Energy thread

[kapkomet]

Unless, of course, the government was also being used by certain elements to keep alternative energy sources from being profitable, by, for example, dumping huge subsidies on to the old fossil fuel sources, creating regulatory issues that prevent development and deployment of alternatives or encourage additional consumption rather than conservation, and so forth.

Oh, so THAT's how they're so profitable right now...

 

[Balta1701]

Oh, so THAT's how they're so profitable right now...

Oh, ok, and then let me add..."And failing to break apart or strongly regulate industry groups that are behaving as uncompetitive monopolies" to that list.

[southsider2k5]

Unless, of course, the government was also being used by certain elements to keep alternative energy sources from being profitable, by, for example, dumping huge subsidies on to the old fossil fuel sources, creating regulatory issues that prevent development and deployment of alternatives or encourage additional consumption rather than conservation, allowing indirect costs for things like cleanup and mitigation of environmental harm due to the use of those fuels to be covered by someone other than the purchaser of that energy, and so forth.

 

And you wonder why I don't want government involved in things they have no business being involved in...

[kapkomet]

And you wonder why I don't want government involved in things they have no business being involved in...

Egggggggggsactly.

[Balta1701]

And you wonder why I don't want government involved in things they have no business being involved in...

Here's the question though...is it government in general screwing things up...or is it the people we have in that government.

[kapkomet]

Here's the question though...is it government in general screwing things up...or is it the people we have in that government.

Come on Balta, you're better then that. That's semantics, or what am I missing that you're trying to say?

[southsider2k5]

Here's the question though...is it government in general screwing things up...or is it the people we have in that government.

 

Yes.

 

Government is the most ineffecient, slow-moving, and least motivated entities out there. There is no incentive to ever get anything right, because there is no reward for it,. There is no disinsentive for doing something wrong, because there is no one to answer to. Preservation of budget is the only mitigating factor, so instead governmental policy is formed by those who have direct interest in what governmental policy is doing.

 

For example, what happened to FEMA for screwing up in NO?

[Balta1701]

For example, what happened to FEMA for screwing up in NO?

If I'm contending that the problem is the idiots that won a 5/4 election in 2000 and their determination to use the government solely for the benefit of their friends and contributors rather than running the government well...then pointing at Katrina is not evidence to back up your case. That's evidence that backs up my case...that the problem we have is the group running it right now.

[lostfan]

This isn't something that's unique to this decade. Our government is more or less structured that way on purpose

[mr_genius]

If I'm contending that the problem is the idiots that won a 5/4 election in 2000 and their determination to use the government solely for the benefit of their friends and contributors rather than running the government well...then pointing at Katrina is not evidence to back up your case. That's evidence that backs up my case...that the problem we have is the group running it right now.

 

as compared to the Democrats who do a good job ? LOL

 

I like the boohooing over losing the electoral college and the 'stolen' election thing. I guess Hillary Clinton supporters put together a big documentary about how Obama stole the primary. See Dems never lose, the other side always cheated or stole an election.

 

 

[kapkomet]

If I'm contending that the problem is the idiots that won a 5/4 election in 2000 and their determination to use the government solely for the benefit of their friends and contributors rather than running the government well...then pointing at Katrina is not evidence to back up your case. That's evidence that backs up my case...that the problem we have is the group running it right now.

You're joking, right? CONGRESS for the past 30 freakin' years could do something about this, and you're still crying about the 2000 election and how bad that's messed up the country? It says it all.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

In terms of energy prices being high now, if there were some alternative that would make money, it would CERTAINLY already be done. So, by logic, it tells me that the price point of energy being high is only now justification for alternative energy investment tells me the price point on that very same alternative energy is just as high, if not higher. That means everything is bunk that's being spread by BOTH campaigns on this issue. Since RSO supporters are more "enviro-friendly", they're getting sold a bigger line of bullpuckey.

Late on the reply here, but, I really want to make sure you get what I am saying. I think there are two big business factors you are missing here. First, developing and maturing these technologies takes time. It can be already done if the prices just recently reached a key point - if they did, then we're only going to see an increasing trickle for now, then a steady increase following. Second, if you are trying to grow a business line, then you act right at that cusp -- not wait until everyone else is doing it.

 

[mr_genius]

Obama was on tv with T.Boone Pickens today. good to see. maybe they can hash out a way to make alternative energy grow big in this country.

[southsider2k5]

If I'm contending that the problem is the idiots that won a 5/4 election in 2000 and their determination to use the government solely for the benefit of their friends and contributors rather than running the government well...then pointing at Katrina is not evidence to back up your case. That's evidence that backs up my case...that the problem we have is the group running it right now.

 

I could point to things from every administration as evidence of how badly our government functions. I purposely picked one that I knew you would relate to. If you would like one from the golden era of government, how about something like Echelon or Janet Reno and Waco...

[EvilMonkey]

Trying to get power from asphalt. Turning roads into solar collectors.

 

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2014/

[NorthSideSox72]

Trying to get power from asphalt. Turning roads into solar collectors.

 

http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2014/

That would rock and f***ing roll.

 

[Cknolls]

BROKAW: Well, I think most people understand that, but at the same time, if we work our way off carbon-based fuels, in the meantime, this is not going to happen overnight.

PELOSI: No, it isn't, but you could -- again, you could reduce the price at the pump immediately with (inaudible). You can have a transition with natural gas. You can have a transition with natural gas. That is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels.

***

PELOSI: I'm -- I'm investing in something I believe in. I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels.

