That whole Global Warming Thing is such a joke...
- Thread starter theclemsonkid
- Start date
stdreb27
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455462
Longer than your lifetime.
lol, not quite the answer I was anticipating...
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455462
Longer than your lifetime.
lol, not quite the answer I was anticipating...
bang guy
Moderator
Yeah. I agree with you whole heartedly on the availability of good, abundant, cheap energy alternatives right now. They are scarce and expensive. Especially with China having full command of Rare Earth minerals. Solving this is a huge, expensive, long endeavor. It's not going to be solved in 10 or 20 years, it's many decades. If we don't start, in earnest, until it's needed then it will be devastating for our country.
This is an complete opinion piece of course.
This is an complete opinion piece of course.
slice
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455498
Yeah. I agree with you whole heartedly on the availability of good, abundant, cheap energy alternatives right now. They are scarce and expensive. Especially with China having full command of Rare Earth minerals. Solving this is a huge, expensive, long endeavor. It's not going to be solved in 10 or 20 years, it's many decades. If we don't start, in earnest, until it's needed then it will be devastating for our country.
This is an complete opinion piece of course.
I completely agree, and we should use every resource we have to fund this endeavor.
Continuing to send our money overseas does not promote our ability to fund this. "Drill here, drill now, pay less" does.
This is an complete opinion piece of course.
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455498
Yeah. I agree with you whole heartedly on the availability of good, abundant, cheap energy alternatives right now. They are scarce and expensive. Especially with China having full command of Rare Earth minerals. Solving this is a huge, expensive, long endeavor. It's not going to be solved in 10 or 20 years, it's many decades. If we don't start, in earnest, until it's needed then it will be devastating for our country.
This is an complete opinion piece of course.
I completely agree, and we should use every resource we have to fund this endeavor.
Continuing to send our money overseas does not promote our ability to fund this. "Drill here, drill now, pay less" does.
This is an complete opinion piece of course.
reefraff
Active Member
It depends how much we produce. If we and Canada really open up production we would greatly reduce the influence OPEC has on prices. You do that and the price will drop but not a ton. Just getting to the point where we get enough from the Americas will hold down prices. It isn't going back to under 2 bux a gallon because the cheap oil is gone
The positive is taxes, royalties and jobs are paid and created here if we produce more. My dad was in the production end of the business. Back in the 70's he had it right. He said let the Arabs sell their easy oil at these low profit margins. Even after the embargo it was tough in the oil business here.
The positive is taxes, royalties and jobs are paid and created here if we produce more. My dad was in the production end of the business. Back in the 70's he had it right. He said let the Arabs sell their easy oil at these low profit margins. Even after the embargo it was tough in the oil business here.
stdreb27
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455585
I don't think that's true. I could be wrong but oil hasn't really followed the supply/demand model. I don't believe having more US oil would affect the global price much. However, being energy independent would be priceless!
Sure it does, but take the USA out of the picture, and every major oil producing country has a nationalized oil company. There is all sorts of government control type systems influencing the price of oil... If anything, making the USA a major player is their (in comparison, there is a huge caveat to this that is a long explanation in and of itself) freer business practices. It would weaken the price fixing that is in place in the oil commodity market...
What ends up happening a lot of time. Is that private companies end up teaming up with public companies, (because they can't get in otherwise) and they end up doing all the work, because they recognize their own ineptitude, but they also still want their cut.. The private companies takes their cut and the rest funds that countries government. Which add huge costs in developing a well.
Originally Posted by Bang Guy http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455585
I don't think that's true. I could be wrong but oil hasn't really followed the supply/demand model. I don't believe having more US oil would affect the global price much. However, being energy independent would be priceless!
Sure it does, but take the USA out of the picture, and every major oil producing country has a nationalized oil company. There is all sorts of government control type systems influencing the price of oil... If anything, making the USA a major player is their (in comparison, there is a huge caveat to this that is a long explanation in and of itself) freer business practices. It would weaken the price fixing that is in place in the oil commodity market...
What ends up happening a lot of time. Is that private companies end up teaming up with public companies, (because they can't get in otherwise) and they end up doing all the work, because they recognize their own ineptitude, but they also still want their cut.. The private companies takes their cut and the rest funds that countries government. Which add huge costs in developing a well.
darthtang aw
Active Member
Bang, there are two reasons I see for oil to cost what it does. The first is market manipulation to a degree. That is hard to factor for since so many countries have their hands in this. The other is supply and demand. Oil usage and demand has out paced production in the last two decades or so. Especially with china coming on line. As fewer and fewer new wells are developed due to government interference and what not, more and more people are using oil. This is the single most contributing factor to oil cost. we have seen a double in the demand. Factor in political unrest in the primary regions oil is viewed to come from, for the most part, and you have your higher price. If the U.S. was viewed as the major oil player instead of the mid east, price would drop greatly. As we are the most stable country in the world for the most part.
bang guy
Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455603
The positive is taxes, royalties and jobs are paid and created here if we produce more. My dad was in the production end of the business. Back in the 70's he had it right. He said let the Arabs sell their easy oil at these low profit margins. Even after the embargo it was tough in the oil business here.
This is an excellent point.
Another point I just thought of is the indirect cost of oil for us. stdreb27 did already mention it previously but I didn't get it at the time. We have an estimated $2 - $3 indirect cost for every gallon of gas that we all pay. This cost comes from our role as the world police to protect our overseas oil supply. It's NOT just military costs. If we stop meddling in other countries we save a lot of money. It doesn't affect the price at the pump but these indirect cost need to be considered when discussing energy policy. To streb27's point, if we're drilling more here to the point of being independent, at least within North America, we don't need to meddle in middle eastern affairs.
