NationStates Jolt Archive

Everyone would agree that the ideal solution to the oil dependence would be to find some other source of energy. But we need something for the meantime.

There are vast deposits of oil under the USA and off both coasts. Should we start using those resources?

Our refining capacity is low, contributing to the supply problem and driving up prices. Should we be increasing our national refining capacity?

I say yes to both. Refineries and oil drilling facilities can be built in an environmentally responsible manner. We could not only reduce (or eliminate) US dependence on foreign sources of oil, but we cuold also bring prices under control and let's face it... sooner or later those fields under the Middle East are going to run out. Shall we wait until then, when there's a critical shortage to begin upping our sources?

In a time when those foreign fields have been exhausted, will we fight to defend our own, untapped resources?

Thoughts?

The local refinery is only refining like 5% of what they are able to, I am not sure why, but it's got something to do with legal stuff and environmental things and ..... yeah I don't remember why. Anyway, we don't need to build refineries, we just need to use the ones we have.

no, its time Americans really start thinking about conserving oil and the environment instead of paying around half the English cost

course there is typically a reason why this oil hasn't been tapped that we are not being told (I mean come on now as if its that simple)

The local refinery is only refining like 5% of what they are able to, I am not sure why, but it's got something to do with legal stuff and environmental things and ..... yeah I don't remember why. Anyway, we don't need to build refineries, we just need to use the ones we have.

That's true, but there's also a problem of having our eggs in too few baskets. One major refinery was damaged by Hurricane Katrina and I'm not sure that to this day the repairs are complete. Add to that another major refinery (I forget which) went offline last year for major overhaul. It's been something like 35 years since we last built a refinery in this country even though demand for fossil fuel is vastly more than it was back then.

no, its time Americans really start thinking about conserving oil and the environment instead of paying around half the English cost

course there is typically a reason why this oil hasn't been tapped that we are not being told (I mean come on now as if its that simple)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

I get tired of oil companies citing the cost of observing environmental and other regulations while simultaneously posting record profits (not income, PROFITS) in successive years. So you'll make $30B instead of $40B. Tough shit.

I get tired of oil companies citing the cost of observing environmental and other regulations while simultaneously posting record profits (not income, PROFITS) in successive years. So you'll make $30B instead of $40B. Tough shit.

Know what though? Profits to the oil company is only a small fraction of what you pay at the pump. Federal and State level taxes are much, much more, in some cases 20x more. This is why I call shennanigans on the GOvernment when it talks about looking for ways to give us gas price relief. If they were really interested in doing that, they'd lower or repeal those taxes.

1. One thing we could do is mandate a federal standard for the quality of Gasoline and Diesel. Right now there are variants for almost every state depending on state laws, epa requirements and other reasons. A switch to one "summer blend" and one "winter blend" would let refineries focus on making more fuel instead of making variants.

2. Even if we authorize to drill right now, we won't get a single drop of oil for years.

3. Changing to the British system would cause the American to undergo a massive change in lifestyle that right now is untenable. No one wants to live cooped up in tiny houses, and ride crowded trains all the time like y'all do in England. Also, since the entire country of England is smaller than my home state of Alabama, you can have a nationalized rail system that connects everywhere, something that will NEVER work in America. It would be a week long ride to get from coast to coast.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

pumping out all that oil will not end your dependence only increase it and this comes at a time when we should be moving away from the stuff

I get tired of oil companies citing the cost of observing environmental and other regulations while simultaneously posting record profits (not income, PROFITS) in successive years. So you'll make $30B instead of $40B. Tough shit.

they can price oil as they please considering its a finite resource that is currently on low production

Know what though? Profits to the oil company is only a small fraction of what you pay at the pump. Federal and State level taxes are much, much more, in some cases 20x more. This is why I call shennanigans on the GOvernment when it talks about looking for ways to give us gas price relief. If they were really interested in doing that, they'd lower or repeal those taxes.

O rly?

