toldailytopic: Should America do more to become oil independent?

[Nick M]

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

Reston, VA - North Dakota and Montana have an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in an area known as the Bakken Formation.

A U.S. Geological Survey assessment, released April 10, shows a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151 million barrels of oil.

Liberals changed the story and spread it so they could say "see, they exaggerated".

 

[Nick M]

Yes, we need to harvest it. Colorado has more HC's inground than Saudi Arabia. Harvest it while we build 100 more nuke plants.

 

[some other dude]

The reason it's cheap there, and ironically to a lesser extent here, is that there is a glut in the middle of the country. We have partial temporary isolation from the world market for oil. When they start pumping it out of here, which they are in the process of doing, the glut will end, and we'll see prices more in line with rest of the country and world.

Just because we drill it here doesn't mean it stays here. It's still a world market.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business...prices-why-fuel-is-so-cheap-in-denver/253504/

But American based producers won't export crude. They'll export refined product.

 

[MrDeets]

Perhaps you missed the story of the hundreds of ducks that were killed by tar sands oil up in Canada. And that's only one incident that went public, Unconventional oil makes giant ponds of toxic waste which can get into water supplies.

Yep. Save the ducks, but kill the babies. Winner winner, mallard dinner.

Most of the oil we have is hard to get and unconventional which means more expensive and more polluting.

Unconventional? Have you ever drilled a well? While we're on the subject, explain hard to get... hard to get compared to what??? Its just as tough to get out here as it is in dubai or russia or khazziakkshnapakistan....

 

[Lon]

Why?

I think what we will find is oil is cheaper, more efficient, and easier on the environment than any other fuel source. Discarded batteries will pose a far greater risk long term to the environment than expended oil fuels.

Furthermore.... why not use oil since it's so cheap and available? Can't we continue to develop other energy sources in the background and have them ready for when we really need them? Why the big push to stop using oil now?

We have oil. Lets use it.

I could be wrong, but it seems biodiesel has less environmental impact (among other options like natural gas etc.).

Other than that, I think I agree we won't get off of oil, but seeking and having available other sources would definitely give big oil a reason to lower prices.

 

[Granite]

I could be wrong, but it seems biodiesel has less environmental impact (among other options like natural gas etc.).

Other than that, I think I agree we won't get off of oil, but seeking and having available other sources would definitely give big oil a reason to lower prices.

Well when you're talking to someone who denies climate change, "not ravaging the environment" isn't an argument that usually makes a dent. But competitive sources of energy that are cleaner and more efficient would force the oil industry's hand...which may well explain why efforts to pursue such endeavors have been frustrated ever since we've entered the oil age.

 

[chrysostom]

But competitive sources of energy that are cleaner and more efficient would force the oil industry's hand...which may well explain why efforts to pursue such endeavors have been frustrated ever since we've entered the oil age.

are you frustrated by the Keystone Pipeline Project?

 

[jwp98]

I could be wrong, but it seems biodiesel has less environmental impact (among other options like natural gas etc.).

Other than that, I think I agree we won't get off of oil, but seeking and having available other sources would definitely give big oil a reason to lower prices.

I like biodiesel. It does have some water or lubricity issues. In fact if you blow up your $10k fuel pump under normal use, a motor company starting with the letter 'F' won't pay for it.

For some reason Americans have been slow to embrace diesel. A small turbo diesel with regenerative braking and an automated dry clutch would be better than a battery car IMO.

 

[eameece]

Do you have solar panels on your roof?

Do you drive a battery powered car?

What I do makes little difference. What counts is what the nation does. That is obvious to all except dinosaur trolls. And the nation can't act because of conservatives like you.

Oh well, one neg rep is enough for now.

 

[Nick M]

I'd rather we do more to become independent of oil.

At the same time, we keep closing domestic refineries and laying off thousands of workers, driving the price of gasoline up.

If we opened more refineries, especially those equipped to handle the heavy crude found in abundance in the lower 48, this would decrease the overall unemployment rate and contribute to lowering the price of gasoline.

A friend suggested we force the refinery companies to artificially raise the price of gas, and use the windfall to fund alternative fuel R&D...but if we did, the extra money would just make the oil barons richer without providing any benefit for the country as a whole.

