Obama "shifts" on off-shore drilling...

meta4 wrote:

Markwes wrote:

meta4 wrote:I'm not looking for the candidates to DO what's need to be done, I'm looking to investors, the public, etc. to change the dependence. WTF is McCain or Obama going to do?

So you're basically saying we should do nothing then right? Unless you have a plan to change people's dependence, that is.

My point, which I thought was very clear, was that I'm not so worried about this particular issue being as some would say a 'Messiah' issue. The problem lies equally on the shoulders of all petroleum users in the US.

I haven't said anything beyond this, go figure, a punctuation mark generally denotes the end of a sentence.

So then I was correct in saying your plan is to do nothing.

I'm not trying to stir the pot or say you're wrong. Just sayin'...

cardinal5150 wrote:It's mostly psychological.. people want to see the gov't is trying to get us off foreign oil... it'll do a lot to calm fears of shortages.... look at us right now.. we don't have an oil shortage, refining.. maybe... but not oil. However, the oil prices are shooting everything else up. To say we'll drill anywhere we can will get into people's heads that we're going to beat this.. meanwhile.. we can do more in wind, solar and nuclear to get us truly off foreign energy.

Something McCain has been pushing from the start of his campaign.

cardinal5150 wrote:I was referring to the price of oil being psychological... not dependency on foreign oil.

OK...

I just want to clarify, no antagonism just "reflective listening". The parts I put in bold from your quote were what threw me.

Do you think we don't have a problem with petroleum dependence and there is no oil shortage? Or were you summarizing the media messages that are being spun?

I think you're saying the media spins the solution is to drill anywhere we can ... that we can beat this. Meanwhile, (in the next 10 years or so while we're drilling) we'll also invest in wind, solar and nuclear. Do I understand you correctly?

Can you clarify what has McCain been saying, or is this what McCain has been saying?

I missed most of the heat In this thread, but I have maintained for a very long time that "staying the course" is not a strategy I wish our servants to adhere to, less they (god forbid) be criticized for changing their mind. All I have to say is that I want our leaders to be able to say something like this with a straight face and believe that they mean it.

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post.

"If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage — I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done."

Careful, well thought out... This is a politician that is clearly leaving all his options on the table in order to come up with a plan that will address the problem carefully. That is the kind of politician I want in the white house.

pez wrote:Careful, well thought out... This is a politician that is clearly leaving all his options on the table in order to come up with a plan that will address the problem carefully. That is the kind of politician I want in the white house.

I was thinking along similar lines yesterday when reading up on suspension of disbelief. The way that I would describe the two candidates would be Prejudice vs. Suspension of Judgment. I prefer a candidate who would wait to make the decision... careful is a good word... after all, how's the saying go? "Haste makes waste"

meta4 wrote:

cardinal5150 wrote:It's mostly psychological.. people want to see the gov't is trying to get us off foreign oil... it'll do a lot to calm fears of shortages.... look at us right now.. we don't have an oil shortage, refining.. maybe... but not oil. However, the oil prices are shooting everything else up. To say we'll drill anywhere we can will get into people's heads that we're going to beat this.. meanwhile.. we can do more in wind, solar and nuclear to get us truly off foreign energy.

Something McCain has been pushing from the start of his campaign.

cardinal5150 wrote:I was referring to the price of oil being psychological... not dependency on foreign oil.

OK...

I just want to clarify, no antagonism just "reflective listening". The parts I put in bold from your quote were what threw me.

I assumed the part that said we don't have an oil shortage gave away that I wasn't addressing anything to do with supply or where we get it from.

Do you think we don't have a problem with petroleum dependence and there is no oil shortage? Or were you summarizing the media messages that are being spun?

I think you're saying the media spins the solution is to drill anywhere we can ... that we can beat this. Meanwhile, (in the next 10 years or so while we're drilling) we'll also invest in wind, solar and nuclear. Do I understand you correctly?

Can you clarify what has McCain been saying, or is this what McCain has been saying?

No.. I'm suggesting that oil isn't in as short of supply as the media wants us to believe. Again.. just about every oil analyst out there is telling the public supply isn't the problem.

Everyone agree's we have to get off foreign energy, be it oil or anything else. The message I have been getting from the McCain camp is we need to get off foreign energy and we need to get our own energy and we need to do it now. Open up every option, drilling, solar, nuclear, wind, and do it all now. For whatever reason the Dem's seem to only want to talk about how we can't drill.

