Obama’s Answer to Drilling Debate: Inflate Your Tires

[red states rule]

This guy is an idiot folks. We do not have to drill, just inflate the tires and get a tune-up

"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much." the messiah known as Obama


http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=142113

[theHawk]

Yup the answer to $4 gasoline is not drilling for crude oil....its inflating your tires. This jackass can't stop shooting himself in the foot. Does he really think Americans are THAT stupid? Oh wait...half of them are....

[red states rule]

Yup the answer to $4 gasoline is not drilling for crude oil....its inflating your tires. This jackass can't stop shooting himself in the foot. Does he really think Americans are THAT stupid? Oh wait...half of them are....

Well, I will take my car in for a tune-up and watch the gas station across the street to see if the price drops :laugh2:

[Immanuel]

The answer from one with an inflated ego... inflate more.:lol:

Immie

[red states rule]

The answer from one with an inflated ego... inflate more.:lol:

Immie

Good one there Immanuel. You got off a good ripper there :laugh2:

[midcan5]

Drilling is like giving a drug addict more heroin. It would provide little down the road and is shortsighted. Plenty of oil out there, get a competitive market that has other choices and the speculators will come back to earth. Why ruin what beauty there is to drive your SUV to a remote suburb where you sit at a TV or computer when you could be out in the world staring at the clouds and seeing them not smog.

"First, let’s examine the claim that more drilling can lower gasoline prices. Between 1999 and 2007, permits for drilling in onshore and offshore public lands “increased by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices have also risen dramatically,” the House Natural Resources Committee reported in a new analysis. “There is simply no correlation between the two.""

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11397.html

Even the conservative US News and World Report agrees, ruining our home is a bad idea.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html

[red states rule]

Drilling is like giving a drug addict more heroin. It would provide little down the road and is shortsighted. Plenty of oil out there, get a competitive market that has other choices and the speculators will come back to earth. Why ruin what beauty there is to drive your SUV to a remote suburb where you sit at a TV or computer when you could be out in the world staring at the clouds and seeing them not smog.

"First, let’s examine the claim that more drilling can lower gasoline prices. Between 1999 and 2007, permits for drilling in onshore and offshore public lands “increased by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices have also risen dramatically,” the House Natural Resources Committee reported in a new analysis. “There is simply no correlation between the two.""

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11397.html

Even the conservative US News and World Report agrees, ruining our home is a bad idea.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html

How many jobs would be created at once with your new sources of energy VS starting up the drills?

How long before your new energy sources hit the market VS the new oil that would be pumped out of the ground if we started drilling?

Or why not do everything right now and see which one produces the best results?

Sna Fran Nan and Harry "the war is lost" Reid are about to go on a 4 week vacation and so far they have done NOTHING to increase our domestic energy

[avatar4321]

Drilling is like giving a drug addict more heroin. It would provide little down the road and is shortsighted. Plenty of oil out there, get a competitive market that has other choices and the speculators will come back to earth. Why ruin what beauty there is to drive your SUV to a remote suburb where you sit at a TV or computer when you could be out in the world staring at the clouds and seeing them not smog.

"First, let’s examine the claim that more drilling can lower gasoline prices. Between 1999 and 2007, permits for drilling in onshore and offshore public lands “increased by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices have also risen dramatically,” the House Natural Resources Committee reported in a new analysis. “There is simply no correlation between the two.""

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11397.html

Even the conservative US News and World Report agrees, ruining our home is a bad idea.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html

I know basic economics may be beyond you. But in order for more supply to decrease prices, you have to create more supply then the current demand. When the demand for oil is exploding at a higher rate than the supply is being churned out then the prices are going to rise.

However, that doesnt mean its useless to drill. it simply means you need to make sure you are drilling for more oil then the increase in demand. If you did absolutely nothing the price would jump because you would clearly not be getting enough for the demand.

Finally, drilling for oil doesnt destroy the environment. In fact, it's a total myth that we can destroy the environment because anything we remove to get the oil, we can replace. That's the beauty of the world.

However, if you are concerned about the environment, i encourage you to set the example. Stop using oil. Stop eating food produced by oil. Stop driving. Stop heating your home or using your air conditioner. I understand you might not suffer a lack of oil. But you have no right to tell other people they have to die just so you can "save the planet". Especially when its not in danger.

[Silver]

Drilling is like giving a drug addict more heroin. It would provide little down the road and is shortsighted. Plenty of oil out there, get a competitive market that has other choices and the speculators will come back to earth. Why ruin what beauty there is to drive your SUV to a remote suburb where you sit at a TV or computer when you could be out in the world staring at the clouds and seeing them not smog.

Drilling is like medicine to the ailing...a bypass to a heart patient....a blow job to Clinton....and can be done, is being done, and will be done with little to no adverse effect on the "beauty of earth".....actually I find oil rigs quite pleasant to gaze upon..as nice as windmills and solar panels anyway....


"First, let’s examine the claim that more drilling can lower gasoline prices. Between 1999 and 2007, permits for drilling in onshore and offshore public lands “increased by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices have also risen dramatically,” the House Natural Resources Committee reported in a new analysis. “There is simply no correlation between the two.""

Drilling alone will affect oil prices little, but actually finding an oil field and pumping that oil into our economy will make OPEC oil prices irrelevant....

there is no correlation between your brain and economic reality.


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11397.html

Even the conservative US News and World Report agrees, ruining our home is a bad idea.

And NOBODY is advocating "ruining our homes" ,,....moron....:fu:
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html
t

[red states rule]

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/richedit/upload/2k66874487d4.jpg

[stephanie]

the polls show a majority of people, Republican and Democrat are in favor of drilling..

Come Nov.... after the Democrats come back at the end of Sept. from their 5 to 6 weeks paid vacation, and we're still paying $4 for a gallon of gas...tsk tsk tsk..

