$5.00 per gallon gas

[Phil B.]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

You seriously want to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWAR)?

If you suspend gas taxes how do you plan to maintain roads?

The Keystone XL pipeline is not an oil reserve it is just a pipeline. The same amount of oil flows into the USA from Canada via other methods.

You understand less than I do.
Yes it is safe drilling..exploring in that area.
Yes but with 2 pipeline areas coming in that's roughly 1.5 times you had before.
The system is sitting there basically idol.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[slimslob]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

The same amount of oil flows into the USA from Canada via other methods.

Mostly huge trains of tanker cars that travel through major cities at night. One derailment and you have a spill within a populated area that is Exxon Valdez in size. Nowhere near as environmentally and humanly safe as a pipeline.

[slimslob]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Gas prices, already at record highs, expected to go higher | Just The News

[Phil B.]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Gas prices, already at record highs, expected to go higher | Just The News

Biden built that.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[bsm2]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Free market sets the price of oil

So ends your lesson for today

[SalesServiceGuy]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

One of the big problems facing the USA is that there has not been a single new refinery built in the country since 1977. Demand has increased much faster than the refineries can add extra capacity.

There is a definite cap on the max numbers of refined litres that can be produced in the USA. What extra demand that cannot be refined in the USA has to be imported.

When a refinery goes off line, either due to forced maintenance, natural disaster or lack of inbound oil tankers prices will spike. Global crude oil prices and rising oil tanker ship fees also increase prices.

So much is not in the control of any President, that it is mean spirited and uninformed to point fingers.

[slimslob]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

https://www.theblaze.com/news/video-line-of-teslas-wait-to-charge?utm_source=theblaze-breaking

[SalesServiceGuy]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

You understand less than I do.
Yes it is safe drilling..exploring in that area.
Yes but with 2 pipeline areas coming in that's roughly 1.5 times you had before.
The system is sitting there basically idol.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

What proof do you have that drilling for oil and exploring for oil in ANWAR is safe?

List of the Cons of Drilling in ANWR

1. It could threaten the way of life for indigenous tribes.

There are people who currently live in ANWR as they have done since their ancestors first moved to the region. Although the climate is often challenging, especially near the northern portion above the Arctic Circle, changing the environment to accommodate drilling could disrupt their living patterns. These tribes rely on local caribou and other wildlife for their sustenance. There is a very real possibility that migration routes could shift, which could force people off of their lands.

2. The amount of oil produced by ANWR is relatively insignificant.

On the average year in the United States, there are 3.7 billion barrels of oil which come through American ports. The total that is available in this wildlife region would allow for about 6 years of independence at best assuming that the current consumption levels stay the say. The additional products coming from here would not make a significant difference on the price of crude oil as an international commodity, nor would it help to foster energy independence in an impactful way. The results would create a minimal uptick in what could be stored as an emergency reserve at best.

3. There is the increased risk of oil spills in the region.

Oil spills that occur on natural preserves are devastating to the environment and local wildlife. The liquid will coat the feathers or fur of the animals, which destroys the insulation they have to the cold weather in the region. It also negates the water-repellant abilities, so there is an increase in the risk of hypothermia as well. There is a risk that plants could be killed, and the animals eating oil-covered plants would be poisoned when the product is ingested.

4. Production activities destroy the tundra.

When companies begin to explore for oil in regions like ANWR, they create an immediate and negative impact on the local environment. The tracks that their vehicles leave behind can be seen for decades after the event. If production occurs in this region, then there will be new power lines installed, increased road traffic, and construction trucks moving up and down the tundra. Even the noise and debris from these operations would be enough to disrupt caribou and waterfowl living habits.

5. Local wildlife impacts could have global consequences.

Boelman notes that there are birds that cover every puddle and pond in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge when the warmer days of spring start to come. There are endangered species that come to this region, along with birds who migrate from all over the world. “If something happens to their breeding grounds,” she told State of the Planet, “it will impact the rest of the planet.” The area designated for drilling is also a critical calving ground for caribou that could be disrupted by the drilling activities.

6. It isn’t a place where energy companies want to be in the first place.

When the first studies about the potential for lease interest went out to energy companies about this opportunity in ANWR, most of them stayed away from the idea without giving it a closer look. Oil explorers in this region would face additional challenges because they’re drilling in an area where no one has a lot of experience. There are no guarantees of resources to be found there yet. Environmentalists seeking to protect the land would likely file lawsuits in an attempt to prevent development activities. Then there is the fact that a future administration could ban or block their investment in the future. Unless oil prices rise and then stay high, this isn’t a project most will pursue anyway.

7. Accessing it now would remove a potential reserve for the future.

The reality of today’s world is that we are starting to look for ways to reduce the use of fossil fuels. We don’t need the resources that are sitting beneath this nature preserve right now. Having access to it won’t impact the cost of oil or natural gas in significant ways. Although there is an employment benefit to consider, even these positions would be temporary. If we know that this resource is available, then keeping it as a critical reserve could be the wiser course of action.

8. It will eventually run out.

The primary disadvantage that we all face when drilling in ANWR is that this is a finite product. Even if we tap all of the reserves which are available here, there isn’t going to be anything to produce one day. We will move on, but the delicate ecosystems of the tundra will stay ravaged for generations. Is it worthwhile to create lasting change in an environment which already supports our needs to generate a few billion dollars’ worth of economic activity over a couple of decades?

9. More natural resource use equates to higher levels of greenhouse gas production.

If we have access to more crude oil, then it becomes possible to create more refined products from this resource. This results in a higher level of greenhouse gas production which could offer ongoing negative impacts to the planet. Although there is some contention about the cause of the world’s warming trend, it is difficult to ignore the fact that it is getting hotter outside. Global land and ocean temperatures as an anomaly have not experienced a decline since the 1970s. They are also at their highest levels in history today.

[SalesServiceGuy]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Reduce speed limits and car-free Sundays: The IEA has a 10-point plan to cut oil use

• Many organizations are calling for a cut in fossil fuel use, actually achieving such an aim is a gargantuan task.
• “France and all European countries must get out of their dependence on fossil fuels,” Barbara Pompili, a French government minister, says.
• The IEA’s latest report follows on from the publication of another 10-point plan centered around reducing Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas.

Speed limits on highways should be cut by at least 10 kilometers per hour (6.2 mph) to help lower oil demand, the International Energy Agency said Friday.
The recommendation is part of a wider 10-point plan published by the Paris-based organization.

“We estimate that the full implementation of these measures in advanced economies alone can cut oil demand by 2.7 million barrels a day within the next four months, relative to current levels,” the IEA’s report said.

The 2.7 million figure equated to the oil demand of all cars in China, it added in a news release.Part or full adoption of the measures in emerging economies would amplify their effect, it also said.

The plan comes at a time when oil markets are facing significant uncertainty and volatility following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February.

Russia is a major supplier of oil and gas, but its actions in Ukraine have caused several economies to try and find ways to reduce their reliance on Russian hydrocarbons.

In a news conference broadcast via Zoom on Friday morning, the IEA’s executive director, Fatih Birol, described oil markets as being in an “emergency situation.” Birol added that things “may get worse” over the next few months.

Against this backdrop, the IEA’s other suggestions to reduce oil demand include:

• Working from home for as much as three days per week, when possible.
• Car-free Sundays for cities.
• Reducing the cost of public transport and encouraging people to walk and cycle.
• Avoiding air travel for business when other options are available.
• Traveling on high speed or night trains instead of flying when it’s practicable to do so.
• And reinforcing the uptake of electric and “more efficient” vehicles. The full list can be read here.

"Reducing oil use must not remain a temporary measure,” the IEA’s report said. “Sustained reductions are desirable in order not only to improve energy security but also to tackle climate change and reduce air pollution.”

It added that governments had “all the necessary tools at their disposal to put oil demand into decline in the coming years, which would support efforts to both strengthen energy security and achieve vital climate goals.”

A number of organizations are calling for a cut in fossil fuel use, but actually achieving such an aim is a gargantuan task. The vast majority of cars on our roads, for instance, still use gasoline or diesel, while energy companies continue to discover new oil and gas fields in a variety of locations around the world.
In a statement issued Friday, the IEA acknowledged that the majority of its proposals “would require changes in the behaviour of consumers, supported by government measures.”

“How and if these actions are implemented is subject to each country’s own circumstances – in terms of their energy markets, transport infrastructure, social and political dynamics and other aspects,” the IEA said.

Also commenting on the IEA’s plans was Barbara Pompili, the French minister for the ecological transition.

“France and all European countries must get out of their dependence on fossil fuels, in particular on Russian fossil fuels as soon as possible,” she said.
“It is an absolute necessity, for the climate but also for our energy sovereignty. The plan proposed today by the IEA offers some interesting ideas, some of which are in line with our own ideas to reduce our dependence on oil.”

The IEA’s report follows on from the publication of another 10-point plan centered around reducing Europe’s dependence on Russian natural gas.

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Reduce speed limits and car-free Sundays: The IEA has a 10-point plan to cut oil use

• can be read here.

HAHAHA!!!


Liberals never learn. SSG is about to be taught a valuable lesson. The people aren't at all interested in your asinine plan to stay at home more and not drive. Nope. They're gonna vote the democrats out this November. Thanks for making it so damn easy. Candy from a baby.

[slimslob]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Americans overwhelmingly want Biden to increase domestic energy production, polls shows | Just The News

[bsm2]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Oh No gas prices are going Down what will the poor Amigos Bitch and Moan about now

[Phil B.]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Oh No gas prices are going Down what will the poor Amigos Bitch and Moan about now

Down 3 cents a gal, soon expect the price to increase again.
#BidenBuiltThis

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[slimslob]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas

Oh No gas prices are going Down what will the poor Amigos Bitch and Moan about now

And today the bench mark crude oil price in the US was up over $100 a hogs head again $105.32 for WTI (West Texas Intermediate) at close. High for the day reached $106.28. Crude Oil Price Today | BRENT OIL PRICE CHART | OIL PRICE PER BARREL | Markets Insider

[bsm2]

Re: $5.00 per gallon gas