Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Oil hits record-high above 93 dollars (.. and the winds whisper 'ANWRrrrr' .. 'Drill Offshorrrrre')
AFP on Yahoo ^ | 10/29/07 | AFP

Posted on 10/29/2007 8:43:01 AM PDT by NormsRevenge

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last
To: NormsRevenge

Hey, the higher oil and gold go, the higher the stock market goes. Right? Let’s wish for $125 oil and we’ll all be rich!!


41 posted on 10/29/2007 12:33:11 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (This post sold by weight, not volume. Content may have settled during shipment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Yep! Thanks to Global Warming, the Sun will be running the cars then


42 posted on 10/29/2007 12:37:59 PM PDT by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

It’s a false peak, created by politics and greed.

It could be fixed easily.


43 posted on 10/29/2007 12:50:02 PM PDT by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak; Species8472
Alaska owns ALL mineral rights in ALL of Alaska

If Alaska owned the mineral rights to all of Alaska, ANWR and NPRA would already be flowing oil. The portion between those two that the State does control, has already went to lease and production.

Alaska owns the mineral rights to all of Alaska, except that which is own by the Federal Government (most of Alaska) and that which is owned by the Natives. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, passed by Congress in 1971, mandated the creation of regional and village Native corporations for the disbursement of the 44 million acres and payment of one billion dollars mandated to Native ownership.

Land Ownership in Alaska
http://www.conservationgiscenter.org/maps/html/landown.html

44 posted on 10/29/2007 1:52:11 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Thanks for the info. I do have a silly question though. If that is true, why have some people told me if I want to protect my land from being taken, I should file a claim on my own property. I own the land, no other agency does.


45 posted on 10/29/2007 2:45:30 PM PDT by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked. Prov. 25:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak

I believe private individuals do not own the mineral rights to their property in Alaska, the state does. But the state does not own the mineral right to the Federal Land or the Native Land. Privately owned land in Alaska is less than 1% of all of Alaska.


46 posted on 10/29/2007 2:48:37 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak
I own the land, no other agency does.

Try not paying taxes on that property for a few years and see who actually controls the land. (grin)

Some information for the Alaska Department of Natural Resources:

Title: Land Ownership In Alaska
http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/mlw/factsht/land_own.pdf

Mineral Locations (Claims) and the Rights Acquired
http://www.dnr.state.ak.us/mlw/factsht/mine_fs/minera_rights.pdf

Be VARY wary of those offering to help you in filing a claim for your own property.

47 posted on 10/29/2007 2:58:57 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I know the whole don’t pay your taxes bit. Lefties I have talked to use that argument on me, when I tell them we live in best most free Country in the history of the world.
As far as taking help from people on filing a claim, I know what I have to do and can do it myself if I feel like it. Thanks though.


48 posted on 10/30/2007 11:57:11 AM PDT by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked. Prov. 25:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Syncro

The peak was last month, but oil is down $3 today, which shows how critical the peak actually is.


49 posted on 10/30/2007 12:01:11 PM PDT by RightWhale (anti-razors are pro-life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Again:

It’s a false peak, created by politics and greed.

It could be fixed easily.

I will add manipulation and power to the above


50 posted on 10/30/2007 12:41:01 PM PDT by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Syncro

You are right. Industry reports don’t matter.


51 posted on 10/30/2007 1:07:09 PM PDT by RightWhale (anti-razors are pro-life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
No you are right. Untapped reserves of oil (IE Alaska, California Coast, Canadian Coast, Gulf of Mexico etc etc) and the shale area put into Nat'l Park System (above the Grand Canyon) by Clinton (So we could buy it from his friends in Indonesia) don't count.

Plenty of oil, low pollution shale oil/coal to last for decades, if not hundreds of years.

Suck the oil out and build refineries and the "peak" theory is just that.

OTOH, you really are right. Politics and Power and Manipulation give the peak oil thingie credibility.

Cranking up my windmill now...

52 posted on 10/30/2007 2:06:49 PM PDT by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Syncro

The thing about peak oil is that it is nuanced a lot more than the population bomb lobby wishes. It doesn’t mean peak oil but peak cheap oil, and we’re not going to suddenly run out when production of cheap oil is at the peak (which it was last month.) We’ll be on the downslope for a long time. Oil will cost more, which is the definition of scarcity, which has nothing to do with shortage.


53 posted on 10/30/2007 2:11:49 PM PDT by RightWhale (anti-razors are pro-life)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DevSix

Thanks for saying that. I’ve been saying it for 10 years. Or more. I have not heard one single candidate on either side propose it.

Why not?


54 posted on 10/30/2007 2:14:15 PM PDT by Judith Anne (Thank you St. Jude for favors granted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Judith Anne; NormsRevenge
I agree with you guys.

But let’s not forget the oil off the California Coast, in the Gulf of Mexico, off the coast of Canada (one of the largest reserves in the world, but hey won’t drill it) and off the coast of Florida.

Speaking of which, the Chinese are drilling for oil 45 miles from said coast, but we won’t because of the evrio-wackos.

Hay, I've got a good idea. If the Chinese can drill a few miles from our coast, what is stopping us from drilling off of Canada's coast?

Quite environmentally sound for the USA.

:>)

55 posted on 10/30/2007 2:22:25 PM PDT by Syncro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson