A must read...

Truly amazing how many lefties want to continue to attempt to derail the topic. Apple being the exception who is actually attempting to discuss it.

For those who actually wish to discuss the topic rather than stamp their feet and throw a tantrum like Dung... I pose the following questions...

1) Is it smart to use food for energy production when it is highly inefficient AND people are starving in other parts of the world?

2) Is it smart to complain about the environmental protections on oil production HERE, when the alternative is to let someone else produce our oil/nat gas with us having NO control over the environmental consequences of that production?

3) Is it smart to ship our money overseas to foreign producers of oil and nat gas when that money could stay IN the US and benefit our economy?

4) Is it smart to ship jobs overseas when we could be putting people HERE to work?
 
Dungheap said:
Nothing Victor Davis Hanson has ever written can possibly be characterized as a must read, unless, of course, you love right-wing hackery. It's like me posting that something Noam Chomsky has written is a must read.
Click to expand...
how is the article wrong ?
 
Onceler said:
It's a little more than political leanings w/ Hanson. The guy really is in a league of his own when it comes to hackery. I'm someone who can listen to Savage or Limbaugh or whoever, but I really can't read Hanson anymore. He's that bad.

That said, I do support much more expanded domestic drilling & natural gas production & all that. So it's a very conflicting thread for me. I think I'll just leave it.
Click to expand...


You can support expanding domestic oil and natural gas production without pretending that it will solve all of our problems, which is the main problem with the VDS piece.
 
Superfreak said:
Again... you are thinking of the residents WHERE? There are residents in many locations... but if you really want to harp on that... then what is your objection to opening up more of ANWR?
Click to expand...
don't you know? Then it's the animals who will compensate the animals?
 
Dungheap said:
You can support expanding domestic oil and natural gas production without pretending that it will solve all of our problems, which is the main problem with the VDS piece.
Click to expand...

LMAO... thanks for proving you didn't actually read the article. This is your liberal debater Darla... woefully uninformed.

Yet more gas and oil can offer America critical breathing space until better technology makes wind, solar and electric power more price-competitive -- without massive federal subsidies and a marked reduction in our standard of living.
Click to expand...

Just one little blurb that Dung either ignores or didn't read. He doesn't pretend that it will solve everything. He didn't just stomp his feet and shout drilling more will solve everything as Dung the hack wants to pretend.
 
unless there is a completely new hydrogen power plant waiting to come out tomorrow afternoon, we are going to need oil for the next 2 or 3 decades. I would rather that oil come from our reserves and our money staying in our country.
 
Onceler said:
It's a little more than political leanings w/ Hanson. The guy really is in a league of his own when it comes to hackery. I'm someone who can listen to Savage or Limbaugh or whoever, but I really can't read Hanson anymore. He's that bad.

That said, I do support much more expanded domestic drilling & natural gas production & all that. So it's a very conflicting thread for me. I think I'll just leave it.
Click to expand...

I am conflicted on the issue, also. It is one of the topics, as a person who depends on the oil industry for my livelihood, so naturally, i support it, It is a necessary evil at this point, it needs regulation, but we also need alternative resources.

We should stop eating beef. It would free up massive amounts of agri products to use to feed people and to use as energy alternatives.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... thanks for proving you didn't actually read the article. This is your liberal debater Darla... woefully uninformed.



Just one little blurb that Dung either ignores or didn't read. He doesn't pretend that it will solve everything. He didn't just stomp his feet and shout drilling more will solve everything as Dung the hack wants to pretend.
Click to expand...


I was talking about this one:

In the current presidential campaign, three issues dominate: national security, fiscal solvency and high unemployment. Development of America's vast new gas and oil finds addresses all three at once.
Click to expand...
 
Socrtease said:
unless there is a completely new hydrogen power plant waiting to come out tomorrow afternoon, we are going to need oil for the next 2 or 3 decades. I would rather that oil come from our reserves and our money staying in our country.
Click to expand...

Exactly. In addition to what the article states, I would add that the oil subsidies should be taken away and re-directed to alt energy research and development. (and NO Obama, this doesn't mean simply handing money to Al Gore or your big political donors who have OBVIOUS flaws in their companies)
 
Dungheap said:
Where would you like me to start?
Click to expand...

The beginning would be nice. Or you could just start with the points that SF has highlighted, though I would suspect that it would be harder for you to disagree with those questions.

Seriously, (this is why I wondered if Lorax would chime in) to me this is where the left and the right should be able to come to some common ground....a discussion I have had on a few occasions with Lorax/Oncelor over the years. It boggles my mind to see that they can't.

For me it indicates or at least makes me speculate a few things. Many have too much of a vested interest in overseas oil production and don't want to see us become less dependent on it......many have too much of a vested interest in supporting the "science" that prohibits tapping more of our natural resources making us less dependent on foreign suppliers....and some just don't want to go along with something because the other side proposes it. There's more but that will do for now.
 
Rana said:
I am conflicted on the issue, also. It is one of the topics, as a person who depends on the oil industry for my livelihood, so naturally, i support it, It is a necessary evil at this point, it needs regulation, but we also need alternative resources.

We should stop eating beef. It would free up massive amounts of agri products to use to feed people and to use as energy alternatives.
Click to expand...
GIVE UP BEEF??!!!! :eek:
 
Socrtease said:
unless there is a completely new hydrogen power plant waiting to come out tomorrow afternoon, we are going to need oil for the next 2 or 3 decades. I would rather that oil come from our reserves and our money staying in our country.
Click to expand...

Start with that, while also making every effort to reduce 2 to 3 decades to 1 - 2 decades.
 
Rana said:
I am conflicted on the issue, also. It is one of the topics, as a person who depends on the oil industry for my livelihood, so naturally, i support it, It is a necessary evil at this point, it needs regulation, but we also need alternative resources.

We should stop eating beef. It would free up massive amounts of agri products to use to feed people and to use as energy alternatives.
Click to expand...

What? Whew, I didn't see that coming. I need to read more.
 
Superfreak said:
How about with WHERE you think it is wrong dipshit.
Click to expand...


Well, the first quote that you posted is a pretty good place to start:

With expanded exploration and conservation, the United States could also eventually supply half its own petroleum needs. If we were to eliminate just 5 million barrels of our current daily 9 million barrels of imported petroleum, the annual savings could reach nearly $200 billion per year. Eventually, the new gas and oil could add another 1.6 million new jobs and add up to nearly $1 trillion in federal revenue.
Click to expand...

I don't know what he means by "eventually" but he has to mean more than the next 25 years. The idea that we "eliminate just 5 million barrels of our current 9 million barrels of imported petroleum" is insane. "Just?" We produce about 5 million barrels per day currently. Pretending that we could magically double that production in any sort of near term window is unrealistic. The EIA projects an increase to about 6 million bpd by 2035, and that includes increased production due to technological innovation.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
GIVE UP BEEF??!!!! :eek:
Click to expand...

Yes, become a vegetarian. Look up the stats on that - it's the single biggest thing any individual can do to drastically lower your contribution to global warming, among other things. It's really stunning. If it's too much, and for most it is, become a vegetarian-except-for-weekends, or a vegetarian-before-5pm. Even that would matter. A lot.

That's something I've known for years. Right now I'm in the middle of studying up on the science. Honestly, I am sick and tired of listening to the deniers, but I've never read up on the science. It's something I've known I'd have to tackle for a while.

Actually, Superfreak inspired me to take it up.

That boy soooo needs an ass-kicking on the topic and I finally realized that like everything else in life; when you want something done and done well, do it. Don't wait for someone else.

So that's coming. 2012 and it's totally on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top