How good are the odds our gas prices will level off once Haliburton's biggest supporters leave the white house?

How good are the odds our gas prices will level off once Haliburton's biggest supporters leave the white house?
PP : it has little to do with Bush or Cheeney/Haliburton in or out of the White House.
We are encountering shortages of oil supply. Permanent shortages. Worldwide shortages.
The best one can do is decrease oil/energy consumption : drive smaller cars, drive less, use less electricity.
Remember that the average American uses double the energy of the average European with a similar lifestyle.
So it can be done!
Remember that you gringo's are not too bad off at all : we pay here in the EU over 2 US$ for one single liter of gasoline. Americans should pay the same : with 1 US gallon = 3.78541178 liter that means 7.6 US$ for one single gallon of gasoline! Not the current 3.2 to 3.5 US$ that you pay at this moment. That will teach them to reduce energy consumption and conserve natural resources!!
:)

Oil supplies are running out... some estimates are as short as 50 years.
I think it's much more likely that the prices will level off once we find a cheap and efficient means of alternate energy. As easy as it is to blame the government, the prices of oil are dictated more by competition with countries like China and India than anyone at the White House. Both of those nations have emerging economies and are consuming more and more oil. If you think gas prices are high, please take a trip overseas... in the UK gas is over $8/gal Ireland gas is over $7/gal.

The truth is that gas prices are rising because of futures market speculators. Possibly the price will drop under them and they will take a beating but the reality is that there is a growing world wide demand for petroleum.

I think prices will rise with a Democrat in office ;at least on a temporary basis. Why ? They want a drastic increase in the pump tax... up to 50 cents a gal. They like Credendovidis think that would reduce consuption ;and maybe they are right on that . You see already that the major auto dealers are featuring some kind of hybrid vehicle... responding to market realities . Freemarketers know that rising prices increases incentives to invest in emerging technologies .

The vicious cycle is that if they were successful there would be a glut of oil;the price of crude would again drop ;and most likely we would return to some form of gas guzzling.

I agree with Tom, but those who think that they are going "green" by buying hybrids are not properly informed. The mining, processing, manufacturing, and disposal of those batteries produces pollution. Add to that the expense of replacing those batteries. I expect to see a high percentage of these hybrids in the salvage yards at an early mileage when the owners find that it costs less cash to replace the vehicle than to replace the batteries.

PP : it has little to do with Bush or Cheeney/Haliburton in or out of the White House.
We are encountering shortages of oil supply. Permanent shortages. Worldwide shortages.
The best one can do is decrease oil/energy consumption : drive smaller cars, drive less, use less electricity.
Remember that the average American uses double the energy of the average European with a similar lifestyle.
So it can be done!
Remember that you gringo's are not too bad off at all : we pay here in the EU over 2 US$ for one single liter of gasoline. Americans should pay the same : with 1 US gallon = 3.78541178 liter that means 7.6 US$ for one single gallon of gasoline! Not the current 3.2 to 3.5 US$ that you pay at this moment. That will teach them to reduce energy consumption and conserve natural resources !!!
:)

That's what we're being told. However, the gasoline prices jump upward steadily even when they are stable in the middle east - so it's more than just that.

Tom, I think if Cheney and Haliburton weren't so tight, we would have allowed alternate fuel exploration many years ago.

I think if Cheney had such an influence on things we would be drilling for oil in ANWR already .

Galveston you are probably correct about the hybrids. Even if they were reliable I would wait a few generations of vehicles for the manufacturers to iron out defects.

As for alternate fuels I have my doubts about ever finding a subsititute for oil that is as reliable. Ethanol has many negatives as has been explored in other postings and you make a excellent point about the drawbacks to electric power. Most people are not educated about even the proper disposal of the AA s in their cameras .

Purplewings

My point about alternatives is that no one is going to put the resources into developing them until it is economically viable to compete with the existing means of power (oil) . Government mandates in things like ethanol production has been an unmitigated disaster full of unintended consequences .

I know I am right on the biggest cause of the price hike is commotities speculation. Here is what is happening . Investors do not want to put their dollars into the stock market and interest rates are so low that it is not worth investing in tresuries or even putting the money in the bank. So commodities like oil ;gold etc. are the investment option they choose. That is driving up the cost of all related commodities .

Ok Tom. The commodities idea makes sense too.

Did you know that Ford Motor Co was going to come out with ethanol ready cars a couple years ago and the government prevented them from doing it?

I'm really bugged that every quarter we have to watch Exxon gloat about their huge profits. It's coming from our pockets and at the worst time possible.

BTW since Cheney was CEO of Haliburton, why would you think he didn't use some influence for and with them?
*************
Halliburton, Cheney, and Wartime Spoils (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0403-10.htm)
By Lee Drutman and Charlie Cray - 2003
Excerpts...
However, of all the administration members with potential conflicts of interest, none seems more troubling than Vice President Cheney. Cheney is former CEO of Halliburton, an oil-services company that also provides construction and military support services - a triple-header of wartime spoils.

A few weeks ago, the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers awarded a no-bid contract to extinguish oil well fires in Iraq to Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), a subsidiary of Halliburton. The contract was granted under a January Bush administration waiver that, according to the Washington Post, allowed "government agencies to handpick companies for Iraqi reconstruction projects."

Do you know that most bids awarded by Bill Clinton in the Kosovo campaign was also to Haliburton's KBR even though DynCorp out bid them? That is because they provide a service that is pretty unique . They have in fact divested themselves from their Kellogg Brown Division because it is jusrt not profitable . Now what service do they provide ? It used to be in the past that the military did a lot of things like cooking and trasport for themselves . Now most of that type of work has been outsourced to private companies. But there just aren't too many of them willing to send in cooks and truck drivers to a war zone . Hence KBR provides that service. It has nothing to do with the price of oil.

I didn't know that about Bill Clinton but at this point I'm so thoroughly discouraged with our government that I can only see red. Every one we've had in office in the past several years and all those who've made it onto the ballot have been suspect. Before they do anything for our country, they fill their own coffers. I'm pretty sure if Clinton used Halliburton, he got something in return... just as I believe of Cheney/Bush. We've gotten to pay the bills while watching our jobs go to other countries. Not exactly as I've viewed my government in the not-so-far past.

Onboard High-Tech Oil Rig, U.S. Answers to Rising Prices - Noble Clyde Boudreaux Photos - Popular Mechanics (http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/extreme_machines/4255407.html?page=1)


"A typical offshore development in 100 ft. of water costs $100 million; just the test well for Chevron's Jack No. 2 cost $100 million, and the U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates the cost of developing a deepwater field can exceed $1 billion. Shell won't say what the Perdido regional development will cost, but Noble is charging Shell hundreds of thousands of dollars a day for its rig. Shell has already spent $554 million on leases in the gulf—that's just for the right to drill."



IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Our Thorny Oil Patch (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290300562257258)

"The laws by which CONGRESS hamstrings energy producers have had the lethal effect of slowing down the economy while driving up prices. It's high time for measures that do just the opposite."


Increasing demand [ USA, China, India, developing nations ]

Plus

Limited supply [ Nuclear power? coal regulations, drilling limits - off shore, anwr for example - ? R and D into alternative energy ]

Equal higher prices.





Purple, you give Haliburton way too much credit.








Here is another cause: an oldie but a case in point: nimby hypocrisy

Storm Over Mass. Windmill Plan, Plan For Nantucket Sound Wind Farm Raises Debate - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/26/sunday/main560595.shtml)

" Last year, oil companies paid the federal government $5 billion to drill offshore. "

"The campaign to stop the wind farms was started by Cape Cod merchants and wealthy landowners. It's also opposed by almost every town government. Sen. TED KENNEDY, who has a home overlooking the proposed wind farm, also opposes the project. So does one of Martha's Vineyard most famous residents, former CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite"

The only thing that will possibly bring oil prices down is
A. The truckers are claiming they are parking their trucks on April 4th because they can no longer afford to work.
B. The environmentalists will not allow us to get our own oil. They put everything on the 'endangered' list to prevent it from happening

I think the truckers should say they will not go back to work until the environmentalists suffer enough to give up on us not being allowed to access our own oil.

