• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. to Be World’s Top Oil Producer in 5 Years

Build refineries, drill holes. Pull natural gas out of the ground.

Care to back these innocuous words of yours with some facts, numbers and locations?
 
Jesus Christ. You guys have lost it. You have no economic sense whatsoever, do you? Any FREE energy alternative would have an EROEI of infinity, since it's free. People (not just conservative people) will happily take whatever is cheapest.



What TF is "socio-psychopathic neurosis?" Trying to suddenly be a psychiatrist, are we?

Incorrect statement

The US economic system is based upon a protectionist Fascist Corpocratic regime that detests free market discipline.

This is why the USA follows the corporate profit path.

OIL implies wars, wars means US corporate profit.

Nuclear energy is the most expensive, most unclean and most dangerous energy forms and yet the US pursues it with its corporate fascist model in the most violent manner

Are you aware that you cannot INSURE any nuclear power plant anywhere in the world?

So your CHEAPEST option scenario is kind of a silly statement isnt it?

Perhaps you need to read up some more on what your fascist US corpocracy stands for and what it is doing domestically and globally before you attempt to engage in discoursal banter in here

cheers
 
Industry analysts and players have been quietly wondering for a little while now if the reticence and slow pace of approving new LNG terminals is a subtle form of protectionism to keep domestic natural gas and consequently electricity rates low. A few Congressman like Ed Markey in Massachusetts have been directly attacking the approval of new export licenses, but they have been voices in the wilderness so far. With the late support from President Obama in the last election cycle it seems more favorable that approval will go forward but its still uncertain.

But yes, of course exporting natural gas will cause a rise in prices since right now the US is a massively oversupplied and almost air-tight market. However it also stimulates efforts to expand gas exploration and production and prevents industries from ramping down production and expansion due to an ultra-cheap and oversupplied market. Moreover it provides important revenue generation for the US, spurs further energy innovation, and creates jobs in a new and expanding industry. Moreover expanding natural gas production from shale reserves and hydrofracking also increases, at least for the foreseeable future, crude production due to the associated exploitation of light tight crude deposits.

We might even hit the holy grail and discover an innovative way to approach oil shale and actually make it economical and commercial. But we'll see.
 
Being happy we can produce more oil is like being happy you can buy more crack. I'll never understand the right wing hatred for cleaner energy sources which are available to us.

Why don't you impress us now with you understanding of science and engineering, by explaining to us all how in a span of five years or less you will execute a plan to install an entire infrastructure based on another energy source? Your hatred of oil, blinds you to the fact that it is a very portable and energy dense source. And for this reason it has been used for over 100 years. Tell me how you will fly jet aircraft without oil. One day we will probably find other forms of propulsion, but they are a long way off. In the mean time, oil is what we use so get over it. There is no rightwing hatred for cleaner energy, there is only what can currently be engineered and what cannot. You seem to fail to grasp the scientific limit currently in place, and that other forms of propulsion are many years away.
 
Last edited:

You will find if you try very hard and are completely honest with yourself that public liability for Nuclear power plants is not provided by any instuace group in the world.

What nuclear power operators do is put about 100 million dollars each into a pool which is then used for liability in case of a major nuclear meltdown

In the USA, there are about 110 reactors and so about 11 billion dollars is available in case of a nuclear disaster

And we know from Fukushima, 11 Billion dollars is chicken ****.

Fukushima has resulted in TEPCO going out of business and in fact being nationalised by the Japanese government. TEPCO was the largest power company in Asia.

The clean up costs for Fukushima will be about 1/2 trillion dollars, with some analysts saying this figure is conservatibe and may just apply to the next 25 years only.

So you can delude yourself and assume that you can obtain full public liability insurance for nuclear power plants
 
Similarly, I would like to see a few states join together to create quasi-public corporations to build refineries to sell only in their states at or near cost which would put pressure on big oil to stop manufacturing supply shortages to run prices up.

Liberal states in particular would benefit from that because they have listened to the eco nuts the most on additives so their gasoline blends always cost more due to limited refining capacity for their states' exact blend.
 