Federal tax = $.20 / gallon.
State tax = $.16-25 / gallon.

And we actually see the results of these taxes, in our road system. I've never seen an oil company do something for me with their profits.

Changing to the British system would cause the American to undergo a massive change in lifestyle that right now is untenable.

so what your saying is America collapsed in 1973?

No one wants to live cooped up in tiny houses

tiny my hairy arse you will notice that your rather alone in your house sizes whilst other nations don't see fit to complain that they don't have so many acres of pointless grass and living room

and ride crowded trains all the time like y'all do in England.

I ride the bus and its not crowded at all (I think maybe 8 people ride with me usually)

course naturally something must be wrong with Americans eh? ;)

Also, since the entire country of England is smaller than my home state of Alabama, you can have a nationalized rail system that connects everywhere, something that will NEVER work in America. It would be a week long ride to get from coast to coast.

and the same by car :confused:

And we actually see the results of these taxes, in our road system. I've never seen an oil company do something for me with their profits.

Except provide billions of dollars in domestic investment, tens of billions in taxes, employ hundreds of thousands of people in the US directly and at least a few million more in supporting industries. Not to mention support dozens of pension funds and investment portfolios with their stock and pay out billions in dividends to their investors every year.

No, they're not doing anything for you with their profits.

so what your saying is America collapsed in 1973?

Wouldn't know. I was born in '81. ;) Seriously, nothing really changed in 1973. We're still living in the same manner we were living in beforehand. The same thing happened then that happened now. People bitched, then the situation resolved itself, and people went back to not caring.

tiny my hairy arse you will notice that your rather alone in your house sizes whilst other nations don't see fit to complain that they don't have so many acres of pointless grass and living roomI'm fine with that. I like grass. I like not having to hear my neighbors fuck through paperthin walls. I like not living like a New Yorker, which seems to be what the rest of the world wants us to live like. You can't ever convince me that wanting a place of land for yourself is something to be scorned. I actually want more land, and to retire to 200 or so acres out in the mountains of West Texas.

and the same by car :confused:
Who uses a car to go from coast to coast? I drove to Birmingham Semi-National Airport, and caught a plane last time I wanted to go cross country.

Question to refute your car/train thing: If it took you 4 days on a train to get from N-Hampton to Sunderland or Portsmouth, would you take a train there?

Except provide billions of dollars in domestic investment, tens of billions in taxes, employ hundreds of thousands of people in the US directly and at least a few million more in supporting industries. Not to mention support dozens of pension funds and investment portfolios with their stock and pay out billions in dividends to their investors every year.

No, they're not doing anything for you with their profits.

They're not doing that with their profits. They're doing that in order to have a successful business and make a profit.

1. One thing we could do is mandate a federal standard for the quality of Gasoline and Diesel. Right now there are variants for almost every state depending on state laws, epa requirements and other reasons. A switch to one "summer blend" and one "winter blend" would let refineries focus on making more fuel instead of making variants.

2. Even if we authorize to drill right now, we won't get a single drop of oil for years.

3. Changing to the British system would cause the American to undergo a massive change in lifestyle that right now is untenable. No one wants to live cooped up in tiny houses, and ride crowded trains all the time like y'all do in England. Also, since the entire country of England is smaller than my home state of Alabama, you can have a nationalized rail system that connects everywhere, something that will NEVER work in America. It would be a week long ride to get from coast to coast.

I would love to stop driving. The Highways in the New York/ New Jersey area are lethal and dangerous. I wish I could take a crowded train from my job to college every day. If it takes longer fine, I have books and newspapers to read everyday so fine by me. I live in a small house by US standards anyway, and I want a smaller house. I don't want to pay the heating costs and I don't feel like maintaing a large house. Besides I spend as much time as possible outside. There a lot of other americans who need to learn to step outside. Transitions are always rough. I for one support a useable public transport system. And fine I'll make the sacrafice's while the system is being built.

People don't typically take a train from the east coast to the west coast... we have airplanes.

