| Bush Wants Drilling in Alaska Wildlife Preserve |
|
|
|
| by Tom McGregor | Tue, Apr 29, 2008, 03:07 PM |
|
But, the Houston Chronicle reports that, “Bush declined to jump into the political fray over whether the federal government should give motorists a tax holiday on a federal excise tax on gasoline.” At a White House Rose Garden news conference, Mr. Bush said global oil production isn’t keeping up with a growing demand, which is a major reason for higher gasoline prices. Bush wants Congress to permit The U.S. Energy Department estimates the wildlife preserve could yield a million barrels of oil per day, but lawmakers have blocked exploration in the area. Bush believes more domestic drilling would make the country less dependent on foreign oil. To read the entire article from the Houston Chronicle, link here:
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Bookmark
Email This
Comments (16)
...
written by Grrr , April 29, 2008 I really don't care about the Artic National Whatever, but we just need to stop with the crazy oil business for ground transportation, especially cars & trucks. Technology exists to run the damn things on water. Just guessing, but it is to the point where our national security is at a medium range tipping point due to oil.
...
written by Byron George , April 29, 2008 I agree. Furthermore, the enviromental restrictions should be lifted so new gas refineries can be built..
...
written by HSH , April 29, 2008 GWB is nothing but an irrelevant wind-up toy at this point. It's amazing how this guy has no ability to come up with a new idea. ANWAR is not the solution. And GWB knows it. The Energy Information Administration, which is the Energy Department's independent analytical arm, estimated that if Congress had cleared Bush's ANWR drilling plan the oil would have been available to refiners in 2011, but only at a small volume of 40,000 barrels a day -- a drop in the bucket compared with the 20.6 million barrels the U.S. consumes daily. At peak production, ANWR could have potentially added 780,000 barrels a day to U.S. crude oil output by 2020, according to the EIA. The extra supplies would have cut dependence on foreign oil, but only slightly. With ANWR crude, imports would have met 60 percent of U.S. oil demand in 2020, down from 62 percent without the refuge's supplies. I (and 77% of the American public) am so ready for him to move to Crawford.
...
written by ElHombre , April 29, 2008 More refineries aren't the answer, Byron. China and India are now competing for oil on the market. Simple supply and demand is going to keep the price high. Conservation is the best answer there is to high gas prices. If you have to go somewhere, walk. If it's farther away, ride a bike. If it's even farther, car pool. Then there's public transportation (which we now really need more of). If you have to drive, use a smaller car (a hybrid is better). Just imagine where the US could be right now if the Bush admin had instituted policies like this after 9/11.
...
written by Grrr , April 29, 2008 Byron good point. There is no sense in getting more oil out of the ground if we don't have the refining capacity to process it. I think it was in the '70's when we built the last refinery. We need our leaders to say that we will have ZERO dependence on foreign in 10 years. I don't know, 15 or 20 years, we just need to put it out there.
...
written by Danilo , April 29, 2008 HSh, it's people like you who are the reason our gas prices are so high. Ethanol failed, biofuels are the part of the reason our food prices are keeping poor people from buuing enough food, and all the while the oil companies try to remind us this is simple supply and demand. At least the President is listening. ANWR is not the end-all, but it is one of many things we need to do to stem the rise in oil prices. We also should cancel ethanol-production requirements at refineries, encourage the building of more refineries, work towards a stronger dollar (or merge our currency with the Euro, which will happen eventually), etc. We need also to give serious credence to McCain and Hillary's gas tax plans, but realize that permanent reductions in energy taxation are necessary.
...
written by hsr , April 29, 2008 Is that a picture of the proposed drill site? I dont think so. They can drill all over my neighborhood in Ft Worth but we cant drill in a frozen wasteland thousand of miles from civilization?
...
written by manny , April 30, 2008 if allowed to drill in anwr we need a clause that does not allow them to EXPORT the oil because that is what they are going to do. Another thing,, what if we threaten to nationalize oil as a it is a national security concern. I mean Mexicans are a national security threat hence the fence but oil we can do anything about …..i don’t get that ……. All you republicans thank bush for destroying your party and sending you to minority party status. People will remember 380 dollar gas like they remember Cater and gas lines.
