The BHO bums continue to prevent progress with regard to your fuels and our exports. It's an ancient and modern day problem that is going to continue to hold down the economy and your availability to what's needed for your way of life.

http://www.businessinsider.com/iea-on-us...all-2014-1

As George Carlin would say... "I'm sick of this ****, sick of this ****"
from his "save the planet" video/performance. Enjoy ! ! LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

I am too ! ! ! !

Well, are you?

Went to the gas station earlier. They had plenty.

With U.S. oil production near 30 year highs and Canadian production at all time highs, no, I'm not at all concerned about the available of petroleum.

I'm very much a "save the planet" person. But an all-out attack on fossil fuels is not the proper way to save the planet.

What you do is an all-out effort to develop alternatives with less harmful environmental impact, and transition to them as quickly as possible. But here's the problem. Those alternatives don't exist. To get OFF fossil fuels, you need something to get ON instead. And that's what's missing, the something to get ON.

Not entirely, of course. There are a number of things that can be done now. But that means fossil fuels are still a big piece of the energy picture. And the left can't stand that. So instead of a reasonable and sensible approach of doing what can be done, they opt for trying to create such mass hysteria that we'll all agree to drop fossil fuels in return for nothing, even though that is an incredibly stupid idea. And they only push for that here, while the developing world continues to use coal and oil at a pace that will bury the positive impact of anything we do.

Conceptually, it's an absurd approach. But I suppose it somehow makes sense to a lefty.

We should appreciate all those animals, especially the large ones, giving up their
lives so that we could drive cars, boats and fly airplanes. Never have so many
owed so much to so many. We probably need to set up a world holiday to remember
those lost in the name of petroleum. PETA should be outraged....probably best not
to mention it to them.

Nope. There's plenty out there as evidenced by recent discoveries, most notably the Bakan formation that straddles North Dakota, Montana & Saskatchewan. A lot more is believed to be in the far north of Canada.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cou...l_reserves

I'm only concerned in the lunatics that would stop us from refining it fast enough.

Notice what's just north of the US that Obama is bound and determined to **** up for us.

There's plenty out there.

Here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W33HRc1A6c

Enjoy ! !

There have been reports that in New York State the natural gas industry is being stressed out on gas availability and are requesting manufacturing companies to cut production. Yep, New York, the state wherein Governor Andy Cuomo has instituted a ban on fracking.

(01-22-2014 03:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm very much a "save the planet" person. But an all-out attack on fossil fuels is not the proper way to save the planet.

What you do is an all-out effort to develop alternatives with less harmful environmental impact, and transition to them as quickly as possible. But here's the problem. Those alternatives don't exist. To get OFF fossil fuels, you need something to get ON instead. And that's what's missing, the something to get ON.

Not entirely, of course. There are a number of things that can be done now. But that means fossil fuels are still a big piece of the energy picture. And the left can't stand that. So instead of a reasonable and sensible approach of doing what can be done, they opt for trying to create such mass hysteria that we'll all agree to drop fossil fuels in return for nothing, even though that is an incredibly stupid idea. And they only push for that here, while the developing world continues to use coal and oil at a pace that will bury the positive impact of anything we do.

Conceptually, it's an absurd approach. But I suppose it somehow makes sense to a lefty.

Why not nuclear? Of course that's really only possible for power plant usage, but it's a step in the positive direction.

Natural gas is clean, cheap, plentiful, and can use most of our existing infrastructure, why bother with anything else in the near future?

(01-22-2014 06:48 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(01-22-2014 03:50 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm very much a "save the planet" person. But an all-out attack on fossil fuels is not the proper way to save the planet.

What you do is an all-out effort to develop alternatives with less harmful environmental impact, and transition to them as quickly as possible. But here's the problem. Those alternatives don't exist. To get OFF fossil fuels, you need something to get ON instead. And that's what's missing, the something to get ON.

Not entirely, of course. There are a number of things that can be done now. But that means fossil fuels are still a big piece of the energy picture. And the left can't stand that. So instead of a reasonable and sensible approach of doing what can be done, they opt for trying to create such mass hysteria that we'll all agree to drop fossil fuels in return for nothing, even though that is an incredibly stupid idea. And they only push for that here, while the developing world continues to use coal and oil at a pace that will bury the positive impact of anything we do.

