06 Aug 08
2 edits
Originally posted by treetalkExporting is good for a nation's economy! In any case, they'd sell to whoever wanted to pay them the most.
And if the oil companies decided to sell to another country, how would that help Americans?
Transport costs to the US would be lower than to elsewhere too.
06 Aug 08
I don't see a problem with our drilling in the Rockies, offshore, wherever, AS LONG AS the President or Congress slaps the label of "national security interest" on every barrel, so that no foreign country or company could buy it. That way, the oil remains "ours", we get some relief, and everybody's just skippy!
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterno you won't because your refineries were already producing as much gasoline as they can. If you increase oil supply, you DON"T increase gasoline supply.
Not true -- Americans will benefit because we'll get cheaper gas and we won't be sending our money overseas to finance another Arctic theme park in Dubai or foreign terrorists.
What WILL happen is the price the refineries pay for oil will decrease slightly since we aren't talking about a huge increase in oil supply.
It will then be up the gasoline companies to pass that savings onto consumers at the pump....and what do you think the odds of that happening are?
Pfft, not likely when Imperial oil just announced record breaking profits last quarter.
And, you should also remember that since americans have cut back on their gasoline usage, refinereies have actually DECREASED the amount of gasoline they produce in order to limit the supply of gasoline to maintain higher prices at the pump! This has resulted in slowing the drop in gasoline prices that we've seen over the past few months.
Trust your gasoline companies if you want to, but more oil doesn't mean huge gasolne price drops. It just means more profits for oil companies and shareholders.
06 Aug 08
1 edit
Originally posted by PinkFloydFree Trade agreements don't allow that.
I don't see a problem with our drilling in the Rockies, offshore, wherever, AS LONG AS the President or Congress slaps the label of "national security interest" on every barrel, so that no foreign country or company could buy it. That way, the oil remains "ours", we get some relief, and everybody's just skippy!
You cannot limit the amount of a product available with facing huge financial penalties. Once you start selling a product worldwide, you have to continue. You have no choice. It's one of the huge drawbacks of any free trade agreement.
Canada is facing the same issue with water. If we start to sell some of our water supply in the great lakes to the US, then under NAFTA we can't stop selling it, even if the water supply starts to run out in the future.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by PinkFloydNo, "we" wouldn't get "relief". If it's for national security we'd never see that oil.
I don't see a problem with our drilling in the Rockies, offshore, wherever, AS LONG AS the President or Congress slaps the label of "national security interest" on every barrel, so that no foreign country or company could buy it. That way, the oil remains "ours", we get some relief, and everybody's just skippy!
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by uzlessIt just means more profits for oil companies and shareholders.
no you won't because your refineries were already producing as much gasoline as they can. If you increase oil supply, you DON"T increase gasoline supply.
What WILL happen is the price the refineries pay for oil will decrease slightly since we aren't talking about a huge increase in oil supply.
It will then be up the gasoline companies to pass that savi ...[text shortened]... n huge gasolne price drops. It just means more profits for oil companies and shareholders.
Good! Shareholders are people too. Such an event would be good for the economy.
06 Aug 08
Originally posted by wittywonkaHe's bringing thrifty back. Its the old conservatism. Increase your wealth by not spending more than you need to. In energy terms that simply translates as make every drop count.
How out of touch is Barack Obama?
Conserve every ounce of heat you generate, don't allow it to easily dissipate.
Its easier to hang on to something than to start from scratch everytime.
07 Aug 08
Originally posted by uzlessIn that case, the first thing that needs to happen is the new pres must nullify all those Free Trade agreements.
Free Trade agreements don't allow that.
You cannot limit the amount of a product available with facing huge financial penalties. Once you start selling a product worldwide, you have to continue. You have no choice. It's one of the huge drawbacks of any free trade agreement.
Canada is facing the same issue with water. If we start to sell some of ...[text shortened]... er NAFTA we can't stop selling it, even if the water supply starts to run out in the future.