Newt Gingrich: Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less

 Amusing  Comments Off on Newt Gingrich: Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less
May 312008
 

I am glad to see a petition like this. The Liberal left has put us in a weakened position as they have made us dependent on other countries that seek our destruction to provide for our fuel needs.

Sign the petition which will make your stance clear to our representatives that you demand real solutions to this energy crisis that has the potential to cripple America.

I signed it already. If nothing else, it’ll piss off the corrupt politicians.

100,000 Americans Petition Congress to Drill for Oil Now


American Solutions for Winning the Future announced today that more than 100,000 Americans have now signed a petition urging Congress to immediately start drilling for oil domestically to ease gas prices. The petition is part of the “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” campaign American Solutions launched last week.

The petition reads:

“We, therefore, the undersigned citizens of the United States, petition the U.S. Congress to act immediately to lower gasoline prices by authorizing the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries.”

Next week, American Solutions will deliver the signatures, gathered from citizens in all 50 states, to the U.S. Senate as a first step toward stopping the destructive Warner-Lieberman bill which would raise the cost of gasoline, diesel fuel, heating oil, and aviation fuel.

According to American Solutions’ research, 73% of the American people agree that with appropriate safeguards to protect the environment, we should drill for oil off America’s coasts to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. This belief is so widespread it is supported by a majority of Democrats, Republicans, and independents.

“Our message of ‘Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less’ is clearly resonating with hard-working Americans who are struggling to pay for rising gas prices,” said Dave Ryan, American Solutions Executive Director. “The voices of more than 100,000 Americans are demanding that Congress offer real solutions to our energy challenges, and that begins with drilling for oil now.”

For more information about the “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less” campaign, visit www.AmericanSolutions.com/DrillNow.


Related:
10 Energy Questions for the US Senate
Congress Responsible For High Oil and Gas Prices
Saudis And Democrats See No Reason To Raise Oil Production Now
The Democrat’s Energy Plan: When Common Sense Is Not So Common
ANWR Derangement Syndrome: Senate Democrats Reject Domestic Oil Drilling
Energy Pandering: Congress Divided On Energy Plan
Senators Introduce Bill to Increase Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production
200 Billion Barrels Of Oil That Could Make The U.S. Energy Independent
Democrats Put Big Oil on Display Once Again
Corn Prices Jump to Record $6 a Bushel, Driving Up Costs for Food

As Gas Prices Soar, More People Are Riding Scooters

 Amusing  Comments Off on As Gas Prices Soar, More People Are Riding Scooters
May 292008
 

Don’t laugh, I have actually been thinking about buying a scooter. I’m willing to trade my pride for 75-120 miles per gallon. Hey… I might even start my own scooter gang.

Scootin’ along: More people opting for 2-wheel solution to save money on fuel


Watch out drivers – there are more scooter and moped riders out there.

As gas prices soar, more and more drivers are looking for two-wheeled alternatives.

Scooters and mopeds are growing in popularity among commuters, allowing them to keep their cars in the garage to help reduce emissions for the quick trips around town.

Nationally, fuel-sipping scooters are surging in popularity from 12,000 sold in 1997 as compared to 131,000 in 2007, according to statistics compiled by the Motorcycle Industry Council in Irvine, Calif.

“It seems like when we’ve seen these recent spikes in fuel prices, that there has been a correlation in sales,” said Mike Mount, a spokesman for the industry group.

For some people, bicycling takes too long or leaves work clothes crumpled.

In Missoula, Dr. Diana Griffith fills up her yellow scooter for about $4 and uses it to commute to Community Medical Center where she works in the emergency room. She only refuels about once a month.

Griffith, 33, bought her Genuine Scooter Co. Buddy last year, paying about $2,000. A petite woman, Griffith said her scooter is easy to maneuver. She rode it last year from April to October. It gets about 90-120 miles per gallon.

