F... gas prices

GTripp0012

I think high energy prices are going to force the next president's hand, whoever it may be, to drill for whatever they can.

And this is why the election process is meaningless. Millions of votes will go one way or the other on this issue alone -- and when it comes down to it, the situation is going to force one or both candidates to abandon the platform they ran on.

__________________
Shanahan: “The bad thing is he's [Sav Rocca] probably our best offensive weapon and that’s not good.”

Schneed10

Just because recent permits have been increased, and land is available for exploration, does not mean that Oil companies have chosen to drill (in many cases they haven't because the oil reserves aren't large enough for them to cover costs).

In the offshore areas where the reserves are gigantic, the potential for profit is much greater.

Furthermore, any permits for drilling that have been issued within the last few years would not lead to oil production for several more years. This is a ridiculous assessment, it's akin to grading Devin Thomas and Malcolm Kelly solely on their first 8 OTA practices. You have to give the drilling and refining process time (it takes YEARS) before you start seeing an affect on gas prices.

__________________
Skins' Salary Cap Status | CrazyCanuck's Cap Figures by Player | Salary Cap 101

onlydarksets

In the short-term, that doesn't sound right to me, unless the long-term outlook overwhelms the short-term economics.

I found this quote interesting:
Sounds like the oil companies want to pass the buck onto the American people so that they don't have to do expensive testing to find more oil. I have little sympathy that they have to pump some of their record profits back into their business to find new oil.

__________________
Stop reading my signature.

Daseal

Get used to it folks -- even if we drill, oil is only going to rise in price. It's supply and demand -- exactly what our capitalistic system is based of off. We've been stealing oil for years and made no attempts to find a renewable resource to use for energy. We squarely shot ourselves in the foot. India and China won't be looking for any less oil, and I doubt we'll touch the ANWR, which is where most of the domestic oil would be found.

We already drill in Alaska, but it's controlled and not in a national park. I've heard the argument "The people in Alaska are for it." Why wouldn't they be? They already don't pay taxes (the state picks up the tab) plus they get an 'oil check' once a year with the left over profits.

__________________
Best. Player. Available.

Schneed10

This makes so little sense, it boggles my mind.

If it costs $1.0 billion to explore, test, and drill in an area considered relatively small by oil exploration standards, only to generate $0.9 billion in expected oil revenues, why the hell would any company want to do that?

They're not passing the buck to anybody. They're not asking that someone else test it and explore it. They're simply passing on the opportunity because the payoff isn't there.

Can you explain how the American people, as a whole, benefit if Exxon loses $100 million of shareholder value on an exploration like this? Americans get a minimal added benefit in the form of increased oil supplies; mostly American shareholders of Exxon experience a $100 million loss in stock value. The loss in stock value negates the gain on oil prices.

People forget that big business comes back to help the general public.

__________________
Skins' Salary Cap Status | CrazyCanuck's Cap Figures by Player | Salary Cap 101

dmek25

this issue should have been addressed as far back as the 70's. how much more time do they need?the answer is not more oil, its an alternative

__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan

dmek25

this isn't exactly true. those large corporate tax breaks that most of the big players enjoy are mostly for research and development. so mainly, you and i are paying for the drilling

__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan

Schneed10

So because we should have addressed DE five years ago in the draft, we shouldn't address it now?

Don't we still have the need?

__________________
Skins' Salary Cap Status | CrazyCanuck's Cap Figures by Player | Salary Cap 101

Schneed10

But it's not that simple. First, we get a benefit in the form of lower gas prices to help offset the tax issue. Secondly, if the government reduces expenditures while giving those tax breaks, then the buck isn't passed. I recognize Bush has bloated spending excessively, which I certainly don't condone. But you can't look at a tax break and directly link it to the public "picking up the tab" because it assumes all else remains constant in a vacuum.

__________________
Skins' Salary Cap Status | CrazyCanuck's Cap Figures by Player | Salary Cap 101

onlydarksets

You're worried about $100 million in shareholder value measured up against properly incentivizing oil companies to develop alternative fuels? That's disappointing.

What happens after they exhaust this supply? They have to explore the 68 million acres anyway, because they are going to do the same thing they've done for decades past, which is to ignore the fact that oil is not a renewable resource. The oil companies want the quick fix (which I understand). I also don't begrudge them their record profits (I've stated in the past that this is our fault, as consumers, for paying increasing prices instead of demanding they develop alternatives).

However, giving the oil companies another free pass does not help the consumers in the long run. The current path is simply not a sustainable position.

__________________
Stop reading my signature.

dmek25

all im saying is that this isn't a single party issue. if congress wants to be taken seriously, let them explain what they have been doing the last couple of decades to try and alleviate our dependency on oil. because most of those guys are career politicians

__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan

onlydarksets

Not if it means bringing in Jason Taylor at the expense of a first round pick. Your faith in big oil is frighteningly naive.

__________________
Stop reading my signature.

dmek25

oh contraire, mon fraire. those oil companies are specifically told those breaks are under the conditions of re investing in further research and development. and we all know our gov't would never lie to us, would they? or are the lunatics running the asylum again?

__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan