How to break free of oil »
Posted By STONERS 1 year, 3 months ago in Business & FinanceWhen the Founding Fathers declared our independence, they could not have imagined that, 232 years later, the United States would be so spectacularly dependent on foreign countries. It would be roughly eight more decades before oil gushed from a well in Titusville, Pa., marking the beginning of the global oil economy.
Read Full Story at delawareonline.com »
1644 Views Share Story 48 Comments Report
Submitted By:
STONERS
Welcome to my profile...I've started a ""STONERS Daily News Group"" Please stop by and have a look and join if you like it ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 148 of 149 Comments (view all)
-
Neutral
STONERS1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Real energy independence can be achieved only through fuel choice and competition. That competition cannot take place as long as (according to the Department of Transportation) we continue to put 16 million new cars that run only on petroleum on our roads every year, each with an average street life of 16.8 years -- locking ourselves into decades more of petroleum dependence."
"So let's remember the saying: When in a hole, stop digging. If every new car sold in the United States were a flex-fuel vehicle and if millions of Americans could plug in electric cars, gasoline would be facing fierce competition at the pump and the socket. Moreover, our money would have migrated from Exxon to Pepco, from the Middle East to the Midwest -- as well as to scores of poor, biomass-producing countries in Africa, Latin America and South Asia, including countries that don't yet hate our guts.This is the road to independence."
Reply-
-
Neutral
BB641 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Reduce, cut back, etc. what a bunch of commie lefty crap from the 70's. Son, we're in a global economy now, we cut back someone will still buy. Again, this isn't the 70's. I'm in the energy world so I'll try to make this easy. Picture you work at Dunkin's, no offense. Last year you had a police station across the street but now you had two new police stations move in next door. So now instead of just having your old station, you now have 2 more. That's what happened to the oil markets. In the past it was the EU and USA. Now you have China and India using just as much and growing.
Reply -
Neutral
bigurn1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Stoner, most of the countries in your article increased internal petroleum production. Only two switched to electricity.
Also, none of them have our Federalizing program for safety, economy or emissions. There are real technology barriers. Brazil is the closest to the U.S., and the last time I was there everything ran on gasoline - Brazilian gasoline.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
lum-chate1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here is a thought,let's drill for oil here in the US.
Not drilling here because it will take 5 years to retrieve is more stupid than idiotic. It's like a Major League team saying let's none participate in the draft because it will take 5 years to develop players.
It sure will reduce our ridiculous trade deficit which is as big a problem as the price of oil. By the way, the price of gasoline in Europes most prosperous countries is about $9.50/gall so 4.50/gall doesn't seem so bad! Anyone at this point in congess who is stopping us from drilling should resign Monday morning!
Besides that, 9 out of 10 caribou in the ANWAR area herd support drilling
Reply-
-
Neutral
Tangent0011 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Besides that, 9 out of 10 caribou in the ANWAR area herd support drilling"
Why does the Right have such a hard-on for ANWR when the oil companies are sitting on thousands of oil leases they are not bothering to take advantage of?
Drilling in ANWR should be done very carefully and ONLY if we can get assurances that the oil derived therefrom is ONLY made available to the US.
Reply -
Neutral
Dionys1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
" Here is a thought,let's drill for oil here in the US. "
"Not drilling here because it will take 5 years to retrieve is more stupid than idiotic."
It'll take more than 10 years to see the first barrel.
The 'major impact' drilling in ANWR or offshore will have is one tenth of one percent of the international oil market -- in other words no impact whatsoever on price. Even if we could (and would) use the oil for the US only it would have an impact of about 4-7% of our yearly needs.
Better to spend all that money (and yes, the government does spend the money, not the oil companies for the most part) on alternative energy sources, increasing effeciency and companies that will actually do something to solve the problem rather than continue it.
Even a modest increase in efficency in a number of areas of energy use would easily surpass drilling in all these sensitive areas.
Reply -
Neutral
vor1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If we start now and drill with little restriction we might be able to add 5%-10% to our needed supplies in five years. Unless demand is greatly curtailed demand would easily swallow up that 5%-10%. Nor will it ever be easier to drill into the sea floor from a floating platform or from frozen tundra than to extract oil straight out of the desert. The Arabs will always win this cost equation. At least until they run out of oil.
Increased drilling is a canard. We need to find alternative sources. Our continued reliance on petroleum will only lead to more situations like Iraq where we act to protect our supposed interests only to find we have shot ourselves in the foot. Cheney never was a good shot but he didn't miss this time.
Reply -
Neutral
quackpot1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ANWAR oil might provide an extra few percent.
Reducing waste via smaller cars, shorter commutes, better freight hauling options (e.g. trains), more efficient buildings would save FAR FAR FAR more than ANWAR drilling could ever produce.
