OneBlueSky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 01:43 AM
Original message |
shouldn't Democrats introduce a bill mandating that oil from ANWR . . . |
|
be consumed exclusively in the US? . . . Republicans would be in a real pickle if they voted against it, and oil companies probably wouldn't drill if it passed . . . win win . . .
|
BrklynLiberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 01:48 AM
Response to Original message |
1. EXCELLENT IDEA. I have heard that most of that oil would go to Japan, as |
|
does most of the oil coming from Alaska right now.
Nominating for greatest.
|
napi21
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. I've read that too. Wronk kind of crude. |
|
It's a good idea to introduce a bill like that! Call Hillery!
|
tokenlib
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 01:51 AM
Response to Original message |
2. This should be done for certain.. n/t |
Straight Shooter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 01:53 AM
Response to Original message |
4. I think it should go exclusively to those indigenous natives Akaka lauded |
|
They get first dibs, then everyone else in Alaska, then Washington State, and it can trickle down from there, just like the Republicans' great economic plan for America. Trickle. Trickle. Trickle.
|
illflem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 02:01 AM
Response to Original message |
5. The reason Alaskan oil goes to Japan is more logistics |
|
since Japan is closer than the lower 48. It makes no difference, the oil companies are just trading the Alaskan oil for sources that are closer.
|
sandnsea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 02:36 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
6. It does make a difference |
|
Oil prices are high because of global demand, which is only going to increase. Telling Americans that this oil is somehow going to keep OUR gas prices down and get US off foreign oil is a lie. If the demand goes up more than 1 million barrels a day, and it will, the price goes up. The only way to reduce our dependence on oil is to address the problem and it's CARS. As long as they perpetuate this lie that the oil will help us, we do nothing about CARS and keep paying higher prices to the oil companies and the Bush Buddies.
|
JohnnyRingo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 02:48 AM
Response to Original message |
7. Watch the oil cos. lose interest in ANWR |
|
If they can't ship it across the Bering Strait to the lucrative Asian market.
Until we're willing to pay European prices, expect the "shortage" to continue.
|
alittlelark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 03:03 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Find one that is REALLY interested. |
|
They all seem ambivalent.
|
dutchdoctor
(306 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 03:38 AM
Response to Original message |
9. That would be a bad idea. |
|
Edited on Fri Mar-18-05 03:42 AM by dutchdoctor
I don't think even Republicans would fall for that one.. It is a free global market. The US will make the biggest profit from their oil if they keep transport costs low, so getting it to the nearest buyer whoever that may be is a logical idea. Keeping it inside the U.S. will not make any difference in lowering the price of oil or gas, because it's not a local market but a global one.
That price is determined by the equilibrium between global supply and demand and it doesn't really matter which oil goes where..
Anyhow, the real question is how long that small trickle of oil from the ANWR will postpone the impending peak of oil production, but that is a separate issue from the question where the oil actually goes.
(edited to add the last paragraph)
|
OneBlueSky
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Mar-19-05 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. the actual policy may be a bad idea . . . introducing the bill is not . . |
|
since the Republican rationale for drilling ANWR has always been to lessen our dependence on foreign oil . . . calling them on this lie is a winning strategy, imo . . .
|
arcos
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Mar-18-05 12:36 PM
Response to Original message |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sat May 11th 2024, 08:49 PM
Response to Original message |