Aviation fuel - price of crude...

Up above $53/barrel now.... Can we *puhleeeze* start developing our own oil
in Alaska; off the coast of Calif. and the gulf now??? Or should we just
keep on doing what we are doing ... nothing... in total denial and keep paying
out the anal cavity to other countries.

In my opinion it is way past time to start developing our own oil here at home.
Put Americans to work and help our own economy at the same time and reduce
the trade deficit while we are at it. And why not start building a few more
nuclear power plants to replace some aging fossil fuel plants????

But NO.... if the environmentalists have their way we'll be paying $20
a gallon for gas (GA will no longer exist) and we'll be reminiscing over
some ripped and out of date sectionals by candlelight.

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
[...]
But NO.... if the environmentalists have their way we'll be paying $20
a gallon for gas (GA will no longer exist) and we'll be reminiscing over
some ripped and out of date sectionals by candlelight.

Not to worry. We'll never have to pay $20/gallon for gas. After all, don't
you remember? As a self-professed expert posted right here, oil will never
cost more than $60/barrel. According to that guy, we're nearly done --
forever -- with price increases for oil.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...40xmission.com

kontiki wrote:

Can we *puhleeeze* start developing our own oil
in Alaska; off the coast of Calif. and the gulf now???

Correct me if I am wrong but I do believe that one of the areas that
your country has repeatedly turned down is the states that contain
shale oil.

Up here in Northern Alberta (Canada) we have huge amounts of what is
called tarsands where the oil is held in suspension in sand. This is
similar to which you have in some of the lower 48 states

It's black, oily, hard as rock and that's in the summertime.

You ought to see the equipment, and technology needed to extract the oil
especially in the middle of winter.

When our government first allowed development years ago when the price
of a barrel of oil was much lower it was very difficult with technology
and costs at that time for the companies to make a profit.

Now 30 years later, with new technology, and yes oil being worth much
more per barrel the companies are able to make money with that process.

There have been numerous politicians including governors from oil shale
producing states that have come up to see for themselves how it works
but to date I don't believe any State in the US is actually mining it
in any way shape or form... correct me if I am wrong.

Here in Northern Alberta we probably are supplying about 15 - 20
percent of our daily Canadian consumption and it is generally agreed
that the reserves in oil are far greater than that of Saudi Arabia plus
a few other smaller oil producing countries.

There are lots of start up operations currently in the area testing the
methadology, market, etc. but the two links below will take you to the
two large companies that have been in existance now for many years.


http://www.syncrude.com/

http://www.suncor.com/start.aspx

You are quite correct... thanks for the response. There are extensive
oil shale reserves over and above that liquid stuff we have in areas
of Alaska and off the coasts.

Nothing will be done however until we can eliminate the naysayers...
those who continually raise the argument that "our reserves are not
as big as Saudi Arabia's so why even bother?. Lets all just get used
to conserving and doing without (except politicians of course) and
someday [maybe] we'll have alternative forms..."

Using that logic the vast majority of people can argue that they will
never, ever have the vast monetary reserves that John Kerry or Oprah
Winfrey have (to name a few) so why even bother to work hard and try
to make more money??? Lets just all give up... plan to live simpler
lives, go barefoot and ride bikes like other 3rd world countries and
just shut up and vote for John Kerry and be happy about it.

Well apparently thousands of illegal immigrants a day come here for
a better life than they have in their country so I guess they haven't
gotten the message yet.

"kontiki" wrote in message
...
Up above $53/barrel now.... Can we *puhleeeze* start developing our own
oil
in Alaska; off the coast of Calif. and the gulf now??? Or should we
just
keep on doing what we are doing ... nothing... in total denial and keep
paying
out the anal cavity to other countries.

In my opinion it is way past time to start developing our own oil here at
home.
Put Americans to work and help our own economy at the same time and reduce
the trade deficit while we are at it. And why not start building a few
more
nuclear power plants to replace some aging fossil fuel plants????

But NO.... if the environmentalists have their way we'll be paying $20
a gallon for gas (GA will no longer exist) and we'll be reminiscing over
some ripped and out of date sectionals by candlelight.


We we could and it is a great idea to pay the $53/barrel to ourselves
instead of others BUT the problem remains that all of the refineries just
about everywhere are a 100% cap right now.

We need to build more refineries and you can blame the lack of them on the
Envirowacks.

kontiki writes:

Up above $53/barrel now.... Can we *puhleeeze* start developing our own oil
in Alaska; off the coast of Calif. and the gulf now??? Or should we just
keep on doing what we are doing ... nothing... in total denial and keep paying
out the anal cavity to other countries.

Sure. While we're at it, can we *puhleeeze* have a rational energy
policy that includes conservation, like raising CAFE standards? How
about encouraging solar energy panels for homes, especially in the
Southwest (Calif-Nevada-Ariz-NM-Texas-Col) via tax incentives? How
about dropping bogus political distractions like hydrogen for cars,
which is simply another *form* of energy, *not* new energy?

