Democrats block every attempt to explore and open new oil fields in the United States such as ANWR?

Question

and in the Gulf of Mexico, which would have increased supply and reduced our import of oil from the volatile Middle East. If we had started drilling in ANWR when first approved by Republicans, and had encouraged construction of new oil refineries, we simply would not have the shortages - real and imaginary - that we do today.

Democrats also added to today’s crisis by passing a Windfall Profits Tax against oil companies in 1980, right after a similar big jump in retail prices. The effect was a decline in both new or improved oil refineries, and a curtailment of exploration for new oil reserves.

The nonpartisan Congressional Research Service reported in 1990 that the effect of the 1980-87 Windfall Profits Tax, "reduced domestic oil production between 3 and 6 percent, and increased oil imports from between 8 and 16 percent ... this made the U.S. more dependent upon imported oil."

The Sierra Club wing of the Democratic Party and their host of affiliate "environmental" groups are also hugely responsible for today’s oil problems. Their decades-long opposition to new oil refineries and domestic oil fields, nuclear power plants, coal, and even hydroelectric facilities has led to a near stagnant supply of energy, in the face of constantly growing demand.

That has finally caught up with us in the form of skyrocketing prices and unsteady supplies, which was precisely their intent. Radical environmentalists, as outlined in former Vice President Al Gore’s book "Earth in the Balance", believe that low prices for energy are actually bad for the environment, and that $5 a gallon gasoline is what it will take to force us evil consumers to conserve by giving up suburbia for Stalin-style public housing projects, where we can be better supervised into adopting the liberal point of view on everything.

Mr Osama You always Say things but rarely back them up with more than capitilzation. NEXT!!!!!!

Answer 1

Did it ever occur to YOU that it does not matter if we bring these oilfields on line anyway...IN the LONG RUN

The energy crisis starts in the bedroom......thats right

PLOP...another baby monster FUEL HOG AMERICAN just hit the bedsheets. 20 years from now the monster will want his own SUV and jet ski.

Answer 2

You'd be surpried to know that there were quite a few republicans that were against drilling in the ANWR too. The second part of your logic is that there isn't enough oil ther to really make an effective difference in our nations oil addiction. Research shows that the oil in the ANWR would only last approximately 6 months at the rate this country uses oil.

A more logical solution would be to take all the money that would be spent on drilling in the ANWR and spend that money on investing on alternative fuel sources.

Oh wait that won't happen because oil corporations and thier lobbyists are loged so far up our governments a$$ for that too happen.

America, had the perfect oportunity to break its addiction to Middle East oil, after the oil embargo of the 1970's and big oil used its influence to make sure that didn't happen. Brazil took advanatge of that siutation and isn't as dependent on foreign oil as we are. Until people start to realize this, very little is likely to change.

Answer 3

You need more facts & numbers. This is not a partisan issue. ANWR & the Gulf of Mexico are drops in the bucket.

For ANWR, the EIA (the Energy Information Administration, which is known to be very optimistic & pro-oil) estimates that there are 6-16 billion barrels, with 6 having a 95% probability, and 16 with 5%. So it's more likely on the lower range.

For the Gulf of Mexico, total reserves are between 3-15 billion barrels.

Oil can't be drilled out all at once. The EIA estimates that ANWR could produce 780,000 bpd (barrels per day) at PEAK production in 2024 (oil fields need a while to reach peak production). The Gulf could produce about 3-500,000 bpd.

That's a total of about 1.3 million bpd.

Do you know how much oil the US uses per day?
20.8 MILLION, and growing 1-2% annually (historically).

The US only self-produces 5.14 million, declining 1-5% annually.

So how can ANWR & the Gulf increase supply and reduce oil imports with 1.3 mpbd, representing 5% of current US consumption???? They CAN'T. They can barely stem the flow of blood - they certainly can't stop it.

Prices are higher EVERYWHERE in the world, not just the US. As long as global demand (now at around 85 mbpd) keeps going up 2-3% annually, and global oil production stays at its current plateau of +/-85 mbpd, then Higher Prices = Normal. Flat Supply + Growing Demand = Higher Prices.

Oil is a finite resource. We've already used up 1 trillion barrels, and there are about 1 trillion left. Unfortunately, not all halves are equal. The remaining half is harder & costlier to discover, recover, extract, and refine. All the world's older oil fields are past peak production and drying up, and there are not enough new ones coming online to replace them - because there aren't that many, and they're small. An estimated 95% of all oil has been discovered. We're at the END OF CHEAP OIL.

That's why oil companies are spending progressively less each year on Exploration, and $0 on new refineries. Instead, they've been spending their dough on technology, stock buybacks, and M&A.

So who's pushing ANWR? The oil companies.

Who's saying ANWR can save us from high gas prices & oil imports??? Republican politicians in bed with the oil companies. The same Republican politicos who don't know JACK about oil.

Or, maybe they DO know about oil, but they're selling these lies to their Party Faithful & the General Public - both of which don't know Jack about oil, either.

So everybody just believes the lies - which is much easier to do than to look at the facts & numbers. Because the Truth is often much, much worse than it seems.

