ANWAR - The Republican Universal OUT for High Gas Prices

[Nbadan]

Spin: Gas prices are high because liberal tree-huggers care more about protecting buffalo and elk than they care about lowering gas prices....

---

Nevermind that If you took all the oil in the Arctic National Wild-life Refuge out of the ground, it would last less than half a year just for U.S. consumption, but it is a long-term answer to the U.S. energy crisis

[Yonivore]

Spin: Gas prices are high because liberal tree-huggers care more about protecting buffalo and elk than they care about lowering gas prices....

---

Nevermind that If you took all the oil in the Arctic National Wild-life Refuge out of the ground, it would last less than half a year just for U.S. consumption, but it is a long-term answer to the U.S. energy crisis

There is certainly disagreement over the amount of recoverable oil from ANWR. But, no reasonable person is suggesting ANWR would solve the probem, anyway.

Other things the tree huggers are preventing that would make a dent:

Drilling in the Gulf and off the coast of California.

Building new refining capacity.

Building nuclear power plants.

Tree huggers have quite the obstructionist legacy when it comes to energy independence in America.

[George Gervin's Afro]

There is certainly disagreement over the amount of recoverable oil from ANWR. But, no reasonable person is suggesting ANWR would solve the probem, anyway.

Other things the tree huggers are preventing that would make a dent:

Drilling in the Gulf and off the coast of California.

Building new refining capacity.

Building nuclear power plants.

Tree huggers have quite the obstructionist legacy when it comes to energy independence in America.

How many Republican administrations have we had in the last 28 yrs?

[George Gervin's Afro]

There is certainly disagreement over the amount of recoverable oil from ANWR. But, no reasonable person is suggesting ANWR would solve the probem, anyway.

Other things the tree huggers are preventing that would make a dent:

Drilling in the Gulf and off the coast of California.

Building new refining capacity.

Building nuclear power plants.

Tree huggers have quite the obstructionist legacy when it comes to energy independence in America.

I forgot to ask. Do you have any proof that the sole reason there are no refineries being built is befcause of tree huggers? Please save me the opinion pieces I want to see something that verifies your point in a unbiased way.

[Yonivore]

I forgot to ask. Do you have any proof that the sole reason there are no refineries being built is befcause of tree huggers? Please save me the opinion pieces I want to see something that verifies your point in a unbiased way.

Who gives a what you want to see, "Don't With Me" Afro?

Tell me where I said it was the "sole" reason first, Mr. "Don't With Me" Absolutist.

[Yonivore]

How many Republican administrations have we had in the last 28 yrs?

What's your point? Republicans had the White House and Congress for precisely 8 months before 9-11 changed priorities. Before that, there wasn't a veto-proof Republican Congress or a Republican President with a cooperative Congress for over 40 years.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Who gives a what you want to see, "Don't With Me" Afro?

Tell me where I said it was the "sole" reason first, Mr. "Don't With Me" Absolutist.

Oh ok I guess your to stupid to realize that in your post you imply that the tree huggers are the reason. I noticed you didn't mention anyother reasons..

I didn't think you could justify yet another ,talking point, post...

[George Gervin's Afro]

What's your point? Republicans had the White House and Congress for precisely 8 months before 9-11 changed priorities. Before that, there wasn't a veto-proof Republican Congress or a Republican President with a cooperative Congress for over 40 years.

My point is you are so blindly biased that you walk the fine line of not making any sense...

[Yonivore]

Oh ok I guess your to stupid to realize that in your post you imply that the tree huggers are the reason. I noticed you didn't mention anyother reasons..

It is you that is too stupid to realize we were talking about environmentalist impacts on energy and that it is you that insinuated the absolute into the conversation.

And, if I were implying that, I would say so. But, looking at the issue, most obstacles to new refinery construction point to environmentalists. I'm not intelligent enough on the subject to say the cause is soley due to environmentalists.

So, go ahead, tell me; what are some of the other reasons we haven't increased our refining capacity?

I didn't think you could justify yet another ,talking point, post...

I have this vivid image of the Scarecrow from "The Wizard of Oz," with an afro.

[George Gervin's Afro]

It is you that is too stupid to realize we were talking about environmentalist impacts on energy and that it is you that insinuated the absolute into the conversation.

And, if I were implying that, I would say so. But, looking at the issue, most obstacles to new refinery construction point to environmentalists. I'm not intelligent enough on the subject to say the cause is soley due to environmentalists.

So, go ahead, tell me; what are some of the other reasons we haven't increased our refining capacity?


I have this vivid image of the Scarecrow from "The Wizard of Oz," with an afro.

I guess I didn't interpret the 'tree huggers' remark as an idictment on the whole environmental movement when it comes to energy independence.

Well for one it maximizes profits with no new refineries. Considering now an oil company can shut one down which directly affects the supply of oil in the market.

[Yonivore]

My point is you are so blindly biased that you walk the fine line of not making any sense...

Your question was either a non sequitur or you were trying to make a point.

If you were trying to make a point about my bias by bringing up the fact there have been Republican Presidents and we still don't have drilling in ANWR, I merely responded that it takes more than a President, it takes a cooperative Congress...and vice versa.

That's why I asked what was your point and, it's why I pointed out there hasn't been an opportunity for a Republican President or Congress to get this done because of the environmentalist pandering crowd embodied in Democratic Congresses and Presidents.

So, again, what's your point? If that was it, I responded in a manner I believe belies the accusation of blind partisanship. If that wasn't you point, I'm curious to know what it was.

And, finally, if that was your point, and I responded to it, maybe it's you that is so blindly biased and not making any sense.

[Yonivore]

I guess I didn't interpret the 'tree huggers' remark as an idictment on the whole environmental movement when it comes to energy independence.

Well for one it maximizes profits with no new refineries. Considering now an oil company can shut one down which directly affects the supply of oil in the market.

That's a question for scott but, that's not what's been reported by the media over the years. The principal reasons that I've heard are that draconian environmental regulations on new construction have made it unprofitable to build them. And, extra-regulatory environmental roadblocks to attempted construction of refineries (protests, lobbying, and sabotage) have also contributed.

I don't buy your reason. I'd be happy to read something on the premise if you have it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

That's a question for scott but, that's not what's been reported by the media over the years. The principal reasons that I've heard are that draconian environmental regulations on new construction have made it unprofitable to build them. And, extra-regulatory environmental roadblocks to attempted construction of refineries (protests, lobbying, and sabotage) have also contributed.

I don't buy your reason. I'd be happy to read something on the premise if you have it.

I have heard one of the reasons is the cost associated with building new refineries (primarily with all of the environmental regs). To me that doesn't make sense because the companies could still return a profit with one or two new refineries. That's why I think the major players blame many factors as to why they won't because all they have to do is close one down and the coast goes way up.. I find it kind odd that these refineries are shut down durin the summer months.. peak time.. maybe it's just a coincedence..

[Yonivore]

Here, I'll help you out; I've thought of another group that is stalling the construction of new refineries:

The NIMBYs - The Not In My Back Yarders.

You know, like Senator Kennedy and the wind farm off the coast of Martha's Vineyard.

So, they're not necessarily environmentalists but local NIMBYs that are also thwarting efforts to increase our refining capacity.

But, for the most part, I think you have the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, etc... to thank.

[Yonivore]

I have heard one of the reasons is the cost associated with building new refineries (primarily with all of the environmental regs). To me that doesn't make sense because the companies could still return a profit with one or two new refineries. That's why I think the major players blame many factors as to why they won't because all they have to do is close one down and the coast goes way up.. I find it kind odd that these refineries are shut down durin the summer months.. peak time.. maybe it's just a coincedence..

I appreciate your opinion on this but you'll forgive me if the fact you don't actually build or finance refineries precludes me from buying your assertion without some do ented support.

"I have heard..." usually doesn't cut it.

[George Gervin's Afro]

I appreciate your opinion on this but you'll forgive me if the fact you don't actually build or finance refineries precludes me from buying your assertion without some do ented support.

"I have heard..." usually doesn't cut it.

Actually it's the opinon of the talk radio circuit. That is where I got this tidbit of information. xray says hush tells the truth 100% of the time so I guess Ray will vouch for it..

[Yonivore]

I have heard one of the reasons is the cost associated with building new refineries (primarily with all of the environmental regs). To me that doesn't make sense because the companies could still return a profit with one or two new refineries. That's why I think the major players blame many factors as to why they won't because all they have to do is close one down and the coast goes way up.. I find it kind odd that these refineries are shut down durin the summer months.. peak time.. maybe it's just a coincedence..

And, another thing on this premise. If it were true, why isn't someone other than the oil companies building refineries?

Seriously, it's not like oil companies are the only ones who could build refineries. After all, the technology isn't particularly complex. And with everyone from investment banks to insurance companies to private equity firms, chasing high returns in an era of low global interest rates, there's a ton of cash out there just looking for a place to go.

So why hasn't anyone plunked it down to make more gas?

Personally, I think it points back to Enviro-whackos and NIMBYs. But, that's just me. I'd like to get scott involved in this conversation if we can get him to quit training pirates in an attempt to re global warming.

[Yonivore]

Actually it's the opinon of the talk radio circuit. That is where I got this tidbit of information. xray says hush tells the truth 100% of the time so I guess Ray will vouch for it..

You just get blown by the wind, don't'cha?

I don't listen to talk radio...except for the local drive time guy that talks about local politics. And, refineries haven't been a local source of discussion in Austin -- that I recall.

[xrayzebra]

Actually it's the opinon of the talk radio circuit. That is where I got this tidbit of information. xray says hush tells the truth 100% of the time so I guess Ray will vouch for it..

Never said 100 percent. But he is correct most of the time,
like 98.8%.

Now you, wrong about the same percentage of the time.
And I give you the 1.2 correct because you can get your
post on-line most of the time.

[DarkReign]

Building nuclear power plants.

That is the answer to home consumption, which would reduce our consumption of oil by a very, very large degree.

Chernobyl ed everything up. The inevitable Energy Crisis thats staring us all in the face as we speak will force Americans to reevaluate their priorties.

You either:

a) save all the fuzzy, cute animals and keep your predisposed fear of any phrase that starts with the word nuclear, while living in some pre-industrial-type socio-economic structure (ie living a completely different, self-sustaining lifestyle where you grow your own food and instead of watching TV, you sit around a campfire).

or

b) build the necessary amount of nuclear power plants to supply the entire United States giving the needed time to figure out what the we are going to do about the world's dwindling oil supply.

You choose.

[ElNono]

Technically speaking, there's no reason you couldn't build one or two huge nuclear power plants in the middle of the desert, where you are less likely to cause both an environmental or human catastrophe in case something goes wrong. From a security standpoint, you could run it as a military-base type of facility, and being that it's in the middle of the country, it's an ideal location against aerial attacks.

Now when you see the oil prices keep going up solely on speculation ("A nigerian might fart, up 2 more dollars a barrel" or "Venezuela might continue sucking, up 3 bucks a barrel") and most all energy companies keep posting record profits at the same time, I think it's pretty obvious what's going on. I don't think you're going to change the status quo when these same companies fund your political campaign.

[Spurminator]

We need a nuclear power plant in space with a bunch of wires coming out of the sky and supplying power to our homes.

[Yonivore]

We need a nuclear power plant in space with a bunch of wires coming out of the sky and supplying power to our homes.

I thought Tesla eliminated the need for wires...can't we just transfer the energy through thin air?

[Walter Craparita]

Building new refining capacity.

Building new refining capacity.

Building new refining capacity.

All these ecolosers do nothing but make it more expensive for us. Jojobooka down in S. America doesn't give a and is killing the environment regardless of the actions losers up here try to make everyone do.

LOL at Hillary telling Bush he needs to tap into the petroleum reserves. As if that will do anything.

She's going to make a great president.

Using 150 years of history on a planet dating back millions of years is awesome.

[PixelPusher]

Yeah, the oil companies are just chomping at the bit to build more refining capacity.

Yep.

Yes sir....