Let's look at this some more. Estimates are that ANWAR would produce as much oil as we now import from Saudi Arabia. This is not taking into consideration any additional drilling offshore. If we were closer to being energy independent, it should bring the price down some, and might scare the futures gamblers into backing off. Since this is election year, let's look at who has been preventing us from getting our own natural resources. It isn't G. Bush. One of his first objectives was to get us energy independent, but it has been congress that has prevented this from happening. Mostly, it has been the Democrats, as the Republicans had only a thin majority. Actually, legislation was passed permitting drilling in ANWAR, but was vetoed by Bill Clinton in 1992, I think. So come voting time, remember who is putting your tail in a crack. Not only is it ANWAR, it is nuclear power, coal (we have technology to clean it up), and offshore, but the Sierra Club has bought too many Senators. I hope they all freeze in the dark!

But let's look a little deeper. Gold, oil, and food have not changed their value, it is the dollar that has shrunk. Why is this so? I believe the answer is usury, money lent on interest, particularly that money that our government borrows into circulation. Our government has been in conflict with the Constitution almost from the beginning. The Constitution calls for the government to issue money. If it did so, we would not have this crushing burden of the national debt that we now have. Example; if you had a very tiny country with a total amount of currency of $10 and someone borrowed that $10 at 10% interest, where is the $1 interest going to come from? Without printing more money (inflation), the only place it can come from is to devalue the $10 turning it into $11, each one being worth less than before. The cycle repeats, and the dollar gets smaller and the bankers get richer. When it becomes impossible to pay the interest on that debt, our economy will collapse, and the dollar will be as worthless as Confederate money.

Now I'm going to irritate some of you. That book that you blow off as nothing more than fiction (The Bible) forbade Israel to charge interest on loans within the country. Seems God knew what would happen, huh?

My best guess, gas will go up to over 4 this year and we will latter see 5 and 6 dollar a gallon gas.

It has nothing to do with who is in the white house, they have no effect on the oil at all. Not really. Congress has restricted every aspect of what the auto industry can do, and they also restrict the building of atomic plants for other energy ( which puts more strain on oil resouses)

There is only *** numbers of barrels of oil available at a given time, places like India, China, russia and Korea are wanting more and more oil and so to get the oil we want, we have to offer more and more money, so what can we do.

1. perhpaps bomb china, korea and russia back to the stone ages so they don't need the oil, ** not sure why bush has not thought of that one

2. drill for more oil in Alaska, offshore all along the eastern sea coast and the gulf

3. take the oil by military force ** not sure why did do not when we had Iraq, everyone though Bush was anyway

4. or just pay more per gallon to get it into the US.

Congress controls every aspect of production so costs are of production are fairly well controlled.

We need to build more refineries. We are no running out of oil. We are running out of refineries. Why can the people of Venezuela buy gas at less than a dollar a gallon?

Our government can afford huge amounts of money for things that serve their purpose...
December 12, 2007
IDB approves US$100 million loan to Mexico for job training and employment -
But the cost of building refineries in this country is just too much money??

Of course our oil companies that make this kind of profit will be paying taxes to the government so I say YES our government is benefited while the citizens pay much more than necessary.
__________________________________________________ _______________________

Exxon Mobil's staggering $40.6 billion earnings for 2007 drive the truth home: There's no business on the planet that gushes forth more profit than selling oil—nothing even close.
__________________________________________________ _______________________

The inflation of the dollar, which lowers it's value, pushes the price of oil up to compensate. The dollar is the world reserve currency used to buy oil. That is all that is pushing the price up. We have plenty of oil right here in the U.S. Thousands of wells capped off.

The inflation of the dollar, which lowers it's value, pushes the price of oil up to compensate. The dollar is the world reserve currency used to buy oil. That is all that is pushing the price up. We have plenty of oil right here in the U.S. Thousands of wells capped off.
I posted what I think is causing the dollar to fall. What are your thoughts about it?

I posted what I think is causing the dollar to fall. What are your thoughts about it?

I think you are 1000% right. I was reenforcing your stance on the subject. Your explanation of money backed by nothing but interest for the bankers is spot on.
As a young man, I worked as a rough neck in the oil fields of Texas and Wyoming. We would drill a well, cap it off and then move on to the next one. Those wells are still capped. We have enough oil in Alaska alone to last us at least 200 years. It's just more money in the bank collecting "intrest" for the Rockefellers.