On the subject of oil drilling. No, it is stupid. Why spend billions of dollars while possibly damaging a fragile ecosystem for a temporary fix. We have loads of tested technology that would allow us to have efficient vehicles or non gasoline dependent vehicles. We haven't changed yet because company's that build cars and sell gas don't want there time to expire. Additionally American company's are slow on the pick up on new technology. Nearly 10 years ago BMW started working on hydrogen powered cars. GM should have looked at the rest of the world and seen what was happening. What happens in England and some parts of Europe is often a precursor to what happens in the US.

This topic I assume was brought up because Bush once again asked to drill in ANWR. This land is called National Wildlife Reserve! Don't drill in it. If it was reserved for wildlife to be presserved then it wasn't meant to be drilled. the government isn't supposed to ignore it's own legal doctorine when it is inconvient.

Yeah so I was watching a video on http://iht.com/ it claims that gas is about $9 a gallon in England if we are paying $4 a gallon I am more understanding.

However I expect nothing to change. America is all about the status quo.

Wouldn't know. I was born in '81. ;) Seriously, nothing really changed in 1973. We're still living in the same manner we were living in beforehand. The same thing happened then that happened now. People bitched, then the situation resolved itself, and people went back to not caring.

naturally its good that this oil crisis has been growing for years and years then course the point I was making is that Americans found ways around it and I see no reason why they can't do the same today

I like grass.

but its such a waste of garden? *is English*

You can't ever convince me that wanting a place of land for yourself is something to be scorned.

yes I can its called the reality of your situation and in all honesty though I do hear the mom next door shout at her kids I can actually ignore it rather easily and live how I would anywhere else

however I have a bird nest outside my house and every morning I'm woken up by bastard pigeons making noise so I don't see how the country can be this silent zone (I will note that I live right near fields and a city)

Who uses a car to go from coast to coast? I drove to Birmingham Semi-National Airport, and caught a plane last time I wanted to go cross country.

yes if you need to be somewhere quick you take a plane and don't drive anyway, whats the issue?

Question to refute your car/train thing: If it took you 4 days on a train to get from N-Hampton to Sunderland or Portsmouth, would you take a train there?

yes, I rather enjoy the train when on long journeys especially if I can stop off on the way :)

I get tired of oil companies citing the cost of observing environmental and other regulations while simultaneously posting record profits (not income, PROFITS) in successive years. So you'll make $30B instead of $40B. Tough shit.

Take a look at the oil companies profit MARGIN sometime. It's a different picture.

pumping out all that oil will not end your dependence only increase it and this comes at a time when we should be moving away from the stuff


Well I definitely agree that ideally we need to get away from it, but the kind of tech that would enable us to do it is still too far away to ignore these resources now.


they can price oil as they please considering its a finite resource that is currently on low production

Actually it's the market that sets the prices. Basic Economics. Supply vs. Demand.

O rly?

Federal tax = $.20 / gallon.
State tax = $.16-25 / gallon.

And we actually see the results of these taxes, in our road system. I've never seen an oil company do something for me with their profits.

Actually, state taxes range as high as 40 cents per gallon in some cases. using your minimum and my max that's a combined total of 36 - 60 cents on the gallon when the oil companies onlt get about 3 cents per gallon profit, and the retailer sees maybe 2.

Tax on diesel fuel is even higher, which is bad news for the trucking and railroad industries.

Ideally, that tax money is supposed to go to the roads and improvements but it doesn't. It gets dumped into general funds to cover deficits and we wind up just getting taxed more anyway. Look at Virginia, one of the most densely populated and wealthy states. They STILL came up with that scheme last year to jack up fines for moving violations on repeat offenders to the neighbordhood of $2,000 a pop, meant to go to the highways and roads.

And yes, the oil companies DO do something for you with those profits. Who finances exploration for new sources? Not the Government, the oil companies. Who builds the refineries? Who builds the drilling facilities? Do they get compensated by Government if t heir explorations turn up nothing?

