...........AND build several new oil refineries?Should the United States drill for oil in Alaska, the Dakotas, and offshore in the Gulf of Mexico?
ABSOLUTELY!
Steve...OMG! You are full of it. Liberals have been blocking both for decades.Should the United States drill for oil in Alaska, the Dakotas, and offshore in the Gulf of Mexico?
we should drill in texas, alaska, north, south dakota, nebraska, mexico, new mexico. we should stop depending on foreign countries. that is why our dollar value is dropping. Report Abuse
We already drill in Alaska and the Gulf.
We just found the 10th largest oil field in the world, off the coast of Louisiana in the gulf, last year, of course it will take 10 years before we start getting any oil out of it.
As to refineries, we don't need new refineries right now.
When the hurricane hit Texas and Louisiana, it did cause a jump in gas prices because the refineries had to shut down.
But right now, we have more than enough gasoline, so that's not whats driving the cost of gasoline up.
It is the world price of oil.
And there isn't a shortage of oil right now either.
It's just a jittery comedies market.
Yes, and ease up on the restrictions that have caused us not to build a new refinery in the USA for over 30 years.
How long since you have heard of a disasterous oil spill or oil well blowout in the US? Long time because technology that prevents such things has improved greatly.
The liberals and environmentalists objections are way, way out of date and we should be drilling new wells, building new refineries, and building new nuclear plants.
Failure to do so means economic disaster. Can you say $10/gal gasoline? $25/gal?
P.S. - we are so short on refining capacity that we are importing refined gasoline, a situation that only adds even more to its cost.
I would say yes, but it will not be easy. There are plans to build a refinery thirty miles from my house, but it has faced strong opposition. Oddly, people opposed to the refinery, claiming it would create so much pollution, have been vandalizing any signs and posters that promote the refinery.
Yes. It's a short term solution. Then we can use that money to research the long term solution: which is an alternative to fossil fuels.
That said, I think that the oil drilling (especially in delicate ecosystems) should be done very carefully and if that makes it more expensive and done slowly, I'm fine with that.
What are you hoping to acheive? There haven't been any oil shortages, and Texas light sweet crude is trading at 117 bucks a barrel like all other similiar grade oil on the exchange.
If you are worried about the high price of oil, drilling isn't going to move the price. A good deal of the price situation is that oil is traded in dollars, and the dollar is being debased.
Of couse we should by not doing so we are allowing all the power to the Arab countries and Venezuela who control the flow and price.
Write your Congress and Senate and let them know what you think. The environmentalists have gotten us in this mess. Now because of them we use corn for ethanol which is causing a food crisis in the third world.
Yes yes %26amp; yes, the Caribou won't mind %26amp; neither will the seals %26amp; whales. Altho oil in Alaska is pretty well useless as fuel, (high cost of refining) but it can be used for plastics which would take a chunk out of the oil we now comsume for that purpose.
Of course, but that would spoil things for the big oil companies who have been using government to maintain their monopoly. We have the best politicians money can buy.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147%26amp;q=oil+in+alaska%26amp;ei=OmMNSI-FBpSUrgKVh8i9BA check out this video, saw it a few weeks ago..
http://www.bdtonline.com/princeton/local鈥?/a>
Try this,
Yes. Emphatically. The present fiasco is costing the economy about a billion dollars a day.
If it would clear us from our dependency on foreign oil, it would be worth it. (Besides, the ecology we know is about to cease to exist anyway.)
Yes,yes,yes and yes.
Yes, start with the refineries.
Yes, and continue to research alternative fuels. Cover your bases, etc.
WITHOUT A DOUBT! To heck with the environmentalists. We need to be self sufficient.
I think the Middle East is tired of us by now.
WIthout a doubt. Yes.
Yes.
YES
yes... and build nuke plants too
No. It's far too expensive to drill for. Congress already turned it down when the GOP was in control of both houses and the White House. The U.S should lead the world in finding alternative ways to meet its energy needs. We would create a whole new economy here in the states that would create great jobs. Electric cars are our future, not more smog producing and respiratory disease producing oil.
People are building great electric cars now and the technology is only going to improve. Tesla, Phoenix motors are both new and exciting new industries that are meeting the needs of new and clean energy sources in lithium batteries. Even better batteries are making their way into the market as well. There are venture capitalists who want to create the infrastructure to support electric powered cars already in Silicon valley, California. Oil is the past, clean and quite battery power is our future. Can you image never having to fill up your car with gas or at least filling it up only once a month or once every other month?
It would be great!
http://www.businessweek.com/autos/conten鈥?/a>
http://iht.com/articles/2007/10/29/busin鈥?/a>
BTW, why would oil corporations build more oil refineries that would cut into their profits. They took out about a dozen refineries in 2000 in California where I live just to drive up gas prices for more profits.
http://www.senate.gov/~govt-aff/050202bl鈥?/a>
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_Inte鈥?/a>
This is up to the the private oil companies, not the government.
The reason they haven't done these things has essentially nothing to do with laws, and everything to do with economics.
hell no, we need to start using other natural resources we have available.
or your heart... because it's Black as Coal ?
No comments:
Post a Comment