Reply -
Neutral
Wolfie20071 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah, they will still be saying that 5, 10 or 20 years if we don't start now. If we had been drilling and adding to our reserves all along we wouldn't be in this mess now.
I want to know why we can't do it all. Wind, solar, electric cars and nuclear. Tell us why oh, liberal sages, why can't we drill and do the other stuff, too.
I know why, it's the liberal are afraid we might become energy independent.
Reply -
-
Neutral
Lincoln851 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Let the caribau get a room like everyone else. It's not like the small footprint drilling will have will effect the millions of acres they can reproduce on. If someone found a cure for cancer from some fungi in the Mississippi River...some socialists leftist nut job group would protest it because it endangers the habitat of the red freckled river frog. There is a reason we are a republic and not a pure democracy..and that is to overrule cooks like these. Don't get me wrong..I love the red freckled river frog just as much as the next socialist...just saying.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Exon is bigger than saudi arabia. Exon has been for years funding Charlatan political anti-global warming think tanks. Exon does not need america to make billions of profit a quarter. Exon paid its CEO a 350 million dollar bonus in 2006, which is more than all union members (9% of the amerian workforce) made in a year.
What Exon wants, Exon gets. That's the republican way. Exon and Israel. Send your children to death to preserve them. Jesus loves a good war profit.
Reply-
Neutral
simonsez1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Exxon is the 14th largest oil company in the world. Most of the 13 ahead of it are much larger than Exxon.
"With 94% of the world's oil supply locked up by foreign governments, most of which are hostile to the United States , the relatively puny American oil companies do not have access to enough crude oil to significantly affect the market and help bring prices down. Thus, ExxonMobil, a "small" oil company, buys 90% of the crude oil that it refines for the U.S. market from the big players, i.e, mostly-hostile foreign governments. The price at the U.S. pump is rising because the price the big oil companies charge ExxonMobil and the other small American companies for crude oil is going up as the value of the American dollar goes down. They will eventually bleed this country into printing even more money and we will go into runway inflation once again as we did under the Carter Democratic reign."
Reply -
Neutral
1-2-Oscar1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Exon (sic) paid its CEO a 350 million dollar bonus in 2006, which is more than all union members (9% of the amerian workforce) made in a year."
According to the US Dept. of Labor's Jan. 25, 2008 summary, there are 15.7 million union members in the US. If they made as much as $23 each, then your statement is false.
Were you a math major?
Reply
-
-
Neutral
jmopinion1 year, 3 months ago
-
Neutral
nostalgia1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Congress won't listen
They are in the pockets of special interests
Congress needs to get out of the way and STOP picking winners and losers through subsidies
Everything needs to be encouraged and let the chips fall where they may
In the short term there needs to be more drilling while the alternatives are developed
Reply -
-
Neutral
BB641 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, not really. Natural gas would require congress to release more lands for drilling. Most of the unused lands currently leased are not worth drilling. In most cases, there's nothing to drill for. Transport is always a problem.
On hydrogen, it seems like such an easy solution. To make hydrogen you simply use water and electricity and split the atoms. The problem, it takes more energy to make the hydrogen then the hydrogen will ever be able to produce. Transporting hydrogen is also a problem. It doesn't compress well. The tanks currently required to transport the gas often times is larger than the full size of a sedan's trunk. It will take time to develop the technology here.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
skeptic2711 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
According to the Energy Information Administration's official energy statistics from the U.S. government our refineries have a total capacity of 17,593,847 barrels per day. They are currently operating at 17,225,797 or about 98%. http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pnp_cap1_...
You can drill all you want but if the refinery capacity isn't increased it won't increase our supply.
Reply -
-
Neutral
kboy1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Congress has not shown us any leadership in the last 20 years. They have tried to force us into smaller cars while the trucks get larger. The Greens are no better. They have blocked all fossil power plants except natural gas and then blocked the pipelines to deliver the natural gas. Both sides have blocked nuclear plants and electric transmission lines as well as drilling for oil in our coastal waters (China will now be drilling there for Cuba). Electric cars may be an answer. Place outlets at every parking meter and charge for parking and electric. Spend money for research and development grants for promising technology, not subsidizing inefficient stills and wind machines (idle 62% of the time)
Reply-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ACtually, congress has shown great leadership, for the rich. The income redistribution for the rich over the last 8 years was the greatest in the history of the world, with the exception that the rich no longer are bound by nations, they are international aristrocracy of billionaires and CEO's and drug Warloards and rock stars and military dictators whos money is not kept in their nations.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
simonsez1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why would we want to "break free" from oil? It's our natural fuel, stored below ground until we need it, used in thousands of products we depend on, formed over millions of years from all things that have ever lived. It's a gift, not a threat.
Jackson should work on Al Gore instead of Obama ...