[red states rule]

the polls show a majority of people, Republican and Democrat are in favor of drilling..

Come Nov.... after the Democrats come back at the end of Sept. from their 5 to 6 weeks paid vacation, and we're still paying $4 for a gallon of gas...

Some polls are showing about 60% of people want the drilling to start

Pelosi and Reid are bucking the will of the people again for their own politial reasons

[Hobbit]

Drilling is like giving a drug addict more heroin. It would provide little down the road and is shortsighted. Plenty of oil out there, get a competitive market that has other choices and the speculators will come back to earth. Why ruin what beauty there is to drive your SUV to a remote suburb where you sit at a TV or computer when you could be out in the world staring at the clouds and seeing them not smog.

"First, let’s examine the claim that more drilling can lower gasoline prices. Between 1999 and 2007, permits for drilling in onshore and offshore public lands “increased by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices have also risen dramatically,” the House Natural Resources Committee reported in a new analysis. “There is simply no correlation between the two.""

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11397.html

Even the conservative US News and World Report agrees, ruining our home is a bad idea.

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/05/23/arctic-drilling-wouldnt-cool-high-oil-prices.html

No, it's like giving a starving man a meal. It won't help him keep him from being hungry next year, but it will keep him alive until a more permanent solution can be found.

[retiredman]

hey hobbit...what about those six million muslims?

asshole

[stephanie]

hey hobbit...what about those six million muslims?

asshole

wtf??
what about them?

[red states rule]

wtf??
what about them?

It is more minless and hateful babble form the preacher man

[Hobbit]

When I first heard about this, I thought it was something somebody made up as a joke. Then, I found out that it's practically a direct quote from Jimmy Carter from, you know, when there were mile long gas lines.

[Joe Steel]

This guy is an idiot folks. We do not have to drill, just inflate the tires and get a tune-up

"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much." the messiah known as Obama

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=142113

He's right.

The key to solving our oil problem is conservation. We'll never have an oil problem if we don't use any oil.

Read my lips.
No new drilling.

[red states rule]

He's right.

The key to solving our oil problem is conservation. We'll never have an oil problem if we don't use any oil.

Read my lips.
No new drilling.

Sorry Joe, as usual you and yopur messiah is wrong.

Oil shale formation could produce a minimum of 800 billion barrels of oil alone, which would be a 100 year supply at our curent rate of usage.

Tire inflation could improve gas mileage by about 3%, which would relate to about 600,000 barrels of oil a day

[red states rule]

When I first heard about this, I thought it was something somebody made up as a joke. Then, I found out that it's practically a direct quote from Jimmy Carter from, you know, when there were mile long gas lines.

I remember Pres Peanut telling people to wear a sweater as home heating oil was in short supply

Obama is indeed the second coming of Pres Peanut

[Yurt]

Sorry Joe, as usual you and yopur messiah is wrong.

Oil shale formation could produce a minimum of 800 billion barrels of oil alone, which would be a 100 year supply at our curent rate of usage.

Tire inflation could improve gas mileage by about 3%, which would relate to about 600,000 barrels of oil a day

tire inflation really only works when you are on the open road, it accounts for next to nothing, if at all, idling in traffic or going about the city...these miles account for the vast majority of driving

[red states rule]

tire inflation really only works when you are on the open road, it accounts for next to nothing, if at all, idling in traffic or going about the city...these miles account for the vast majority of driving

and do not forget the tune-up :laugh2:

Obama is always willing to show what and idiot he really is

[Yurt]

and do not forget the tune-up :laugh2:

Obama is always willing to show what and idiot he really is

tune up do help, a little, however, this was big news in the day of carburetors...you know, from pres peanut carter days

its good to know he cares so much about us...i can just imagine him in his large airplane flying at 35000 feet looking down on us from his lofty perch and thinking....al gore is my hero

[red states rule]

tune up do help, a little, however, this was big news in the day of carburetors...you know, from pres peanut carter days

its good to know he cares so much about us...i can just imagine him in his large airplane flying at 35000 feet looking down on us from his lofty perch and thinking....al gore is my hero

I hope the Dems stick with the tree huggers. A new CNN poll shows that 72% want the drilling to start

[Immanuel]

Some polls are showing about 60% of people want the drilling to start



Yes? Maybe so, but I bet they don't ask, "if the drilling was going to be in your neighborhood would you still want drilling?" Ask that question and I wouldn't be surprised to see that number much, much less. Just like Ted Kennedy regarding the Cape Cod Wind project. "Not in my backyard".

Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to drilling and I live in Tampa. If they started drilling off the Florida coast, it would more or less be in my back yard. I can live with it although I would prefer windmills to oil rigs.

Immie

[red states rule]

Yes? Maybe so, but I bet they don't ask, "if the drilling was going to be in your neighborhood would you still want drilling?" Ask that question and I wouldn't be surprised to see that number much, much less. Just like Ted Kennedy regarding the Cape Cod Wind project. "Not in my backyard".

Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to drilling and I live in Tampa. If they started drilling off the Florida coast, it would more or less be in my back yard. I can live with it although I would prefer windmills to oil rigs.

Immie

Pelosi said she had no plans to allow votes to lift a ban on offshore drilling despite widespread support for the move. A recent CNN poll conducted by the Opinion Research Corp. found that 72 percent of those polled supported more offshore drilling. About a quarter -- 27 percent -- backed Pelosi's position. The poll, conducted June 26-29, has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3 percentage points.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/17/congress.oil/#cnnSTCVideo

[Immanuel]

Pelosi said she had no plans to allow votes to lift a ban on offshore drilling despite widespread support for the move. A recent CNN poll conducted by the Opinion Research Corp. found that 72 percent of those polled supported more offshore drilling. About a quarter -- 27 percent -- backed Pelosi's position. The poll, conducted June 26-29, has a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3 percentage points.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/17/congress.oil/#cnnSTCVideo

But again, read what I said. They support offshore drilling because it is not in their backyards. Put an oil rig or two blocking their view and they will sing a different tune just like Ted Kennedy.

Immie

[red states rule]

But again, read what I said. They support offshore drilling because it is not in their backyards. Put an oil rig or two blocking their view and they will sing a different tune just like Ted Kennedy.

Immie

The point is, the libs are going against a huge majority of the voters, byt sticking with the tree huggers

Dems are fighting a losing game when all they do is say conserve.

BTW, when people do drive less and use less gas - Dems want to raise the gas tax to make up for the loss in gax tax revenue

[theHawk]

But again, read what I said. They support offshore drilling because it is not in their backyards. Put an oil rig or two blocking their view and they will sing a different tune just like Ted Kennedy.

Immie

Is offshore drilling in anyone's backyard?

[Immanuel]

Is offshore drilling in anyone's backyard?

Not really, but the effects of a spill could be.

There has been concern mentioned along the Florida Gulf Coast that if a spill happened it would ruin tourism here for years to come. I must say, they make a good case for it although I am not certain of the likelihood of something like that happening.

Immie

[red states rule]

Not really, but the effects of a spill could be.

There has been concern mentioned along the Florida Gulf Coast that if a spill happened it would ruin tourism here for years to come. I must say, they make a good case for it although I am not certain of the likelihood of something like that happening.

Immie

Tell me, how much oil was spilled in the Gulf during hurricane Katrina?

[theHawk]

Not really, but the effects of a spill could be.

There has been concern mentioned along the Florida Gulf Coast that if a spill happened it would ruin tourism here for years to come. I must say, they make a good case for it although I am not certain of the likelihood of something like that happening.

Immie

A spill can happen anywhere a shipping lane is too. Does that prevent ships from entering our ports to deliver the oil? No.

It seems a little strange to me to not want something because of a very small risk. There is risk in everything we do, but when the rewards far outweigh the risks then its definately worth it. I grew up in Southern California where there were plenty of off shore oil platforms. Never thought twice about them and I have never heard of anything bad happening. Even if something bad did happen once its still worth having them all there supplying us with what we need. I'd rather be paying those people for it than some foreigners.

[Immanuel]

Tell me, how much oil was spilled in the Gulf during hurricane Katrina?

First, I'm not defending it.

Second, that is a completely different scenario so it doesn't apply here.

Third, how much oil was spilled in the Exxon Valdez disaster? That is the concern of the residents (mostly small resort owner, small business owners and hotel owners) here. They have a legitimate concern.

Immie

[red states rule]

First, I'm not defending it.

Second, that is a completely different scenario so it doesn't apply here.

Third, how much oil was spilled in the Exxon Valdez disaster? That is the concern of the residents (mostly small resort owner, small business owners and hotel owners) here. They have a legitimate concern.

Immie

So you have to go back many years to try and find an example, and not accept a more recent example that goes against your concerns?

The technology is much more advanced, and the tree huggers and left are ingnorant when it comes to the basic economic prinicpal of supply and demand; and how oil drilling is done

Dems have a vested interest in keeping gas prices high, food prices high, and allow no drilling all for political reasons

Reid and Pelsoi have shown they do give a rats ass about the working folks. Obama has no problem with people paying $4.50/gal for gas

All they care about is winning in November

[Immanuel]

A spill can happen anywhere a shipping lane is too. Does that prevent ships from entering our ports to deliver the oil? No.

It seems a little strange to me to not want something because of a very small risk. There is risk in everything we do, but when the rewards far outweigh the risks then its definately worth it. I grew up in Southern California where there were plenty of off shore oil platforms. Never thought twice about them and I have never heard of anything bad happening. Even if something bad did happen once its still worth having them all there supplying us with what we need. I'd rather be paying those people for it than some foreigners.

See post #33.

Personally, I would rather we were completely out from under oil. I would prefer we were using solar or wind power or some other non-polluting form of power, but that is just not going to happen any time soon.

I imagine the only way the Middle East conflict is going to end is when we eliminate our need for oil. Once we say, "adios" to oil the ME goes back to being a relatively insignificant piece of earth.

Immie

[Immanuel]

So you have to go back many years to try and find an example, and not accept a more recent example that goes against your concerns?

The technology is much more advanced, and the tree huggers and left are ingnorant when it comes to the basic economic prinicpal of supply and demand; and how oil drilling is done

Dems have a vested interest in keeping gas prices high, food prices high, and allow no drilling all for political reasons

Reid and Pelsoi have shown they do give a rats ass about the working folks. Obama has no problem with people paying $4.50/gal for gas

All they care about is winning in November


Once again I AM NOT DEFENDING THEM!

I happen to be for drilling and I have said it time and time again, all they care about is the future votes.

Immie

[Immanuel]

So you have to go back many years to try and find an example, and not accept a more recent example that goes against your concerns?


Exxon Valdez is not ALL THAT LONG AGO.

Hurricane Katrina doesn't even represent the concerns that people who make a living on the Florida Gulf Coast have. I have not said they are right or that any of them or all of them want to stop drilling. I'm saying they have a concern as all of us should. We should all be concerned of the possibility of a spill. Does that mean we should say no to drilling? No, it means we should be concerned about spills and take precautions against something happening.

I grew up in California (northern). We had earthquakes all the time and always heard about "the big one that was coming". Does that mean we should not build in California and people should not live there because there is a risk of an earthquake? Hell no! People evaluate the risks and choose to live with them or not.