***

PELOSI: Well, that's not -- that is the marketplace. The fact is, the supply of natural gas is so big, and you do need a transition if you're going to go from fossil fuels, as you say, you can't do it overnight, but you must transition

 

BROKAW: Sounds like we’re going to have offshore drilling.

PELOSI: No, no, no.

 

No, Nancy the gas will just spew forth from the Earth at the behest of the Great Messiah. Get a F****ng clue already.

[kapkomet]

Here comes Katrina, er I mean, Hurricane Gustav. Its projected path is remarkably like Katrina's. Prices are about to go up 25 to 50 cents at the pump.

[Cknolls]

Here comes Katrina, er I mean, Hurricane Gustav. Its projected path is remarkably like Katrina's. Prices are about to go up 25 to 50 cents at the pump.

 

 

Just got long the USO.

[southsider2k5]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/368005c4-7305-11...?nclick_check=1

 

US drillers to get $1bn court award

By Sheila McNulty in Houston

 

Published: August 26 2008 03:00 | Last updated: August 26 2008 03:00

 

A US federal appeals court ruled yesterday that 11 oil and gas companies should receive more than $1bn awarded to them in 2006 after the government effectively changed the terms of leases to drill off the California coast.

 

The US Court of Appeals was upholding a 2006 ruling that the government had breached the leases when changes in federal law materially interfered with the companies' efforts to develop the oil and gas reserves off California.

 

The case points to the difficulties US oil and gas companies have developing oil and gas resources in the US.

 

Even when acreage is legally open to production, restrictive regulations about how properties can be developed have made it impossible for companies to follow through.

 

The US government had estimated the area contained more than 1bn barrels of oil equivalent.

 

Politicians have been critical of the industry for pushing for Senator John McCain's proposal to open up protected areas off the coast of Florida, saying they have yet to develop all the property currently open to production.

 

The industry can point to this case as a good example of why not all leased properties in the US are under development.

 

"We're very pleased and we believe it is the right result," said Lyndon Taylor, senior vice president and general council for Devon Energy.

 

"This illustrates the importance of the government honouring its contractual obligations."

 

The nearly three dozen leases in this case were sold in the 1980s by the US Department of Interior to the 11 companies, which included Devon Energy, the biggest US oil and gas company solely focused on exploration and production. The bigger companies, such as ExxonMobil, the world's biggest publicly listed oil company, also do refining and marketing.

 

"When any person, company or organisation enters into a contractual agreement in this country, they must fulfil the terms or pay damages, even if that entity is the US government,'' said Steven Rosenbaum, partner at Covington & Burling, which represented the 11 companies.

[NorthSideSox72]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/368005c4-7305-11...?nclick_check=1

The Takings Clause (A5) strikes again.

 

[Balta1701]

Create your own joke line. There's too many out there already for me to choose frrom.

 

Government officials handling billions of dollars in oil royalties engaged in illicit sex with employees of energy companies they were dealing with and received numerous gifts from them, federal investigators said Wednesday.

 

The allegations of bad behavior involve 13 government employees in Denver and Washington, reports CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson. Those accused are workers who sell U.S. mineral rights to oil companies. Such sales are one of the government's biggest sources of revenue besides taxes.

 

But the Inspector General for the Interior Department says they rigged contracts, and engaged in illegal moonlighting, drugs, sex and gift-taking from oil company representatives, according to three reports released Wednesday.

 

The reports revealed startling allegations including that an employee attended a so-called "treasure hunt" in the desert with all expenses paid by an oil producer, and that a former supervisor - who bought cocaine from a colleague then boosted her performance award - had sex with subordinates, and steered government contracts to an outside business where he also worked, Attkisson reports.

 

The investigations reveal a "culture of substance abuse and promiscuity" by a small group of individuals "wholly lacking in acceptance of or adherence to government ethical standards," wrote Inspector General Earl E. Devaney.

 

The reports describe a fraternity house atmosphere inside the Denver Minerals Management Service office responsible for marketing the oil and gas that energy companies barter to the government instead of making cash royalty payments for drilling on federal lands. The government received $4.3 billion in such Royalty-in-Kind payments last year. The oil is then resold to energy companies or put in the nation's emergency stockpile.

[Balta1701]

link

The media has played a significant role in convincing Americans that offshore drilling for oil in the United States could significantly lower the price of gasoline, according to an analysis released today by the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Even though the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Information Agency has stated that the benefits from such drilling would be too small to have any significant effect on oil prices, the media has overwhelmingly conveyed the impression that it could. Media coverage of the issue may have influenced public opinion, with a majority now favoring expanded drilling, as proposed by presidential candidate John McCain.

 

“This is a clear case where the overwhelming majority of the media has not done its job, and the McCain campaign is benefiting as a result,” said CEPR Co-Director and co-author of the paper, Mark Weisbrot.

 

The paper, “Oil Drilling In Environmentally Sensitive Areas: The Role of the Media,” finds that in 267 television news broadcasts, the Energy Information Agency data was cited only once. Also, in 91 percent of the news programs in this sample, there was not even an opposing opinion presented.

[NorthSideSox72]

Chevy does official rollout of the Volt. 40 miles electric-only on a charge, then 300 miles on the gas engine.

 

[EvilMonkey]

Also, an electric auto plant breaks ground in Kentucky.

http://gas2.org/2008/09/16/zap-breaks-grou...ry-in-kentucky/

 

I like how they mention that it would be cheaper to build them here than to ship them from China and then to the east coast.