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455603
The positive is taxes, royalties and jobs are paid and created here if we produce more. My dad was in the production end of the business. Back in the 70's he had it right. He said let the Arabs sell their easy oil at these low profit margins. Even after the embargo it was tough in the oil business here.
This is an excellent point.
Another point I just thought of is the indirect cost of oil for us. stdreb27 did already mention it previously but I didn't get it at the time. We have an estimated $2 - $3 indirect cost for every gallon of gas that we all pay. This cost comes from our role as the world police to protect our overseas oil supply. It's NOT just military costs. If we stop meddling in other countries we save a lot of money. It doesn't affect the price at the pump but these indirect cost need to be considered when discussing energy policy. To streb27's point, if we're drilling more here to the point of being independent, at least within North America, we don't need to meddle in middle eastern affairs.
stdreb27
Active Member
Hey, now, I'm all for meddling... Stable energy supply is just one of America's interests over there... One of my biggest problems with Ron Paul is that he fails to consider that if those jokers decide to start lobbing nukes at each other, there will be world wide consequences whether it be environmental, economic etc...
Don't forget the outrageous taxes placed on gasoline. Take the taxes out, and we would get a totally different picture on how much gas at the pump costs us.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp
Also, in terms of creating an alternative to oil, the biggest impediment that I see is not the creation of a new energy source, but dealing with the infrastructure issue. To me, that would be a mind-boggling undertaking. Its one thing to build a new infrastructure as innovations occur; its a another thing to tear what we have down and build anew. Especially, when we are so dependent on what we have now.
http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp
Also, in terms of creating an alternative to oil, the biggest impediment that I see is not the creation of a new energy source, but dealing with the infrastructure issue. To me, that would be a mind-boggling undertaking. Its one thing to build a new infrastructure as innovations occur; its a another thing to tear what we have down and build anew. Especially, when we are so dependent on what we have now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455634
Hey, now, I'm all for meddling... Stable energy supply is just one of America's interests over there... One of my biggest problems with Ron Paul is that he fails to consider that if those jokers decide to start lobbing nukes at each other, there will be world wide consequences whether it be environmental, economic etc...
But wouldn't an isolationist approach include developing our own means of taking care of ourselves? I don't think Ron Paul is a tree hugger. I agree that aspect of his platform is scary, but the USA's dependence on other nations, as we are now, is extremely scary and doesn't exactly work for us that well since we are now trillions in debt.
Originally Posted by stdreb27 http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455634
Hey, now, I'm all for meddling... Stable energy supply is just one of America's interests over there... One of my biggest problems with Ron Paul is that he fails to consider that if those jokers decide to start lobbing nukes at each other, there will be world wide consequences whether it be environmental, economic etc...
But wouldn't an isolationist approach include developing our own means of taking care of ourselves? I don't think Ron Paul is a tree hugger. I agree that aspect of his platform is scary, but the USA's dependence on other nations, as we are now, is extremely scary and doesn't exactly work for us that well since we are now trillions in debt.
stdreb27
Active Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455637
But wouldn't an isolationist approach include developing our own means of taking care of ourselves? I don't think Ron Paul is a tree hugger. I agree that aspect of his platform is scary, but the USA's dependence on other nations, as we are now, is extremely scary and doesn't exactly work for us that well since we are now trillions in debt.
I think that train of though goes overboard... Plus misleading... Self sufficiency does not equal isolationist. There a lot of implications that aren't accurate. (I'm not saying that you're doing that, BUT I've heard lots of people discuss that train of though, have no clue what they're talking about) For example, us importing walmart quality goods really doesn't result in federal debt.
I'm all about free trade... But I'm not for all the whining and complaining about us not building enough different stuff. The government stopping us from producing our own oil reserves is completely on the table...
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455637
But wouldn't an isolationist approach include developing our own means of taking care of ourselves? I don't think Ron Paul is a tree hugger. I agree that aspect of his platform is scary, but the USA's dependence on other nations, as we are now, is extremely scary and doesn't exactly work for us that well since we are now trillions in debt.
I think that train of though goes overboard... Plus misleading... Self sufficiency does not equal isolationist. There a lot of implications that aren't accurate. (I'm not saying that you're doing that, BUT I've heard lots of people discuss that train of though, have no clue what they're talking about) For example, us importing walmart quality goods really doesn't result in federal debt.
I'm all about free trade... But I'm not for all the whining and complaining about us not building enough different stuff. The government stopping us from producing our own oil reserves is completely on the table...
Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455671
If them Middle Easterners don't want us meddling they shouldn't live on top of OUR oil.
And think of all the negative consequences that has come from helping them live on top of our oil.
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/390237/that-whole-global-warming-thing-is-such-a-joke/60#post_3455671
If them Middle Easterners don't want us meddling they shouldn't live on top of OUR oil.
And think of all the negative consequences that has come from helping them live on top of our oil.
darthtang aw
Active Member
But wouldn't an isolationist approach include developing our own means of taking care of ourselves? I don't think Ron Paul is a tree hugger. I agree that aspect of his platform is scary, but the USA's dependence on other nations, as we are now, is extremely scary and doesn't exactly work for us that well since we are now trillions in debt.
a greater majority of our debt is due to local spending. i dont see how removing our dependence on other nations for certain consumer goods would change our national debt situation.