So many who are upset with our current energy situation insist that using our own proven sources of energy is too damaging to our environment.

But I wonder, do these same folks not eat the food that is harvested from our fields of plenty? These same fields which are covered in ammonia and nitrogen in amounts that are measured in gallons per acre. These same fields that are sprayed with noxious chemicals and pesticides that are measured in gallons per acre.

In order to derive the production necessary to keep our food costs low our farmers are forced to pollute our rivers and streams and thereby even our oceans as they strive to keep food on our tables. Organics simply cannot supply the masses. Yet very little is ever said about the ecological damage done in order for us to eat.

We cannot make our own oil wells in our backyards yet we can garden to help lessen a much more serious pollution problem than a few oil spills. But do we? No.

Many folks say we cannot expand our refineries because its bad for the environment but many of these same people walk directly past a drinking fountain connected to potable water and spend 1.85 for a few ounces of water that is not as pure as what is available to them at the fountain. Then they casually toss the single use bottle made from petroleum products into the trash can to help continue the overflow of our landfills.

We cannot drill in the shallows of the continental shelf because our strict laws are not strict enough, but a communist nation with a proven history of outright disdain for ecological concerns can drill just outside our waters and never a word is said.

We have millions of serviceable vehicles on our roads today, most with many years of loan payments yet to made before their drivers can call them their own. Yet we have many who say we should discard the technology and force these people to figure out how to procure new vehicles using a different technology while still paying for their gas burning vehicles.

We must use the resources we know we have available while we figure out how to make the change over in the future. Simply forcing up the price is only driving this nation and its people to their knees. Once the speculators see real progress in refinery expansion, even just the beginning of construction, and once these speculators see that the oil fields will be developed and the energy harvested, then the futures price of this energy will have no where to go but down. Just as in all commodities if the futures pricing falls then the wholesale pricing follows very closely behind.

All we must do to return to about 2 or 2.50 per gallon gasoline is to decide to use our own resources and begin the process of harvesting them. The process does not have to be complete to see a meaningful reduction in the prices at the consumer level, it just has to start.

We can use our own resources, there is nothing wrong with them. We can also encourage conservation by requiring people who buy fuel guzzling vehicles to show actual need. Most construction workers need strong pick up trucks and farmers need even stronger ones. But the accountant down the hall who has never driven a vehicle off of a strip of asphalt or who has never carried anything heavier than a bottle of wine and his briefcase does not need a 10 mpg Hummer. In fact, other than our armed forces or a geologist out in the field somewhere who in the hell really uses a Hummer to its capacity?

Common sense, a sense of reality and the realization that we are not Mario Andretti, are three major contributing thought processes that must be applied in this country to solve this very solvable energy crunch.

If we actually conserved enough to make a difference (and we will), then consumption would decline and then another refinery capacity would only jack up the price.

Without getting into great detail, the short answer is this - that oil belongs to your children and their children. You already used your fair share. Don't get greedy just because you're a little scared.

The future is closer than you think.

If we are conserving then additional capacity will serve to lower the price even farther. Adding more fuel to a growing available supply does not raise prices. (I know what is in the ground is limited iu am talking about what is currently available to be used.)

Oil is the resource we are geared to use. We can continue to develop and deploy other resources but until they are developed and deployed we have to use what is available.

Another analogy is the man in the desert who is found dead of dehydration though he has three gallons of clean drinkable water in his possession. he died because he was saving his water for later.

We have technology in the pipeline for the future and it will work, but meanwhile we have to use what we know works and what is available. A man who makes 13 dollars an hour and has 4 more years to pay on his gasoline vehicle cannot go buy a 45 thousand dollar hydrogen car.

The infrastructure for new systems have to be deployed and phased in just as ownership of new technologies by consumers must be phased in. But just forcing the entire working class into bankruptcy while no other alternatives are immediately available is wrong.

You keep doing this.

