Announcement Announcement Module
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Republicans say new study belies Obama claim US has 2 percent of world oil Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse



Latest Topics Latest Topics Module
Collapse


X
Conversation Detail Module
Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Republicans say new study belies Obama claim US has 2 percent of world oil

    Republican senators are accusing President Obama of pushing a "less-than-honest" claim about the scarcity of domestic oil, after a U.S. Geological Survey study showed the United States might actually hold a quarter of the world's untapped, undiscovered supply.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz1sbFWMoE9

  • #2
    Not sure how much it matters as not a drop of it belongs to "us".

    Comment


    • #3
      I would not even have to hear the assertion by BHO. He cannot tell the truth, never heard of the truth, hates the truth, hides the truth. Therefore whatever he says is a lie.
      On the plus side, I hear he likes Guinness.

      Comment


      • #4
        Obama may be making a factual statement but he is using it to sway the ignorant in a deceptive way in order gin up public pressure for his policy initiatives.

        The average American is not aware of the difference between proven oil reserves and recoverable oil reserves. Politicians and public officials exploit this ignorance. Proven oil reserves are those that are economically feasible to extract at the present time. Recoverable oil reserves are too costly to extract presently, but with advances in technology and higher oil prices these reserves are becoming more and more economically feasible to extract every day. The fox news article the OP linked alluded this.

        When you hear Obama say "the problem is we use more than 20 percent of the world's oil and we only have 2 percent of the world's proven oil reserves." "Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil" Then follow that with a plan to expand federal regulatory authority. Obama is leaving the impression in the minds of the ignorant that the US has no chance of ever competing domestically in the oil market, nor vastly increase its ability to supply its own consumption of oil. Obama is from the government and he's here to help.

        US recoverable oil reserves are where it is at. We need to be developing infrastructure and industry to extract, transport, and refine our ever increasing oil supplies. After all the free flow of oil at market prices is vital to individual Americans independent lifestyle in the modern world. The central planners in Washington thrive off of the dependency of these individuals on them. If they can get public policy in place that furthers this dependency they will push that policy forward at any opportunity.

        Comment


        • #5
          Was this " study " approved of by ALEC ? They're shaping reality through controlled truth.Our problem isn't oil ownership,it's oil usage.Everyone knows it,but those standing to gain [ at the expense of the future ] will do everything possible to avoid the true focus/gist of the problem.Canada has just came up with a plan to re-route their intended pipeline into the U.S.,addressing environmental concerns.Cudos to them,a much better solution than jamming things through by lobbying the right liars.Solutions don't always have to go through the "proper channels" to be right or effective.The "proper channels" channels role is to expedite solutions EVEN when those solutions come from environmentalists--labeled as impediments by industries wooing our legislators.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by o.a.b. View Post
            Our problem isn't oil ownership,it's oil usage.
            Yes and the central planners in Washington have many ideas that will help the masses to conserve and save us from ourselves. And as you often point out whatever they come up with will not apply to them.

            Comment


            • #7
              http://www.freemarketamerica.org/


              chilling video clip

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by majorspark View Post
                When you hear Obama say [I]"the problem is we use more than 20 percent of the world's oil and we only have 2 percent of the world's proven oil reserves."
                And, the left always fails to point out that the U.S. also generates 25% of WORLD GDP.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Levi View Post
                  Republican senators are accusing President Obama of pushing a "less-than-honest" claim about the scarcity of domestic oil, after a U.S. Geological Survey study showed the United States might actually hold a quarter of the world's untapped, undiscovered supply.

                  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz1sbFWMoE9
                  I would not even have to hear the assertion by faux news. It cannot tell the truth, never heard of the truth, hates the truth, hides the truth. Therefore whatever it says is a lie.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by majorspark View Post
                    Obama may be making a factual statement but he is using it to sway the ignorant in a deceptive way in order gin up public pressure for his policy initiatives.

                    The average American is not aware of the difference between proven oil reserves and recoverable oil reserves. Politicians and public officials exploit this ignorance. Proven oil reserves are those that are economically feasible to extract at the present time. Recoverable oil reserves are too costly to extract presently, but with advances in technology and higher oil prices these reserves are becoming more and more economically feasible to extract every day. The fox news article the OP linked alluded this.

                    When you hear Obama say "the problem is we use more than 20 percent of the world's oil and we only have 2 percent of the world's proven oil reserves." "Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil" Then follow that with a plan to expand federal regulatory authority. Obama is leaving the impression in the minds of the ignorant that the US has no chance of ever competing domestically in the oil market, nor vastly increase its ability to supply its own consumption of oil. Obama is from the government and he's here to help.

                    US recoverable oil reserves are where it is at. We need to be developing infrastructure and industry to extract, transport, and refine our ever increasing oil supplies. After all the free flow of oil at market prices is vital to individual Americans independent lifestyle in the modern world. The central planners in Washington thrive off of the dependency of these individuals on them. If they can get public policy in place that furthers this dependency they will push that policy forward at any opportunity.
                    WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!

                    If we are going to invest the kind of money you suggest above, we MUST invest it in sustainable technology. I would rather see 100 Solyndra failures than one more dollar spent to try to recover expensive oil reserves. We need to develop technologies that use energy more efficiently, and new types of sustainable technologies such as hydrogen power for vehicles and solar power for electricity. It would be almost as cheap to develop solar generation in space transmitted to ground by microwaves as to recover much of the oil mentioned in these articles. It's stupid to spend money on something we are going to run out of eventually, even it's another 100 years down the road. Invest NOW in the technology we will need by 2050, and we will be much better off.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by jimmacqueen View Post
                      WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!

                      If we are going to invest the kind of money you suggest above, we MUST invest it in sustainable technology. I would rather see 100 Solyndra failures than one more dollar spent to try to recover expensive oil reserves. We need to develop technologies that use energy more efficiently, and new types of sustainable technologies such as hydrogen power for vehicles and solar power for electricity. It would be almost as cheap to develop solar generation in space transmitted to ground by microwaves as to recover much of the oil mentioned in these articles. It's stupid to spend money on something we are going to run out of eventually, even it's another 100 years down the road. Invest NOW in the technology we will need by 2050, and we will be much better off.
                      Jim,
                      I agree that we MUST as fast as possible move to sustainable fuel technology, but we must also continue to obtain what is in our ground in the meantime and stop going after what is oversees. In other words lets be dependent of our own resources. That is the part where the left and the right fail!

                      I'm also distraught by your comment regarding the Solyndra failure. If you do some reasearch....it was already known it was going to fail...so we should not have gone that route. When you fail it gives you a chance to make changes to eventually succed, but if it is a known failure...it should stop and move into another direction!
                      Last edited by wisdome; 04-24-2012, 10:31 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        It automactically lost credibility when your thread started with " Republicans say"

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Bubbles*545 View Post
                          It automactically lost credibility when your thread started with " Republicans say"

                          Had you taken the blinders off you would have noticed the information came from the US Geological Survey.

                          Fooled again by your monthly union propaganda; I mean newletter ??

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            No newsletter ( i spelled it correctly), just tired of watching a bunch of bought and paid for Republicans protect the 1%.
                            Since you are blinded by hate , here is what is really happening:

                            1) Bush had the plane (a metaphor for the country) headed into the ground.
                            2) Obama gets into the pilot seat, saves the Banks, saves the auto industry, finally gets Bin Laden and the economy starts a slow swing upward.
                            3) The same bought and paid for for Republicans I mentioned before hate the new pilot so much they are willing to crash the plane (with us onboard) just to get rid of the new pilot.
                            QuackerOats share your Fox news / Koch Brother drivel that you have been spoon fed with your buddies at the next (tea or me) party meeting.
                            Last edited by JJ; 04-24-2012, 11:17 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by jimmacqueen View Post
                              It would be almost as cheap to develop solar generation in space transmitted to ground by microwaves as to recover much of the oil mentioned in these articles.
                              Solar power is currently 3X more expensive to produce than fossil fuel. I'd be curious to learn how beaming it from farking orbit will reduce said cost.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X