Posted on 07/03/2008 4:45:49 PM PDT by brwnsuga
Drilling off the coast of California, Florida and elsewhere would increase domestic oil production by 7 percent by 2030, according to the Energy Information Administration. But “because oil prices are determined on the international market…any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.” There is no short-term benefit to drilling, says the EIA, because it would take at least five years for oil production to begin. (Source: Center for American Progress.)
(Excerpt) Read more at bradblog.com ...
“...it would take at least five years for oil production to begin”
That’s decades faster than any so called alternative sources. I don’t believe it would take 5 years. You can go through college in a year less than that. There’s no way it would take 5 years. No way.
This story is funny. First of all if it had any legs at all it would have taken off into a sprint by now from the MSM. Second of all I find it funny that the blowhard olberman keeps making comments about how Graham did this all by himself, like he ran congress or something. This is a non story. Olberman probably thought he had some type of monster story here and it is a nothing!! Way to go blow hard, more propaganda.
Kind of creepy, posting a blog entry from a guy who admires Keith Olberman, and mostly quotes from Keith’s propaganda show.
FWIW - This morning on CNBC Sharon Epperson said that she has been getting E-Mails from refining executives. The executives are telling her that the refineries are not making a profit and that they are going to have to shut down in a few weeks. (Maybe two weeks before the Democrat Convention?)
Somehow, a loophole signed into law by Clinton in 2000, did nothing to the oil markets for 6 years, until the Democrats took control of congress. Then, with the markets assured that no new oil would come from the United States, the oil prices shot through the roof, but not because of the assured shortages making oil consumers scared enough to bid up the price, but instead because of speculators who for some reason had no idea they could make billions like this until the Democrats took over.
The Energy Dept. is ignoring 2 things when they conclude that the economic effect would be negligible:
1) The effect that the drilling would have on the dollar. If we use our own oil instead of importing it from Saudi Arabia, then the dollar will rise as the trade deficit declines, and that will make even foreign oil cheaper here, even though it has no significant effect on the world price.
2) The fact that we’d actually be better off if it had no effect on the price of oil. That’s because the oil is owned by the Federal Government and can be sold to the oil companies as part of the drilling process. The proceeds can then be used to fund the budget, without increasing taxes.
agree.
The headline is ridiculous.
It is pure Rat propaganda to justify doing nothing constructive.
Drill, drill, drill!
Sorry using “Countdown With Keith Olberman” as your main source immediately discredits this report
Lemme correct that for ya: (Source: Center for American COMMUNIST Progress REGRESSION.)
That 'international market' price is sort of a misnomer when it comes to prices we pay in America.
Just because the Arabs or Nigeria (or whatever) is selling crude for $144 a barrel doesn't mean that US companies (Exxon or Marathon or Valero, etc) is paying $144 a barrel for oil they get in the Gulf of Mexico, or Oklahoma, or Texas, or Alaska.
In fact, if we as a country import 50% of our oil from overseas, then only 50% is purchased at a high price... and the rest was produced at ... at the cost of getting it out of the ground, refining, etc.
The gasoline now in tanks at the local gas station was most likely taken out of the ground about six or eight months ago...
shipped, pipe-lined, refined, stored....
Bottom line: a totally American company who gets all their crude oil in America should be at a tremendous advantage because they are not forced to pay cut-throat prices from the Saudi's, Venezuela, Nigeria, etc.
five years is not a long time to wait for a successful national energy policy which includes all forms of energy development.
We’ve been putting off an energy policy since the 70s by saying developing new oil sources will take too long to implement or ‘drilling in the U.S or offshore won’t give us enough oil.”
What do you mean its a non story...it is being debated in Congress. I expect nothing to happen as the public unions of the US are some of the biggest oil futures speculators.
There are people who live in this country and want to see it destroyed.
Speculators only bet on the direction and the direction is more Demand than Supply. We increase Supply and we change the Direction.
If you like $5/gal, Thank Congress. If you want $10, Vote Obama.
Pray for W and Our Troops
You are absolutely correct, and here’s why. The suppliers are selling processed oil to the service stations. The oil that was processed was purchased at a lower price, but the oil to replace that processed oil is now much higher, so the price to replace is passed on down the line and ends with the consumers in all the various forms (your loaf of bread even has oil cost in it). Now, when the supply is expanded, the speculation over tightening supply ends and the speculation over expanding supply takes hold. THEN, the competition for sales reverberates back up the line of the plentiful supply futures and the cost to consumer comes back down. [The cornered silver market of bygone days (by the despicable Hunt brothers speculation) is an excellent object lesson.]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.