This country developed the atom bomb and sent men to the moon when it
wanted to...if we elect politicians with real honesty and courage, we
can *easily* do it again and become energy independent of the
middle-east.

"Bob Fry" wrote in message


Sure. While we're at it, can we *puhleeeze* have a rational energy
policy that includes conservation, like raising CAFE standards?

I'm all for a rational energy policy, but how does imposing MPG standards on
manufacturers achieve those goals? Why not let the market decide? As shown
by the waiting list for the latest generation of hybrid cars, there is pent
up demand for high mileage cars and the major manufacturers are responding
to that demand.

As a rule, the less government intervention, the better.

How
about encouraging solar energy panels for homes, especially in the
Southwest (Calif-Nevada-Ariz-NM-Texas-Col) via tax incentives?

How about just a flat Federal income tax? I local jurisdictions want to
provide tax breaks, more power to them.

How
about dropping bogus political distractions like hydrogen for cars,
which is simply another *form* of energy, *not* new energy?

Um...what "new energy", for example?

FWIW, I like the excitement about hydrogen. It may turn out to be
completely infeasible, but at least it's getting people to think beyond the
status quo.

This country developed the atom bomb and sent men to the moon when it
wanted to...if we elect politicians with real honesty and courage, we
can *easily* do it again and become energy independent of the
middle-east.

Agreed.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

It does not really matte guys, with the Kyoto Protocol going into effect
soon, the world with have to dramatically cut down on production of harmful
gases. Don't worry about the cost of gas it will be a null point when it is
not needed to drive the us population to work everyday.

You also have to think of the point of technology and the way the world
works. Look at the Internal combustion engine and the incredible
in-efficient way it burns fuel. We must ask ourselves why have we not come
up with better technologies? Mr. Big oil doesn't like it.


"John T" wrote in message
news:1097205380.tfcDDVgHhsNXJeJEYLKL8g@bubbanews.. .
"Bob Fry" wrote in message


Sure. While we're at it, can we *puhleeeze* have a rational energy
policy that includes conservation, like raising CAFE standards?

I'm all for a rational energy policy, but how does imposing MPG standards
on manufacturers achieve those goals? Why not let the market decide? As
shown by the waiting list for the latest generation of hybrid cars, there
is pent up demand for high mileage cars and the major manufacturers are
responding to that demand.

As a rule, the less government intervention, the better.

How
about encouraging solar energy panels for homes, especially in the
Southwest (Calif-Nevada-Ariz-NM-Texas-Col) via tax incentives?

How about just a flat Federal income tax? I local jurisdictions want to
provide tax breaks, more power to them.

How
about dropping bogus political distractions like hydrogen for cars,
which is simply another *form* of energy, *not* new energy?

Um...what "new energy", for example?

FWIW, I like the excitement about hydrogen. It may turn out to be
completely infeasible, but at least it's getting people to think beyond
the status quo.

This country developed the atom bomb and sent men to the moon when it
wanted to...if we elect politicians with real honesty and courage, we
can *easily* do it again and become energy independent of the
middle-east.

Agreed.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

"John T" wrote in message
news:1097205380.tfcDDVgHhsNXJeJEYLKL8g@bubbanews.. .
"Bob Fry" wrote in message


Sure. While we're at it, can we *puhleeeze* have a rational energy
policy that includes conservation, like raising CAFE standards?

I'm all for a rational energy policy, but how does imposing MPG standards
on manufacturers achieve those goals? Why not let the market decide? As
shown by the waiting list for the latest generation of hybrid cars, there
is pent up demand for high mileage cars and the major manufacturers are
responding to that demand.

As a rule, the less government intervention, the better.

How
about encouraging solar energy panels for homes, especially in the
Southwest (Calif-Nevada-Ariz-NM-Texas-Col) via tax incentives?

How about just a flat Federal income tax? I local jurisdictions want to
provide tax breaks, more power to them.

How
about dropping bogus political distractions like hydrogen for cars,
which is simply another *form* of energy, *not* new energy?

Um...what "new energy", for example?

FWIW, I like the excitement about hydrogen. It may turn out to be
completely infeasible, but at least it's getting people to think beyond
the status quo.

This country developed the atom bomb and sent men to the moon when it
wanted to...if we elect politicians with real honesty and courage, we
can *easily* do it again and become energy independent of the
middle-east.

Agreed.

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_s...veloperid=4415
____________________

John T wrote:
"Bob Fry" wrote in message

[snip]

This country developed the atom bomb and sent men to the moon when it
wanted to...if we elect politicians with real honesty and courage, we
can *easily* do it again and become energy independent of the
middle-east.

Agreed.

personally, I wish I could vote for Jed Bartlett....