Why don't you impress us now with you understanding of science and engineering, by explaining to us all how in a span of five years or less you will execute a plan to install an entire infrastructure based on another energy source? Your hatred of oil, blinds you to the fact that it is a very portable and energy dense source. And for this reason it has been used for over 100 years. Tell me how you will fly jet aircraft without oil. One day we will probably find other forms of propulsion, but they are a long way off. In the mean time, oil is what we use so get over it. There is no rightwing hatred for cleaner energy, there is only what can currently be engineered and what cannot. You seem to fail to grasp the scientific limit currently in place, and that other forms of propulsion are many years away.

The USA makes upi about 5% of the total global population and yet consumes about 1/3 of the worlds resources and generates about 30% of the worlds waste and pollution

A totally unsustainably decadent situation dont you think?

Is it any wonder that the US military needs to invade countless countries, slaughter civilians and theive their resources on behalf of its fascist corporate tyrannt masters?

You speak about science and engineering and yet your delusional introspective neurosis does not allow you to see your own national psychopathy and global terrorist activities

A trait that was very common in NAZI Germany during the 1930s
 
Care to back these innocuous words of yours with some facts, numbers and locations?

Apparently they fail to teach economics 101 at Karl Marx University, but it goes like this:

When the value of a product, determined by a demand, makes the production thereof a profitable proposition, someone will produce. This is called the supply side of the equation. As long as there are not other limitations, demand and supply will reach an equilibrium at a mutually agreeable price. Other limitations might include a lack of raw goods, limiting supply, other competing products, or government intervention, which will increase or increase costs artificially.

In the case of carbon fuel, there is no shortage of raw goods, between coal, oil, and NG, the US has at least decades of raw goods. Demand is rising, and with an abundance of raw goods, the potential for profitable exploitation is valid. Where there is profit, there will be production. It is the government that is standing in the way, and fuel costs have near doubled in the past 4 years.

As for where, there is ANWHR, the gulf, Idaho, Penn, Colorado, South Dakota, and others to numerous to mention.

The number is simple. we need to produce approximately 13 million barrels more than current production to make ourselves self sufficient.
 
The USA makes upi about 5% of the total global population and yet consumes about 1/3 of the worlds resources and generates about 30% of the worlds waste and pollution

A totally unsustainably decadent situation dont you think?

Is it any wonder that the US military needs to invade countless countries, slaughter civilians and theive their resources on behalf of its fascist corporate tyrannt masters?

You speak about science and engineering and yet your delusional introspective neurosis does not allow you to see your own national psychopathy and global terrorist activities

A trait that was very common in NAZI Germany during the 1930s

This ridiculous rambling will no doubt bring you shrieks of glee from the extremist ilk, but will wholly unimpress most thinking minds.
 
The USA makes upi about 5% of the total global population and yet consumes about 1/3 of the worlds resources and generates about 30% of the worlds waste and pollution

A totally unsustainably decadent situation dont you think?

Is it any wonder that the US military needs to invade countless countries, slaughter civilians and theive their resources on behalf of its fascist corporate tyrannt masters?

You speak about science and engineering and yet your delusional introspective neurosis does not allow you to see your own national psychopathy and global terrorist activities

A trait that was very common in NAZI Germany during the 1930s

Care to back these innocuous words of yours with some facts, numbers and locations?
 
This ridiculous rambling will no doubt bring you shrieks of glee from the extremist ilk, but will wholly unimpress most thinking minds.

I see, so you cannot render any counter argument, either moral or social.

You should relieve yourself of all debating duties for 18 months in order to collate what residual integrity remains in your putrid rotting immoral carcass
 
The USA makes upi about 5% of the total global population and yet consumes about 1/3 of the worlds resources and generates about 30% of the worlds waste and pollution

A totally unsustainably decadent situation dont you think?

Is it any wonder that the US military needs to invade countless countries, slaughter civilians and theive their resources on behalf of its fascist corporate tyrannt masters?

You speak about science and engineering and yet your delusional introspective neurosis does not allow you to see your own national psychopathy and global terrorist activities

A trait that was very common in NAZI Germany during the 1930s

:violin::2bigcry:
 
None. We have taken 6 refineries offline in the past few years.

And started exporting 400,000 barrels a day of refined gasoline because of decreased demand for gas here. We are using less gas today than in 2000.
 