Now, I live in Florida. There is a risk that a hurricane would level my home near the mouth of Tampa Bay. Does that mean my neighbors and I should move? Hell no! I love where I am right now and I accept the risk of living here... um, truthfully though, if a hurricane is coming my way... I'm outta here! :laugh2:

Immie

[red states rule]

Once again I AM NOT DEFENDING THEM!

I happen to be for drilling and I have said it time and time again, all they care about is the future votes.

Immie

Good - we agree on this issue

Now if San Fran Nan and Reid wil get with the program

[Immanuel]

Good - we agree on this issue

Now if San Fran Nan and Reid wil get with the program

Yeah, right, she already said she doesn't care what Americans think about this issue, there won't be a vote on it... period.

She knows what's good for you better than you do. Don't you know that?

Immie

[red states rule]

Yeah, right, she already said she doesn't care what Americans think about this issue, there won't be a vote on it... period.

She knows what's good for you better than you do. Don't you know that?

Immie

Liberal arrogance demands libs know what is best for everyone else. Libs can spend our money more efficently then we can.

Obama is showing more and more of his liberal arrogance and that is why he is dropping in the polls

[Hobbit]

First, I'm not defending it.

Second, that is a completely different scenario so it doesn't apply here.

Third, how much oil was spilled in the Exxon Valdez disaster? That is the concern of the residents (mostly small resort owner, small business owners and hotel owners) here. They have a legitimate concern.

Immie

Actually, the Exxon Valdez spill is a good argument FOR offshore drilling. Because of the fact that ships move, the likelihood of a spill from a tanker is FAR more likely than from a platform, and the less distance a ship has to cover to get from the platform to the port, the less risk there is for a spill.

[red states rule]

Dems are great at accomplishing NOTHING

Lawmakers head home after impasse on gas prices

WASHINGTON - Lawmakers sped for the exits Friday as Congress was to begin a five-week recess after a summer session noteworthy for bitter partisanship and paralysis on the issue topmost in the minds of many voters: the cost of gasoline.

As its last major act, the House passed by a 409-4 vote its first spending bill, a $72.7 billion measure awarding generous increases to veterans programs and military base construction projects.

More noteworthy however, was what Congress failed to do: pass energy legislation and other measures aimed at lowering the price of gasoline.

Senate Republicans blocked a bill aimed at curbing speculation in oil markets, while a similar bill and several others by House Democrats — including a plan to encourage drilling in already available coastal areas and in Alaska — failed to advance after party leaders brought them to the floor under procedures that required supermajorities to pass. That procedure blocked Republicans from forcing a vote on opening new areas to oil drilling.

Republicans have been pressing to allow oil exploration in areas that are currently off limits, including the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic and Pacific coasts. They have been relentless in their assault on Democrats over the topic, even though opening the Outer Continental Shelf to new exploration wouldn't put any oil on the market for a decade or more.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080801/ap_on_go_co/congress

[Immanuel]

Actually, the Exxon Valdez spill is a good argument FOR offshore drilling. Because of the fact that ships move, the likelihood of a spill from a tanker is FAR more likely than from a platform, and the less distance a ship has to cover to get from the platform to the port, the less risk there is for a spill.

But once again, I am not arguing against offshore drilling!!!

GRRRRR... would someone please show me where they think I argued against offshore drilling, because I can't find it.

I was slamming the Dems in my posts there guys... especially Teddy K who is all for conservation of energy as long as he doesn't have to stare at those windmills in Cape Cod.

And Hobbit, I agree with you on the spill being more likely from a tanker than a rig. The issue for those who make their living on the coast of Florida though is that a spill of any kind would destroy their lives and I must say in that instance they are correct. It would destroy them.

Immie

[MtnBiker]

hey hobbit...what about those six million muslims?

asshole

Well that has nothing to do with air pressure or drilling for oil. Seems you are just provoking.

[Kathianne]

Well that has nothing to do with air pressure or drilling for oil. Seems you are just provoking.

Seems he was doing a lot of that yesterday. Perhaps today will be a better one?

[red states rule]

Seems he was doing a lot of that yesterday. Perhaps today will be a better one?

5 will get you 10

[Joe Steel]

Sorry Joe, as usual you and yopur messiah is wrong.

Oil shale formation could produce a minimum of 800 billion barrels of oil alone, which would be a 100 year supply at our curent rate of usage.

Tire inflation could improve gas mileage by about 3%, which would relate to about 600,000 barrels of oil a day

Oil shale is not a solution. When all the costs are included, it's a disaster. Filling tires is virtually cost-free.


Oil Shale Would Affect Valuable Water Supplies

Oil shale development uses vast amounts of water. Mining and retorting oil shale can require up to five barrels of water for the production of just one barrel of oil; this in one of the West’s most arid regions. Shell Oil Corporation, currently advancing its experimental method of heating the shale in place, acknowledges that water use for their in-situ method is significant, and that water supplies are likely to be a limiting factor.

Oil Shale Would Require Huge Amounts of Energy

Extracting oil from rock requires massive amounts of energy. A 100,000 barrel-per-day oil shale operation using Shell’s in-situ conversion technology would require 1,200 megawatts of electricity. That much energy would require the construction of a new power plant as large as any currently operating in Colorado, big enough to serve a city of 500,000. Such a power plant, costing about $3 billion, would consume five million tons of coal each year. To produce one million barrels of shale oil a day (as has been projected) would depend on the output of ten new power plants and five new coal mines.

Oil Shale Would Cause Serious Air Pollution

All of the areas primed for oil shale development currently enjoy relatively pollution-free air. But fossil fuels are burned to produce the energy needed to refine shale oil, and these huge energy demands lead to significant emissions. The mining and processing of shale itself produces numerous toxic pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, and particulates, which can also cause severe health impacts, create acid rain and add to global warming. The power plants required for a million-barrel a day industry would release 35,000 tons per year each of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide, and more than 105 million tons of carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere.

