Oil crisis looms / LJWorld.com

Letters to the Editor

March 5, 2009

To the editor:

Global oil production will hit its peak in a few decades, at which point oil prices will skyrocket and consumers like the United States and China will quickly drain every last barrel they can afford to buy. As supplies dwindle, an economic disaster dwarfing Katrina will unfold.

The U.S. GAO concluded there’s an urgent need to assess and develop alternative energy technologies to avert “severe economic damage.” The DOE warned of “extremely damaging” impacts if measures aren’t put in place at least 10 years ahead of time.

Peak oil impacts range from dire to catastrophic. At best, we face a crippling recession and widespread inflation. At worst, we face severe global food shortages threatening wide-scale starvation and an overall breakdown of social and economic institutions. And if history’s any guide, we should expect a series of military invasions into every remaining oil field on the planet.

Ask yourself: When oil becomes scarce, how will I get food? How will my water district purify water without petrochemicals? Which of my medications are made out of petrochemicals? How will I get to work? Will I even have a job anymore?

Some point at alternative energy technologies as a silver bullet. But most energy analysts say it’ll be decades before such alternatives are available for wide-scale implementation.

We’ve kept our head in the sand for too long, and rather than address this issue, we continue to focus our attention on more important matters like roundabouts and football fields. I think it’s time to change the subject.

Steve Craven,

Lawrence

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

5 March 2009
at 12:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

Anytime you here that the sky is falling, you should be a alert to someone trying to take away some of your freedom.

What will really happen: rising energy prices will create new markets for these alternative energy sources, and entrepreneurs will quickly step in to capitalize. Hmm, well that's what would happen in a free market.

What will really happen, for real: rising energy prices will create new markets for these alternative energy sources, but large government subsidies and strict regulation will inhibit the market from reacting causing entrepreneurs to be slow to respond, or to not respond at all (how can you compete with the government?). The energy crisis gets worse, our leaders blame it on greed and the market, calling for more subsidies and more regulation. Catastrophy ensues. I guess Craven is right after all.
5 March 2009
at 4:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Steve, don't despair, I think all the measures Obama, Pelosi and Reid are putting into motion are going to save us all from these cataclysmic events you have described. They are in essence saving us from ourselves, as though do know what's best for us, and the for the world for that matter. These are some incredibly talented leaders, especially Nancy Pelosi. We're lucky to have this highly talented folks, and the other folks like Geithner, Sebelius, Holder, Clinton etc etc who know how to solve these dire problems you have written about.
5 March 2009
at 4:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

sb: “….these highly talented folks….”

To expound on my earlier post, it's been made clear to the American people that they are not capable of handling their own affairs, their own lives if you will. Obama and his people have finally convinced everyone that this is indeed the situation. They are our friends, Steve, and they want to make life much better for us and all future generations. They are selfless givers and some of the most compassionate people ever to be in Washington—especially Nancy Pelosi. They consider themselves as servants to us and never forget who they represent.

They are just the best, Steve, and don't worry too much!
5 March 2009
at 4:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Shoot! Al Gore–how could I have forgotten to mention the wonderful works of Al Gore. He may singe-handedly started this entire cycle of positive change in which the government steps in and takes care of all our problems by controlling our seemingly out of control selves. Al Gore is the champion of global cooling.
5 March 2009
at 4:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

I meant global warming (Freudian slip) I guess. See, I had just heard and read about now supposed global cooling. Must be just a bunch of scientists in the tank for the right-wing–evil!
5 March 2009
at 5 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Logrithmic, you're getting your wish. Like I would suggest to Steve Craven, don't worry, be happy. Socialism is here to save us all from certain doom. Free market economy? We should've known it wouldn't work 200 years ago.

May god bless and keep you.
5 March 2009
at 6:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

Drive your unicorn-toot powered car & smile, smile, smile.

5 March 2009
at 7:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xbusguy (Anonymous) says…

If you want someone to voice an opinion… just mention “change the subject”
Log v Tom = undecided.
5 March 2009
at 7:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

tumbilweed (Anonymous) says…

“But most energy analysts say it’ll be decades before such alternatives are available for wide-scale implementation.”

—

This has given me pause for some time. If I understand the system even just a little, I am inclined to believe that this is so because of the power of lobbyists and the oil companies supressing research/ legislation on new technologies in favor of the much more immediately profitable status quo, i.e. burning fossil fuels

So what I am led to believe is, the reason these technologies are perpetually “in the future” is because big oil wants it that way….out of self- interest and profit and nothing more. They will keep shrouding their stubbornness in car and oil advertisements with plenty of green spread all over, to cover up the soot…..
5 March 2009
at 7:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jumpin_catfish (Anonymous) says…

Saying “Oil crisis looms” is like saying a comet may hit the earth. Both statements are likely to happen but when and how. We could have a oil crisis next week if Israel attacks Iran. Remember this, just a few short months ago we were told that we would never see $2.00 a gallon gas again so all the scary talk about oil crisis has little if any effect on us. With that said we urgently need development of alternate fuels, if for no other reason national security but the bozos in Washington will never get it done.
5 March 2009
at 7:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

devobrun (Anonymous) says…

Technology which is too expensive is a result of the need for too much energy to make it.
The reason photovoltaic cells are expensive is that they require a lot of energy to make. Ditto all the other technologies so far.
No amount of monetary subsidies change this poor energy balance.

Engineers have been working on these technologies for many decades. They perform poorly because they don't work. No amount of wishful thinking will change the situation. Apparently you have been unaware of the massive amount of work that engineers have put into alternative energy since the time of Edison and Ford.
The only people with their head in the sand are the alternative energy proponents who are ignorant of the efforts that have been around since the first windmill went up in Holland .

Why did engineers choose fossil fuel? Because it worked better than windmills. Did in 1537, does today.

Will viable alternative energy systems come along in the future? Maybe, but not because of government intervention and insistence that we must adopt faulty systems.

It won't be politicians and lawyers saving yer sorry butt.
5 March 2009
at 8:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

“March 2, 2009 — For those who have endured this winter's frigid temperatures and today's heavy snowstorm in the Northeast, the concept of global warming may seem, well, almost wishful.
But climate is known to be variable — a cold winter, or a few strung together doesn't mean the planet is cooling. Still, according to a new study, global warming may have hit a speed bump and could go into hiding for decades.
Earth's climate continues to confound scientists. Following a 30-year trend of warming, global temperatures have flatlined since 2001 despite rising greenhouse gas concentrations, and a heat surplus that should have cranked up the planetary thermostat.”
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/03…
5 March 2009
at 8:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

It will only take a couple of weeks for the country to switch from oil to air power.

Green lives!

And may Darwin light your path!!
5 March 2009
at 9:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Pilgrim2 (Anonymous) says…

logrithmic (Anonymous) says…

“Anytime you here that the sky is falling, you should be a alert to someone trying to take away some of your freedom”

*************************************

This from someone who has asked the Journal World to ban me from the forum for stating my point of view! What a hypocrite.
=======================

I don't know if Liberty is a hypocrite or not, though I suspect not, but what s/he wrote is truth.
5 March 2009
at 9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

Lib_one says:
“What will really happen: rising energy prices will create new markets for these alternative energy sources, and entrepreneurs will quickly step in to capitalize. Hmm, well that's what would happen in a free market.”

Problem is, energy is not like other sectors of the market. If the price of tennis racquet string goes up, it drives up the price of tennis racquets. If the price of energy goes up, it drives up the price of everything. We need to subsidize the transition to renewable energy before energy becomes too expensive for the “free” (always been a myth) market to necessitate the transition.

5 March 2009
at 9:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

logrithmic, do you think that nobody here shares your views? You need to be banned because you dumb down the conversation. Look at all the nazi references in your posts, do you really think that makes you look smart? I would respond to the substance of your post, but there's no point—you are incapable of civil discourse. If you can write an intelligent, non-invective filled post I would gladly respond, but I won't hold my breath.
5 March 2009
at 9:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

Cappy, but where do we get the money for the subsidies? It has to come from somewhere, so the price of everything is going to go up no matter what.

Subsidizing it only makes the problems worse. If it's subsidized, than market forces aren't allowed to operate and the market gets skewed. For example, if the price of gas is kept artificially low, then people don't change their consumption habits. But as gas prices rise, people buy more fuel efficient cars, they take the bus, the train, or they move closer to work. As prices rise, businesses buy products from more local sources etc. If prices are kept low, people continue to use more and more gas, and the real problem of a shortage becomes worse. Not only that, but entrepreneurs aren't developing alternatives because there's no money in it—gasoline powered cars are still cheap to operate.

My point is, if you subsidize the transition, there won't be a transition. Entrepreneurs won't work on developing new sources of energy because the government has already picked the “winners” and is pumping money into those. But how does the government know which ones are the correct ones? There's no profit and loss column to keep track of whether it is a successful idea or not. Hence bad ideas are not weeded out, good ideas don't gain a larger share of the market. Malinvestment happens and we all suffer, and no transition takes place.
5 March 2009
at 9:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

JohnBrown (Anonymous) says…

Free markets make tactical decisions, not strategic ones. If the national strategic goal is to be moderately energy self-reliant by the time peak oil occurs then free markets are not a reliable way to get there, since free markets will only kick in when we arrive at peak oil…which may be too late.

Free markets are great, but gosh guys, they are not the be-all and end-all. Free markets operating in a vacuum is lawlessness. You need either litigation or regulation to ensure they don't harm the country (remember? “Country First”). And, because they are so myopic, free markets can't prepare the country for peak oil (tho they can respond to it).

Get a grip free marketeers, the trusts were broken up nearly a century ago. Free markets enabled the Japanese to dominate and ruin Manchuria, free markets gave us the economic debacle we have today. Free markets are amoral and not necessarily pro-America.
Free markets don't solve problems until they arrive.
5 March 2009
at 9:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

d_prowess (Anonymous) says…

Maybe I am stretching the relevance to this topic today, but did anyone else see the new wind turbine that the gas station at 9th and Iowa was installing this morning? Does anyone know the cost and energy production from one of those things? Just curious to know if that is what the future will look like on a lot of buildings!
5 March 2009
at 10:01 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

John Brown—I don't know of any free market economists that call for litigation to be banned, so I'm not sure where you are getting that. You say that markets cannot respond until it is too late, but peak oil won't happen in one day. We won't go from $2.00 gas to $200.00 gas overnight. Like I said, as prices rise, new markets will open up for alternative sources of energy, and entrepreneurs will move quickly to capitalize on those markets. Also, as prices rise, consumption will decrease. We saw that last summer. More people were taking alternative modes of transport. So your worries are unfounded.

Also, what exactly is so great about government strategic planning if they get it wrong? Wouldn't we be far worse off if we spent billions of dollars trying to develop an alternative source of energy only to find out we picked the wrong one? Since the government has virtually unlimited resources, we won't know until it is too late.

You blame our current economic debacle on free markets, but we don't have true free markets under Austrian economics. The government via the federal reserve, regulations and fiscal policy manipulates the economy. We have a mixed economy, so simply blaming markets as if they act alone doesn't make any sense.

Regardless, free markets don't respond to issues after they happen, they respond as they happen.
5 March 2009
at 10:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cthulhu_4_president (Anonymous) says…

Gosh that letter was scary. I now have an irresistable urge to do whatever Steven Craven tells me to do in order to prevent this catastrophe.

I'm going to start doing my part, and ask Steve Craven every week how I should spend my paycheck!! When oil peaks and the sky falls he and I will be laughing it up at the rest of you starving suckers!!
5 March 2009
at 10:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

logrthmic, of course you care that I respond to your posts, why else would you talk to me, why else would you write an essay directed at me? If you didn't care you would ignor me. I find it strange that you took my post so seriously about banning you, my intention was to motivate you to calm down with the invective. Sometimes shaming people works to modify their behavior. You try and compare me to communist censors, but we are both invited guests on someone else's property, and I asked the host to remove a rather unruly guest. But I see that instead of feeling some shame you decide to redouble the invective and scream at me. So I'll just be direct: how does one go about having a civil conversation with you, or is it impossible to disagree with you without being called a nazi?
5 March 2009
at 10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Pronunciation:
\ˈkrā-vən\
Function:
adjective
Etymology:
Middle English cravant
Date:
13th century

1archaic : defeated , vanquished2: lacking the least bit of courage : contemptibly fainthearted

5 March 2009
at 10:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Fairness_Doctrine (Anonymous) says…

Oil is more abundant than ever. Storage stations are near full and tankers are sitting all around the world anchored up and full with oil with nowhere to put it. Who said we have no oil? Did someone put this hogwash on a website somewhere and then someone else read it and blogged it and then someone else read that and here we go. America is getting laughed at by the whole world and some think we are not liked? No, they feel sorry for our dysfunctional sorry butts.
5 March 2009
at 11:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

khprather (Anonymous) says…

Here's one argument for why we should not rely on market forces to create solutions and why waiting until we've hit peak oil to make the transition is potentially disastrous. http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2006…

“Say we are about one to two years beyond the peak. There is no longer any doubt, the world has come to realize that peak oil is here and oil production will drop a little each year…..forever.
…
Every industry is, in one way or another, dependent on energy for growth. If their energy supply starts to shrink, it means that instead of the expected growth year after year, they can expect to shrink a little every year. Now since people invest in the market for capital growth, not capital shrinkage, people will start to pull their money out of the equities market. Which will trigger more market losses and cause more people to dump stock which will in turn trigger….. Well is it not obvious? I mean the realization of an ever shrinking energy supply will, sooner or later, trigger the mother of all stock market crashes and all the massive layoffs and hardships that go with it. This stock market crash will make the market crash of 1929 look like a Sunday Picnic, and likewise the depth of the depression that it triggers.

The second point I would like to point out concerns something that M. King Hubbard often stated. He said: “Were we a rational society, a virtue of which we have rarely been accused, we would husband our oil and gas resources.” During the seventies US oil producers tried to keep out cheap imported oil which allowed them to sell more domestic oil. Hubbard sarcastically called this “The drain America first polity.”

So what happens when countries like Mexico, Russia and many other oil producing nations become totally rational and decide to husband their oil? Would these countries decide not to drain their country first and save it for themselves? Would not Russia realize the very strong position they would be in if they had enough oil to last for many decades while most of the rest of the world suffered?

Of course Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iran and a few other heavy producers would not be in such a position because they are almost totally dependent on petrodollars to feed their ever-growing populations. These countries have virtually no internal industries and if oil funds dried up they would be flooded with starving, and perhaps rioting hoards. But for many other countries the problem would not be nearly so severe. They would realize that if they are to survive in a collapsing world, they must husband their oil.

And this drying up of perhaps half the oil on the export market would cause a sudden cliff in the availability of oil for countries like the US, Japan, China and all countries that import more than half their petroleum…
I am predicting that the decline is likely to be far more violent and traumatic than most people, even Peak Oilers, believe.”
5 March 2009
at 11:44 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

snap_pop_no_crackle (Anonymous) says…

Never-ending Godwin flags on loggy.
5 March 2009
at 12:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Here's some far-left level propaganda. Only this is not even out of any of America's looney far-left propaganda machines.

http://www.infowars.com/russian-schol…

Some of this is out there, but some is not. I think this guys timelines are too soon. After we've hit the skids and there is pandemonium from Bangor to Baja, I'm guesstimating about late 2010-2011, some of this would then take place. Mostly the martial law. I don't for one minute think this president would bat an eye to do it.
5 March 2009
at 12:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

logrthimic, you don't understand the concept of free speech Under your rubric, if I came over to your house and starting saying insulting things about your guest, you would have no right to toss me out of your house. Do you agree with that statement?

And please, quit trying to set me up as some sort of Bush apologist. I invite you to find any post I've ever made where I say Bush did something right. I think you'll see I've been consistently critical of Bush regarding the war in Iraq, his economic policies, and his abuse of power and overstepping of the constitutional limits placed on the presidency. You only make yourself look foolish by asserting that I support Bush's policies in any way.
5 March 2009
at 12:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

gl0ck0wn3r (Anonymous) says…

“parrotuya (Anonymous) says… All markets are controlled and manipulated by the wealthy and the powerful in order to maintain the status quo. ”

Someone has a little Captain in him.
5 March 2009
at 1:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cg22165 (Anonymous) says…

Hey XD40 and Fairness_doctrine,

So what you are saying is that new oil is being produced faster than mankind is consuming it? If that is true, great. Otherwise, it isn't a question of if peak oil will happen, just when.
5 March 2009
at 3:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

As a rule of thumb, whenever you see logrithmic weighing in so heavily and often on a topic, it's best to just move along. No need to expend brain cells to head-spinning stupidity and stomach lining to nausea.

5 March 2009
at 3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

cthulhu_4_president (Anonymous) says…

log: You may want to re-evaluate your usage of the term “Reichwing”, as the Nazi party and a majority of fascist governments in our history, came to fruition and power through the policies and parties of the extreme left.

Just a friendly suggestion.
5 March 2009
at 3:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

barrypenders (Anonymous) says…

This is no problem. Just quit drilling. Eventually, air will take the place of oil and with free rubbers and $13 extra a week, I'm set.
5 March 2009
at 3:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

“Otherwise, it isn't a question of if peak oil will happen, just when.” -cg

Can I answer? OK, thanks. Who gives a flying rats a**!? This country and world is so f'ed up now, I'll be long dead and gone and oil will be the last of anyone's worries. Oil is oil is oil. When it's gone, it's gone. When we're done on this planet, we're done. Chalk it up to your chosen god or Al Gore or Charles Darwin or whoever you choose. You or anyone else honestly think you can beat the clock? Come on be real. Leftist ideology is for personal fulfilment, and if you think I believe for a second it is a “save the world” movement, you're dreadfully wrong. Leave me alone and I'll leave you alone. Drive your Pruis, or pedal your bike and I'll run around in my big V8 truck and V8 boat and suck all the gas and fume up the atmosphere. Who cares? Afterall, I'm a right winger, would you expect anything else?
5 March 2009
at 4:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jaywalker (Anonymous) says…

Thank you, barry, I needed a chuckle.
5 March 2009
at 4:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

logrithmic (Anonymous) says…

“First, you don't own this forum. Second, this is not your house.”

No, this is the journal world's forum. You are the guest throwing around insults, why can't the journal world censor you?
5 March 2009
at 4:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

logrithmic (Anonymous) says…

“you will be forever tarred by me in any discussion that I enter into for your attempt to control my freedom of speech.”

Yeah, because I'm the government. Damn you are stupid.
5 March 2009
at 4:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

Cthulu,
Check your definitions. Communists and Socialists are Left. Nazis and Fascists are Right.
No matter what Jonah Goldberg says.
5 March 2009
at 4:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

prospector (Anonymous) says…

XD40, the Bakken Shale oil is just a drop in the bucket and will never produce more than 5% of our countries needs.

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3868

The Bakken potential resource, while large by US onshore field standards, will have only a minor effect on US production or imports. Using 2006 US imports and consumption for comparison, the Bakken undiscovered resource of 3,649 million barrels of oil, if subsequently discovered and fully developed, would provide us with the equivalent of six months of oil consumption or 10 months of imports, spread over 20 or more years. In reality, the reserves developed are likely to be many times smaller than this value.

5 March 2009
at 4:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Liberty_One (Anonymous) says…

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

“Cthulu,
Check your definitions. Communists and Socialists are Left. Nazis and Fascists are Right.
No matter what Jonah Goldberg says.”

No quite. Socialists and Fascists are neither liberal nor conservative, neither right nor left, just like libertarians are neither right nor left. That is a logical fallacy to assume there are only two choices.

Check out the nolan chart which adds a second dimension to classify political ideology.
http://www.nolanchart.com/faq/faq8.php
5 March 2009
at 6:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

Glib_One,
Your link does not address the question of Socialist or Fascist. It has always been my understanding that Socialism is Left of center, giving government a stronger role in addressing societal (i.e. social) problems while Fascism is Right of center, imposing strict hierarchical rules on personal liberties to preserve social order.
5 March 2009
at 6:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

Glib_One,
As to the nature of Fascism, this is why many of us were disturbed by the Bush administration and the apparent goals of the republican party.

http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm
5 March 2009
at 6:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas_opines (Anonymous) says…

Wow, rarely does a point get so pefectly and perhaps unintentionally illustrated as with Logrithmics 9:57am post.
5 March 2009
at 6:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

camper (Anonymous) says…

“What will really happen: rising energy prices will create new markets for these alternative energy sources, and entrepreneurs will quickly step in to capitalize. Hmm, well that's what would happen in a free market.”

