who cares, overall it went up. have you seen what happened to oil prices this week. they are falling steeply we still have upper level of historical supply in inventory.
I care. I want more jobs in this country. I want more energy produced in this country. I want gas prices to fall faster if possible. Everyone else cares too.
the free market worked, gov't not allowing willy nilly access to land forced oil companies to adjust and improve drilling methods to maximize production in existing fields see how it works
what did he lie about, and i notice you can't address actual facts as usual. you're lucky i have time to play with you on this sunday but its getting boring
I'm the one who presented stats and legislation (both facts). You have not. Lying by Omission Like the stats (facts) I presented.
what is he lying about? oil production has increased, thanks. if you cannot deny that stop posting until you tell me what he is lying about. amazingly timed piece in today's chronicle to combat your "facts" http://www.chron.com/opinion/outloo...ma-has-abandoned-green-revolution-3602950.php
I just told you....... Hes lying by omission by purposely misleading the public about drilling. He mislead you. you thought he wasn't hindering production and he is. good if true. He should of done it earlier.
no you haven't, just because he didn't open up more federal lands means he hindered production. apparently they don't need more lands. apparently refiners have enough oil to refine. apperently you have no argument. that's from a conservative columnist
Let me see if I've got your argument correct. oil production has gone up therefore Obama can't be hindering oil production?
if oil production has gone up, it hasn't been hindered. i mean according to you wingnuts, if the president wanted to hinder oil production, he would just drone attack the petroleum engineers
pgabriel....do you know about the Bakken field? I imagine you know a little about the Keystone pipeline, but do you understand WHY that is so important to the people drilling on private and federal lands in Montana and North Dakota? If not, do a little reading on this. (not meant to be condescending) This area is the answer to our energy needs for the next 50 years if we can just get the federal govt to help. My own family owns small mineral rights in this area of the world. It directly would help my family if they could get it built because smaller energy companies would VASTLY increase drilling production (and more companies would get involved). Right now, they can get the oil out of the ground thanks to new technologies. They just can't get it moved to the refineries in an economically feasible way without a pipeline. Until they get that, the oil remains in the ground...American's who need the energy instead get it from foreign sources, American's who would have jobs building the pipeline and drilling (and the resulting economic boom to that area from the impact) remain unemployed, many thousands of mineral owners wait decades longer to see if they ever get anything from the oil their land resides on...etc etc. All over what? To keep some environmentalists happy? To get re-elected? It doesn't make sense to me.
i know a helluva lot about the keystone pipeline, search the thread i started on it. the people of nebraska don't want it going through their state. right now refining capacity is at historical lows. the refinerers don't need that extra oil oil right now. the keystone pipeline if for the future. edit: oil is a global market, more production here doesn't mean lower prices. but we are getting most of our imports from canada so its not even that big of a deal as much as it was just four years ago another edit: sorry refining capacity usage is at historical lows. refiners are using 85% of their capacity. they are buying as much oil as they need. oil production is not a problem
Found it. Don't know how I missed it before. Probably because I usually avoid the D&D like the plague. Good thread too. Learned some things. Looks like essentially either build the pipeline so Canada will sell the oil to us or expect them to find someone else to sell it to. The aquifer thing seems to have a simple enough solution...build it where there is no aquifer. Looks like that has already been suggested. Was that the crux of the issue as to why the Nebraska political leaders were against it? The refinery capacity thing is another issue. I'm from Billings, MT (much closer to the Bakken) where they have had 2 refineries for decades. I always wondered why if we as a country are so close to capacity and Billings is so close to this new source in the Bakken, there hasn't been new refineries built, although I can guess its one reason...to keep supply artificially low in order to drive up energy prices/profits. Anyways...thanks for the heads up on the thread.