Reply-
Neutral
Tangent0011 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Why would we want to "break free" from oil?"
Um, because it's a finite resource? Because it makes us reliant on whack-jobs in the most unstable region on the planet? Because it's highly polluting?
That's just off the top of my head...
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Jaydee401 year, 3 months ago
-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are asking the rich and powerful to give up their income source and their power. Not going to happen if we keep voting republican. but of course, the republicans can count on their evangelical army of christian zionist crusaders to keep voting abortion, guns, gays, and flag, like the rich give a flying faarrt about any of those issues or would be caught dead in a red inbred flyover state.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Nowalive1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As a mechanic I have been saying this for years. I have suggested a SHORT TERM solution here several times. Here it is again.
1. Eliminate ethanol. Ethanol REDUCES performance, REDUCES vehicle mileage, and currently burns NO CLEANER. Ethanol also costs more to produce than a gallon of raw gasoline. Recover the $1.08 susidy from ethanol and use that to fund the highways, thereby eliminating the 18.5 cent per gallon Federal Highway Tax. Ethanol costs $4.59 per gallon and the oil companies purchase it at the subsidized rate of $3.51.
2. Eliminate the over 30 "boutique blends" of gasoline and produce one blend, the cleanest burning possible, and mass run it at every non specialty refinery. Lower refining overhead results in lower cost to the consumer.
3. Recover methane from landfills for use in municipal vehicles. There is no shortage of garbage produced by this country. Utilize NG, LP for vehicles.
Reply-
-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The ethanol producers are small farmers and local economy. Exon no likey.
You want to reduce vehicle mileage, regulate the auto industry to higher mpg, but exon no likey.
Brazil imports no gasoline, has an ethanol economy, fuel flex automobiles, and exon no likey.
Good idea about methane.
Reply -
Neutral
BB641 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Nowalive
Well said, but let's back you up a bit.
1) Ethanol takes between 4-5 gallons of fossil fuel to produce and then additional energy for the trucks to haul it. It can't be sent via pipeline. Also it leaves a very bad waste product that currently is classified as toxic waste.
2) Get rid of all the blends. In most cases it really doesn't help anything.
3) Methane has been pulled from waste dumps for years by Waste Management. My first paid engineering gig was to convert 2 "junked" rail road yard generators for gasoline to methane. SC Johnson wax has been doing that for years off of several of their dumps.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Nowalive1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CONT.
4. Reopen ALL capped wells, idle refineries to increase our own supplies reducing imports.
5. Build 30 new refineries. We have not built a new refinery in 33 years.
6. Mandate increasing vehicle economy by an additional 50%. Well within the scope of current technology.
7. Expand public transportation where possible. Currently I have to drive 26 miles to my job as there is not PT to that area.
8. Encourage more electric vehicle use in urban areas. By reducing the number of IC engine vehicles within metropolitan areas air quality will also be improved.
9. More solar, wind, and nuclear power for electricity generation. A large number of electricity providers utilize NG for gas turbine generators. Reduce this and home heating and cooking costs will come down.
Again these are only SHORT TERM solutions and MUST be treated as such, even if gasoline were to drop to $2.00 again.
Reply-
Neutral
antibrainwasher1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That is as you say short term. Here's what would fix it entirely.
NATIONALIZE american oil. 100% of profits to build high speed rail service, funded by just one quarter's profit. This would also be a national security issue, as burning oil is causing a catostrophic increase in global temperatures and climate change.
We need a new industrial revolution/new deal, the kind of sacrifice shown in WWII, otherwise our children are F*Ked, inheriting a unsustainable economy with an unsustainable ecology.
Not that that matters to republicans, whos only thought is profit, greed and preservation of power in the hands of the super rich and to continue the permanent american war against the non white poor of the planet, 2 billion of which are living on less that 2 bucks a day, that's 1/3 the planet population.
Another solution, tax the f*ck out of the rich. 1% of the american population own 85% of american stock. .01% have more than the lowest 50%, 3 billion people.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
jossch1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oil production has peaked around 1970 in the US . Congress has known of this impending crisis and has done little to prevent this economic and security related crisis. This country has sent billions of dollars to some of the most hideous governments on the face of this planet who will use this money to finance terrorism . The bottom line is we need more energy to run this economy and there is only one way to obtain that result until we can find alternatives to oil. Enviornmental lawsuits have done more to halt production of oil, build refineries, stop nuclear facilities from coming on line,etc,etc, than anything I can think of. Our first obligation is to our families, our friends and the security of this nation not the polar bear, owls or some other animal.
Reply -
Neutral
vor1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Our first obligation is to our families, our friends and the security of this nation not the polar bear, owls or some other animal"
Pathetic hubris laden man speaking....we are more important than the earth beneath us? It won't be any God teaching us a lesson when we go extinct ourselves. The odds against our longevity are staggering and we make them shorter everyday. We have only been on the Earth a small fraction of her existence. Not only do we have little clue as to our Creation, we make up myths to explain those questions away. We make ourselves important to the equation by our actions although we are but a tiny piece of the puzzle. We don't learn when we destroy the rainforests and see the results, we just continue the devastation. Man is by far the most destructive inhabitant of this planet. What exactly have the animals done to diminish her?
Reply -
Neutral
joeblowe1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This garbage about "it's going to take 10 years (or 15, or 20, or 30 depending on who's telling the lie)" is pure crap. In the event of a reasonably accessible puddle of oil, it shouldn't take more than a couple of MONTHS. I've seen it on TV - putting up a rig, drilling 10,000 feet, and getting the pumps running simply does NOT take as long as the tree-huggers/idiots are claiming. Even deep water drilling - which IS pretty difficult - doesn't take that long any more. It's a well understood process at this point. The ONLY thing that takes that long: the idiotic bureaurocracy that has to be overcome simply to start the operation.
Reply-
Neutral
bigG1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
joeblowe - One must FIND the oil first before drilling. That takes time. Additionally, studies must be done to ensure placement of the wells to get the best oil recovery/depletion rate - assuming there is enough there to bother with. Not having a proper plan for the reservoir can damage the formation and lose much of the recoverable oil. There also has to be facilities and infrastructure built. Gotta have a way to get the oil from the wells to a storage facility.
All of this figures into the economics, and whether you like it or not, oil companies are in the business of making money so the economics weighs heavily.
It isn't near as easy or quick as you try to make it sound.
Oh, and I am not a "tree hugger/idiot" - I am in the business.
When you make statements like that clearly without knowing what you are talking about you appear to be the latter.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Bojoco271 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You people need to wake up, oil is not the answer, even Bush said these off shore drillings would be good for about 10 years of consumption, if you believe him, what then???
We should spend the money on renewable resources now, and we won't have the international issues we have now. Release our independence on foreign oil, take back our future.
Reply -
-
-
-
Neutral
CHAM1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Haven't read all the comments, so has anyone mentioned:
South Africa has been non dependent on oil since the 30's when an American Company (ITT )and others developed a coal slurry for them.
Atlantic Research developed a reduced sulpher, coal slurry that would stay in suspension in tanks and pipelines and they licensed it to several foreign countries ( Guess America wasn't interested). The United States has enough Coal to supply our current energy needs for the next 1000 years.
Then there's enough untilled land in the south to raise enough Sorghum ( 8 times better than corn for energy )to
supply a good portion of Americas energy needs. Then there's our rich reserves of Natural Gas, not to mention the capped oil wells in America (more capped wells than uncapped). Finally we have Nuclear, Wind,Geo-Thermal,
Sun,Tidal,and a myraid of other synthetics.
You can bet your last nickel we could go Energy independent any time we decide to. But will we?
Reply -
Neutral
bigbrain1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There will always be oil, but the days of cheap oil are over, never to return. There are vast reserves of shale oil, for instance, which used to be too expensive to extract, but is now almost at the point of being profitable. We will have oil for as long as we want it, provided we are willing to pay higher and higher economic, social, geopolitical and evironmental prices for it. It has taken the western world 200 years to become as dependent upon fossil fuels as we now are, and we can not expect to replace them overnight. We shall have to adjust to the fact that more and more of our disposable income will be devoted to heating our houses and driving our cars from now on...
Reply -
-
-
SwampFox-82ndComment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
Cityslicker1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
One thing , no matter what is used Oil , Gas , Electricity , Water , someone will exploit it and make people dependent on that product so they can control the price or prices of more than one product .
Seen Natural Gas used in the 70's , someone figured out people were using it cheaply , up goes the prices .
Same with Diesel , cheap fuel , impose regulations , up the price .
Perfect world everyone would share and all would be equal , but face it the Rich rob the poor to get Richer .
Someone must have bought Natural Gas stock .
Reply-
Neutral
CHAM1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Oil Companies and Energy Companies. NObody mentioned compressed Air but that is also something that could be used in conjunction with other fuels.
There is no reason for America to be energy dependent. And we are not energy dependent on any foreign power, we are energy dependent on Big Oil, Big Gas, Big Farms, Big Big.
That is the problem, not some little nation sitting on a pool of oil.
Reply
-
-
More News
Daily Finance
More IPOs in the pipeline as Macau casino stocks surge, Japanese insurance companies gain
Goldman Sachs CEO Blankfein says firm is doing 'God's work'
Michael Mauboussin's 'Think Twice': A cautionary tale for investors
Alternative energy down on the farm: A still-untapped resource
In a Congress of millionaires, Republican Anh Cao voted for poor New Orleans
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.