Coal to oil is possible but very expensive and it leaves a very very dirty footprint(doubles the CO2 emissions) in the atmosphere. Not a real long term solution.
Someone tried to tell me the far left is making it impossible to expand our resources. The reality is the extremes of both parties make the main stream within their ideology look bad. Look, there are plenty of leases out there, both Off shore and in North Dakota and elsewhere. The Oil companies don't want to invest in those areas, they would rather round up some leases first and 'squat' in Alaska. Sorry, they need to work with the over 80% of the off shore leases they already have, and other permissions before they beg for more!
Furthermore, I agree 100%, Nuclear technology is significantly cleaner and further
along then the Three Mile Island days. Time to make that commitment.
Not my words, but information cobbled from the Internet
The U.S. is already drilling extensively, and oil companies have extensive untapped domestic resources. The OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) moratorium only protects 16% of the total recoverable oil resources in the OCS and 13.5% of the recoverable natural gas. Just 21% of OCS leases are in production. There are 7,740 active leases in the outer continental shelf and only 1,655 are in production. Of 45.5 million acres of federal lands leased to oil and gas companies, 31 million acres are not producing. There are 45.5 million acres of federal onshore lands currently leased by the oil and gas industry—but there are over 31 million acres not producing.[Comprehensive Inventory of U.S. OCS Oil and Natural Gas Resources, Department of Interior, 2/06]I learned a lot this week. I'll have an Independence Day post up at some point, otherwise enjoy your extended weekend, stay safe, and be refreshed for the debate to continue!
Lifting the drilling Moratorium Would Have Minimal Impact on Gas Prices. The Bush Administration's own Energy Information Administration found OCS drilling would have no significant impact on crude oil prices – let alone gas prices – before 2030. Another Bush Administration analysis found that drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would reduce oil prices by 75 cents a barrel – approximately 2 cents per gallon of gas – 18 years from now. As the EIA analyses note, OPEC can counteract the impact of any increase in U.S. production simply by increasing its own output. [Energy Information Administration, 2007, May 2008]
ExxonMobil pulled funding from radical groups, including the Institute for Energy Research. In May 2008, ExxonMobil announced they would no longer be funding organizations that take extreme positions on climate change. Reuters reported, "ExxonMobil Corp is pulling contributions to several groups that have downplayed the risks that greenhouse gas-emissions could lead to global warming, continuing a policy started in 2006 by Chief Executive Rex Tillerson. Exxon will not contribute to some nine groups in 2008 that it funded in 2007. It said in its corporate citizenship report that the groups' 'position on climate change could divert attention from the important discussion on how the world will secure the energy required for economic growth in an environmentally responsible manner.'" [Reuters, 5/23/08]
Independent government agency repeatedly shows drilling in ANWR to have negligible effect on price of oil, gas. The federal government's independent Energy Information Administration concluded in both March 2004 and May 2008 that drilling in ANWR would have a negligible effect on reducing America's dependence on foreign oil, and would lower the price of oil by no more than $1.44 a barrel, and possibly as little as 41 cents a barrel. [MSNBC, 3/16/04; US News and World Report,
5/23/08]
Joint congressional committee concurs. In June 2008 a U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee analysis of federal-government data concluded that drilling in ANWR would reduce the price of gas by between one and four cents a gallon. [United States Congress Joint Economic Committee, 6/10/08]
Flash
No comments:
Post a Comment