Liberty, I agree with you to a point. However, energy is such a large resource, I'm not so sure that a changeover to alternative fuels will come quickly or easily. It will take a lot of investment for not only power companies, businesses, manufacturing, and individuals to convert (or retrofit) its equipment, or phase in new machinery all-together. For this reason, I think when in comes to energy, we need to strategically plan for the future well in advance.

Just my two cents here.
5 March 2009
at 6:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

Wow! The left has sure been praising each other alot lately. What's up? A bit unsure of yourselves?

I have a question.

Why do today's American new-age liberals feel they know what's best for the rest of America? No smart-Alecy answers now!
5 March 2009
at 6:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

Ms_Nancy,
You miss the point. Why do you think the so-called free market knows what's best for you? Adam Smith's invisible hand is not the hand of god. It is rational to try to plan for the future when the cost of extracting oil will become prohibitive to developing the energy infrastructure necessary to get off fossil fuels. We need to use the (sort of) affordable energy now to make the transition to the long term sustainable energy of the future before we can't afford it anymore. If we just wait for market forces (and the resistance of those who profit from the old ways) to come around, it could well be too late.
5 March 2009
at 6:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

camper (Anonymous) says…

If strategic planning is liberal, I don't mind being labeled a liberal.

5 March 2009
at 7:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

jonas_opines (Anonymous) says…

“Why do today's American new-age liberals feel they know what's best for the rest of America?”

The real question is, why do you limit that question to new-age liberals? The answer to your question is stupidly simple, because lots of people think they know what's best for everybody, which makes the real point why you felt the need to only include one particular demographic.

I do already know the answer to my question, of course.
5 March 2009
at 7:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

TomShewmon (Tom Shewmon) says…

So Cappy, just do it already! How long will we just talk about other energy sources? This has been going on for decades–talking about oil independence. When? What's holding the rich elite left from moving forward. There's been a Democratic majority for over two years and now a full deck and Obama has allocated money for this and still has not said the what/when/how/where. What is the problem? Evil Repubs blocking it, right?
5 March 2009
at 10:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Pilgrim2 (Anonymous) says…

logrithmic (Anonymous) says…

As usual, you lie in your post 9:07 a.m. I wrote simply:

“This from someone who has asked the Journal World to ban me from the forum for stating my point of view! What a hypocrite.”

I personally don't believe in banning anyone from the forum - not even a nutcase like you.
***************************************

Excuse me? I used direct quotations from both of you. How can a direct quote be a lie? And my reference to Liberty writing the truth regards the sky falling and lost freedoms.

I think you need a new dealer.
5 March 2009
at 10:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Pilgrim2 (Anonymous) says…

logrithmic (Anonymous) says…

Folks, this should demonstrate beyond all doubt the Nazi roots of the rightwing.
**************************************

Godwin's law. Epic fail.
5 March 2009
at 10:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

shepdog (Anonymous) says…

wasn't there a story on sixty minutes a month or so ago about saudi oil. they showed a war room where the ceo said they could track every drop of oil which was impressive. they also talked to another oil exec that was building a oil production plant or two i can't remember. he was saying that it would produce enough oil for the next fifty years. they pump water several miles down and force oil up and its pumped out is how i remember the story. there was also mention that in order to substain saudi arabia they needed to get at least fifty dollars a barrel.
6 March 2009
at 3:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Hoots (Anonymous) says…

Actually, some of the most respected oil experts think we reached our true peak in oil production a couple of years ago in real terms. For the most part we need to find a new game fast. Sure we can make fuel from other things like coal and shale but it becomes ever more expensive and destructive.
6 March 2009
at 8:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Cappy (Anonymous) says…

MS_Fancy_Panties,
What's the hold up? Is it republicans? You bet, considering that most oil company and auto manufacturer exec are likely R's. Jimmy Carter started us on the right path (conservation and research) but Reagan slashed research into other forms of energy and even removed the solar panels off the White House because he was so deep into Big Oil's pockets. Clinton was useless as far as energy went and, of course, Bush was less than useless. Maybe now we have a chance 30 years late.