• 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!

Would you be willing to dramatically boost U.S. oil and gas production to help the world stop importing from Russia?

Should the U.S. boost domestic energy production to replace what we wish to no longer come from Russ

  • Leans Left - No

    Votes: 10 24.4%
  • Leans Left - Yes

    Votes: 9 22.0%
  • Middle Leaner - No

    Votes: 2 4.9%
  • Middle Leaner - Yes

    Votes: 8 19.5%
  • Leans Right - No

    Votes: 1 2.4%
  • Leans Right - Yes

    Votes: 11 26.8%

  • Total voters
    41
Or just REGULATE the industry to keep the TAXPAYERS from having to clean up in the future...

Did you read your link? It appears that nobody knows who (or how many folks) had messed with that old and long ago abandoned ‘dry well’.
 
Did you read your link? It appears that nobody knows who (or how many folks) had messed with that old and long ago abandoned ‘dry well’.

Yep.. I did read the link.. The lack of REGULATIONS when the well was drilled is now costing the TAXPAYERS money to remediate the damage.. Failure to learn from history is a poor national strategy... We both know the Texas Railroad Commission has long overlooked the shoddy record keeping and performance of Texas drillers.. It's not some big secret...

 
Regardless of the level of US oil production, we will be charged gasoline at the market rate, period. The US would have to increase production so much that would impact global supply and price for everybody and that ain't gonna happen. We don't have the infrastructure to increase production that much.
 
Regardless of the level of US oil production, we will be charged gasoline at the market rate, period. The US would have to increase production so much that would impact global supply and price for everybody and that ain't gonna happen. We don't have the infrastructure to increase production that much.

Hmm… didn’t congress just pass a large “infrastructure” spending bill?
 
I would, but I think its going to increase anyway as existing leases get tapped due to the price increase.

Also, any new legislation needs a big boost in renewable research funding to solve the root issue and to give us new tech to sell to the rest of the world.

Honestly, I think we should just be investing in renewables and if increasing oil mollifies public opinion, that's a nice bonus, even if it means Biden takes credit for something that will happen anyway. My preferred end game is that Russia (and the middle east) could never use oil to influence us again.
That makes perfect sense. Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels while researching and making alternatives more cost effective.
 
That makes perfect sense. Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels while researching and making alternatives more cost effective.

Many say how much “perfect sense” it makes to have (lots of new?) public investment in “alternatives”, yet never explains why they don‘t personally (privately?) invest in them.
 
This is a follow-up to @Cardinal 's other thread about whether or not we should be willing to accept higher prices in order to cut off Russia.

As painful as it would be, I voted no. Climate change is real and there are going to be wars even worse than this one fought as a result of it. I think the US should impose its own embargo of Russian energy and accept that Europe may need more flexibility in the short term. I would encourage enough oil production to sustain global demand but not necessarily beyond that point.
 
As painful as it would be, I voted no. Climate change is real and there are going to be wars even worse than this one fought as a result of it. I think the US should impose its own embargo of Russian energy and accept that Europe may need more flexibility in the short term. I would encourage enough oil production to sustain global demand but not necessarily beyond that point.

That (bolded above) will happen automagically. Production (supply) beyond demand would drive prices (and profits) down.
 
CO2 is not a pollutant. Period.

"Runaway Global Warming" is not happening. Period.

Climate changes all the time. We've been warming since the 1880's, and most of the warming occurred before the larger increases in CO2 occurred - which of course contradicts the theory.

Those facts don't stop the radical left from using the bogus issue as an excuse to over regulate and micromanage citizen activity.

It is about power and control.

Of course oil production and natural gas production should be going gangbusters. We need more coal fired power plants, and nuclear power plants as well.

Get a clue people!!! Scarcity is a necessary component of government control - stop giving these monsters power over your lives.

Get educated on these subjects!!
 
REGULATION...
Oh?

What regulation is going to stop a more than 80 year old abandoned well from turning into a salt water geyser?
 
Yep.. I did read the link.. The lack of REGULATIONS when the well was drilled is now costing the TAXPAYERS money to remediate the damage.. Failure to learn from history is a poor national strategy... We both know the Texas Railroad Commission has long overlooked the shoddy record keeping and performance of Texas drillers.. It's not some big secret...



The damage and clean up are always Socialist, to be paid by taxpayers.

But the profits are private, right to the upper management and stockholders.

Pretty sweet deal for the fossil fuel companies when you really stop and think about it.
 
This is a follow-up to @Cardinal 's other thread about whether or not we should be willing to accept higher prices in order to cut off Russia.
Wish you would have had an OTHER option on the Poll.

As it was I lean Left and said YES.

Had there been an OTHER option I would have chose that and explained what I will now.