As stated, a month ago, everyone agreed with
Nick, here (except for maybe some odd hold-outs, keen on reviving Communism of all things). Then the general election started, and all the Dems forgot they'd ever entertained a sensible thought on the nation's energy needs.

I really need to keep better records. Coulda sworn you shaded your stance not more than a week ago.

If I thought for a minute that drilling would help you out, I'd say go for it, but it's not. What were talking about is drilling in the OCS and that's deep water drilling which cost two hundred million to a billion dollars per rig (I hate to keep expalianing this over and over) and they don't make a lot of these rigs. We don't even make them - most of them come from asian shipbuilders.

So you're not going to get a lot of oil for a while - even if we started now. A couple drilled in two years, a couple more in five. It's not going to help much. You want to harvest the tar sands? The Canadians are already doing that full tilt, but we only have some in Utah and that takes a lot of water and water is even a little more precious in the Great Southwest than oil. We even recyle our sewerage. Five states share one fucking river. Same goes for shale oil only moreso.

On top of all that, it takes a lot of energy to cook that shit into something useful. Enough energy so that it wasn't even worth it at less than three bucks a gallon, so don't expect for that to help drop the price any.

Meanwhile, the replacement technology is going to come online in about the same amount of time. Whether we drill or not, it's going to take five years to get out of this mess. That's the news you don't want to hear, that's the news you don't want to believe, but there it is.

Another refinery is not going to help you either. If refineries don't operate at capacity, they add to the expense. It is only when refineries are a bottleneck that that they can start jacking the price. Refineries have only been the bottleneck when damaged by hurricanes. So build another one, I don'[t care, but it's not going to help you, either.

You know, my son lives near you, I think. Champagne/Urbana. Doesn't drive a car. Can't afford one. I'll help him with his college expenses (he goes part time), sometimes with the rent, sometimes just when he's low on cash - I even took him up to Seattle with me just a couple of weeks ago. But I won't help him buy a car. I didn't even drive one myself until recently. Almost ten years - no car. Took the bus everywhere or walked. Don't think I don't know what that means.

You didn't see this coming? I bought a hybrid four years ago because I did. For four years I've been trying to tell you that this was where we'd wind up. Did you listen?

was that I think we should open the OCS to natural gas only. Much less risk, much more gain. It's not that we shouldn't open the OCS to oil sometime. The moratorium expires in four years. That sounds about right.

NickD,

At times, I wasn't sure what sort of point you were trying to make, since you combined rather contradictory arguments, which in essence said, we need to use more oil -- and -- look what wasteful shit we've made with that oil????

But let me deal with the let's get our hands on more oil argument --

1). Even if we said let's drill OCS and ANWR for oil today, we wouldn't see a drop of it for at least five years! Why?

• Since this will call for massive investments the oil companies would first want to drill some exploratory wells, then they'd need to hire crews, and build the infrastruture to deal with what's found
• The ships that do ocean oil exploration are booked solid for the next five years... by countries that can actually pay cash on the barrelhead, not IOUs like us

2). While there are fewer refineries than 20 years ago, the ones we have have expanded greatly. During the 90's oil companies cutback on capacity, because there was a glut on the market. To suggest that environmentalists had anything to do with that business decision is utter bullshit.

3). For us to accuse Cuba of having 'outright disdain for ecological concerns,' well...ROFLMAO.

4). Speculators have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the price of crude oil. If they did, we would see large increases in inventories being hoarded, but worldwide inventories are going down! The price of crude is being driven by two simple facts: despite billions of dollars spent drilling for new oil, world oil production has been flat for the past three years and demand for oil is soaring in developing nations like China and India and in oil-producing nations like Saudi Arabia and Russia. It's all due to those fundamentals!

5). The International Energy Agency has been leaking info from its report due out at the end of the year (The Bush administration has blocked it until then), which says the world is on track to hit $200/barrel oil in the near future. That's $7+ gallon of gas! We will never, ever see $2.50/gallon gas again. The only two things that might prevent the price from going even higher are -- strict conservation measures instituted now or one awful worldwide recession. I'd prefer the former, myself.