Oil Shale Would Eliminate Valuable Wildlife Habitat

Elk, deer, and aquatic species -- including native fish -- could be seriously impacted by a full-scale commercial oil-shale industry. BLM has estimated that large-scale oil shale development would result in the permanent loss of BLM stream fisheries. BLM also found that water disruptions would result in the loss of up to 35% of Colorado River cutthroat trout fisheries. Oil shale would also doom up to 11% of available nest and brood range for blue and sage grouse to long-term, potentially unrecoverable loss.

Even industry itself admits that they have yet to identify an economically feasible technology to extract oil shale on a commercial level, and there are still no guarantees that such development can take place in an environmentally responsible manner. It is critical that industry and the BLM proceed slowly and identify all social and environmental impacts as well as ways to mitigate them, before we make a decision on whether commercial oil shale production is an appropriate choice for Colorado's future.

Oil Shale (http://www.ourcolorado.org/what-we-do/energy/oil-shale/)

[red states rule]

Oil shale is not a solution. When all the costs are included, it's a disaster. Filling tires is virtually cost-free.

With the current price of oil, shale is a good idea and profitable

Again, your idiot messiah's solution has been blown out of the water

[Immanuel]

Oil shale is not a solution. When all the costs are included, it's a disaster. Filling tires is virtually cost-free.

Really? Know any gas stations that don't charge you $0.50 for 10 seconds of air compressor time?

When I grew up you used to be able to go into any gas station and fill up your tires for free. Now they want to charge you for the air! And I never carry change!!! :laugh2: It's a pain in the arse if you ask me.

Immie

[Joe Steel]

Really? Know any gas stations that don't charge you $0.50 for 10 seconds of air compressor time?

1. Yes.

2. Look-up "virtually."

[red states rule]

U.S. Policies Put Most U.S. Oil Off-Limits to Drilling

CNSNews.com) - Huge basins of untapped oil can be found on federal lands throughout the United States, according to a new report from the federal government. But much of it cannot -- and may never be -- recovered, because it lies under national parks and national monuments, or it is subject to environmental laws and restrictions that make drilling prohibitive.

The report, which was produced at the request of Congress by the Department of Interior's Bureau of Land Management (BLM), said there are 279 million acres under federal management where oil and gas could potentially could be extracted. More than half of it is totally off-limits to drillers.

"The total onshore resource is 31 billion barrels," said BLM's lead scientist Richard Watson, who authored the report. "Of that, 19 billion barrels are currently inaccessible or 62%. A little over 2 billion barrels, or 8%, is accessible under what we call standard lease terms."

If you add in the 85.9 billion barrels of oil that lie offshore, as determined by the Interior Department's Minerals Management Service, there are 117 billion barrels of oil on lands owned or managed by the U.S. government. But all expansion of offshore oil recovery is currently off-limits.

Adding in what's available on privately held land, the figure rises to 139 billion barrels of oil, according to the government - more than the known oil reserves of Iran, Iraq, Russia, Nigeria or Venezuela, respectively.

The biggest untapped land-based oil deposit in the United States lies within ANWR, the Artic National Wildlife Refuge, which is currently off-limits. "We estimate there is something on the order of 7.7 billion barrels in that one area alone," Watson said.

But setting aside Alaska, there is untapped oil on federal lands all across the United States, the government reported, with oil pockets found in Oregon, Washington state, Montana, Wyoming, Florida -- even in the Appalachian Mountains. "In the lower 48 states, there are about 12 billion barrels onshore," Watson noted.


http://bp1.blogger.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/SE0wQyJnr6I/AAAAAAAAEyM/qB1woRiwGvk/s400/oilmap.jpg


http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2008/06/us-policies-put-most-us-oil-off-limits.html

[Immanuel]

1. Yes.

2. Look-up "virtually."

So, what you are saying is virtually all gas stations now charge 50 cents to use the air compressor?

Those that don't simply don't provide "air" service at all.

Immie

[Joe Steel]

With the current price of oil, shale is a good idea and profitable

Again, your idiot messiah's solution has been blown out of the water

First of all, Obama is correct. Proper tire inflation and tune-ups do reduce fuel consumption. He was correct.

Secondly, if you think he was proposing tire inflation and tune-ups as the sole and exclusive solution to the oil problem, I'm not surprised you bought the "more drilling" snake oil.

[red states rule]

First of all, Obama is correct. Proper tire inflation and tune-ups do reduce fuel consumption. He was correct.

Secondly, if you think he was proposing tire inflation and tune-ups as the sole and exclusive solution to the oil problem, I'm not surprised you bought the "more drilling" snake oil.

Look, your messiah said we do not have to drill, inflating your tires and getting tune-ups will save so much oil we wil not have to drill

Read to what he said

"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much." the messiah known as Obama

[Joe Steel]

So, what you are saying is virtually all gas stations now charge 50 cents to use the air compressor?

No. I said tire-inflation is virtually cost-free. It costs almost nothing.



Those that don't simply don't provide "air" service at all.


I carry an electric pump in my vehicle.

I know of a gas station which doesn't charge for air.

[Joe Steel]

Look, your messiah said we do not have to drill, inflating your tires and getting tune-ups will save so much oil we wil not have to drill

Read to what he said

I know what he said. He's correct. Drilling will produce so little extra oil, it probably can be matched by tire inflation and tune-ups.

[red states rule]

I know what he said. He's correct. Drilling will produce so little extra oil, it probably can be matched by tire inflation and tune-ups.

You are so full of it. the numbers prove you and your messiah are wrong. But liberal arrogance prevents both of you from admitting it

There is no way inflated tries and tune up would save over 100 billion barrels of oil

[Immanuel]

No. I said tire-inflation is virtually cost-free. It costs almost nothing.

