To: xzins
My problem is the Fed's should not own Alaska and or have the right to say if private business can work there. That is pure fascism.
I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan and does not even come to the US even with the high prices we cannot help ourselves.
The government says oil goes to Japan for "balance of trade" and such ... which is why you hear of no oil shortage problems in Japan.
Our second problem is one we drill, where to we refine? Here in California you cannot due to government regulations so, while I support opening up to drilling if the oil can come here, we need to build refineries as well.
22 posted on
03/16/2005 11:07:46 AM PST by
edcoil
(Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
To: edcoil
That is pure fascism.
Private profit at public expense is one of the hallmarks of fascism.....a mixture of capitalism, socialism, and nationalism.
Nonetheless, this bill stops the government from blocking drilling.
To the extent that they control the process is the extent to which you'll recognize national socialism.
38 posted on
03/16/2005 11:12:52 AM PST by
xzins
( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of it!)
To: edcoil
The federal government bought Alaska in 1867. Not all the land is owned privately. So the public lands are under the control of the Congress.
To: edcoil
The dirty little secret about no new refineries is, the owners of existing refineries have made damned sure no new ones get built.
To: edcoil
I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan and does not even come to the US Where did you hear that outrageously FALSE piece of information?
63 posted on
03/16/2005 11:18:49 AM PST by
Dog Gone
To: edcoil
"The government says oil goes to Japan for "balance of trade" and such ... which is why you hear of no oil shortage problems in Japan."
This is the exact opposite of what is happening. Not one drop of Alaskan crude leaves North America. One of the big fears was that people like you would not understand the balance of trade, so congress passed a law that said "Alaskan crude will be used in the U.S. and Canada only" . It would be cheaper to export crude to Japan, in trade for Japan buying Saudi oil and bringing it to the east coast (panama canal problems), but instead, we are stuck with the higher prices on the east coast.
If you have and documentation of crude being sold to Japan, I would like to see it. Everything I see on line and in the Library of Congress states that no Alaskan crude is going overseas.
86 posted on
03/16/2005 11:26:26 AM PST by
Lokibob
(All typos and spelling errors are mine and copyrighted!!!!)
To: edcoil
"...which is why you hear of no oil shortage problems in Japan."
There is likewise no shortage of oil here. Home heating oil and gasoline are plentiful.
88 posted on
03/16/2005 11:27:25 AM PST by
JoeV1
To: edcoil
(My problem is the Fed's should not own Alaska )
They don't most is state land.
(I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan )
Haven't heard that one before.
(Our second problem is one we drill, where to we refine?)
It can be refined there or pipelined to the lower 48 for refining, which ever is the most economical.
(Here in California you cannot due to government regulations )
That would be state regulations. I dare to say, it cost more to produce a barrel of oil in California than anywhere else. Between Unions and Environmentalist, I'm amazed their industry still exists.
97 posted on
03/16/2005 11:33:53 AM PST by
Graycliff
("Life is just one darn thing after another; LOVE is just two darn things after each other.")
To: edcoil
"My problem is the Fed's should not own Alaska and or have the right to say if private business can work there. That is pure fascism."
Well, that is jus the way it is ... The Feds own most of Alaska, and have since we bought it from the Russians in 1865 ... ANWR has been dedicated wildlife refuge land for decades.
We could sell ANWR, but it is useless tundra useful only for caribou and oil drilling.
The eco-extremists wanted it to remain economically useless tundra ... now, it can be used for oil drilling AND remain a wildlife refuge ... WIN/WIN.
Well done, I predict Alaska will have a few decades of prosperity thanks to this.
103 posted on
03/16/2005 11:40:12 AM PST by
WOSG
(Liberating Iraq - http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com)
To: edcoil
"My problem is the Fed's should not own Alaska and or have the right to say if private business can work there. That is pure fascism."
This is Government land and as such can not be used by private business unless authorized.
I guess you think Alaska should be returned to Russia.
A lot of people were against Stewards' folly, using American money to buy Alaska.
122 posted on
03/16/2005 11:50:58 AM PST by
HuntsvilleTxVeteran
(When you compromise with evil, evil wins. AYN RAND)
To: edcoil
My problem is the Fed's should not own Alaska and or have the right to say if private business can work there. That is pure fascism.Welcome to the United States of America, home of democratic party socialism.
136 posted on
03/16/2005 11:56:52 AM PST by
RetiredArmy
(America will NEVER be free as long as we have Democrats.)
To: edcoil
AAAAARRRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH
Your problem is just that YOUR problem.
140 posted on
03/16/2005 11:59:54 AM PST by
OldFriend
("If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child might have peace." Thomas Paine)
To: edcoil
I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan and does not even come to the US even with the high prices we cannot help ourselves. With all due respect you don't know.
That we export Alaskan oil a bold faced liberal/envirowacko lie. There has never been more that 10% of Alaskan Crude exported outside the United States.
References:
Data from Alaska Dept of Revenue
Congressional Report
202 posted on
03/16/2005 12:38:02 PM PST by
Species8472
(ANWR - Drill now!)
To: edcoil
But the law states any oil withdrawmn for ANWR is earmarked for domestic sale first above all.
Also, the oil from Alaska does not go directly to Japan, it goes into the world market for Pacific oil sales, Japan just happens to be the ones that snap it up. (so said someone on the Wall St. Journal This Morning from the other day, I didn't catch the name, it was 5am.)
203 posted on
03/16/2005 12:38:08 PM PST by
infidel29
("It is only the warlike power of a civilized people that can give peace to the world."- T. Roosevelt)
To: edcoil
refineries need to be built period!!!
al gore special blends need to be done away with.
I need to be king of the world and i will straighten this mess out!!!
To: edcoil
Maybe we can Chevron's largest oil tanker, the 129,000 ton "Condoleezza Rice" up there and fill it up!
In 2001 it was renamed the "Altair Voyager."
269 posted on
03/16/2005 2:10:37 PM PST by
FreedomCalls
(It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
To: edcoil
I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan and does not even come to the US even with the high prices we cannot help ourselves.
State your proofs please!
With over 40 years in Alaska, this is news to me! Also the feds own more of Alaska than they ever should in these latter days... the compact with the USA and Alaska was to have much more land shifted out of Federal possession in fifty years from statehood inception ...and it's not going to happen either.
To: edcoil
"Here in California you cannot due to government regulations so, while I support opening up to drilling if the oil can come here, we need to build refineries as well."
We all know California is over regulated to the hilt, but it's not the only place in the world where we can refine.
I say we do it in a way that unionized labor can't get a hold of the process.
337 posted on
03/16/2005 6:13:38 PM PST by
AlGone2001
(You will never know that Jesus is all you need, until Jesus is all you've got-Mother Theresa)
To: edcoil
I got a refinery right down the street, oh wait, I am in Alaska, and it is a local refinery, that is causing me to pay 2.07 a gal. Can't believe that we are finally cheaper than CA, and most of the Lower 48.
358 posted on
03/16/2005 9:34:32 PM PST by
RedlegCPT
(Artillery lends dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl)
To: edcoil
>> I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan and does not even come to the US even with the high prices we cannot help ourselves. <<
Not a problem. The world is one big oil market. If Japan buys from Alaska, we buy from the people who would have sold to Japan. Rather that the US using Alaskan oil, and the Japanese using Carribean oil, we use Caribbean oil, and let the Japanese use Alaskan oil Makes for much less of shipping, which is a major cost of oil production.
382 posted on
03/17/2005 10:04:44 AM PST by
dangus
To: edcoil
I also know, the vast majority of oil in Alaska goes to Japan and does not even come to the US even with the high prices we cannot help ourselves. Nonsense. Before 2000, NO oil from Alaska was allowed to be sold outside of the US. Even today, no more than about 7% of Alaskan oil is sold to Asia.
Moreover, this oil is typically traded for other oil that Japan would have bought from other sources. Given that the oil from Alaska has high sulpher content, is relatively expensive to refine, and there is a toal lack of capacity for refining any aditional volume on the west coast, trading some Alasken crude for other sources that can be refined on the east coast makes great economic sense.
which is why you hear of no oil shortage problems in Japan.
Oil is a fungible good - if more is produced anywhere in the world, it affects the price everywhere in the world. And by the way, there is no "oil shortage" in the US either, which is why you don't hear about one here.
419 posted on
03/17/2005 6:37:09 PM PST by
jscd3
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson