bushwacked Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Man, you have a lot of opinions about something you don't know much about. More than anyone on the Huddle. You just find that out now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 About $5. Well that's a BOLD FACED LIE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 About $5. Man, you have a lot of opinions about something you don't know much about. I find that fascinating. I know about running a business and making it profitable. I don't know much about the actual cost of drilling an oil well, and honestly I doubt you do either. Doest the $5 a barrel you quoted take into consideration losses on dry wells? I assume a deeper well will cost more to recover. Etc... You don't have to know specifics about a particular business to know what makes business sense. It just makes sense that oil that is easier to recover and easier to refine would be more profitable. Why wouldn't the oil companies go after this in lieu of deeper dirty oil? If the government was running it would you want it be less efficient? Then why would you want corporations, that you probably in some small part own to be less efficient? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Why would a company drill for oil in area A that cost $2 to pull out of the ground and refine, when they can drill in area B that costs $1 to pull out of the ground? It would be a pour business decision, at the current demand. If you nationalize the oil industry, would you want your government to make such a poor business decision? I'm sure the stockholders of the oil companies don't want poor decisions like that. And yet you would have me possibly approve the destruction of our coastal industry because some oil company wants to save on drilling costs. I am sorry. There are plenty of places they have to drill....your argument notwithstanding. It costs too much....almost laughed and blew pepsi out my nose! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 nd yet you would have me possibly approve the destruction of our coastal industry You get this crap in your 'history' class? Would you rather an American company drill or some chinese outfit down by keywest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 I was just pointing out to dip shiznit that even if oil companies were nationalized, I would want them to go after the most profitable or most economical product. I haven't got a clue how much it costs to pull a barrel out of the ground. Hey Atomic, did you marry Randull's sister? Lately you've been off the reservation a lot. Thanks for calling me a dip...but it seems to me I have the added virtue of being correct. I do not advocate nationalizing the oil industry....just thought I would point that out. But they do need to explore every other option of leases they currently hold before I open up my national forests and preserves to them in the name of profits. Remember, these are yours too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Well that's a BOLD FACED LIE. LOL...yes it is....it costs about 19 to 25 dollars....depending on the well....to pull a barrel out of the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 You get this crap in your 'history' class? Would you rather an American company drill or some chinese outfit down by keywest? LOL...stay informed....Cheney already said this was a lie...the Chinese are not drilling there...nor are there any plans. cheney spread the rumor to begin with. Anyway.....If Cuba wants to strike a deal with China, which it hasn't, and drill off their coastal shelf, I have no problem with that....when they have a spill....and it pollutes our water....then I will have a problem.....why don't you ask the tourist industry that relies on the coastline if they feel drilling is good or bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Found this for you to sift through H8....it is from the Miami Herald....via a different website: ENERGY China-Cuba rumors fuel renewed offshore drilling debate Rumors of China drilling in Cuban waters are rallying support for drilling off Florida's coast, but experts say they're untrue. Posted on Thu, Jun. 12, 2008 BY LESLEY CLARK AND ERIKA BOLSTAD lclark@MiamiHerald.com WASHINGTON -- With gas topping $4 a gallon, some Republicans are pointing to Cuba once again to bolster their case that the U.S. should be drilling along Florida's coastline. The claim: China has Cuban leases to drill for oil -- miles from the Florida shore. Even Vice President Dick Cheney got into the mix Wednesday, telling the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that ``oil is being drilled right now 60 miles off the coast of Florida. We're not doing it. The Chinese are in cooperation with the Cuban government. ''Even the communists have figured out that a good answer to high prices is more supply,'' he added. ``Yet Congress has said . . . no to drilling off Florida.'' But industry experts and other observers say there is zero evidence that China is drilling in Cuban waters, and doesn't even hold a lease to drill offshore. ''China is not drilling in Cuba's Gulf of Mexico waters, period,'' said Jorge Piñon, an energy expert at the University of Miami's Center for Hemispheric Policy. Rising gas prices are prompting renewed efforts to open Florida waters to drilling, and the specter of oil-thirsty China slurping up nearby reserves is helping to fuel the push: In recent days, House Republican leaders have penned newspaper opinion pieces making the claim. `DEBUNKING THE MYTH' The renewed efforts prompted Florida Sen. Mel Martinez, who opposes drilling off Florida's coast, to take to the Senate floor Wednesday to -- as his office put it -- ''debunk the myth'' of China drilling in Cuban waters. ''Reports to the contrary are simply false,'' Martinez said, his remarks delivered just before Cheney spoke. ``They are akin to urban legends. China drilling off the coast of Cuba only 60 miles from the Keys, that is not taking place. . . Any talk of using some fabricated Cuba-China connection as an argument to change U.S. policy has no merit.'' House Minority Leader John Boehner's office defended the GOP drilling claims, pointing to a 2006 New York Times story that noted Cuba had ``negotiated lease agreements with China and other energy-hungry countries to extract resources.'' ''The fact is China can drill off the coast of the United States and Americans can't,'' said Boehner spokesman Michael Steel. ``At a time when the nationwide average price for a gallon of gas is over $4, that policy just doesn't make sense.'' The latest effort to bring drilling closer to Florida's shores by lifting a decades-old ban on gas and oil exploration along the outer continental shelf was rapidly defeated Wednesday in a House subcommittee meeting along partisan lines. Democrats on the panel said the measure was ''unnecessary'' because most of the known reserves along the coast are already open for drilling. Committee Chairman Rep. Norm Dicks, a Washington state Democrat, noted that the Bush administration, too, opposes lifting the ban. PUSHING THE MEASURE But Rep. John Peterson, a Pennsylvania Republican, said he plans to keep pushing the measure, which would allow drilling 50 miles beyond the shoreline. Florida's congressional delegation remains staunchly opposed to offshore drilling, and Martinez noted the delegation had reached a compromise in December 2006 to give up eight million acres in the Gulf of Mexico in exchange for the state getting at least a 125-mile buffer zone from drilling. Piñon, who supports oil and gas exploration, said he met with several congressional offices Wednesday about the China-Cuba connection. He said he told them: ' `If you guys want to use this as a scare tactic to lift the moratorium on drilling off the west coast of Florida, at least be factual, be correct.' They didn't do their homework.'' China's Sinopec oil company does have an agreement with the Cuban government to develop onshore resources west of Havana, Piñon said. The Chinese have done some seismic testing, he said, but no drilling. Western diplomats in Havana told McClatchy that to the best of their knowledge there is no Chinese drilling offshore. Cuba's state oil company, Cupet, has issued exploration contracts to companies from India, Canada, Spain, Malaysia and Norway. But many oil companies from those countries have expressed reservations about how to turn potential crude oil into product. Cuba doesn't have the refinery capacity, and the biggest potential market -- the U.S. -- is off limits because of the trade embargo. McClatchy Washington Bureau reporters Kevin Hall and David Lightman contributed to this report. Source Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirehairman Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 And yet you would have me possibly approve the destruction of our coastal industry because some oil company wants to save on drilling costs. I know someone else asked but missed the answer. What coastal industry is being threatened with destruction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Thanks for calling me a dip...but it seems to me I have the added virtue of being correct. I do not advocate nationalizing the oil industry....just thought I would point that out. But they do need to explore every other option of leases they currently hold before I open up my national forests and preserves to them in the name of profits. Remember, these are yours too. My argument is with those that want to nationalize the oil industry, and those complaining about the cost of gas. It is a commodity, and when demand is high the cost is high. Personally I don't have a problem with oil companies drilling where ever, as long as they are responsible for any environmental damage they might cause. My only point is you can't have your cake and eat it too. If gas prices are so high some idiots are thinking of nationalizing the oil industry then they are high enough to open up restricted lands where high quality oil is easy to obtain. I will say it is ridiculous that the US government puts standards on US companies regarding drilling on the continental shelf that it can not enforce on foreign companies. As far as opening up additional leases, I could care less at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 I know someone else asked but missed the answer. What coastal industry is being threatened with destruction? You have ports....you have travel industry dependent upon nice coastal conditions....you have all sorts of coastal industries. Idea...versus asking me to answer....simply employ google: American Coastal Industries....see what you come up with...k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Thanks for calling me a dip...but it seems to me I have the added virtue of being correct. I do not advocate nationalizing the oil industry....just thought I would point that out. But they do need to explore every other option of leases they currently hold before I open up my national forests and preserves to them in the name of profits. Remember, these are yours too. I think you'll find Perch doesn't give a crap. He advocates cutting taxes by removing all money from national parks and, by implication, selling them off to the highest bidder who can then lay waste to them. LOL...stay informed....Cheney already said this was a lie...the Chinese are not drilling there...nor are there any plans. cheney spread the rumor to begin with. Anyway.....If Cuba wants to strike a deal with China, which it hasn't, and drill off their coastal shelf, I have no problem with that....when they have a spill....and it pollutes our water....then I will have a problem.....why don't you ask the tourist industry that relies on the coastline if they feel drilling is good or bad. Or maybe ask all the Republican governors of Florida, including Bush's brother, why none of them supported coastal drilling either. BTW, if you assume that every word Cheney says is a lie, you will be right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 My argument is with those that want to nationalize the oil industry, and those complaining about the cost of gas. It is a commodity, and when demand is high the cost is high. Personally I don't have a problem with oil companies drilling where ever, as long as they are responsible for any environmental damage they might cause. My only point is you can't have your cake and eat it too. If gas prices are so high some idiots are thinking of nationalizing the oil industry then they are high enough to open up restricted lands where high quality oil is easy to obtain. I will say it is ridiculous that the US government puts standards on US companies regarding drilling on the continental shelf that it can not enforce on foreign companies. As far as opening up additional leases, I could care less at this point. I think we can agree here much Perch. I really don't care where they drill either...as long as they can prove no other leases they hold can produce oil...if it can...drill it there. That is why they receive tax subsidies. Now...idiots would nationalize the oil/gas industry. I am a proponent though that something so vital needs to be better regulated and we need to cut out the speculators. You will see oi/gas be cut in half by getting rid of speculation.....then a rising dollar should mitigate the other increases. I believe any company can drill in international waters...if they