Ah, I see, but I was only teasing in my reply anyway. 50 Cents IS virtually nothing. Although, honestly, proper inflation doesn't come close to solving the issue.

What is most annoying is that I never have change on me.


I carry an electric pump in my vehicle.

I know of a gas station which doesn't charge for air.

There are one or two around I'm sure.

Immie

[MtnBiker]

I know what he said. He's correct. Drilling will produce so little extra oil, it probably can be matched by tire inflation and tune-ups.

Then why do democrat Senators Baucus, Landrieu, Nelson, Pyror and Lincoln support more drilling? Are they wrong?

[red states rule]

Then why do democrat Senators Baucus, Landrieu, Nelson, Pyror and Lincoln support more drilling? Are they wrong?

and more the 70% of folks in a CNN poll released today

[Joe Steel]

Then why do democrat Senators Baucus, Landrieu, Nelson, Pyror and Lincoln support more drilling? Are they wrong?

1. Politics.

2. Yes, if they're saying drilling will lower gasoline prices a significant amount in the near term.

[avatar4321]

1. Politics.

2. Yes, if they're saying drilling will lower gasoline prices a significant amount in the near term.

Before we go further, define a significant amount.

[MtnBiker]

1. Politics.

2. Yes, if they're saying drilling will lower gasoline prices a significant amount in the near term.

Are the 70% of people that are in favor of drilling likely to support canidates of similar perspective on drilling.

[Joe Steel]

Before we go further, define a significant amount.

Enough to make the average consumer notice the savings. Increased offshore drilling, for instance, will reduce gasoline at the pump $.02 per gallon in ten years. The average consumer wouldn't even notice that.

[Joe Steel]

Are the 70% of people that are in favor of drilling likely to support canidates of similar perspective on drilling.

Not solely because of their stance on drilling. It's not an important enough issue.

[red states rule]

Enough to make the average consumer notice the savings. Offshore drilling, for instance, will reduce gasoline at the pump $.02 per gallon in ten years. The average consumer wouldn't even notice that.

Where did you get that number? From a Chucky Schumer speech?

[MtnBiker]

Not solely because of their stance on drilling. It's not an important enough issue.

$4.00 a gallon for gas is a very important issue, if you do not believe so and if you believe that 70% of people who support drilling do not believe it is an important issue, then you are missing the boat.

http://http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x2882.xml?ReleaseID=1196

[MtnBiker]

He's right.

The key to solving our oil problem is conservation. We'll never have an oil problem if we don't use any oil.

Read my lips.
No new drilling.

I wonder how Obama's lip reading skills are these days?


ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday he would be willing to support limited additional offshore oil drilling if that's what it takes to enact a comprehensive policy to foster fuel-efficient autos and develop alternate energy sources.



Shifting from his previous opposition to expanded offshore drilling, the Illinois senator told a Florida newspaper he could get behind a compromise with Republicans and oil companies to prevent gridlock over energy.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080801/ap_on_el_pr/obama_60

Damn it, now you are going to have to change your talking points!

I guess Obama has been looking at those battleground state polls and is "refining" his position. This guy is nothing new, same old politics, going where the votes are.

[Kathianne]

I think sort of on topic, Krauthammer makes some good points:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/31/AR2008073102824.html


Pelosi: Save the Planet, Let Someone Else Drill

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, August 1, 2008; A17

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi opposes lifting the moratorium on drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and on the Outer Continental Shelf. She won't even allow it to come to a vote. With $4 gas having massively shifted public opinion in favor of domestic production, she wants to protect her Democratic members from having to cast an anti-drilling election-year vote. Moreover, given the public mood, she might even lose. This cannot be permitted. Why? Because, as she explained to Politico: "I'm trying to save the planet; I'm trying to save the planet."

A lovely sentiment. But has Pelosi actually thought through the moratorium's effects on the planet?

Consider: 25 years ago, nearly 60 percent of U.S. petroleum was produced domestically. Today it's 25 percent. From its peak in 1970, U.S. production has declined a staggering 47 percent. The world consumes 86 million barrels a day, the United States, roughly 20 million. We need the stuff to run our cars and planes and economy. Where does it come from?

Places such as Nigeria, where chronic corruption, environmental neglect and the resulting unrest and instability lead to pipeline explosions, oil spills and illegal siphoning by the poverty-stricken population -- which leads to more spills and explosions. Just this week, two Royal Dutch Shell pipelines had to be shut down because bombings by local militants were causing leaks into the ground.

Compare the Niger Delta to the Gulf of Mexico, where deep-sea U.S. oil rigs withstood Hurricanes Katrina and Rita without a single undersea well suffering a significant spill.

The United States has the highest technology to ensure the safest drilling. Today, directional drilling -- essentially drilling down, then sideways -- allows access to oil that in 1970 would have required a surface footprint more than three times as large. Additionally, the United States has one of the most extensive and least corrupt regulatory systems on the planet.

Does Pelosi imagine that with so much of America declared off-limits, the planet is less injured as drilling shifts to Kazakhstan and Venezuela and Equatorial Guinea? That Russia will be more environmentally scrupulous than we in drilling in its Arctic?

The net environmental effect of Pelosi's no-drilling willfulness is negative...

[Psychoblues]

So much for so little?!?!?!??!?!??! Krauthammer is a freakin' idiot, kitty!!!!!! Even FauxNews and the WashPost keep him on pretty much a very short leash, don't you know?




I think sort of on topic, Krauthammer makes some good points:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/31/AR2008073102824.html

Aside from all that,,,,,,,

Hit it, Willie, On The Road Again: :salute::cheers2::clap::laugh2::cheers2::salute:

[Kathianne]

So much for so little?!?!?!??!?!??! Krauthammer is a freakin' idiot, kitty!!!!!! Even FauxNews and the WashPost keep him on pretty much a very short leash, don't you know?