I would be willing to do that increase of oil and natural gas in a deal as long as at least half of the profits on the exports was MANDATED to be invested in alternative energy research and development.

Why not make it a Win, Win, Win for the world?
 
This is a follow-up to @Cardinal 's other thread about whether or not we should be willing to accept higher prices in order to cut off Russia.
I think it’s an excellent opportunity to increase production of renewable energy sources. Texas has 25% green energy sources, California 36%…the point is it’s a choice, and states can make use of multiple varieties of renewable resources…if they wanted to.

By the way, I also believe we need to ramp up thorium reactor production.
 
Last edited:
I think we should increase domestic oil production, but with some caveats.

1. I think it should be coupled with efficiency mandates. We not only need to produce more, we need to use less in the long run. If cheaper oil prices results in more people purchasing less efficient vehicles, then we have not accomplished anything.

2. We need sufficient environment protections in place. However, these should be pragmatic. For example, it is much safer to transport oil via pipelines than rail.

3. We likely will need some kind of government backstop to prevent OPEC and Russia from putting our producers out of business. We have a lot of oil in this country. However, unlike with Saudi and Russian oil, our oil is not profitably extracted at oil prices of less than 40 to 60 dollars a barrel. The Saudis and Russians have exploited this in the past by ramping up production, flooding the world market with oil, thus driving prices too low for U.S. domestic producers to profitably recover our oil (particularly shale oil), putting U.S. domestic oil producers out of business. So we probably need to figure out a way to treat oil production like we do agriculture, but at the same time keeping corruption out of the system (how we do that, idk).
 
Agreed, but this isn't about our reserves, it's about reviving our own production of oil to make us less dependent - or not dependent at all - on foreign sources for our oil needs; including Russia.

The question was whether we should dramatically increase production to help make the rest of the world less dependent on Russia's oil.

Short term I'm fine with increasing production to meet domestic needs. Short to medium term (10-20 years) we should be trying to replace as much fossil fuel based power generation as possible with renewables and nuclear. Medium to long term (20-40 years) we should aim to replace ICE vehicles with EVs as much as possible while building EV infrastructure and instituting common vehicle standards to improve ease of use. That's so that long term we preserve as much of our petrochemical reserves as possible for our other non-energy and non-transportation needs (i.e. plastics, lubricants, solvents, etc.)
 
This is a follow-up to @Cardinal 's other thread about whether or not we should be willing to accept higher prices in order to cut off Russia.
Does "dramatically" mean with utmost speed?
Or does it mean "right away"?

Oil production in this country after Biden discouraged further drilling is not like a spigot which can be turned on immediately to relieve us of high gasoline and fuel prices.

Anyone know why we are still importing up to 20 million barrels a month from Russia? Someone out there must know.
 
Well, I don't really give a rat's ass about helping the world stop importing oil from Russia. They make their choices and suffer the consequences.

But I DO think the US should boost oil and gas production to get the US off the Russian oil tit...where the Biden pukes have put us.

If there are supplies left over and if other countries want to get off the Russian oil tit, then sure...we can help them out, too.
Take it up with the oil companies. If they didn't sell US oil production on the world market they wouldn't have to buy Russian oil.
They might not have to buy any foreign oil. I haven't checked the latest but not long ago US oil company's exported more oil than they imported.
And make no mistake- It's oil company's buying that oil, not 'the US'.
 
Last edited:
Does "dramatically" mean with utmost speed?
Or does it mean "right away"?

Oil production in this country after Biden discouraged further drilling is not like a spigot which can be turned on immediately to relieve us of high gasoline and fuel prices.

Anyone know why we are still importing up to 20 million barrels a month from Russia? Someone out there must know.
Ask the oil companies. They buy that oil.
 
This is a follow-up to @Cardinal 's other thread about whether or not we should be willing to accept higher prices in order to cut off Russia.
Gas prices are not driven by political party, but by peoples opinions
The concept that personal opinions about all issues must be driven by political affiliation is absolute horseshit.
Only brainless morons follow party positions lock, stock, and barrel for everything
 
I think it’s an excellent opportunity to increase production of renewable energy sources. Texas has 25% green energy sources, California 36%…the point is it’s a choice, and states can make use of multiple varieties of renewable resources…if they wanted to.

By the way, I also believe we need to ramp up thorium reactor production.
;) (y)
 
Gas prices are not driven by political party, but by peoples opinions
The concept that personal opinions about all issues must be driven by political affiliation is absolute horseshit.
Only brainless morons follow party positions lock, stock, and barrel for everything
Ever notice that when the price per barrel goes down the inventory at the station has to be sold before the price at the pump goes down but the price at the pump goes up immediately when the per barrel at the wellhead goes up?
 
Back
Top Bottom