Mag, it seems that there are so few people who have been informed about this vital information. There is a theory that both Lincoln and JFK were assissinated because they planned to issue interest free money. I don't have enough information to back this up, but it is interesting, as I do believe that anyone who set out to stop this constant rip-off of the USA would become a prime target of the world bankers.

Amazing isn't it!! A US President can control many countries through wealth. And certainly control the citizens of it's own. When the rest of us are unable to enjoy life because the prices of 'everything' has risen along with the tremendous rise in gasoline, our politicians will not suffer because they had the *foresight* to keep their funds where they know the payoff will be.

Oh yes, I should knock myself out to get to the polls to vote one of them into office so they can have an even better existence - at our expense.. . one sheep as left the herd...

There are many conspiracy theories surrounding JFKs death . Most are best disregarded .

IT has NOTHING to do with BUSH!! Why don't people get this?? Holy lord. There is a shortage any president would be in the same god damn situation. I'm sick of people trying to find excuses to bash bush. Just wait till these idiots vote for obama or hiliary. Then you will see a huge downfall in this country. It will be a damn shame I tell you!

It has everything to do with politics and it doesn't matter who the president is. Big oil has been in cahoots with the white house forever. Do you see how the oil companies tout the big bucks they're making while raising prices ridiculously on the citizens? Why aren't they absorbing some of the higher costs instead of getting it all (and more) from us? Why are they getting away with doing this to us? Maybe it's because of the huge sums of tax money they pay the government?

Why haven't we explored our own oil supplies? It isn't the money it would cost us to get it going.- not with the way we spend.

Someone has answers that work. I wish we could hear the truth for a change.



IT has NOTHING to do with BUSH!!! why don't people get this????? holy lord. there is a shortage any president would be in the same god damn situation. im sick of ppl tryin to find excuses to bash bush. just wait till these idiots vote for obama or hiliary. then you will see a huge downfall in this country. it will be a damn shame i tell you!

The oil companies only make 8 cents on a gallon profit on gas sales. The US government collects 18 cents per gallon and your local State even more.

So who is gouging ?

All that for one measly gallon?? That's like a drop of water in the ocean. It looks like all of them are gouging, but especially our government.




The oil companies only make 8 cents on a gallon profit on gas sales. The US government collects 18 cents per gallon and your local State even more.

So who is gouging ?

Estimated Gasoline Price Breakdown & Margins Details (http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.html)

The oil companies only make 8 cents on a gallon profit on gas sales. The US government collects 18 cents per gallon and your local State even more.

So who is gouging ?


I'll play contrarian.


Is not that tax money suppose to be used to build and maintain roads and bridges?

I'll play contrarian.


Is not that tax money suppose to be used to build and maintain roads and bridges?

Sure ;but if that is true ;and I agree it is a legitimate role of the government to build and maintain roads ;then other taxes should be reduced. Frankly the unstated thing in this debate is that Americans have had a bargain for years on the price of gas. WE don't want to hear it;but even now we pay lower prices than our cousins in Europe. This blame the big oil companies is not founded in fact.

Tom, most people in Europe have been angry for years about the costs of living there, even though they have good public transportation to depend on. I have many friends in the UK that complain about financing the wealth of the royal family and the cost of Thatcher's vicious politics.

Gasoline has not been their priority because they have excellent public transportation. Where I live there is none. If my sons need to go into the city for business they have to be taken 12 miles to the nearest bus stop and of course picked up again later. People here need cars just to get to their jobs. The public transportation available in the city is unreliable and unsafe too.

I don't think we can start comparing ourselves to other countries in regards to one item like gasoline cost, or we would also have to find what better things they have that we don't - such as health care - housing, etc. Plus, don't forget our very high taxes... isn't that the reason our ancestors left Europe in the first place?

The oil companies may not hold the entire blame for raising gasoline prices but they do have some blame or they wouldn't be announcing the huge profits they have been. The government also has plenty of blame but everyone can justify their need for money - EXCEPT THE CITIZENS - who are expected to be quiet and pay. How fair is that?