I don't believe a word of the NY Times article.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Trying to make your flames sound like a college dissertation doesn't make it any less of a flame. Get on topic, stop baiting and flaming, and stop trying to walk the borderline of what's allowed or action will be taken
 
jesus if it really takes 30 years we're screwed. but i cant imagine anything takes 30 years to build...i mean we can make aircraft carriers from scratch including nuclear reactors in 4 years. i cant believe it takes 30 to make an oil processing facility. do you have any sources for that figure? i'd be shocked if it was true

I call bull on this. It only takes ten years to build a nuclear power facility and there is nothing with more red tape than buidling one of those.
 
I posted this in another thread but it occurs to me that it might be relevant here as well:

Just to be clear, shale oil and oil shale are emphatically NOT the same thing. Oil shale which you are talking about refers to the kerogen that is locked up in shale rock which if extracted can then be heated up to release crude oil among other things. Whereas shale oil is a byproduct of exploiting hydrofracking methods in shale deposits which releases light tight oil (LTO) that already exists in the shale but could not previously be accessed.

In other words...

Oil Shale=Kerogen in rock that can be heated up to produce oil.

Shale Oil=Oil that is already present in shale and which innovative extraction methods like hydrofracking can release.
 
So a government limits who a company can sell it's products to - including those in other friendly countries - and that is not 'big government' to you?

Well, it is to me.

Or at least, too big for my tastes.

I never said government would limit it. I said the company would limit its sales in return for a permit from the gov't. Or, we can just keep not getting the permits. Which do you prefer? Read my original post again bro. You obviously didn't read it thoroughly enough the first time.
 
I never said government would limit it. I said the company would limit its sales in return for a permit from the gov't. Or, we can just keep not getting the permits. Which do you prefer? Read my original post again bro. You obviously didn't read it thoroughly enough the first time.

I read it 'thoroughly'. The lack of permits are a seperate matter.

I just do not under any circumstances (except during a declared war) believe in the government limiting or dictating in ANY WAY who and/or how much a private company can sell it's product or service (assuming the product is not outlawed).

And as someone that quotes Ron Paul, I assumed you would feel the same.

Obviously not.


You disagree - that is your right.

But there is NO WAY you are changing my mind - so short of presenting new data, further debate is pointless, imo.


Have a nice day.
 
The evil plan is working. Use up everybody else's oil first then have them begging at our door after we got them hooked on oil.
 
I read it 'thoroughly'. The lack of permits are a seperate matter.

I just do not under any circumstances (except during a declared war) believe in the government limiting or dictating in ANY WAY who and/or how much a private company can sell it's product or service (assuming the product is not outlawed).

And as someone that quotes Ron Paul, I assumed you would feel the same.

Obviously not.


You disagree - that is your right.

But there is NO WAY you are changing my mind - so short of presenting new data, further debate is pointless, imo.


Have a nice day.
THE FRIGGIN PROGRAM I PROPOSED IS VOLUNTARY!!!!!!! How do you not get this man? It is a hypothetical situation where Oil Company A goes to the US Gov't and says, "Hey, if you grant us a permit, we'll only sell to US customers. There are no other stipulations. You cannot regulate us more or less. The permit is the same permit you've been giving out yearly. However, we realize that you are not giving out permits for NEW refineries so this is our attempt at persuading you to do so." Then one of two responses from the US gov't occurs. Response 1 is "Yes, we will grant you the permit." or Response 2 is "No, we will not grant you the permit." In the case of response 1, Oil Company A begins refining oil and selling it to the largest oil market in the world under their own volition. In the case of response 2, Oil Company A says, "Fine, screw you, I'll take my business elsewhere." and carries on with their day. At no point does the US Gov't mandate anything, regulate anything more than they already do, or make a private company do anything that they don't want to do. It is initiated by the PRIVATE company. It is carried out by the PRIVATE company. And at no point does the US Gov't step in and say "Hey, we own this now." I can't believe I even had to go into this much detail about a hypothetical proposal that everyone else in the thread seemed to understand but somehow you didn't. Now, I have a prediction. You will continue to argue this point, even though you will now realize that there is nothing big gov't about what I said. Why? Because like most users on this website you won't cede a point after you've been smarmy.
 
Back
Top Bottom