Makes me wonder WTF the Government thinks entitles it to a cut of that profit... And why it gets so much larger a share.

Except provide billions of dollars in domestic investment, tens of billions in taxes, employ hundreds of thousands of people in the US directly and at least a few million more in supporting industries. Not to mention support dozens of pension funds and investment portfolios with their stock and pay out billions in dividends to their investors every year.

No, they're not doing anything for you with their profits.

And this, too. QFT

Take a look at the oil companies profit MARGIN sometime. It's a different picture.

Right. The large amount of money they make is a small fraction of the percentage they'd get in any other industry. Coca-Cola makes a higher percentage of profit on a bottle of cola then Exxon gets for a gallon of gasoline.

They're not doing that with their profits. They're doing that in order to have a successful business and make a profit.

They are paying taxes to make a profit? Pension funds invest in their stock so that the oil companies can make a profit? That makes no sense. Oil companies pay taxes because they make profit. Millions of people put their money in savings account and pension funds which invest in profitable companies like oil companies because they make a profit.

They are paying taxes to make a profit? Pension funds invest in their stock so that the oil companies can make a profit? That makes no sense. Oil companies pay taxes because they make profit. Millions of people put their money in savings account and pension funds which invest in profitable companies like oil companies because they make a profit.

Absolutely right. People who want to get mad at the oil companies generally envision a bunch of corporate fat cats owning it all and living on 75 foot yacht, wiping their butts with &100 bills and laughing at the little guy. The fact is the oil companies are owned by shareholders like you and me. If you have a retirement account like a 401K, you probably own a piece too. Are some of them ridiculously wealthy? Yes. So what? They aren't going to be the only ones who suffer if profit isn't made.

Hillary talks about the virtues of higher taxes for oil companies. You HOPE she doesn't do it because that will not only hurt the profits, which hurts YOU, but it will force them to raise prices to maintain some kind of profits, which hurts YOU AGAIN.

1. One thing we could do is mandate a federal standard for the quality of Gasoline and Diesel. Right now there are variants for almost every state depending on state laws, epa requirements and other reasons. A switch to one "summer blend" and one "winter blend" would let refineries focus on making more fuel instead of making variants.


3. Changing to the British system would cause the American to undergo a massive change in lifestyle that right now is untenable. No one wants to live cooped up in tiny houses, and ride crowded trains all the time like y'all do in England. Also, since the entire country of England is smaller than my home state of Alabama, you can have a nationalized rail system that connects everywhere, something that will NEVER work in America. It would be a week long ride to get from coast to coast.

also another englander(from MK, Call to Power)...

point 1. yeah, you REALLY need to sort this out, if europe can manage 95RON, 98/99RON, 101RON an good quality diesel....

point 3.

by my calculation you could go the 3000 miles coast-coast in 15hrs non-stop on a european 200mph train... which are comfy as you like and you dont have to check-in or deal with airlines or any of that...

our trains our only crowded because no-one has spent money on the railway PROPERLY since the 1960's... untill now, and even now they are cutting budgets...(i work for NWR)

America should be pushing itself towards europen vehicle emsision standards, and general MPG, i mean we pay £5 a gallon(uk) which is almost $10(usd) i know our gallons are different sizes(ours fractionally bigger?), but hell, if you all drove economical comfortable fast modern diesels or even petrols you'd all save a shedload... my 1991 vw passat(2.0) manages 38mpg, and its 17 years old! american imports to the UK barely hit that and they have 17 years of technological "advances"... if your all fed up of paying silly prices, push US manufacturers to build some decent cheap frugal cars for a change...

i'm sure the whole global "flying culture" dosent help oil usage, but aside form sticking mega taxes on flying i cant see it changing any time soon...

Call to power's comments have been spot on...

The local refinery is only refining like 5% of what they are able to, I am not sure why, but it's got something to do with legal stuff and environmental things and ..... yeah I don't remember why. Anyway, we don't need to build refineries, we just need to use the ones we have.

except that new refineries will run more cheaply and use less energy.

I like what oil and gas prices are doing.

I like what oil and gas prices are doing.

going up? or annoying everybody?

also another englander(from MK, Call to Power)...
point 3.

by my calculation you could go the 3000 miles coast-coast in 15hrs non-stop on a european 200mph train... which are comfy as you like and you dont have to check-in or deal with airlines or any of that...

our trains our only crowded because no-one has spent money on the railway PROPERLY since the 1960's... untill now, and even now they are cutting budgets...(i work for NWR)

America should be pushing itself towards europen vehicle emsision standards, and general MPG, i mean we pay £5 a gallon(uk) which is almost $10(usd) i know our gallons are different sizes(ours fractionally bigger?), but hell, if you all drove economical comfortable fast modern diesels or even petrols you'd all save a shedload... my 1991 vw passat(2.0) manages 38mpg, and its 17 years old! american imports to the UK barely hit that and they have 17 years of technological "advances"... if your all fed up of paying silly prices, push US manufacturers to build some decent cheap frugal cars for a change...

i'm sure the whole global "flying culture" dosent help oil usage, but aside form sticking mega taxes on flying i cant see it changing any time soon...

Call to power's comments have been spot on...

1. I don't know about the state of National Rail so I concede that point about the crowding in trains.

2. Agreed on higher mpg standards.

3. I was talking about how people in within cities in America as compared to Britain. (i.e. the un-usefulnes of public transport.) The point that I awkwardly failed to make previously is this:

In order for inter-city public transport to be successful, you must have a population density that the current citizenty of the United Stated is unwilling to support.

Intra-City public transport is an interesting idea, and could supplant short distance travel within the States if done correctly (see bullet train thread.) It's actually getting financial support from private investors (Desert Xpress, privately funded Anaheim-Vegas rail line) and public money. Although riding for 15+ hours in a train (you didn't include all the stops that would have to be made.) seems like torture.

4. About the Oil companies profits: They run the business to make a profit. They don't specifically run the business to pay taxes, support my IRA fund (which I'm sure is invested in Big Oil), pay pensions, or to pay salaries and wages. Thse things are the necessary costs of running a profitable business. If a company can run a business without incurring high employee costs, or taxes it will as it is in the company's interest to do so. (See Example: Wal-Mart)

No. We need to save any oil for fertilizers and plastics (that includes oil made from coal).

For power, we should use this:

One design of fast neutron reactor, specifically designed to address the waste disposal and plutonium issues, was the Integral Fast Reactor (also known as an Integral Fast Breeder Reactor, although the original reactor was designed to not breed a net surplus of fissile material).[2][3]

To solve the waste disposal problem, the IFR had an on-site electrowinning fuel reprocessing unit that recycled the uranium and all the transuranics (not just plutonium) via electroplating, leaving just short half-life fission products in the waste. Some of these fission products could later be separated for industrial or medical uses and the rest sent to a waste repository (where they would not have to be stored for anywhere near as long as wastes containing long half-life transuranics). It is thought that it would not be possible to divert fuel from this reactor to make bombs, as several of the transuranics spontaneously undergo fission so rapidly that any assembly would melt before it could be completed.

Instead of using less than 10% of the power found in uranium, we would be using over 90%.

While we're using that, develop orbital solar power arrays (or develop them at the same time).

Develop more wind farms - environmentalists can go suck eggs about bird strikes.

Use hydrogen for cars and trucks (in fuel cells - hydrogen is really a power storage medium, not a fuel). Use the power from the nuke plants and solar satellites to recharge them.