“My scooter paid for itself in one summer,” she said. “I have a small SUV and it seems like a huge waste of gas and amount of emissions to be just driving alone.”

She’s also takes her bicycle on errands and says she feels safe riding in town, saying most Missoulians are cognizant of two-wheeled travelers.

Even though the scooter can travel up to speeds of about 70 mph, she said she wouldn’t take it on the highway.

“There are a lot more people on scooters this summer because of the gas prices,” she said. “The more visible we are, then the safer we are.”

Tyler Gilman bought his candy-apple red scooter recently to save on gas for his four-mile commute from home to downtown Missoula.

He spent about $3,000 for his Piaggio Fly, a cousin of the manufacturer’s more famous Vespa, which means “wasp” in Italian. The Fly gets about 70 miles per gallon.

“At the end of the day it is fun to hop on that thing and cruise around,” Gilman said.

Initially, he said his girlfriend was concerned about the image of a man on a scooter. But, she’s now a convert.

“If you don’t watch yourself, the scooter has the tendency to put you in the posture of a prissy woman. It’s very Euro,” he said. “I’m not out to break down any barriers, but vanity will only take you so far on the other side of $3.50 a gallon.”

Genevieve Giroux, who teaches French at the University of Montana, bought a used Honda moped last July for about $600 and zips around town. Its maximum speed? Twenty-seven mph.

She said she scoots around town to run errands on her moped. Legally, she can ride in the bike lane because her moped has pedals. She said she always wears a helmet.

“It’s so old, it doesn’t have directionals, so I use my hands to signal,” she said. “I have an orange helmet and the moped is yellow, so people can see me. There are only a few people with the mopeds. People respect us.”

Nancy McCourt, co-owner of Scooterville in downtown Missoula, said spring is a busy season for scooter sales. But interest has been more pronounced this year because of the gas prices.

“I’m getting a lot of people who’re saying, ‘I never thought I would be buying a scooter,’ ” she said. “They are driven here because of the gas prices.”

Bicycle riding remains popular, but “not everyone can ride up Whitaker (Drive),” she said.

She said they try to match the transportation needs of consumers who step into her small shop on West Broadway. McCourt urges them to enroll in a motorcycle rider safety class, insure their scooters and wear helmets.

She’s noted a shift in the traditional demographic of buyers, including young couples who don’t want to buy a second car, and professional women ages 25 to 45.

These days, the spectrum is larger, and the most striking demographic shift includes guys with pickup trucks and SUVs.

“They still want to keep their rig, but want something to ride to work,” she said.

A culture around scooters is emerging, with scooter rallies and group rides, she said.

Chad Eckley, manager of Five Valley Honda/Yamaha on U.S. Highway 93, estimated their sales have doubled as the fuel prices climb upward.

“For a lot of people, it is realistically a free machine when they figure how much they’ll save in gas,” he said.


Saudis And Democrats See No Reason To Raise Oil Production Now

 Amusing  Comments Off on Saudis And Democrats See No Reason To Raise Oil Production Now
May 172008
 


How ironic! We ask the Saudi’s to increase their oil production and when refused Pelosi, Schumer and all the other Liberals start whining. The same bunch of Liberals won’t let us drill, produce coal, build refineries or build nuclear plants. They refuse to seek our own energy independence.

Remember this every single time you fill up your tank; with new domestic oil supplies and nuclear power YOUR PRICE AT THE PUMP WILL DROP LIKE A STONE. The people standing in our way are the Demo-Leftist-Fascists who “mandate” and “prohibit” all day long.

I think it is time that we hold hearings just to see who in Congress is taking lobby money from “Big Oil” and wacko environmentalist groups. There can be no other reason for denying us our energy independence.

Saudis see no reason to raise oil production now


Saudi Arabia’s leaders made clear Friday they see no reason to increase oil production until customers demand it, apparently rebuffing President Bush amid soaring U.S. gasoline prices.

It was Bush’s second personal appeal this year to King Abdullah, head of the monarchy that rules this desert kingdom that is a longtime prime U.S. ally and home to the world’s largest oil reserves. But Saudi officials stuck to their position that they will only pump more oil into the system when asked to by buyers, something they say is not happening now, the president’s national security adviser told reporters.

“Saudi Arabia does not have customers that are making requests for oil that they are not able to satisfy,” Stephen Hadley said on a day when oil prices rose above $127 a barrel, a record high. “What the Saudis wanted to tell us was we’re doing everything we can do … to meet this problem, but it’s a complicated problem.”

The Saudi oil minister, Ali al-Naimi, announced that the kingdom decided on May 10 to raise production by 300,000 barrels at the request of customers, including the United States. He said that increase was sufficient.

“Supply and demand are in balance today,” he told a news conference. “How much does Saudi Arabia need to do to satisfy people who are questioning our oil practices and policies?”

Bernard Picchi, an energy analyst at Wall Street Access, an independent research firm, said the 300,000-barrel Saudi production increase was “a token amount” that is not expected to have much impact on prices.

It would be different, he said, if Saudi Arabia boosted production by 1 million or 1.5 million barrels a day. The announced increase will have Saudi Arabia pumping 9.45 million barrels a day by June, Saudi officials said. That’s about 2 million barrels below its capacity.

Oil prices advanced Friday as traders, unimpressed by efforts to boost supply, kept buying on the expectation that prices would keep setting new records.

Saudi Arabia often adjusts its output to meet demand, and the increase coincides with the start of the peak driving season in the U.S. “It’s a way to raise production without raising production,” said Phil Flynn, analyst at Alaron Trading Corp. “I think it was a way to save face.”

Hadley never mentioned the Saudi’s new production in his recap with reporters. He said the Saudis briefed Bush again on their plan to increase their production capacity over time. They also argued that even an increase would be unlikely to bring down the soaring prices, driven more by uncertainty in the market, lack of refining capacity for the type of oil readily available and other complicated dynamics, he said.

Economists say prices are being driven up by increased demand, not slowed production. Energy-guzzlers China and India are stretching supplies.

As a result, Hadley suggested the White House was satisfied with — or at least accepted — the Saudi response. He added, however, the Bush administration will see if the explanation “conforms to what our experts say.”

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said the discussion with Bush about oil was friendly. “He didn’t punch any tables or shout at anybody,” the minister said. “I think he was satisfied.”

High energy costs are a major drain on the U.S. economy, which is experiencing a slowdown that some think is already a recession. At the pump, gas prices rose to a national average of $3.78 per gallon on Friday, according to a survey of stations by AAA and the Oil Price Information Service.

When Bush and Abdullah met in the kingdom in mid-January, the president also sought more Saudi output in a plea that also ultimately was for naught.

Iran was the other dominant topic of Bush’s overnight visit with the king.

The two shared a concern over the recent violence in Lebanon, where Hezbollah overran Beirut neighborhoods last week in protest of measures aimed at the group by the country’s government. The display of military power by the Shiite militant group, which the U.S. considers a terrorist organization, resulted in the worst internal fighting since the end of Lebanon’s 1975-90 civil war.

With Shiite-dominated Iran backing Hezbollah, Sunni-dominated Saudi Arabia — eager to stop any advance of regional power by Tehran — joins the West in supporting Lebanon’s government. Hadley said Bush and Abdullah shared a concern that the recent events would “embolden Iran.” The U.S. and Saudi Arabia, he said, “are of one mind in condemning what Hezbollah did.”

On Thursday, Hezbollah and the government reached a deal to end the violence after Lebanon’s Cabinet reversed measures aimed at reining in the militants.

Bush’s Saudi stop was intended, in part, to celebrate 75 years of formal U.S.-Saudi relations and strengthen ties that, once strong, have frayed over the perception Washington favors Israel too much in the dispute with the Palestinians, the Iraq war and the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Fifteen of the 19 airline hijackers were Saudis, and Americans blamed Saudis for allowing the religious extremism that gave rise to them, an accusation that stings here.

