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

Skip to comments.

The Case for Banning Oil Imports
07/30/06 | self

Posted on 07/30/2006 8:06:15 PM PDT by tomzz

The one question I don't seem to be able to come up with any sort of an answer for regarding this "War on Terror" is how Ike and FDR would have managed to fight WWII while buying oil from Adolf Hitler for $75 a barrel and up.

Moreover, if even a third of what I read is true, then even discounting the likelihood of money we spend on oil coming back to us in the form of aircraft crashing into our buildings, the United States should very definitely not be importing oil. If anything we should be exporting it. If a third of what you read is true, then the US has several different potential oil resources, any one of which should suffice for all our needs well beyond any point at which we cease using oil as a fuel.

The question is, how do you get from here to there, and the answer is the same as the answer to "How do I quit smoking?" Basically you just stop.

What I would propose would mess us up about as badly as we were messed up during WWII for somewhere between six months and two years, probably more like a year, but it would put every terrorist regime on Earth totally out of business since oil is 100% fungible and the price of oil would collapse worldwide. It could only be done with a total and permanent ban, so that OPEC could not simply drop prices to ten dollars a barrel for a year until the problem went away.

Such a policy would likely have to include:

Like I say, I can't picture Ike et. al. trying to fight Hitler while buying oil from him.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: energy; newbie; stupididea
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: tomzz

According to Senator Hugh Chance of Colorado, he asked a Richfield Oil executive how much crude oil was in Alaska's North Slope. The oil man said there was as much oil there as in all of Saudi Arabia. So why does our government insist on relying on forgeign oil when we have enough to supply all of America for 200 years? Ask your Congressmen. Ask your Senator.


21 posted on 07/30/2006 8:29:19 PM PDT by Paperdoll (.........on the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
Why not do both?

Why not ban ALL vacations. The time could ba better spent at our jobs increasing productivity.

Take your tin foil hat off. Why don't we use ALL the middleast's oil now, so 25 years from now they will back to riding camels across the desert.

The more we use, the sooner this will happen. Why stretch it out for 50 or 75 years by letting them swim in it?

There is no need to tap our 500 year supply of coal for oil until we have to.

22 posted on 07/30/2006 8:32:01 PM PDT by UNGN (I've been here since '98 but had nothing to say until now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Paperdoll

Because we don't - and didn't in 1966, which would've been the last time anyone asked someone from Richfield Oil that question.


23 posted on 07/30/2006 8:34:02 PM PDT by Rte66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

Plus we have enough crude anyway. We have more crude than the entire Middle-East. We have over a trillion barrels in shale oil, and uncounted amounts in our continental shelf. It would take some time and work to begin pumping it, but remove the restrictions, and increase demand for domestic oil and the problem would be solve itself. Plus we would not ban oil from Canada, as they are our friend. Nuclear could replace heating oil, and anything else that can be done with electricity. Hybrids could reduce the demand as well. We have the technology, with a little work we could be completely independent excepting Canada.


24 posted on 07/30/2006 8:37:50 PM PDT by gafusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: gafusa

Something has to be done. The average joe is getting reamed, and his money is going to fund the next 9/11. I don't see the terrorists ever growing corn in the desert, so ethanol is all right by me.


25 posted on 07/30/2006 8:42:57 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Accygirl
we have plenty of oil and natural gas that the government won't let us get at. The government causes problems and then finds big government solutions to them that always causes more problems for them to find big government solutions to that cause.....

This is the way of government

26 posted on 07/30/2006 8:46:09 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
Even if I bought into the crap about "finite resources" it makes sense that we deplete their resources before we deplete ours.

We already are pursuing America's best strategy...
27 posted on 07/30/2006 8:46:31 PM PDT by rockrr (Never argue with a man who buys ammo in bulk...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tomzz

The only possible and realistic 'alternative' to oil would be natural gas, like burns in stoves and water heaters. Its a clean burning fuel. Like oil, the government has badly restricted it and helped us get addicted to gasoline.


28 posted on 07/30/2006 8:48:00 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Agreed. We have enough domestic energy sources. I think we should begin cutting off import from several countries, especially Venezuela.
29 posted on 07/30/2006 8:48:27 PM PDT by gafusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

ethanol is a joke. It produces cancer-causing agents. Its expensive, requires masive subsidies. Its 1/3 less powerful than gasoline. Ethonal is nothing more than badly spent money by government.


30 posted on 07/30/2006 8:50:22 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: gafusa

Absolutely. I would not buy a product from any company that did a tenth of what most of these oil producing nations have done. Let them see if their psycho buddies can fill the gap that will occur when the US kicks petrol. They hate us? Cool. Have a massive loss in sales, and compete with the new product that American ingenuity produces. It's chic to hate America. They can have their chic and pay a massive price for it.


31 posted on 07/30/2006 8:52:08 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Same arguments were made by the whale oil people about crude way back in the day. And by the buggy whip manufacturers about cars, for that matter.


32 posted on 07/30/2006 8:53:19 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
The average joe is getting reamed, and his money is going to fund the next 9/11.

Reamed? Not really, just paying the inflation adjusted price for fuel from 1980.

A bunch of that money is going to develop production in Canada and right here at home, too. You can't drop the price of crude oil without undercutting the domestic effort as well.

It takes about 4.5 million to bring one of these wells (Middle Bakken Formation, Williston Basin, ND/MT) on line, from spud to production.

At $10/bbl, short of serious deflation across the board, that just won't happen.

33 posted on 07/30/2006 8:54:20 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mysterio

The whole system relies on American wealth. The sell it cheaper at home and to China, they sell it to us higher because we can afford it. If we pulled out, the whole OPEC/Axis of evil cartels would collapse.


34 posted on 07/30/2006 8:55:58 PM PDT by gafusa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
Ethonal would not be produced or added to gasoline if it was not mandated by government and heavily subsidized for a very good reason. It makes No economic or ecological sense.

and they made the same arguments for MTBE as they now do for ethanol

35 posted on 07/30/2006 8:57:01 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
Reamed? Not really, just paying the inflation adjusted price for fuel from 1980.

The price tripled over a couple of years. That's reamed to the average person, especially when you're talking about a product you're forced to buy even if you don't drive. The industry might consider it a "correction," but a lot of the rest of us can't wait until we can ditch this overpriced commodity.

A bunch of that money is going to develop production in Canada and right here at home, too. You can't drop the price of crude oil without undercutting the domestic effort as well.

Sure you can. Get a job in the ethanol industry. I hope the industry is saving up for the massive rainy day that's coming when the market kicks out a serious competitor.

At $10/bbl, short of serious deflation across the board, that just won't happen.

I'm not sure how you'll keep the price of oil over $30 once there is competition. Even if some sheik gets a sprained ankle in the desert or if Chavez' cat has a bowel movement on his carpet. Those events are good for a few bucks a barrel now, but competition will render them worthless.
36 posted on 07/30/2006 9:06:58 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: gafusa

Yeah, they'd have to sell something else to fund their bomb making.


37 posted on 07/30/2006 9:08:19 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mysterio
The price tripled over a couple of years.

The price went from an (inflation corrected) low for the century to a price which reflects better the supply/demand situation. Part of the supply problem was caused by the persistent cheap prices. Virtually every other commodity increased in price, except food which is heavily subsidized.

The prices you decry are what makes the current rash of alternative energy development possible, in an economic sense. The money/financial incentive has to come from somewhere.

Sure you can. Get a job in the ethanol industry.

Until folks are drilling for ethanol, that won't do me any good. I am a geologist.

I'm not sure how you'll keep the price of oil over $30 once there is competition.Will the new fuels be economical at a $30/bbl equivalent?

Even if you could stop using oil for a motor fuel tomorrow, it is still used for lubrication and the chemical base for everything from plastics to asphalt. It won't go away.

By all means, develop alternatives, they will augment oil as a fuel, but they won't replace it in the short term.

While that will cause price fluctuations, those are normal in the industry, anyway.

Oil was on the way up before Chavez started his bit and things really got going in the mid-east, primarily due to demand in Asia increasing, demand which was not foreseen by the EIA in the late '90s when they forecast a worldwide glut of oil. That set up the current price cycle.

Hurricane damage, some still not repaired, contributed, and geopolitical consideratons added too.

It has been a 'perfect storm' of market factors, all contributing to the price, but what you pay at the pump is paying for ethanol additives as MTBE is being phased out, in addition to the rest.

The changes needed to make the former infrastructure work with a hygroscopic additive, coupled with importing some of that additive, (and the tarrfis on that) all add to the cost at the pump.

38 posted on 07/30/2006 9:32:05 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
The prices you decry are what makes the current rash of alternative energy development possible, in an economic sense. The money/financial incentive has to come from somewhere.

I totally agree. These prices might be the very factor that dooms oil. Oh well, oil needs competition.

Will the new fuels be economical at a $30/bbl equivalent?

Well, with competition between oil and widely used alternative, they'll have to be. After some years of technological development and advances, I'd say it's a safe bet.

Even if you could stop using oil for a motor fuel tomorrow, it is still used for lubrication and the chemical base for everything from plastics to asphalt. It won't go away.

But with competition for the fuel market, the price will drop back down to a reasonable level. And that's good for all consumers.

I think the oil companies and oil producing nations know that they are digging their own graves with these prices. Soon we will find out if they care about that fact. My guess is not really.
39 posted on 07/30/2006 9:43:10 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: tomzz
Here, try this

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1674915/posts

40 posted on 07/30/2006 10:07:32 PM PDT by GeronL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next 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