Intra-City public transport is an interesting idea, and could supplant short distance travel within the States if done correctly (see bullet train thread.) It's actually getting financial support from private investors (Desert Xpress, privately funded Anaheim-Vegas rail line) and public money. Although riding for 15+ hours in a train (you didn't include all the stops that would have to be made.) seems like torture.



the way the high speed trains work in europe is:

as few stops as possible, so, basically 1 every 50 or so miles on our system (night trains over here stop alot less than that) would translate to 1 per state for you guys, and if the track was laid well, and the trains were top-class you wouldnt mind 15hrs on one, air conditioned, big comfy seats, tv/film, food, hell, if you get the right service you could sleep it.

you grab a slow train to get you from the nearest town/city to high-speed station an off you go!

having said that track costs a fortune, its something silly over here(cant remember how much exactly, but its mad) but its worth it if you lay it in bulk, for trans-continental haulage and fast passenger lines...

a thought that should be considered more of an option.

4. About the Oil companies profits: They run the business to make a profit. They don't specifically run the business to pay taxes, support my IRA fund (which I'm sure is invested in Big Oil), pay pensions, or to pay salaries and wages. Thse things are the necessary costs of running a profitable business. If a company can run a business without incurring high employee costs, or taxes it will as it is in the company's interest to do so. (See Example: Wal-Mart)

No one is claiming that oil companies are not trying to make a profit. The point is that an oil company's profits and your well being are not mutually exclusive, but mutually dependent even if you hold no direct stock. Furthermore, the oil companies don't pay for your pension fund - your pension fund invests in oil company stocks which, if the company makes profit, increase in value giving you a bigger pension.

the way the high speed trains work in europe is:

as few stops as possible, so, basically 1 every 50 or so miles on our system (night trains over here stop alot less than that) would translate to 1 per state for you guys, and if the track was laid well, and the trains were top-class you wouldnt mind 15hrs on one, air conditioned, big comfy seats, tv/film, food, hell, if you get the right service you could sleep it.

you grab a slow train to get you from the nearest town/city to high-speed station an off you go!

having said that track costs a fortune, its something silly over here(cant remember how much exactly, but its mad) but its worth it if you lay it in bulk, for trans-continental haulage and fast passenger lines...

a thought that should be considered more of an option.

So basically it would only stop for places with over 250,000 people or so.

hmm. that would exclude my town, and make it where the nearest sation would be...an hour and change away. Considering that 99% of my travel is within 2.5 hours anyways (the exceptions being Mississippi State Football, which is in a town so small it might not have lo-speed trains) and the occasional trip to the beach I'd rather just drive to the destination than drive an hour to the station then ride for another hour or so, to get to a place where I won't have a car (and therefore can't get around the new city as well)

Drilling isn't needed but new refineries are. Specifically those which can convert coal into gas. America is the Saudi Arabia of coal, we've got a huge supply here at home that could be converted to gas. So and it wouldn't hurt to start going after some of the coastal oil too but the biggest problem in my opinion is the lack of refineries.

they can price oil as they please considering its a finite resource that is currently on low production

Oil production is at its highest levels in history. "Peak oil" has not happened yet, contrary to what people might have believed as recently as a few months ago; even production of conventional crude oil, not including other liquids, has continued to rise.

Not to mention a lot of oil is wasted; that's not even speaking of us in the developed world, but in the developing world where huge quantities have to be consumed due to the inability of the grid in those countries to supply adequate power. Long story short, this oil market is not only approaching a speculative-bubble level of froth but it's completely defying the actual fundamentals of the market.

In summary, don't bet your retirement on commodities.

going up? or annoying everybody?

Annoying everybody by going up. I think a little pain now can prevent a lot of pain in the future.

That's true, but there's also a problem of having our eggs in too few baskets. One major refinery was damaged by Hurricane Katrina and I'm not sure that to this day the repairs are complete. Add to that another major refinery (I forget which) went offline last year for major overhaul. It's been something like 35 years since we last built a refinery in this country even though demand for fossil fuel is vastly more than it was back then.

Neo Bret, we agree wholeheartedly on this issue. American oil companies have been making record profits and they are not investing in the future of the infrastructure we need. It's still going to take while for us to perfect alt. fuels. Right now we should drill and build more refineries. If I had a choice what to do first I'd pick the refineries.

let's use nucular energy.