Me too.

Do you have solar panels on your roof?

Do you drive a battery powered car?

No, and here is why they don't. They don't know any better, as most people don't know any better. They just assume Rachel Madow is providing facts, and not lies.

This is how it is with "alternative fuels". "Green" fuels are on the right, "Big Oil" is the left.

Hydrogen cars are a terrible idea. Not just because they cost a billion dollars, but because you can't go anywhere with it. Hydrogen has far more energy when it is bonded to carbon.

 

[Nick M]

I think what we will find is oil is cheaper, more efficient, and easier on the environment than any other fuel source. Discarded batteries will pose a far greater risk long term to the environment than expended oil fuels.

I have to add something to this also. Discarded batteries are deadly to people and the enviroment. However, batteries are not discarded. It is one of the few things that is 100% recyclable. I oppose most recycling because it exists only to shift where the money comes and goes, not because it is ecologically sound. But when you buy a battery for your car, give them the old one.

 

[some other dude]

What I do makes little difference.

And yet here you are with your daily whine. :darwinsm:

 

[some other dude]

No, and here is why they don't. They don't know any better, as most people don't know any better. They just assume Rachel Madow is providing facts, and not lies.

This is how it is with "alternative fuels". "Green" fuels are on the right, "Big Oil" is the left.

Hydrogen cars are a terrible idea. Not just because they cost a billion dollars, but because you can't go anywhere with it. Hydrogen has far more energy when it is bonded to carbon.

I like butanol. Great energy density, easy to make from big molecules (biosynthesis from organic matter) or little molecules (methane/methanol, ethanol, propane), and it can be used as a direct substitute for gasoline - similiar lubricative qualities, similiar vaporization characteristics.

And, it burns cleaner than gasoline or diesel.

 

[Nick M]

It has less energy than diesel, therefor it isn't cleaner. Becuase you have to burn more of it, and harvest much more from crude to get the same performance. Think of it that way.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php?order=A

You have to go down to 22 to see why tobacco is attacked by heathens like rusha. 72 is Exxon Mobil. Looking at the chart shows why liberals love some groups, and hate others. Making very strange bedfellows. Like Larry Flint and Gloria Steinem. Well, they have more than just that in common. The common denomiator is they are Christ hating pigs. Follow the money.

 

[chrysostom]

What I do makes little difference.

what you do determines how much you pay for energy

 

[some other dude]

It has less energy than diesel...

Less energy per volume, yes. But we're comparing a mixture of 8-20 carbon chains to a pure substance of four carbons. Maybe later I'll look up the density of diesel and n-butanol and the specific heats and do some calculations. :think:

 

[chrysostom]

did you ever live in an area where you could walk to
church
grocery store
library
restaurants
bars
I have and do
and
you should try it

 

[eameece]

what you do determines how much you pay for energy

That's true enough.

 

[Nick M]

We have a lot more natural gas than oil. Most of the oil we have is hard to get and unconventional which means more expensive and more polluting.

Natural gas comes from crude oil wells, incase anbody doesn't know. When dealing with a Christ hating pig like alateone, ao will lie to your face, because he hates you. Why else would he tell lies that lead to your harm if it wasn't hate?

 

[Alate_One]

Natural gas comes from crude oil wells, incase anbody doesn't know. When dealing with a Christ hating pig like alateone, ao will lie to your face, because he hates you. Why else would he tell lies that lead to your harm if it wasn't hate?

SOME natural gas comes from crude oil wells. It certainly doesn't come from tar sands or any unconventional oil sources.

You of course are a moron and will repeatedly assert that anyone that disagrees with you is a liar regardless of the facts.

The NEW push in natural gas is not coming from crude oil exploration but from specific natural gas exploration that can be accessed through hydraulic fracking. The gas comes from shale, shale is simply rock that has the gas trapped inside.

This is a new technology that has made previously unavailable gas reserves (which are not associated with crude oil), especially in the eastern us, recoverable. Not to say this stuff is risk free either . . .

Fracking

The distribution of shale gas in the USA.