NEW STRATEGY FOR ATTACKING THE OIL SHORTAGE CRISIS AND AT THE SAME TIME INCREASING OUR NATIONAL SECURITY
SECURE OUR COUNTRY
Click here to join the "Lower_Oil_Prices" group at YahooGroups
Our current Oil Independence strategies
are highly flawed. If you want to fully understand, then keep reading....
We will attempt to show you what we need to do to become truely independant
from foreign oil. And we debunk all the excuses that most liberals use
to NOT drill for more oil. We also explain why the conservatives strategy
will not work to reduce prices either. Basically, both sides are wrong
and we go into the rationale behind that statement. Have fun reading and
then get involved!
|TRUE OIL INDEPENDENCE – THE HOW'S & WHY'S|
|Why should we become Truly Oil Independent|
|How to become Truly Oil Independent|
|6 Most common BOGUS reasons why we shouldn't drill in the restricted areas.|
|1. CO2 contributes to Global Warming, so we don't need MORE OIL, we need LESS oil and better conservation and different energy sources.|
|2. The RISK of ecological disaster is too great.|
|3. There is no PROOF that there is oil in these new areas they want to drill in.|
|4. More oil will NOT reduce the price of oil.|
|5. Drilling now will take 10 years to make a difference.|
|6. Why would the oil companies want to sell oil in the USA cheaper than on the world market?|
|NOT So bugus rhetoric from the critics.|
|How can I make a difference NOW?|
|Why Yahoo Groups?|
OIL INDEPENDENCE – THE HOW'S & WHY'S
We need to become truly independent and the reasons we need to do it are plentiful. Now HOW do we get there? We can use our own reserves that are estimated in the billions of barrels - enough to last well over a hundred years (plenty of time to find other sources of energy) Ensure those resources are NOT sold to the world market. So, even unrest in the Middle East would have little or no direct effect on OUR cost of oil!!!!!
Why should we become Truly Oil Independent
True independence does a few things.How to become Truly Oil Independent
CHEAPER cost for energy MidEast conflict will NOT raise OUR costs Gives us time to develop better energy sources while NOT destroying our economy and families livelihoods LESS MONEY goes to terrorists countries from USA MID-EAST OPEC will no longer be able to have us wrapped around their middle finger Better control over speculators, since the world commodities markets don't have to abide by OUR restrictions UN--REGULATED Speculators will be SHUT OUT. Basically eliminated from the USA Oil playground. Better control over price fixing, since we can NOT control OPEC's desire to price fix. Our over-spending that causes massive inflation WILL NOT AFFECT the price of oil that much, because we are only selling oil to the USA, NOT GLOBALLY. If sold globally, then sure inflation will have a direct proportional affect on the price of oil. But if drilled here and sold here, then there is no need to increase the cost of oil ;) Sort of inflation proof!!!! <As long as we pump as much oil as we are consuming>
To accomplish this Congress needs to do the following:
The new law would be fair to the oil companies that have already made investments in existing wells based on prevailing global prices. Any new drilling in the areas mentioned above would be based on a new calculus necessitated by the new law. Oil from existing wells would be allowed to be sold on the open market. Another advantage of the Reed strategy is that when Middle East problems arise, our oil prices will NOT be directly affected... PERIOD!!!!!)
6 Most common BOGUS reasons why we shouldn't drill in the restricted areas.
CO2 contributes to Global Warming, so we don't need MORE OIL, we need LESS
oil and better conservation and different energy sources.
If you watch and listen to the Global Warming <GW> crowd, they will say that since historically, it's shown that in periods of high temperatures that there is a corresponding elevation of CO2 levels. They then make the cardinal sin of concluding that increased CO2 means you will have a raise in temperature. Using Al Gore's analogy, he would tell people to STOP taking medicine because it's shown historically that people taking medicine are SICK and thus stop taking medicine so that less people will be sick. Funny? No, it's false assumptions based on cause and effect. It's quite possible that increases in temperature actually melt away tundra's that contain frozen CO2 and then the CO2 is released and thus more CO2 in the air. Plus if you study history, you will find that the GW people are the same ones that were screaming Global Cooling in the 70s. YES...NO JOKE. Plus you have the GW people say that we've warmed up a lot in the past century. WHAT THEY DIDN'T TELL YOU was that warming / cooling cycles occur naturally and that the period of warming also just so happened to be after the end of the little ice age that occurred in the 1700s. So, it's NATURAL that the median temperature should have increased. What the GW people don't tell you is that since about 2004 we have actually been COOLING. And if you look at the GW reports sent to the U.N., you will find that the data they use to represent their case shows data all the way up to 2004. Ask yourself why? I think you know the answer. Also, what the GW people don't tell you is that the entire solar system is warming. In fact in a interestingly UNIFORM way. Now what do I mean by that. I mean that as Earth warmed, so did Jupiter, so did Pluto, and so did Mars and others. I've heard some right wing people say that it's all caused by the higher output of the Sun. And as a matter of fact, the Sun IS outputting more energy. BUT, their analysis is faulty because if the temperature gain was due solely to the higher output of the Sun, then the amount of warming occurring on Pluto would be much less than occurring on the Earth. The amount of Sun (solar output) that Pluto gets is just a small fraction than what the Earth gets because Earth is so much closer to the Sun. So, solar output is NOT the answer. Personally, I think that since we are entering the galaxies central plane, it means we are going to get more and more gamma rays. Since these rays are emitted from the galactic center, then the uniform warming would be expected. The year 2012 is when we reach the galactic center in case you are interested. GW people use scare tactics like "point of no return" and false cause/effect to get you to go along with them. The sad thing is that just 10 years ago, they were saying that "In 10 years we will reach a tipping point of no return." Hmm, it's 10 years later and they are saying the same thing. So, if they couldn't be trusted THEN, then why trust them now?
The RISK of ecological disaster is too great.
Some might say "Well, there will be great risk of devastation to our environment!". Well, you have to look at the history. If you realize that our safety regulations have worked very well and that no significant oil spills have occurred for over 25 years and that even after Katrina hit hundreds of rigs in the Gulf and that none of them leaked, you have to admit that it's pretty darn safe. BUT if you are just not willing to take the risk, BECAUSE THERE IS A CHANCE for a disaster, then challenge all those people to vote this way on these issues:
There is no PROOF that there is oil in these new areas they want to drill
Some will say "There is no PROOF that there is any oil in those new locations!". Challenge those people with "Great, so if there is NO OIL, then you should NOT FEAR oil spills!!!!!" Also challenge them with this "With thinking like that, then we should NOT be spending large sums of money on stem cell research, or other cancer cures, or ANY RESEARCH AT ALL for that matter!!!!" Because what's research after all? It's an investigation into something that is not yet proven!!!!! Oil companies have suggested that there are huge sums of oil located in those areas, They are much more credible than the nay sayers. They are in the business to make money, to make a lot of money, to make shitloads of money....RIGHT? Environmentalist wackos cannot be trusted with such decisions! NOTE: Not all environmentalists are wackos. If you still don't believe me, ask yourself a simple question...."WHY would the oil companies want to spend millions of dollars to drill where there is NO oil, or drill where they will only get a couple hundred barrels of oil? " .
More oil will NOT reduce the price of oil.
This bill is important, because in a "world market" our oil production will make a small dent in the worlds needs, thus lowering the price of oil by a small dent. Plus, just like with bandwidth and hard drive space, the more that is available, the more will be consumed, so in a world market with lots of 3rd and 2nd world countries just getting revved up, our contribution to the world supply won't turns prices around by a large degree. HOWEVER, WE CAN provide a HUGE difference to our own oil supply. Thus making a huge difference in price. Thus making the oil pumped to be sold here ONLY, will go a long way to reducing prices. Some people will say that speculators will keep the price high like it is now. The problem with that thinking is that the speculators are NOT all speculating on Wall Street. There are MANY commodities exchanges around the world for these speculators to invest their money and drive oil prices up. BUT...but if we ONLY SELL TO USA, then the speculators outside the US will NOT be able to do so. The oil or oil commodities can only be sold to US interests. Sure....a guy in India could have his buddy in the US buy a futures contract for him for the oil commodities, BUT the american that bought the futures contract HAS TO ABIDE BY THE USA TRADE COMMISSION RULES. These rules are currently NOT FOLLOWED in the world market of futures trading....and hence the speculation problems. So, by selling HERE ONLY, we eliminate yet another thorn in the price of oil bush.
Drilling now will take 10 years to make a difference.
That is such a dumb argument that it's not even worth addressing except for those people who are truly short sighted. Clinton VETOED a bill around 10 years ago based on the fact that it wouldn't be useful for another 10 years. Well....guess what? It's now ten years later and we could have been reaping the benefits if he had not vetoed the drilling bill. So, thanks a !@#^%$'king lot Bill Clinton. Anytime someone says you shouldn't do something because of the time it will take are simply STUPID PEOPLE or people with a different agenda and want to HIDE their agenda by using a flimsy excuse. Extrapolating that reasoning:
Why would the oil companies want to sell oil in the USA cheaper than on
the world market?
It works out like this. Let's pretend you have an electrical power plant. And let's pretend you supply California for 20cents a unit and let's say you have an abundance (extra) and that Colorado will pay 10cents a unit AND that it costs you 2 cents a unit to deliver the product. Then you as a company WILL SELL to Colorado, because if you don't someone else will and either way, you LOSE MONEY. SOOOOOO, the Oil companies WILL sell the products here in the USA cheaper than on the world market. Just 3 years ago, it was $50 a barrel, there's no reason why we can't have $50 a barrel oil again. I know we can't go back to $25 a barrel, because the cost of getting oil out of these newer areas are more expensive, but we've had Gulf Coast Oil rigs for many many years and they were built where oil was under $40 a barrel. So, $50 is a reasonable mark.
So bugus rhetoric from the critics.
They are correct when they say that drilling and getting more oil won't force the prices down. But the point they miss is that although pumping more oil onto the world market may not reduce prices that much, they fail to think of the REED-PLAN. And that is .... all new oil pumped can only be sold in the USA. That WILL make a huge difference in the price of oil that USA people pay.
They are correct when they say we need windmills and solar instead of more oil, only IF they don't want the REED-PLAN when we drill here and sell here. Again, if we sell onto the world market, then the price of oil won't go down that much, but windmills and solar would produce energy that is USED HERE in the USA.
SO, they have HALF the equation right.
You need to create energy that is CONSUMED IN THE USA. Where they go wrong
is using bogus excuses to get their way and to NOT inform the people that
we CAN drill here and sell here if the congress really wanted to make it
so. So, you have to ask yourself, does congress have our best interests
in mind? You already know what I think, but what do YOU think?
can I make a difference NOW?
The sad reality is that ONE person alone can't make a big difference. In order to make a difference, you need to have a large following of like minded thinking people all contacting their senators and representatives. In order for congress to feel they need to move in this direction, they need to REALLY feel the heat. To turn up the heat, contact their representatives and Senators once or twice a week until they take positive action. It all starts with getting the masses involved.
Simple. Just follow these steps.
Why should you join the "Lower_Oil_Prices" Yahoo Group?
to join lower_oil_prices group at Yahoo