...
written by HSH , April 30, 2008 Danilo: "People like me" prefer to depend on the facts, rather than politic rhetoric. Americans, including the President, need to face up to the fact that our days of guzzling oil and gas with no price repercussions are over. Oil and gas are a dwindling resource, and worldwide competition for that resource is growing rapidly. Conservation is key here, and GWB knows that, but refuses to show some politic courage and speak it. The damage GWB's administration has done to the price of the dollar is also a big part of this problem. Oil and gas are traded in dollars. Demand for gasoline is actually down right now in the U.S. and refineries are operating at only 80 to 85% of capacity (according to an energy consulting firm in Houston interviewed on Marketplace last night), so the high prices have more to do with speculation in the market and the rapidly falling dollar than anything. I live close to work, drive a small, fuel efficient car, and own a home of less than 1,500 square feet. Because of those things, the price increases are affecting me minimally (and I live very well, thank you). If you want lower fuel bills, change your mindset and lifestyle. Otherwise, keep blowing those hard-earned dollars on energy. Exxon, BP, Shell, Saudi Arabia, et al. thank you.
...
written by Byron George , April 30, 2008 HSH, I agree with most of your statement. But the next time the news media reports that one of the major oil companies made XX billion in profits, I wish they would do a study to see how much the government made off of the taxes of the same gasoline. I suspect it is more than the oil company made.
...
written by HSH , April 30, 2008 Byron -- that would be interesting to know. I'd throw in the state's portion, as well.
...
written by Jason K , April 30, 2008 Ethanol hasn't exactly failed yet.... It's just that our reliance on using corn, instead of other sources for ethanol, has essentially failed. If we ever use sugar-cane, switchgrass, or algae, maybe our ethanol use will help us with our oil dependence, but corn will not unless there's a technological breakthrough that allows us to get more energy from it.
...
written by Holy Roller , April 30, 2008 I saw an article recently about a guy in Texas who is farming algae for use as biofuel. Apparently he found a way to grow it vertically in these plastic cells. Sounds like a better idea than corn, sugarcane, etc at this point. Also, they should be looking at additional CNG stations. The technology exists for cars to run on natural gas as well. Utah apparently is the big place for that right now. Although the drawback there is higher demand for natural gas would increase its price, thus increasing our electric prices again.
...
written by GS , April 30, 2008 Gas prices are high for two reasons, supply and demand and the low value of the dollar. Drilling in ANWAR would help both problems. It would supply one million barrels a day, what we are importing from Saudi Arabia. Sen. Schumer says it would take ten years; the Dems have been blocking drilling for longer than that. Any of you conservationists gonna keep the AC off this year?
...
written by got laws? , April 30, 2008 Finding and pumping more oil will have a real effect not some pie in the sky nonsense alternative fuels offer. By effect I mean on the price of oil in the market place. Nutjobs against this just don't (don't want to) get it. You idiots must be rich and don't care what it costs at the pump. "Let the little people ride the bus" Its going to be drilled sooner or later. Get over it.
...
written by HSH , April 30, 2008 GS: Your numbers are wrong. By the Energy Dept's own analysis, at peak production, ANWR could have potentially added 780,000 barrels a day to U.S. crude oil output by 2020, according to the EIA. The extra supplies would have cut dependence on foreign oil, but only slightly. With ANWR crude, imports would have met 60 percent of U.S. oil demand in 2020, down from 62 percent without the refuge's supplies. I find it impossible to believe that Saudi Arabia is contributing only 2% of our imported oil. And it would take at least 10 years. Again, by the Energy Dept's own analysis. And electricity is derived primarily from coal, natural gas, hydro and nuclear in this country. Not West Texas light crude. Write comment
|
|
President George W. Bush reiterated his call to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling, since gasoline prices are sky-rocketing. Bush also defended his policy of adding crude to the nation’s emergency oil stockpile.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