At 20 mbpd, energy independence is a myth. Alternative Fuels (AF) ??? At 1% of all oil consumption, the US GAO estimates that AF can displace 4% of US oil needs by 2015.
There's not enough investment, technology, and time. So the only gas prices will go down is if global demand goes down EVERYWHERE, not just in the US.

And if oil prices stay high worldwide, just like in the 70s, we'll have worldwide recession, inflation, and unemployment - perhaps long-term, since this time, it's not a temporary shortage, but a permanent one.

Oil is a finite resource which is becoming scarce - therefore, the economy that it fuels, will also be finite.

Google "Peak Oil" and wake yourself up. Don't worry, it's a nonpartisan issue. Although I'm not one myself, I would appreciate it if you stop blaming the Democrats for everything. It obscures the Truth About Reality. The fact is, we all got ourselves in this mess because of our car-based culture & infrastructure. And to think that our lifestyle could last forever on a finite resource is pretty short-sighted.

Answer 4

I'd consider that issue pretty well wrapped up, Thorgirl--you definitely did your homework!
All I can add is actually inspired by a response to another of your posts today that suggested the Dems want oil and electric companies to run charities. He nailed that one!
That's PRECISELY what they want for practically every facet of business. If it could be even remotely tied to the public's "well being" (*cough* meaning we're highly dependent on the private businesses providing the services and don't want the government involved), then the Dems want to control it, regulate the profitability out of it, or tax it to death. (Health care, oil, electric, airlines, internet, telephone, etc..) It would actually be pretty funny if it weren't going to hurt our country--how many times have you sat back and gone "Wow! Our government and/or its employees did a REALLY good job!" (Exception being the military, 'cause we rock! LOL)
Anyway, they see a company succeeding and fulfilling a vital need and just ACHE to get their fingers into the pot-o-dough... Yeah, 'cause big government is going to do SUCH a great job running the oil companies and hospitals! Sheesh.
They really don't understand that if there's no money to be made, the jobs simply won't get done! Why would an oil company invest billions into building a new refinery given the current hostility in the business environment--and hostility of environmental wackos!?
Sigh. I need chocolate!

Answer 5

Wow, what a great question. Full of carefully selected facts, perhaps, but only presenting one possible solution: More oil to satisfy our growing oil needs. No mention of conservation or alternative energy. So what if we despoil the entire planet, destroying natural areas that can never be replaced? As long as we tap out whatever oil supplies they have, who cares? And when that oil runs out, we'll just go looking for more. And when all the oil runs out, and we're left with no energy because we didn't look into conservation and alternative sources, and the Earth has been rendered unlivable, so what? That'll be our children's and grandchildren's problem, not our's.

Typical shortsightedness and finger-pointing, without looking for an actual, workable solution.

Answer 6

Agreed, People who have never been to those places think they know what is best for them. I lived in a small Alaskan town for a while It was destroyed when F'ing Serra Club members got clear cutting outlawed. The woods arround this town was fast growing soft wood trees that are good for only one thing, making paper. The town had been harvesting the trees for about 80 years using a very sound method. The cut a strip of trees about 1 mile wide and 10 miles long out from the town in a wheel spoke. they then moved 30 degrees around the town for the next years' cut by doing this the first strip was totally regrown before they got back to it. The wild life arround the town was thriving and about 6 times what is there now. The Congress outlawed this practice and the town died in about 3 years. No one who was involved in shutting down an entire industry had ever visited us or our state; however, they knew better how to live our lives and take care of our livelyhoods than we did.

I will stop now or Yahoo will erase me.

Answer 7

KT, I put an extra spoon full of chocolate creamer in my coffee and invoked your name. lol. Good stuff.

There are two words that Liberal Democrats do not understand: moderation & reality. Humans have needs, the earth and enviroment provide for those needs. If used in moderation, all will circular. It's illogical to think in an all or nothing rut.

Answer 8

Your facts are just wrong, as usual. Potential ANWR oil reserves are way over blown by the supporters of drilling there. It is unknown how much oil is there but it is thought to be relatively small and all figures about ANWR oil reserves are based on probabilities, not hard facts.

Answer 9

probable simply by fact they found out that even now, the government gets a greater share of oil gross sales than the oil agencies do. Oil agencies save approximately 7% of entire gross sales that they earn by skill of exploring, extracting, refining, and turning in a product to the human beings - the government gets extra advantageous than two times as various the gross sales from oil sales for doing no longer something. Taxing the oil agencies decreased their incentives for appearing fee based events like extra exploration, construction of refineries, extraction and transport, that may in straight forward terms harm grant much extra. it might in straight forward terms worsen an already undesirable subject. to boot, oil agencies do no longer pay taxes, they push them directly to the buyer. This coverage might develop expenses, no longer push them down. base line, providence earnings taxes punish fulfillment. it truly is consistently a bad coverage and is much extra so now. the human beings pushing this law of course have an incredibly constrained information of the financial impact it might have.

Answer 10

Why do they believe that taxing the use of gasoline or other energy will reduce the use of gasoline or other energy, but taxing work and investment will not reduce work and investment.

They are either insane or are brainwashed.

Answer 11

Very interesting points. But you are using facts and the far left cant stand dealing with truth and facts... If they did then they would lose and they can't have that.

Besides we have to think about the feelings of the tiny field mice... It would make them sad if they had an oil derrick near by.