I don't often have any argument with your thinking Rev, but this is just wrong;

"4). Speculators have nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the price of crude oil. If they did, we would see large increases in inventories being hoarded, but worldwide inventories are going down!"

Although it might be the term 'speculators' that is tripping you up, so let's use 'investors' instead.

Investors are leary of just about everything except commodities lately, so they're buy 'stuff', oil is stuff, and when everyone wants any particular item, it drives the price up.

Investment in energy futures used to be regulated rather more heavily than it is now in order to 'protect' what is correctly understood to be a 'strategic resource' from the exact effect we are seeing now.

Heavy investment in energy futres is a large component of 'demand', and is helping driving the price of crude, and thus at the pump.

It's a terrible mistake to think that demand by investors is not 'real' demand.

I suggest you ask Run about this if you don't trust my understanding.

Like I said, I usually find you have a pretty good understanding of economic issues.

By the way, the whole ANWR thing is basically a wedge issue, very effective to distracting the masses. There is just not enough oil up there to make an impact, or we'd be drilling now.

Big Oil's long term plan has always been to exploit the Mid-East resources first, and control, not necessarily extract our domestic reserves, that's the root meaning of reserves right?

The reason we're at war, is to control 'our' supply, our 'Strategic Petroleum Reserves' could rightly be understood as a buffer, protecting our un-tapped domestic oil, our real 'reserves'.

... true but not an exhaustive analysis.

The warning not to scapegoat is welcome advice but the issue still sidesteps the fact that investors hunger for non-illusory opportunities puts inflationary pressure on price.

There is a lot of reluctance to shut down the 'only game in town' and so I can understand why you won't find key players representing either the Energy, or the Investment business discussing this with any clarity.

Nearly everyone has a vested interest in hedge funds remaining solvent, that includes you and me. (401K?)

I'd love to hear Run chime in on this topic.

The Alberta tar sands have proven reserves that hold as much oil as what is in Iraq, and possibly Saudi Arabia if we add the reserves of the northwest USA. These reserves are readily recoverable and the technology exists to cleanly refine it. There are refineries right now begging for the permits to start making gasoline from it.

A common mistake you make and don't feel bad because millions of people are making it. is to think that all of this fuel must be in production or in the gas stations tanks to lower the cost. it does not.

Simply starting the process will drive down the futures prices. Once futures prices fall wholesale prices follow closely behind. All we have to do is start for crying out loud.

Another thing many people fail to mention as they say drilling won't help is where are the alternative sources of fuel thats going to take its place? Oh right its still on the fucking drawing board. So all these technological ideas people want SOMEONE ELSE to come up with do not exist in the real world.

IF a hybrid vehicle that meets my needs is made available I will consider one after my current gasoline vehicles are paid for. How much did your Hybrid cost and are you willing to buy one for the MILLIONS of working class Americans who need to get back and forth to work and still have years worth of payments on their current vehicles?

Ducadmo with all due respect you need to practice up on your listening skills also.

To ignore drilling and recovering oil that exists to help solve our problems is like taking aspirin for a headache but doing nothing to stop the guy from hitting us on the head with a hammer.

Oil is not the only answer but it is part of it and its not just on the OCS its all over the place in the USA and Canada and it is recoverable. The shortage is not even a shortage as there is enough oil to stop this nations slide into ruin. It doesn't mean we don't develop alternatives and thats what you have to get into your head, we use the oil while we put alternatives into place. The analogy of a man dying of thirst is accurate here because Americas economy is dying and the oil to save its life is readily available if we simply choose to use it.

I am sorry but you are being unreasonable. Does your hybrid not use any oil products at all? I think you still need gasoline too don't you? Have you sworn off all products that contain plastic? Have you sworn off all products delivered by truck or train? Do you use electricity in your home? have a furnace or air conditioner, a refrigerator? A washer? A dryer?

A telephone or even a charger? Do you ever use lights inside your house? Did you not require petroleum products to get yourself and your son to Seattle?

See you need lots and lots of energy also and even if you are getting 32 miles per gallon of gasoline you still use a gallon of gasoline every time you drive 32 miles so you need to have oil refineries and oil wells to provide it for you. there is no magic wand.

Every alternative source of energy is going to take time and resources to develop and deploy. That means years and years yet you have yet to say what people should do in the mean time. Or do you think rubbing your hybrid in peoples face is all the energy policy this country needs?

How many hybrid vehicles exist today? 50,000? 100,000? How many millions of Americans have to get back to work next Monday morning?

Hybrids are nice, they are part of the solution, so is the existing oil and so is expanding and improving our refineries. You are completely wrong about the situation with refineries in this counrty. Most run near 80% capacity 24/7 until something breaks. 100% capacity for any length of time is impossible. They are all old and they all have room for efficiency improvements and emissions improvements. Plus refining other types of crude requires different technological systems. Technology that exists and that our own refiners want to use if they could just get the permits to do so.

Incidentally there are off shore platforms being built in Europe and there is no reason we couldn't build them here. In fact a fabulous job creation project would be to hire our existing highly skilled workers to build our platforms here. It will create meaningful employment for your fellow Americans and help lower our energy costs.

Champagne is in North Central Illinois. Hundreds of miles and several hours from me. I have a nephew who will be starting there this fall and a niece who graduated from there a few years ago.. A college kid can walk to class on a campus. Kind of hard for the working class man in the 95% of America with no mass transit to commute without a car.

Gasoline should not cost more than 2 or 2.50 per gallon. What we have now will destroy this nations economy and our standard of living and all we have to do to return sanity to our energy pricing is to take a few very easy steps. We just have to start.

I do not think the arguments were contradictory at all. They were somewhat dissimilar but both pointed in the same direction.

I have personal knowledge of two major refineries that want to expand but are being stopped buy the Sierra Club. One is in Northern Indiana and the other near my home in South Western Illinois. I have personally watched a half dozen anti oil extremists crawl out of their large vehicles (one person per vehicle) and come into meetings to rail against the expansion of these refineries. One of their tactics is to convince impressionable and ideologically manipulated college kids to stand up and read pre prepared questions they can barely pronounce while they and their lawyers try to trip up the answer givers. Its really a transparent and disgusting spectacle.

Yes if we continue down this insane energy path we are on now 7 dollar gasoline will happen. It would be very easy to avoid 7 dollar a gallon gasoline if we simply choose to do so.

I do agree that we need to lower our speed limits back to 55 mph. Thats a 10% reduction or more in national gasoline usage the very second the signs go up. Its the fastest thing this country can do to see a real tangible improvement. Hell we have posters worried about adding an extra pound of air to their tires or rolling up their windows, and people arguing over things that amount to tablespoons of gasoline savings while they ignore wasting hundreds if not thousands of gallons every year.

One last thing, its not countries that hire these ships. It is global energy companies who do pay cash. Many of these ships have already found huge resovoirs and we know where they are.

are well over a million - 700,000 Priuses alone. They are now 3% of market share.

My hybrid cost around $21K - less than most new cars. It does only seat two people (unless someone rides under the hatch - which we have both done on occasion.)

Alternative resources are already being deployed with the total Megawatt capacity/yr exceeding coal. If the Alternative Tax Credit for solar is extended, solar with exceed the growth of all other electrical generation in the Southwest.

So get your numbers straight. Do a little reading. Then we'll talk. It really puts a damper on meaningful conversation when people pull numbers out of their ass.

I simply do not believe the amount of alternative energy exceeds the energy created by coal in this country. Every book or article I have ever read shows coal being the leading source of electricity.