Bush was spending the day with Abdullah at his lavish farm complex outside Riyadh, talking mostly out of public view over multiple tea services and meals. Abdullah greeted Bush warmly at the airport, and rode with him in his limousine out into the desert.

The White House hoped that new agreements formalized during Bush’s visit would give the relationship a boost.

Among them was an agreement for the U.S. to assist the kingdom in developing civilian nuclear power. Another agreement involves U.S. promises to help protect any Saudi nuclear infrastructure with training, the exchange of experts “and other support services as needed.” Hadley said it would not involve U.S. troops.

But the rising price of oil commanded attention.

When Bush first ran for president in 2000, he criticized the Clinton administration for high fuel prices and said the president must “jawbone” oil producing nations and persuade them to drop rates. At that time, oil was nearing $28 a barrel — less than a quarter what it is now.

Bush’s visit comes two days after Congress voted to temporarily halt daily shipments of 70,000 barrels of oil to the nation’s emergency reserve.

After Bush’s talks on Friday, his administration announced in Washington that it has canceled oil shipments into the reserve beginning in July, when the current purchase contract expires. Bush has refused to stop pouring oil into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, saying the stockpile was meant for emergencies and that halting the shipments would have little or no impact on gasoline or crude oil prices.


Related:
The Democrat’s Energy Plan: When Common Sense Is Not So Common
ANWR Derangement Syndrome: Senate Democrats Reject Domestic Oil Drilling
Energy Pandering: Congress Divided On Energy Plan
Senators Introduce Bill to Increase Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production
200 Billion Barrels Of Oil That Could Make The U.S. Energy Independent
Democrats Put Big Oil on Display Once Again
Corn Prices Jump to Record $6 a Bushel, Driving Up Costs for Food

The Democrat’s Energy Plan: When Common Sense Is Not So Common

 Amusing  Comments Off on The Democrat’s Energy Plan: When Common Sense Is Not So Common
May 152008
 

So how is the Democrat’s “common sense” energy plan working? Well, as Charles Reichley points out in the six years before they took control, oil increased an average of about $5 a year. But in the 16 months the Democrats have been responsible for the nation’s energy policy, the price of oil has risen to $126. That is an increase of almost $70 a barrel or $5 each month.

He also notes that the energy bill is one of the few real “accomplishments” the Democrats have had since they took office. If $3.70 a gallon gas is an “accomplishment,” we can all hope they fail more. Their “success stories” are driving us all to the poor house.

Drilling for an energy plan


When President Bush took office in 2001, the price of oil was around $30 a barrel. Six years later the price had doubled. Democrats promised voters they had “a common sense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices.” On October 20, 2006, just before the Democrats took over Congress, a barrel of oil was about $57.

So, how is the Democrat’s “common sense plan” working? In the six years before they took control, oil increased an average of about $5 a year. But in the 16 months the Democrats have been responsible for the nation’s energy policy, the price of oil has risen to $126 — an increase of almost $70 a barrel or $5 each month.

If I had a choice, I’d take $5 a year over $5 a month. Meanwhile, gas prices on the Democrat’s watch went from $2.20 a gallon to $3.67, an increase of almost 10 cents a month. The Democrat’s plan isn’t working, unless their plan was to decrease our dependence on oil by making it so expensive we can’t afford to buy it.

It’s clear the Democrats are fumbling our energy policy. Last week Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged President Bush to get Saudi Arabia to drill more oil so prices would go down. But at the same time, she rejected drilling for domestic oil, claiming that increasing domestic supplies won’t lower the price we pay.

So which is it? Do we want more oil or not? How do we decrease our dependence on foreign oil if we reject domestic oil and increase foreign oil?