Sure ;but if that is true ;and I agree it is a legitimate role of the government to build and maintain roads ;then other taxes should be reduced. Frankly the unstated thing in this debate is that Americans have had a bargain for years on the price of gas. WE don't want to hear it;but even now we pay lower prices than our cousins in Europe. This blame the big oil companies is not founded in fact.

Their profits in dollars may sound huge. But let's not forget ;they are not mom and pop stores. They are huge corporations . In fact their profits as a percentage are about on average with other industries. Yeah they make lots of money. The world consumes 30 billion barrels of oil annually and the demand is constantly growing . The chart that NeedKarma provided shows that they are taking revenue around 10 cents of the cost of a gallon of gasoline, which is let's say $4 /gal... or less that 3% of the retail cost Those "excess profits" are below 3 percent of retail costs.

Every few years our politicians demagogue the issue and have repeated public investigations into charges of oil price gouging . Still they have NEVER been able to make that charge stick . Regulators have never found merit in the charge.
The FTC recentlyreported that..
"All of the increase can be attributed to increased crude oil costs, because gasoline inventories are as ample as they have been for several years, gasoline consumption is declining to a near-record extent, and refining margins -- the difference between the cost of crude oil and the wholesale price of gasoline -- have fallen."
Federal Trade Commission - Oil and Gas Industry Initiatives (http://www.ftc.gov/ftc/oilgas/gascolumn.html)

Who's making the big Bucks then ? Russia ,Saudia Arabia,Venezuela ,Iran ,Canada... etc. Why isn't the US in this list ? Because we stifle domestic production .

...

The European population centers evolved the way they did BECAUSE of issues like high prices. They made that call a long time ago and put heavy taxes on consumption .
On issues like health care and housing I am willing to debate that too but I think it would be off topic on this thred . Suffice it to say that in my view they are higher taxed and get less or substandard services for their money .

Sure I believe they are sick of their system . They just ousted 'Red 'Ken Livingston and voted in the Tories in England . The trend in Europe is toward more conservatism (Sarkosy in France ,Merkel in Germany ,Berlesconi in Italy) while we drift further toward nanny-statism and government solutions to every aspect of our lives. The Europeans have been there and done that .

The Eastern European countries ;now free of the Russian yolk could've adapted the same structure as the Western States ;but if you look at them you will find that they have been the most inovative regarding free market principles and tax policies... and their economies are growing as a result.
The Simple (Tax) Life (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6345)

This is related to the subject, but not in direct answer to the question. "When the going gets tough, the tough get going" is a quote we have all heard. Everyone is looking for a way to lower their fuel expenses, and there are some promising things available. I am joining the thousands who are building HHO generators for their vehicles. If I do it myself, it is not expensive, and some are finding the increase in mileage significant. In WW2 I understand that Englishmen converted their autos to run on wood smoke. Not very efficient, but when there is no fuel, anything is acceptable.

How good are the odds our gas prices will level off once Haliburton's biggest supporters leave the white house?
Unfortunately, I think the answer is no to this question. America has had a buffer from the higher gas prices the rest of the world has had to pay for years due to the might of our purchasing power. Now that China and India are bigger market players and the demand is going up and supply is peaking, that buffer is getting thinner. A good starting point is reading the Hirsch Report on peak oil. This report was created by request for the US Department of Energy and published in February 2005. It's conclusion is that the end of oil will be abrupt and to avoid economic disaster we need to start planning alternatives now. That is why wasting more time and resources on drilling in Alaska really only serves the interest of Alaskans. Yeah it would create wealth and jobs there, but it is a poor direction for America at this point because as you said we are dependent on cars and our whole sprawling lifestyle was built around cheap gas. It's interesting that you mention Europe because they do have the infrastructure to weather the energy crisis. America is going to have some trouble because not only are a lot of people resisting alternative energy they are also not willing to put money into changing our infrastructure to make mass transit more of a priority. Both of these steps are absolutely crucial in this stage of the game.

A vote for McCain quite simply is a vote for decline for our country. We will not be able to sustain our lifestyle if we don't come up with other ideas at this point in the game.