get a permit....but our sovereignty extends beyond our shores....kind of a national easement if you will....and that is what is restricted....nothing else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 Personally I don't have a problem with oil companies drilling where ever, as long as they are responsible for any environmental damage they might cause. And there's the rub. 20 years after the Exxon Valdez disaster, Exxon are STILL fighting the damages in court. It is (at least partially) because none of us believe companies like Exxon are in any way environmentally responsible that we oppose opening up yet more areas to their drills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirehairman Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 You have ports....you have travel industry dependent upon nice coastal conditions....you have all sorts of coastal industries. Idea...versus asking me to answer....simply employ google: American Coastal Industries....see what you come up with...k To avoid getting this thread locked, I am not going to even begin to respond to your pompous, arrogant ass in the manner I would like to. Let's cover a few points: 1. I am not stupid. 2. You are assuming I am. 3. I am aware of the various industries located along our coasts. 4. You are using the impending destruction as a main point in your arguments. 5. I simply asked for clarification on your point. P.S. A Google search of "American Coastal Industries" did not yield any articles about oil exploration destroying coastal industry unless it is buried in some obscure link I'm not aware of. P.P.S. While we're talking about Google, why don't you do a Google search to find out why a majority of Montanans are ok with being dependent on foreign oil if it means there is no drilling on the Rocky Mountain Front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 a majority of Montanans are ok with being dependent on foreign oil if it means there is no drilling on the Rocky Mountain Front. NIMBY! :ducksandruns: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 To avoid getting this thread locked, I am not going to even begin to respond to your pompous, arrogant ass in the manner I would like to. Let's cover a few points: 1. I am not stupid. 2. You are assuming I am. 3. I am aware of the various industries located along our coasts. 4. You are using the impending destruction as a main point in your arguments. 5. I simply asked for clarification on your point. P.S. A Google search of "American Coastal Industries" did not yield any articles about oil exploration destroying coastal industry unless it is buried in some obscure link I'm not aware of. P.P.S. While we're talking about Google, why don't you do a Google search to find out why a majority of Montanans are ok with being dependent on foreign oil if it means there is no drilling on the Rocky Mountain Front. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtomicCEO Posted June 23, 2008 Share Posted June 23, 2008 LOL...yes it is....it costs about 19 to 25 dollars....depending on the well....to pull a barrel out of the ground. Dick. Perch wasn't going to look it up. Thanks for ruining it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted June 23, 2008 Author Share Posted June 23, 2008 One of the things we love about the gulf area down by galveston are the oil derricks 25 miles off shore, they are pretty at night, hold great fish, and help the economy. Having one 50 miles off tampa bay would be invisible, I see no reason not to do it. No one said china was drilling... but they are looking, and so is Venezuela and india. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 I promise gas isn't $4.07 a gallon when the cost of a gallon of gas doesn't have to support $40 billion in anual profits. And while I agree with tank that there's nothing prettier than Pt. Arthur on a muggy July afternoon, the cost of gas may be the least of the problems with reliance on fossil fuels anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 To avoid getting this thread locked, I am not going to even begin to respond to your pompous, arrogant ass in the manner I would like to. Let's cover a few points: 1. I am not stupid. 2. You are assuming I am. 3. I am aware of the various industries located along our coasts. 4. You are using the impending destruction as a main point in your arguments. 5. I simply asked for clarification on your point. P.S. A Google search of "American Coastal Industries" did not yield any articles about oil exploration destroying coastal industry unless it is buried in some obscure link I'm not aware of. P.P.S. While we're talking about Google, why don't you do a Google search to find out why a majority of Montanans are ok with being dependent on foreign oil if it means there is no drilling on the Rocky Mountain Front. All of those points are speculative. YOu asked me a very mundane question about which industries drilling off shore could destroy....I simply told you why ask me.....seems rather logical....find the answer for yourself....IOW...read something. Point 1....I assume you are not stupid.....that also cover point 2. If you were aware of the various industries....and still asked me the question....then you are assuming I am stupid. Point 4 is rediculous....of course a spill of major proportions would ruin the shores...hence the beaches of the tourist industry....no only that but the fishing industry....and on and on and on. So, point 5 really didn't need to be addressed...as logic could have taken care of this for you....no need to ask me. As far as Montanans are concerned....ok...I will take your word for it....you live there. I know oil companies have tons of leases in Montana.....they have every right to explore there if they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 Dick. Perch wasn't going to look it up. Thanks for ruining it. Sorry......next time I will let it pass!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShiznit Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 One of the things we love about the gulf area down by galveston are the oil derricks 25 miles off shore, they are pretty at night, hold great fish, and help the economy. Having one 50 miles off tampa bay would be invisible, I see no reason not to do it. No one said china was drilling... but they are looking, and so is Venezuela and india. Did you read the article I posted and sourced. I gives specific instances of lie after lie after lie....which you virtually parroted regarding China and drilling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted June 24, 2008 Share Posted June 24, 2008 The "Idle" oil field fallacy - from the WSJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.