atomdomb

While we wait for an alternative energy source we keep voting against looking for oil here at home to help ourselves out.
House Subcommittee Rejects Plan to Open U.S. Waters to More Oil Exploration Wednesday, June 11, 2008 WASHINGTON A House subcommittee on Wednesday rejected a Republican-led effort to open up more U.S. coastal waters to oil exploration.
Rep. John Peterson, R-Pa., spearheaded the effort. His proposal would open up U.S. waters between 50 and 200 miles off shore for drilling. The first 50 miles off shore would be left alone.But the plan failed Wednesday on a 9-6, party-line vote in a House appropriations subcommittee, which was considering the proposal as part of an Interior Department spending package.

With record oil prices and gas prices projected to hover around the $4 mark for the rest of the summer, Republicans have ratcheted up their efforts to open up oil exploration along U.S. coastline. But the long-sought change has so far been unsuccessful. Most offshore oil production and exploration has been banned since a federal law passed in 1981. "We are kidding ourselves if we think we can drill our way out of these problems," House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey, D-Wis., said during the bill mark-up session. For his part, Peterson said: "There is no valid reason for Congress to keep the country from energy resources it needs." "I'm disappointed. I did not expect a partisan vote today. I felt we had a chance of winning this. A lot of Democrats have been talking favorably about my amendment. They know we have to do something. But today was an absolute show of Pelosi power, it was dealt from the top down," Peterson said later, speaking with FOX News, adding he was open to other energy solutions, including wind and solar power. According to Peterson's office, the U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates that 86 billion barrels of oil and 420 trillion cubic feet of natural gas can be found along the U.S. outer continental shelf, the area affected by the ban. Peterson is not alone in his desire to open up the shelf. An effort to unlock the resources has been underway in Congress in recent years, and several interest groups are backing the effort, too. "Tapping America's huge reserve of deep ocean energy helps us fight terrorism and increases our domestic energy supply, which will help put downward pressure on gasoline prices," Greg Schnacke, President of Americans for American Energy, said in a news release, adding: "With Americans suffering at the gas pump and with higher energy bills, it's a no-brainer that the OCS should be developed." But the proposal has faced staunch opposition from environmental groups from states where the shorelines are under consideration for drilling, like Florida. Sierra Club lands program director Athan Manuel told a House committee Wednesday that drilling has been unsuccessful in driving costs down.

"The disappointing part about some of the energy policies being promoted (is) that it calls for more drilling when drilling really is the problem. And all we've got to show for pretty aggressive (domestic) drilling for the last 35 years is, again, $4 for a gallon of gas," Manuel said, adding "since the first Arab oil shock in the 1970s, the U.S. has produced almost 90 billion barrels of oil since then, so we've tried drilling our way out of the problem and it just hasn't worked." Environment Florida spokeswoman Holly Binns told the Media General news group that offshore drilling has no immediate impact on prices.
"It would take anywhere from seven to 10 years to bring those resources to shore — to have any measurable impact on supply,” Binns said, advocating renewable energy sources. Democrats held their own series of events on Capitol Hill Wednesday to focus attention on global warming and energy independence, but drilling is not on the agenda. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday ongoing calls for more drilling "is the Johnny One-Note of the Republican Party." Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., dismissed the need for oil explanation, speaking with FOX News Wednesday.
"There are 68 million acres right now that is available for exploration right now that the oil companies have — an area the size of Illinois and Georgia. We ought to be focusing on doing that," Blumenauer said, adding that a legal gap he referred to as the "Enron loophole" exempts energy trading from oversight of the U.S. Commodities Futures Trading Commission.

And not surprisingly, the issue has spilled into the ream of presidential politics as well. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., criticized Democrats, including fellow Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., over recent comments Obama made regarding gas prices. The comments that McConnell referred to were given during an interview with CNBC. Discussing rising gasoline prices, Obama said: "I think that I would have preferred a gradual adjustment. The fact that this is such a shock to American pocketbooks is not a good thing. Obama also said that "if we take some steps right now to help people make the adjustment, first of all by putting more money into their pockets, but also by encouraging the market to adapt to these new circumstances more quickly, particularly U.S. automakers, then I think ultimately, we can come out of this stronger and have a more efficient energy policy than we do right now. McConnell, honing in on Obama's referral to "gradual" price increases, said Obama's remarks are evidence that Obama believes "rising gas prices aren't the problem. The problem, he suggested, is that they've gone up too fast. He said he would prefer a gradual adjustment." He continued: "Whether it's shutting down domestic exploration in large areas both onshore and offshore, instituting a moratorium on oil shale development, increasing the gas tax, or refusing to pursue coal to liquids, Democrats long ago implemented a 'gradual adjustment' on gas prices that's reflected today in the $4.05 Americans are paying for a gallon of gas."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,365627,00.html
other links with same info...
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25105982
http://www.newsday.com/news/dp-local...,6770941.story

Patters

I think there are many reasons we're not looking for more oil:

(1) It does not address our short term needs in that it takes time to find more oil
(2) Investing in oil exploration discourages investment in alternative energy
(3) We are taking oil out of the ground far faster than it is being replenished; the world is running out of oil
(4) Many remaining oil reserves are in hard to reach places that will require enormous amounts of power. (I read that we now find 6 barrels of oil for every barrel of energy spent, whereas in the past we found 100 barrels for every barrel spent.)
(5) Beause of the costs, finding more oil may sustain our energy needs, but it's not likely to lower prices
(6) Oil exploration does not guarantee finding generous reserves
(7) Oil and oil exploration can seriously damage the environment

BelichickFan

It's one of the biggest questions of our time.

No we aren't kidding ourselves. No-one is saying we can get enough oil to be self sufficient for decades but if we added just a small amount (20% or so) to the oil we don't have to buy we would not only save money but drive the price down based on supply and demand.

I wish we could have a national vote on this one issue and see how it turns out.

BelichickFan

What a horrible list.

Because it won't last forever we shouldn't get what we've got ? Seriously, Patters, take the partisan hat off and think for once. Republicans are willing to admit our party *****ed up in Iraq and on spending under Bush - why won't you admit your party (with some Republicans) is leading the charge to high oil prices by intentionally limiting the supply.

Harry Boy

If Billy Blue Dress didn't Veto the Alaska Oil Drilling bill we would be getting Oil from there today.

Democrats love to fly around in their private jets, drive around in their SUV's, heat their mansions, keep their wives fur coats cool with their AC's, but the screwy looney bastards HATE OIL-----

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

BelichickFan

The funny thing is they say we can't drill ourselves out of this problem when that's exactly how we will solve the problem of not enough oil.

When my kid isn't ready for his history test I wonder if he'll say "Dad, I can't read my way out of this problem". Well, in fact, son, that's exactly what you can do. But, Dad, there isn't enough time tonight to know everything for tomorrow. Well, son, read as much as you can. - or the alternative - well, son, if you can't read the whole book tonight, why bother reading at all.

Patters

wistahpatsfan

You forgot that burning fossil fuels causes a number of physical ailments, diseases, and syndromes in people and animals. I guess that could be covered under the evironmental point, but I think that needs to be emphasized. The "Burn-It-All" types don't seem to care about that.

BelichickFan

We have no choice right now do we ? Several of the Republicans here, including me, are on record as being behind a big national project for alternative energy. But that's no closer than oil and we know oil works.

fleabassist1

We are running out of oil?



http://www.ncpa.org/pub/bg/bg159/index.html#c

__________________
GO PATRIOTS!!!!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.