries.
4. Current environmental laws restrict selling old refineries to new companies.
5. The inability to import gas from neighboring states because it's not up to the environmental standards.
6. Refineries going off line for no apparent reason.
7. And hefty local and federal taxes per gallon.
|
|
|
|
05/21/2004 06:21:07 PM · #16 |
The inflation adjusted price of gas in the U.S. was still more than 20% higher in 1984 than it is today. Gas is called "expensive" in the U.S. today because it's 25% higher than it was a year ago. People here have a tendency to ignore the fact that U.S. prices have been historically lower than those in the rest of the world for many years.
By the way, I'm not opposed to paying more for gas to protect the environment. I was just pointing out some of the reasons that gas is getting more expensive. I'd love nothing better than to see the price stay high enough, long enough, to make if worthwhile to replace the existing refineries with more fuel efficient, more environmentally friendly facilities. Then, too, I'd like to see the development of more fuel efficient and more environmentally friendly transport mechanisms ( automobiles today, but tomorrow - who knows what? ).
Ron |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 06:42:17 PM · #17 |
i agree it would be stupid to open the reserves. the reserves have enough oil to serve us for about 2 weeks to 1 month if/when the arabs decide they are done letting us be a super power.
suv's, tanks and bomber jets dont work w/out oil... |
|
|
|
05/21/2004 08:23:12 PM · #18 |
People with 1500 dollar cameras and 7 dollar low fat non fat lattes have abrogated the right to bitch about the price of gasoline when a gallon of water costs more.
End.
DAMN GAS!
Ok, sorry.
End.
M
Message edited by author 2004-05-22 18:22:28. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 03:23:08 PM EDT.
