Obama's purposeful destruction of our energy industry. (arguments)

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by Taratova

Any oil that goes on the market regardless where it goes , relieves the demand and thus creates lower oil prices.

If demand is met and there is a glut , there will be lower prices.

With high oil prices, one should conclude...
1- Demand is high
2- Supply is low

Facts show that the production has never been higher. Does that mean the demand we have today, has never been higher?

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by Fox Terrier

I agree with you; that certainly would have a profound effect, just not a good one for the earth.

Would you care to explain that?

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by nononsenseguy

If we also opened up the ANWR to drilling and production, it would have an even more profound effect.

At what cost? For how long?

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by aus10

Do you have some kind of crystal ball that none of the rest of us have? Unless YOU work for the oil companies you can't say for sure can you? The fact is, most everyone spouting the oil will be sold for foreign consumption are probably just sitting in their armchairs spouting off what they've read in some propaganda... Hell... those of us in the industry yet not employed by the gas companies themselves can't tell you with any certainty what will happen to that oil down the road by the time the line would be built... even if construction started tomorrow...

We do know one thing for sure; if we don't build the pipeline and we don't take the oil, China will.

However, it has also been reported that Warren Buffet's railroads will be happy to deliver the oil ... at greater cost, and with a nice profit for him.

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by nononsenseguy

We do know one thing for sure; if we don't build the pipeline and we don't take the oil, China will.

China will... a reason why we must follow the rules and build the pipeline to the ports.

[chariega]

i'm still trying to figure out what's so wrong with lessening our dependence on a FINITE (meaning LIMITED) resource such as oil. Why shouldn't the US work more on rebuilding our infrastructure to accommodate trains and mass transit? It would lessen the density of many cities, decrease pollution, give people more options for affordable housing, and make the planet more livable for future generations.

I really don't get it. Do you want to milk the earth for all its worth and leave the problem for future generations to figure out?

[nononsenseguy]

Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost

At what cost? For how long?

It costs less today than it did 20years ago, and there is plenty of it.

[aus10]

Originally Posted by chariega

Why shouldn't the US work more on rebuilding our infrastructure to accommodate trains and mass transit?

While I don't disagree that rail and mass transit wouldn't help to lessen our use; it isn't some miraculous end all to our oil needs...........

[MTAtech]

Originally Posted by chariega

i'm still trying to figure out what's so wrong with lessening our dependence on a FINITE (meaning LIMITED) resource such as oil. Why shouldn't the US work more on rebuilding our infrastructure to accommodate trains and mass transit? It would lessen the density of many cities, decrease pollution, give people more options for affordable housing, and make the planet more livable for future generations.

I really don't get it. Do you want to milk the earth for all its worth and leave the problem for future generations to figure out?

1) Because it makes too much sense.
2) You will be competing against fuel companies that drop off luggage filled with cash to Congressfolk and Senators.

[Winter_Sucks]

Why is the oil industry making record profit and our output production is at record high? Does the GOP even attempt to fact check their arguments or do they just assume everyone doesn't have access to google?