Heard an interesting soundbite on WOWO yesterday, I think it was on Rush... Pelosi was talking about something, assuming drilling here, she said her flagship of this congress is to get us off Foreign Oil. Apparently her solution for that is to not only block and any all new drilling or refining in America, but it's also to do absolutely nothing to spurn alternatives. Now, if she doesn't want drilling/refining here because of the time delay.. ok.. that's fine, we all have opinions. But has congress done anything, passed any new bills, given any new tax breaks or grants to get some wind farms or solar farms up and running?

How hard would it be to pass a bill that gives alternative energy companies a tax break.. make the evil big oil companies pay even more tax to offset it. That'll get all the dem's on board, and who's going to oppose a tax break for a company that would provide cheaper energy, and hope to get re-elected?

Oil is a globally traded commodity ... if we did drill it would get traded on the global market meaning our new output would drop the price per barrel pennies ... we have 18 billion barrels that we can drill for is the estimate so our drilling won't have a dent on the world market, so additional drilling here is not the answer. This has been the point all along ... easy to say drill it gets the american people all excited thinking it is going to lower prices when it won't in 10 year ...

Bman wrote:Oil is a globally traded commodity ... if we did drill it would get traded on the global market meaning our new output would drop the price per barrel pennies ... we have 18 billion barrels that we can drill for is the estimate so our drilling won't have a dent on the world market, so additional drilling here is not the answer. This has been the point all along ... easy to say drill it gets the american people all excited thinking it is going to lower prices when it won't in 10 year ...

See that is the problem we only think there is that many barrels but no one knows for sure. Prudoe bay was suppose to be dry 10 years ago and it is still going. With new technologies alot of old dry wells are now providing oil again. I find it funny that the Dem's are complaining about the oil companies not drilling on their leases, where there is no proven reserves, but don't want the oil companies to drill where there are proven reserves.

For some reason the Dem's hate answering this question.. they just had a Dem on CNBC and he refused to answer the question, just kept saying "well, the republicans won't vote with us". Flat out avoided the question of "why won't you allow drilling where we know there is oil when an overwhelming majority of the American public wants you to drill".

Again.. I think it goes back to the psychological part. People want to see the gov't doing something about gas prices. It's one thing to tell people it won't help prices, so we won't allow it (ignoring that it costs the government $0 to do). It's another to say "see, we allowed it, nothing happened". Actually.. the gov't is out money because drilling means investing in rigs which will generate income for businesses and wages to be taxed.

Scooby01_98 wrote:

Bman wrote:Oil is a globally traded commodity ... if we did drill it would get traded on the global market meaning our new output would drop the price per barrel pennies ... we have 18 billion barrels that we can drill for is the estimate so our drilling won't have a dent on the world market, so additional drilling here is not the answer. This has been the point all along ... easy to say drill it gets the american people all excited thinking it is going to lower prices when it won't in 10 year ...

See that is the problem we only think there is that many barrels but no one knows for sure. Prudoe bay was suppose to be dry 10 years ago and it is still going. With new technologies alot of old dry wells are now providing oil again. I find it funny that the Dem's are complaining about the oil companies not drilling on their leases, where there is no proven reserves, but don't want the oil companies to drill where there are proven reserves.

It's hard for me to find sympathy when Exxon-Mobil makes 11 billion and isnt doing R&D on their leases... Oh yea, you arguably fleeced your customers to make more money than any other company, EVER... .and you want us to pave an easy path for you.

Dont get me wrong, Big Oil has a right to profit, but I dont see a right to subsidy.

We are involved with a energy that is old hat the only reason we are still using it is because of the money that can be made on it.

I'm sure there are many patents that have been bought and put away that would shut down oil over night.

We need to get our heads out of the money bag and do what's right for everyone in the world and start now.

Forget the past/oil and get on with new source's and start moving forward instead of arguing about the bullshit oil and the profit's that we have been making for years what since 1840 or so

PLEASE!!!!!!!!

http://www.wanttoknow.info/newenergysources
http://novaspivack.typepad.com/nova_spivacks_weblog/new_energy_sources/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/040825094820.htm
http://www.mhhe.com/physsci/chemistry/cic/sr/text8.htm
http://www.newsweek.com/id/123021

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/res/index_en.htm