Those little bitty two seat go carts are useless to me and my responsibilities. 3% of the market is not going to do anything to get the working class man to work. Also many working class people have to take out 5 year loans on 14,000 dollar used vehicles to have transportation. many cannot afford even half that. How long will your batteries last and what are you going to do with them when they are worn out? How much will your little electric cart be worth in 6 years when a person making 8 dollars an hour might have a chance to procure one? Will it even be serviceable then?

Solar is nice, in the desert. Not so much in a long cold and cloudy Midwestern winter.

There is enough coal in my State alone to provide 100% of current electricity needs in the USA for 100 years. Some estimates have said twice that but lets keep it conservative.

There are hundreds of thousands of able bodied men and women with families to feed that would love to have the opportunity to earn a living providing cheap and abundant electricity to this nation. What is it that you have against the working class man? You don't want them to work in refineries or to recover oil resources. You don't want them to have jobs in mines, you don't want them to have affordable transportation, You just want them to wait for some miracle source of energy that will power the vehicles they own to get them to whatever low paying service sector existence they can scratch up.

I simply do not believe the amount of alternative energy exceeds the energy created by coal in this country. Every book or article I have ever read shows coal being the leading source of electricity.

Not total output - growth output. There were more alternatives add last year than coal utilities added (in output capacity)

Those little bitty two seat go carts are useless to me and my responsibilities. 3% of the market is not going to do anything to get the working class man to work. Also many working class people have to take out 5 year loans on 14,000 dollar used vehicles to have transportation. many cannot afford even half that. How long will your batteries last and what are you going to do with them when they are worn out? How much will your little electric cart be worth in 6 years when a person making 8 dollars an hour might have a chance to procure one? Will it even be serviceable then?

Hybridization makes more sense on larger vehicles rather than small. The Ford Escape Hybrid get over 30 MPG. It's still under-engineered. It makes more sense to economize larger vehicles than small ones. My battery should last ten years and the material is recyclable - although the industry is moving away from NiMH to Lithium batteries.

Conservation and efficiency is (in both the short and long run) more useful than increased fuel production. The government can help provide incentives, but people who can afford it should bite the bullet and make the move. We can increase oil production only about 3% - we can reduce consumption far more. That will have a greater impact on the price and it will have a more enduring impact. But even if increased production were to significantly impact price, it would only encourage people to comsume more.

Generally speaking, people who earn $8/hr probably shouldn't drive a car. They probably can't afford the insurance. I couldn't afford a car the first two years I was married. I had a little 150cc scooter. North of Chicago. Froze my ass off. Like I said, my son can't afford one, either. A lot of young people in big cities don't have cars. Even I can't afford to park in Chicago or New York. We did rent a car in Seattle, but we only used it the first day and on a trip to Mt. Rainier. Otherwise we walked or took a bus.

I understand that working people in rural areas do need transportation. We could provide subsidies for those in need. Kinda like food stamps.

Solar is nice, in the desert. Not so much in a long cold and cloudy Midwestern winter. There is enough coal in my State alone to provide 100% of current electricity needs in the USA for 100 years. Some estimates have said twice that but lets keep it conservative.

There is enough sunlight falling on Arizona alone to fill the electrical energy needs of the entire United States for a couple billion years. And at about the same cost as coal after you take out the mercury and capture the GHG. We have a need for coal in the interim, I don't see it expanding much.

There are hundreds of thousands of able bodied men and women with families to feed that would love to have the opportunity to earn a living providing cheap and abundant electricity to this nation. What is it that you have against the working class man? You don't want them to work in refineries or to recover oil resources. You don't want them to have jobs in mines, you don't want them to have affordable transportation, You just want them to wait for some miracle source of energy that will power the vehicles they own to get them to whatever low paying service sector existence they can scratch up.

There are just as many jobs in alternative energies (it's one of the faster groing sectors in Arizona and California), although we are losing our technological edge to European, Indian, and Chinese corporations.