While claiming oil drilling won’t help, the Democrats said we should stop filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which will increase supplies by 70,000 barrels a day. They say this will decrease gas prices by up to 24 cents a gallon. Economists say the effect will be negligible.

Meanwhile, Democrats reject drilling in ANWR because they say adding a million barrels a day would only drop the oil prices about 5 cents a barrel. So 70 thousand barrels saves us 24 cents a gallon, while a million barrels won’t do a thing?

Also, Democrats want to raise taxes on oil companies. By increasing taxes, they promise the price of gasoline will drop, and the oil companies will increase supply. In reality, taxes decrease incentives to supply oil and raise the price we pay.

Of course, we are collecting a huge amount of taxes from the oil companies. The feds took over $30 billion from Exxon-Mobil last year (that’s more than the taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of all individuals).

The Democrats also say drilling in ANWR is useless because we won’t get any oil for 10 years. But they take credit for a bill they passed which will force Americans to buy more fuel-efficient cars. Their plan requires cars to get 35 miles per gallon, by 2020 — 13 years from now. So we shouldn’t drill in ANWR because it will take 10 years before it helps us, but increasing gas mileage over 13 years is “smart energy policy.”

Meanwhile, my car gets over 45 miles per gallon today — beating their standard for 13 years from now by 30 percent. Americans could buy these cars now, but haven’t. So the Democrats will force us to.
But it won’t help as much as they claim — when cars get more efficient, gas use will increase, because people will be able to afford to drive farther.

The one thing that will make us stop using oil, and switch to alternative fuels, is if gas gets so expensive we get tired of paying the cost. The Democrats claim they want us to stop using gasoline, but they are pushing the administration to force companies to lower gas prices, which will make people use more gas.

So the Democrats want to cut gas use, but are pushing lower prices. They say Bush let prices get too high, but since they took over the price has gone up ten times as fast. They say a million barrels a day won’t make a difference, but 70 thousand a day will. They won’t drill ANWR because it will take too long, but passed fuel efficiency standards that will take longer.

The energy bill is one of the few real “accomplishments” the Democrats have had since they took office. If $3.70 a gallon gas is an “accomplishment,” I hope they fail more. We can’t afford too many more “success stories.”


Related:
ANWR Derangement Syndrome: Senate Democrats Reject Domestic Oil Drilling
Energy Pandering: Congress Divided On Energy Plan
Senators Introduce Bill to Increase Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production
200 Billion Barrels Of Oil That Could Make The U.S. Energy Independent
Democrats Put Big Oil on Display Once Again
Corn Prices Jump to Record $6 a Bushel, Driving Up Costs for Food

Senators Introduce Bill to Increase Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production

 Amusing  Comments Off on Senators Introduce Bill to Increase Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production
May 082008
 

The sad truth is that there is no shortage of oil in the U.S., just a shortage of politicians with enough sense to use it. ANWAR and other sources should have been opened years ago!

John McCain should jump all over this. This would be a HUGE vote getter. If presented wisely, opposition by any Democrat can be used against them given the current concerns of average Americans.

Senators Introduce Bill to Increase Domestic Oil and Natural Gas Production; Coal-Derived Fuel Mandate


US Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, introduced the American Energy Production Act of 2008 (S.2958) to increase domestic production of oil and natural gas and to fund the development of oil shale and coal-to-liquids technology. Eighteen other senators co-sponsored. Included in the bill is language for a coal-derived fuels mandate.

The bill would open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) as well as the Atlantic and Pacific regions of the Outer Continental Shelf for exploration and production; and lift the one-year moratorium on developing oil shale in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah.