Conceptually, it's an absurd approach. But I suppose it somehow makes sense to a lefty.

Why not nuclear? Of course that's really only possible for power plant usage, but it's a step in the positive direction.

Absolutely nuclear has to be part of any solution. You can't make the numbers work without it. But nuclear has limits.

(01-22-2014 09:11 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Natural gas is clean, cheap, plentiful, and can use most of our existing infrastructure, why bother with anything else in the near future?

Historically, the price is (at least relatively) volatile and as you ramp up demand, the price would follow and current advantages diminish. That's why a diverse portfolio is widely advocated. I think it makes a lot of sense to ramp up natural gas usage over coal, wind, solar, but nuclear and coal also have a place (and possibly wind and/or solar, but I'm not sold on either sources as a short or long term benefit).

You would think all the Greenies would support nuclear.

No. I am for exploiting the earths resources at every turn. Id like for us to be as safe and environmentally friendly as possible..but..not at the expense of progress. Until someone comes up with a better method of providing energy...fossil fuels are necessary. I will worry about cleaning up the messes as they come. I like driving my car an d and I like having electricity.

(01-22-2014 09:36 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2014 09:11 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Natural gas is clean, cheap, plentiful, and can use most of our existing infrastructure, why bother with anything else in the near future?

Historically, the price is (at least relatively) volatile and as you ramp up demand, the price would follow and current advantages diminish. That's why a diverse portfolio is widely advocated. I think it makes a lot of sense to ramp up natural gas usage over coal, wind, solar, but nuclear and coal also have a place (and possibly wind and/or solar, but I'm not sold on either sources as a short or long term benefit).

Natural gas is relatively clean and definitely under-utilized, thanks Jimmy Carter. But the cheap and plentiful parts are largely due to under-utilization. Let demand increase and the price will rise considerably and at a higher utilization rate those huge supplies won't last nearly so long. The existing infrastructure is great for delivering gas for current uses, but growth is limited by infrastructure capacity, and expansion to something like automotive use on a large scale would require substantial and expensive infrastructure changes.

No question we should use gas more. Best us for gas is probably as a fuel for fleet vehicles with a central fueling point. That minimizes the infrastructure requirements while increasing usage substantially.

Canada seems like a better and better place to live.

(01-23-2014 09:44 AM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  Canada seems like a better and better place to live.

Too cold.

Even with all the problems here, pretty sure there's no other place I would want to live.

(01-23-2014 09:44 AM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  Canada seems like a better and better place to live.

They're smart enough to not bite the hand that feeds them. For folks that think it's "too cold" it's really not nearly as bad as you'd think. You'd also be shocked at how your body learns to adjust. If you're working outside all day that's one thing but most folks here spend 90% of their day indoors. That said, there's plenty of guys in Alberta that work outside year round in the oil fields.... and they're making 6 figure salaries operating equipment.

That's what the oil industry can do for people. Really sick of folks like dbagjon that have no idea what they're talking about regarding the Oil Sands. There was a time when the methodologies to extract the bitumin was very crude and definitely had a big impact on the environment. Since then technology has changed drastically but keep in mind the Oil Sands industry is in it's infancy compared to other petroleum industries.

http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/about.html

http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/researchtechnology.html

Quote:The Conference Board of Canada states that over the next five years, more money ($6.1 billion) will be invested in climate friendly technology in Alberta than all the other Canadian provinces combined.

There's also a little thing called environmental reclamation. It's a requirement by the Canadian / Albertan government.

http://www.oilsands.alberta.ca/reclamation.html

Fact of the matter is almost everything we have and use is either directly or indirectly impacted by petroleum. It's not just about "reducing the cost of gas" like some of the simpletons think. The industry has many more arms than just providing fuel.

I'll get off my soap box now. Just sick of the mis-information campaign folks like dbackjon and Neil Young continue to promote. I guess it's just par for the course for folks that have never contributed anything tangible to society. The irony is that these hypocrites drive cars, fly on planes and travel Canada on a diesel guzzling tour bus (Neil) every day.

Hopefully you guys will take the time to educate yourselves some more when you have time. Maybe get some interest in a career. There's PLENTY of work up here, that's for sure.