Peak oil is one interesting theory among others.
321energy :: If hydrocarbons are renewable- then is "Peak Oil" a fraud? (http://www.321energy.com/editorials/bainerman/bainerman083105.html)

But let's address the price bubble in oil we experienced this year. Today a report puts the blame squarely on commodities investors playing the global market.
Report Faults Speculators For Volatility in Oil Prices - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122100706431117489.html?mod=googlenews_wsj)

That confirms what I wrote in post #4 ;#8 . I would also point out that the price of the dollar is rising as the price of the oil is dropping . But we know that much of the reason for the price drop is that higher prices stiffled demand (The rats in OPEC want to fix that by pumping less btw) . So perhaps those that think everything is pegged to the dollar value have it backwards. Perhaps oil is the new currency. Just a thought.

Peak oil is one interesting theory among others.
321energy :: If hydrocarbons are renewable- then is "Peak Oil" a fraud? (http://www.321energy.com/editorials/bainerman/bainerman083105.html)



Although the abiogenic hypothesis was accepted by some geologists in the former Soviet Union, most geologists now consider the biogenic formation of petroleum to be supported scientifically (i.e. that they are fossil fuels). Though evidence exists for abiogenic creation of methane and hydrocarbon gases within the Earth, studies indicate that they are not produced in commercially significant quantities. This information was taken directly from a wikipedia entry about abiogenic fuel or the theory that petroleum is produced from sources other than biological decomposition.

The writer of the article you referenced is Joel Bainerman who is primarily a speaker on the Israeli economy and is not a scientist, by the way.

That was one of many links on the subject I could've used . Let's assume however that peak oil is the reality. The rest of the world is exploiting their known reserves and putting it on the market . The United States does not maximize that ability . What are we waiting for?. for the rest of the world to use theirs up and then we can sell it for whatever price we want to ? It just doesn't make sense to have our trade balance warped this way .Pickens is correct when he says it is “the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind.”

I am in full agreement that alternatives need to be developed . But we have the ability to rationally transition to a time when alternatives are viable ;without wrecking the economy ,using known energy reserves and existing technologies.

That was one of many links on the subject I could've used .

What difference does it make as to the link you use if the information is not correct and it's a bunch of people circularly quoting one another?

The point is that right now energy prices are not critical for Americans. Sure some are starting to think about that extra trip to the grocery store or driving 40 miles to have coffee with a friend for a half an hour. (That is an actual anecdote btw). But are we really hurting yet? Is tapping reserves so that people can keep on wasting a finite substance really the best move here? Think hard about it. If we know it's there, what's the rush? I feel like I'm in the desert with a whining child and only one canteen of water and we've only just realized we're lost, for goodness sake. Wouldn't it make sense to explore alternatives now instead of using the last of what we have just as it would make sense to make an attempt to find out where you are before you guzzle all the water that's left in the canteen?

I think the biggest problem is that politicians are only telling people what they want to hear. That goes for both sides. During world war II, people were asked to ration sugar and tires. Now it's suddenly out of the question for our leaders to step up and tell the people what they need to hear... take initiatives for your country and try to conserve first. Should our environment and already threatened species bear the complete brunt of our poor planning and convenience-oriented society? I say no. Yes many might say to hell with the polar bear, who needs 'em. Or I don't give a crap about the baluga whale. Why should I care about conservation of forests or habitats? Why should I care about dumping 90,000 tons of drilling fluid, metal shavings and heavy metals in the ocean for each drilling platform? Why should I care? My answer is that it confounds me that you DON'T care. But then alcoholics really don't care about their livers either. It's almost a perfect analogy, actually. Humans are as thirsty for oil as an alcoholic is thirsty for his favorite drink.

A friend made a very interesting point once that gasoline is one of the only things people pay for that they have to sit and watch a money ticker showing them how much they are paying. Electric bills and natural gas bills arrive in the mail and people think, "Ouch" write a check and vow to shut the lights off and lower the thermostat... but gas is different and it's very telling that the McCain stickers I see are usually on SUV's... People just sucking the earth dry till there's nothing left for their own convenience, but yet I should be expected to go along with THEIR plan of action when it goes against everything I hold beautiful and dear? Sorry, but no thanks.

I don't think most of the people on this board would agree with you that the price is not having a significant impact on their lives beyond that Starbucks.


Is tapping reserves so that people can keep on wasting a finite substance really the best move here? Think hard about it. If we know it's there, what's the rush?


I addressed the reason for that already . Clearly you think it preferable for us to continue to import and maintain a balance of trade deficit that is in no small part caused by our consumption of oil from foreign sources. OPEC is contemplating reducing the supply on the market so they can maintain the higher prices. Does that not concern you ? Does it not concern you that we are import from unsavory characters throughout the world while we let our supplies go untapped ? While you bemoan the fate of the polar bear why don't you check out the Russian plans for the Arctic ?
Russia to drill Arctic oil with nuclear icebreaker - Bellona (http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2007/sevmorput_drilling)
And the Barent Sea
Increased Oil Activity in the Barents Sea (http://arctic-council.org/article/2008/3/increased_oil_activity_in_the_barents_sea)
Or anywhere else there is a drop of oil they can get their hands on !


I feel like I'm in the desert with a whining child and only one canteen of water and we've only just realized we're lost, for goodness sake. Wouldn't it make sense to explore alternatives now instead of using the last of what we have just as it would make sense to make an attempt to find out where you are before you guzzle all the water that's left in the canteen?

I am giving reasonable responses to your comments . Perhaps you are not reading my response because again I addressed that point.
I am in full agreement that alternatives need to be developed . But we have the ability to rationally transition to a time when alternatives are viable ;without wrecking the economy ,using known energy reserves and existing technologies.
Under your proposal we would go thirsty for no reason as there is plenty of water in the canteen until we find the oasis.


Should our environment and already threatened species bear the complete brunt of our poor planning and convenience-oriented society?
Clearly from what I am reading , what you are proposing is draconian lifestyle changes for the whole industrial world. And while you are doing that I suppose you will compel the developing world to comply to your utopian vision ? If you believe that carbon emissions are the ultimate cause of global climate change, the US is certainly becoming an ever increasingly smaller source compared to the other rising powers.Advances in alternative energy, that have originated in America are absolutely stunning and already at a rate of progess unmatched by the research in the rest of the world combined . But still we are not doing enough . We should be compelled to endure greater sacrifices by government mandate .

And I suppose you have ,being a good example ,moved into a grass yurt and forego the automobile ,and climate control in your home ?

I don't think most of the people on this board would agree with you that the price is not having a significant impact on their lives beyond that Starbucks.

First of all (and I had to add this edit) don't distort what I say because you don't know the difference between the word "critical" and "significant impact" Yes, everyone has been significantly impacted. If people are still driving hummers and SUV's, I'm sorry, but the situation isn't critical, yet.



Russia to drill Arctic oil with nuclear icebreaker - Bellona (http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2007/sevmorput_drilling)
and the Barent Sea
Increased Oil Activity in the Barents Sea (http://arctic-council.org/article/2008/3/increased_oil_activity_in_the_barents_sea)
or anywhere else there is a drop of oil they can get their hands on !


Well we aren't voting in Russia, now are we? You are outraged by what they are doing there yet you propose we do the same thing? Two wrongs don't make a right.


OPEC is contemplating reducing the supply on the market so they can maintain the higher prices. Does that not concern you ?

China and India and all developing nations are putting a strain on the world's oil supply. OPEC isn't some criminal oil hound, they are simply dealing with the law of supply and demand-- one of the basics you learn in any economics class. As supply dwindles, price goes up. Does it concern me? Sure. The problem with drilling is that there is no guarantee how much oil we get and returns are expected 10 years down the road. That's 10 more years of complacency when we could use the time to start changing our infrastructure and the way we think.


Clearly from what I am reading , what you are proposing is draconian lifestyle changes for the whole industrial world.

Giving more thought to city planning and giving tax incentives for people to build up instead of out and encouraging people to move to the cities can hardly be called Utopian or draconian. Creating laws that encourage pedestrians and bicyclists and adding dependable light rail system instead of a new interstate is not a grass hut by any stretch of the imagination. Taxing vehicles by weight and reducing the tax based on the number of family members and then using that money to fund alternative energy research makes perfect sense to me. I'm not supporting suffering, but rather encouraging the opinion that we aren't helpless, and we can definitely do better than what we've done the last 8 years which has seen no changes and no forward thinking... at all.