Post by TNRighty on Apr 27, 2005 17:56:27 GMT -5
In case you haven't heard about this, George Bush has proposed a bill that would allow for the private development of oil refineries on closed military bases. This is way overdue, and will go a long way toward reducing gas prices.
First of all, oil refineries and oil mines are two completely different things. For those of you who aren't familiar with the oil business, this proposal doesn't mean we're going to see oil rigs pop up on military bases all across America. Iron ore in its mined form is useless until it has been refined into steel or other products. Same with crude oil.
The stuff we purchase from overseas that arrives here in huge tankers is not what goes into our cars, lawnmowers, furnaces, etc. Its a raw material. It has to be refined before it becomes a useful energy source. You can't build a house from trees you chop down in the woods. They have to be milled and formed into 2x4's, plywood, waferboard, etc. before they become a useful product...you get the idea.
There hasn't been an oil refinery built in the United States since 1986. So basically, the oil refining capacity of the USA hasn't changed in 18 years, but our demand for energy has. The result is simple economics, demand is outpacing our ability to supply it. The result, higher prices. Its 9th grade economics.
Increasing our oil refining capabilities will reduce the price of gasoline in the USA. It won't reduce the price of crude oil because it does nothing to increase the supply of crude. It simply increases our capacity to supply the end product of the crude we purchase.
The next step in reducing gas prices is reducing the price of the crude oil from which it is refined. We do that by encouraging more exploration of crude here at home. ANWR anyone?
Bottom line, if you want us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce gas prices, we can start here at home by mining and refining more of our own.
For those of you who are economically bereft, what I just gave you is a supply side solution to the gas crisis.
OK, now that I've pissed off every liberal on this board, I guess I should switch gears for a minute. For you liberals who would rather work on the demand side of the equation, I'm here for you also. We can decrease our demand for gas (and thus the price) by developing alternative forms of energy...nuclear, hydrogen, etc., and I'm all for it. Don't interpret the first part of this post as me being an oil-mongerer. It was a lesson in economics more than a lesson in the oil business. Anyways, a nuclear plant can supply 4000 Megawats of electricity every day for ten years and after that period have nary enough waste to fill one railroad boxcar. There is no airborn pollution, not one ounce of carbon monoxide. Depleted Uranium is the sole byproduct, and if handled correctly poses absolutely no environmental threat whatsoever. If you had a nuclear powered car, you could place a bee bee sized piece of enriched Uranium in your gas tank and your car would run for ten years, give or take depending on the model.
To end, I'll guaran-damn-tee you that the people who are in the process of solving our energy problems are not the type of people who lay down in front of bulldozers. People who are smart enough to find new ways to power the American economy are too smart to be liberals.
First of all, oil refineries and oil mines are two completely different things. For those of you who aren't familiar with the oil business, this proposal doesn't mean we're going to see oil rigs pop up on military bases all across America. Iron ore in its mined form is useless until it has been refined into steel or other products. Same with crude oil.
The stuff we purchase from overseas that arrives here in huge tankers is not what goes into our cars, lawnmowers, furnaces, etc. Its a raw material. It has to be refined before it becomes a useful energy source. You can't build a house from trees you chop down in the woods. They have to be milled and formed into 2x4's, plywood, waferboard, etc. before they become a useful product...you get the idea.
There hasn't been an oil refinery built in the United States since 1986. So basically, the oil refining capacity of the USA hasn't changed in 18 years, but our demand for energy has. The result is simple economics, demand is outpacing our ability to supply it. The result, higher prices. Its 9th grade economics.
Increasing our oil refining capabilities will reduce the price of gasoline in the USA. It won't reduce the price of crude oil because it does nothing to increase the supply of crude. It simply increases our capacity to supply the end product of the crude we purchase.
The next step in reducing gas prices is reducing the price of the crude oil from which it is refined. We do that by encouraging more exploration of crude here at home. ANWR anyone?
Bottom line, if you want us to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce gas prices, we can start here at home by mining and refining more of our own.
For those of you who are economically bereft, what I just gave you is a supply side solution to the gas crisis.
OK, now that I've pissed off every liberal on this board, I guess I should switch gears for a minute. For you liberals who would rather work on the demand side of the equation, I'm here for you also. We can decrease our demand for gas (and thus the price) by developing alternative forms of energy...nuclear, hydrogen, etc., and I'm all for it. Don't interpret the first part of this post as me being an oil-mongerer. It was a lesson in economics more than a lesson in the oil business. Anyways, a nuclear plant can supply 4000 Megawats of electricity every day for ten years and after that period have nary enough waste to fill one railroad boxcar. There is no airborn pollution, not one ounce of carbon monoxide. Depleted Uranium is the sole byproduct, and if handled correctly poses absolutely no environmental threat whatsoever. If you had a nuclear powered car, you could place a bee bee sized piece of enriched Uranium in your gas tank and your car would run for ten years, give or take depending on the model.
To end, I'll guaran-damn-tee you that the people who are in the process of solving our energy problems are not the type of people who lay down in front of bulldozers. People who are smart enough to find new ways to power the American economy are too smart to be liberals.