Specific provisions of the bill include:

  • Outer Continental Shelf. The bill allows petitions for leasing activities in the Atlantic and Pacific regions of the Outer Continental Shelf. The bill allows the Governors of coastal states to submit a petition for a lifting of the moratorium within their state boundaries. The bill creates a revenue sharing agreement for participating states in which 37.5% of revenues will go to new producing states, 12.5% to the Land and Water Conservation Fund, and 50% to the Federal Treasury.
  • ANWR. The bill establishes a competitive oil and gas leasing program for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Coastal Plain under the Mineral Leasing Act. It provides for a 50/50 share of ANWR revenues between the Federal Government and the State of Alaska. Directs that $35 million of the State share be deposited annually into a “Coastal Plain Local Government Impact Aid Assistance Fund” for Alaska communities.
  • Permitting. Repeals the $4,000 fee for new applications for permits to drill that was established in last year’s Omnibus Appropriations Bill.
  • Refineries. Grants the EPA authority to accept consolidated applications for permits required to construct and operate refineries, and authorizes financial assistance to states and Indian tribes for the hiring of personnel to process permits. Establishes a 360-day deadline for the approval or disapproval of consolidated permit applications for new refineries and a 120-day deadline for applications to expand existing refineries.
  • Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Suspends filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for 180 days.
  • Renewable Fuel and Advanced Energy Technology. Amends the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to strike the definition of renewable biomass and replace it with the Senate-passed definition.
  • Establishes a program of direct loans and grants to accelerate the production of advanced batteries in the United States.
  • Establishes a research program to determine infrastructure needs for the transport of renewable fuel blends, and directs the Secretary of Energy to consider the compatibility of existing infrastructure with intermediate blends of renewable and petroleum based fuels.
  • Studies the environmental and efficiency attributes of diesel-fueled vehicles.
  • Coal-Derived Fuels. Mandates that 6 billion gallons of coal-derived fuels be produced by 2022, starting at 750 million gallons in 2015 and ramping up by that same amount annually. Requires that CTL fuels produced result in lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions not greater than those associated with gasoline and provides waiver authority based on economic or environmental harm.
  • Oil shale. Repeals the one year moratorium on funds to complete final regulations for the commercial leasing of oil shale established in last year’s Omnibus.
  • Increases the current allowable contract duration of five years to 25 years for procurement of synthetic fuels by the Department of Defense.
  • Repeals Section 526 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which prohibits federal agencies from procuring alternative fuels with lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions greater than those associated with conventional fuels that they replace.

Domenici and thirteen other Senators have asked the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) to analyze the impact the legislation will have on America’s reliance on foreign oil and energy prices as compared to forecasts the agency made in its Annual Energy Outlook 2008.

The EIA has assessed the impact of drilling in ANWR before. In March of 2004, the Energy Information Administration, at the request of Representative Richard W. Pombo, then Chairman of the US House Committee on Resources, published a report using government figures and analyzing the projected effect of drilling in ANWR. The report lays out three scenarios: one for low-oil resources, one the mean case, the other for high oil resources.

Some of the report’s findings:

  • The mean-case estimate is that there are 10.4 billion technically recoverable barrels of oil in ANWR, divided into many discrete fields. This estimate includes oil resources in Native lands and State waters out to a 3-mile boundary within the coastal plain area. The mean estimated size of oil resources in the Federal portion of the ANWR coastal plain is 7.7 billion barrels.
  • It will take approximately 10 years to bring the first field on-line (comparable to other Arctic drilling).
  • Assuming sequential development of the fields, rank ordered by size, ANWR production would peak, in the mean case scenario, in 2024 at 870,000 barrels of oil per day.
  • Assuming that every barrel of ANWR oil is consumed domestically, it would reduce imports on a barrel-for-barrel basis.

Co-sponsors of S.2958 include Senators Allard (R-CO); Barrasso (R-WY); Bennett (R-UT); Bond (R-MO); Bunning (R-KY); Chambliss (R-GA); Cornyn (R-TX); Enzi (R-WY); Hutchinson (R-TX); Inhofe (R-OK); Isakson (R-GA); McConnell (R-KY); Murkowski (R-AK); Sessions (R-AL); Stevens (R-AK); Thune (R-SD); Voinovich (R-OH); and Wicker (R-MS).