Aside from all that,,,,,,,

Hit it, Willie, On The Road Again: :salute::cheers2::clap::laugh2::cheers2::salute:

Be that as it may, if so, still doesn't address the fact that his column raises interesting topics.

[red states rule]

Polluter Bush Hiding Fresh Air Inside Your Car's Tires

"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling, if everybody was just inflating their tires and -- and -- and getting regular tune-ups, you can actually save just as much." - President Barack Obama

Less than ten minutes after President Obama issued his holy fatwa about filling our tires with air to bring down gas prices, I was already down at the local Jiffy Lube demanding to speak to the fascist in charge.

"I want answers," I demanded, furiously pounding my fist on the counter, "and I want them NOW!"

I keep telling you," the neo-con chickenhawk manager persisted. "They're those round rubber things on the bottom of your car!"

"And you fill them up with AIR?" I pressed him further.

"For the last time," he sighed, "YES."

This wasn't good. Despite his godlike intelligence, President Obama obviously didn't think this thing through. Every ounce of air we put into our tires is one less ounce that humans - and more importantly, animals - have for breathing. It's air stolen directly from the lungs of Mother Earth and replaced with deadly exhaust fumes. It's a terrible crime against nature that has been going on right under our very noses for years. Apparently, the Jiffy Lube has been surreptitiously - and without my consent - filling my tires with AIR every time I take the Prius in for a tune-up.

Well, I told Jiffy Jim in no uncertain terms to release the air imprisoned within my so-called "tires" hereto and forthwith.

"But sir," he complained, intentionally neglecting to employ a gender-neutral pronoun, "if I deflate your tires, you won't be able to drive your car out of here."

This is why uneducated conservatives will never be able to compete against enlightened progressives in a game of wits. He really thought he had me stumped, but I was one step ahead of him.

"So fill then back up again," I instructed him, "with greenhouse gases!"

It was brilliant! By freeing the air stashed within my tires and replacing it with the greenhouse gases that were destroying the plant, I could essentially kill two of Bush's nasty little birds with one stone.

The manager, of course, couldn't grasp such a complex idea with his tiny, reptilian brain. He gave me that same look I get from rethugs whenever I bring up the Downing Street Memos during a conversation about potato salad. But all cons are motivated by greed, so after I offered to pay him $100 to replace the air in my tires with greenhouse gases, he finally agreed to the task. He even requested that I send my progressive friends and co-workers over to have the service done on their vehicles.

The down side is that you have to leave your car there overnight. It's worth it, though, to save the planet. I picked up my Prius this afternoon - and although it's a deep red color, it's the greenest car on the road.

http://blamebush.typepad.com/blamebush/2008/08/polluter-bush-h.html

[Missileman]

Enough to make the average consumer notice the savings. Increased offshore drilling, for instance, will reduce gasoline at the pump $.02 per gallon in ten years. The average consumer wouldn't even notice that.

You need to provide virtual toilet paper if you're going to post shit you've pulled out of your ass. :slap:

[Sitarro]

wtf??
what about them?

I think he is advocating grinding them up to make ethanol.

[Sitarro]

He's right.

The key to solving our oil problem is conservation. We'll never have an oil problem if we don't use any oil.

Read my lips.
No new drilling.

You mean like Obama, flying around to every podunk bowling alley on an 80 million dollar aircraft, designed to carry 280 people, to go repeat the same bullshit about "us" needing to conserve fuel? He's burning enough fuel in an hour to run a custom Hummer over 12,000 miles a year. Hillary was doing the same thing. Algore uses a smaller jet but it still burns a tremendous amount of fuel........ for what? To lecture us about our cars?

Why do you let these egotistical, hypocritical jerks get away with it? At least John McCain is using a bus for a lot of his campaign.

[Sitarro]

But again, read what I said. They support offshore drilling because it is not in their backyards. Put an oil rig or two blocking their view and they will sing a different tune just like Ted Kennedy.

Immie

The proposal is for drilling 50 miles from the shore, you'll need some binoculars to bitch about seeing rigs in your back yard.

[Sitarro]

Exxon Valdez is not ALL THAT LONG AGO.

Hurricane Katrina doesn't even represent the concerns that people who make a living on the Florida Gulf Coast have. I have not said they are right or that any of them or all of them want to stop drilling. I'm saying they have a concern as all of us should. We should all be concerned of the possibility of a spill. Does that mean we should say no to drilling? No, it means we should be concerned about spills and take precautions against something happening.

I grew up in California (northern). We had earthquakes all the time and always heard about "the big one that was coming". Does that mean we should not build in California and people should not live there because there is a risk of an earthquake? Hell no! People evaluate the risks and choose to live with them or not.

Now, I live in Florida. There is a risk that a hurricane would level my home near the mouth of Tampa Bay. Does that mean my neighbors and I should move? Hell no! I love where I am right now and I accept the risk of living here... um, truthfully though, if a hurricane is coming my way... I'm outta here! :laugh2:

Immie

Hate to break it to you Immie but you live on the Gulf side of Florida, there is already plenty of drilling happening west of you....... which way do the prevailing currents from the Gulf run? You do have waves hitting the beach that consist of Gulf water right?

[Sitarro]

Exxon Valdez is not ALL THAT LONG AGO.

Hurricane Katrina doesn't even represent the concerns that people who make a living on the Florida Gulf Coast have. I have not said they are right or that any of them or all of them want to stop drilling. I'm saying they have a concern as all of us should. We should all be concerned of the possibility of a spill. Does that mean we should say no to drilling? No, it means we should be concerned about spills and take precautions against something happening.

I grew up in California (northern). We had earthquakes all the time and always heard about "the big one that was coming". Does that mean we should not build in California and people should not live there because there is a risk of an earthquake? Hell no! People evaluate the risks and choose to live with them or not.

Now, I live in Florida. There is a risk that a hurricane would level my home near the mouth of Tampa Bay. Does that mean my neighbors and I should move? Hell no! I love where I am right now and I accept the risk of living here... um, truthfully though, if a hurricane is coming my way... I'm outta here! :laugh2:

Immie

The Valdez is an oil tanker, a ship, thousands go by you every year. Let's hear about a drilling rig spill that destroyed a beach.

[Sitarro]

Enough to make the average consumer notice the savings. Increased offshore drilling, for instance, will reduce gasoline at the pump $.02 per gallon in ten years. The average consumer wouldn't even notice that.

What a load of horse shit, wait, that's what the idiots in Congress and that ignorant minstrel fool would like for all of us little people..... ride horses. Look at all of the new jobs that would create. Horse shit pickers, horse shoers and hoof trimmers, farmers could raise the price of hay, saddle makers and all of the accessories that go with them, designer riding clothes......etc. That must be what the Dems want for us. I wonder how much they will tax a bale of hay?

[Sitarro]

So much for so little?!?!?!??!?!??! Krauthammer is a freakin' idiot, kitty!!!!!! Even FauxNews and the WashPost keep him on pretty much a very short leash, don't you know?





Aside from all that,,,,,,,

Hit it, Willie, On The Road Again: :salute::cheers2::clap::laugh2::cheers2::salute:

Willie Nelson could be the most overrated musician, besides Bob Dylan, in the history of music.

[PostmodernProphet]

The Valdez is an oil tanker, a ship, thousands go by you every year. Let's hear about a drilling rig spill that destroyed a beach.
excellent point......think of how many "Valdez" tankers currently travel between Venezuela and the US that we could eliminate with domestic production......if you consider the risk of a sunken tanker on a per mile traveled basis, we could be reducing the risk of an oil disaster considerably.......

[Immanuel]

The proposal is for drilling 50 miles from the shore, you'll need some binoculars to bitch about seeing rigs in your back yard.


Hate to break it to you Immie but you live on the Gulf side of Florida, there is already plenty of drilling happening west of you....... which way do the prevailing currents from the Gulf run? You do have waves hitting the beach that consist of Gulf water right?


The Valdez is an oil tanker, a ship, thousands go by you every year. Let's hear about a drilling rig spill that destroyed a beach.

Earth to Sitarro... Earth to Sitarro!

Did you actually read anything I said? I don't think so... no wait... it is obvious you did not. I'm not complaining or campaigning against drilling off Florida's coast.

If you had actually read what I said, you would see that my statements were directed at the liberals who complain about drilling. I used Ted Kennedy as an example. You see, our esteemed Mr. Kennedy thinks that methods of getting alternative fuels such as Wind Power are just great... as long as it is not in his backyard... i.e. Cape Cod. He wants us to put up windmills somewhere else not where he can see them.

I also pointed out that there are people on Florida's coast that are concerned about a possible spill. I did not once indicate that I was one of those people. They have a right to be concerned. There is a risk. A small risk but there is a risk.

I also said, that although I would prefer developing alternatives to oil so that we could get out from under control of those hoodlums in the Middle East, at the moment we are too far away from attaining such a goal; therefore, drilling is necessary.

There are risks involved with drilling off our coasts. But there are risks to just about everything we do i.e. living in California (earthquakes) or Florida (hurricanes). We have to weigh the risks against the potential rewards and decide if the rewards outweigh the risks. I can think of some risks to drilling but I can also think of plenty of rewards as well.

Immie

[Dilloduck]

excellent point......think of how many "Valdez" tankers currently travel between Venezuela and the US that we could eliminate with domestic production......if you consider the risk of a sunken tanker on a per mile traveled basis, we could be reducing the risk of an oil disaster considerably.......

When they finish proposed refineries in Ecuador they won't be needing to make that trip to the 7 refineries they own in the US.

[PostmodernProphet]

When they finish proposed refineries in Ecuador they won't be needing to make that trip to the 7 refineries they own in the US.
you're right.....then we can worry about gasoline spills instead of crude spills.....

[Dilloduck]

you're right.....then we can worry about gasoline spills instead of crude spills.....

In the Panama canal maybe. No need for then to be in American waters.

[PostmodernProphet]

In the Panama canal maybe. No need for then to be in American waters.

????....so you figure Venezuela is going to stop selling us oil?......

[bullypulpit]

This guy is an idiot folks. We do not have to drill, just inflate the tires and get a tune-up

"We could save all the oil that they're talking about getting off drilling if everybody was just inflating their tires and getting regular tune-ups. You could save just as much." the messiah known as Obama


http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=142113

This was also a position espoused by the Republican governor of Florida, a potential McCain veep choice...Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican governor of CA...The National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration...And, NASCAR. ALL before Obama ever mentioned it.

Are all these Republicans, government agencies and auto associations idiots too? Didn't think so Red. You lose...Again. :laugh2:

[red states rule]

This was also a position espoused by the Republican governor of Florida, a potential McCain veep choice...Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican governor of CA...The National Highway and Traffic Safety Administration...And, NASCAR. ALL before Obama ever mentioned it.

Are all these Republicans, government agencies and auto associations idiots too? Didn't think so Red. You lose...Again. :laugh2:

Sorry son

Fl is now for drilling. With gas now over $4/gal they are seeing the Dems in Congress did not keep their promise top lower gas prices

Dems are on the ropes. They have to choose between what the voters want or what the tree huggers want

Fire up the drills and tell the tree huggers to shut the hell up