Michelle on gas prices: Start drilling

posted at 10:17 am on June 11, 2008 by Allahpundit

So many righteous Republicans demonstrating common sense on this issue. How’d we end up nominating one who doesn’t? I guess he wouldn’t really be Maverick! if he didn’t support $5/gallon oil.

Take a minute to sign Newt’s petition after you watch. Exit quotation from someone who knows what she’s talking about: “Here in Alaska and across the nation, communities are feeling the pinch of high energy costs. It is absurd that we are borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars from one foreign country to buy oil from another. It is a threat to our national security and economic well-being. It is well past time for America to develop our own supplies.”

Link: sevenload.com

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

whyme on June 11, 2008 at 11:59 AM

Where did you read that at?

upinak on June 11, 2008 at 3:26 PM

Oil supply and production has nothing to do with the high gas prices. Drilling more oil in the US will not bring prices down.

lexhamfox on June 11, 2008 at 10:58 AM

Apparently you are a victim of our failed public school system. You need a remedial Econ 101 course ASAP!!!

Another false premise which infects your post is the presumption that oil is a non-renewable resource. There is mounting evidence that this is not true. Also, recent technological advances show that coal can be converted to oil or gas, which not only means that we have even vaster domestic energy supplies than we thought, but this also lends credence to the “oil is renewable” concept.

Naturally, Congressional Democrats are busy blocking all possible uses of coal, too.

landlines on June 11, 2008 at 3:40 PM

Damn, Michelle is so hot. What was the story about again?

revolution on June 11, 2008 at 3:45 PM

Jaibones – speculation is playing a big part in current gas prices, but it’s speculation about supply, so it all comes back to supply.

Short answer: Drill.

Merovign on June 11, 2008 at 12:09 PM

Agreed – “a big part” or all speculation? I am unaware of any change in supply in the run-up from $50 a barrel (late 2006) to $136 today. But again, it’s speculation about the supply, based on the increase in demand, mostly by India and China, right?

The reality of supply is that we continue to find massive reserves of oil all around the world; we just refuse to drill for it, instead inviting our military and economic competitors to suck it up.

Jaibones on June 11, 2008 at 3:54 PM

Gov. Schweitzer of Montana (D) has appealed for coal’s use since he gained office. Coal extraction in Montana is open land mining, not shaft, and they’ve not had a fatal accident in over 15 years. There has been some flickers of interest by Obama’s camp as a possible VP slot. Heck, McCain could reach across the aisle and tap him just as easily. Schweitzer claims it could be up and running in 5 years.

With the increase in fuel for our transportation, just wait until the next hard winter. I’m guessing we’ll see one of the most dramatic economic adjustments in history, possibly worldwide.

24K lady on June 11, 2008 at 3:59 PM

CNN/Money has a story up about the candidates’ positions on energy. The question about drilling (should more areas be opened up to drlling in the U.S.?) is particularly funny, identifying Obama’s position as “no”. Period.

The whole article is stupid, couched in CNN’s usual bias, but also on display is McCain’s environmental douchebaggery. What a shame that we lose the potential of this issue to highlight Obambi’s nothingness, because of McCain’s nothingness.

Jaibones on June 11, 2008 at 4:18 PM

Always great to see Michelle. Glad she is bringing her guns to bear on this problem more often.

Now if she could just take over for Katie Couric so that the whole country could benefit from her wisdom…. and mere presence, rather than just us privileged few.

LegendHasIt on June 11, 2008 at 5:05 PM

I’m all for drilling in ANWR. I think theres great evidence theres at least a fair amount of oil to reduce prices for some time until it starts to peak.

The point that alot of people are missing about the oil shale deposits in Colorado/Utah is that its EXTREMELY expensive to refine. So while theres alot of it, its just not an economically viable situation with current technology.

RoPa4life on June 11, 2008 at 5:11 PM

So, we’ve got GOP folks (Hatch and Allard) fighting for oil shale against democrats. We’ve got strong conservatives running for US Senate in CO and NM against total wankers. But we’re going to have to stop bitching about the POTUS nominee and join together to fight for this issue.

I’m not sure the “conservative” commentariat is ready to do that.

funky chicken on June 11, 2008 at 10:57 AM

Why can’t we do both?
McCain is a SIGNIFICANT, SERIOUS part of the problem. Why should we give him a pass?

Well, at least the guy in NM of whom you write, (Steve Pearce, for those who don’t know) actually benefits from McCain’s presence in the race…. Because all the money that I’d normally send to the Presidential campaign is doubled up and goes all to Steve instead.

And I do greatly appreciate Funky’s PR effort for him, even though I greatly disagree with the McCain shilling.

LegendHasIt on June 11, 2008 at 5:15 PM

So while theres alot of it, its just not an economically viable situation with current technology.
RoPa4life on June 11, 2008 at 5:11 PM

WRONG-O!:

I’ll agree that it costs lots more to refine oil shale than it does from wells and even tar sands, but at todays oil prices of around $135 a barrel; once the plants are established… Not even accounting for technology advances that will happen when we get serious about it… We can produce it for $88 to $100 per barrel less than we are paying now:

What Sustained Oil Prices are Required for
Oil Shale Projects to be Economic?

:First of a kind mining and surface retorting plants
may eventually be economic, providing a minimum
15% rate of return, at sustained average world oil
prices above $54.00 per barrel.
:In-situ processes may be economic at sustained
average world oil prices above $35 per barrel.

Source: US Department of Energy
http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/npr/Oil_Shale_Economics_Fact_Sheet1.pdf

And there have been some significant advances in technology in the last couple of years, since that report was written.

LegendHasIt on June 11, 2008 at 5:37 PM

Invest in green stocks, and old on tight. It’ll all turn around sooner or later. Is a shame though all this ‘war for oil’ talk and here we are at war and no oil. pffft

johnnyU on June 11, 2008 at 6:41 PM

oops HOLD

johnnyU on June 11, 2008 at 6:42 PM

Start drilling

how ’bout:

STOP THE DE-VALUATION OF THE DOLLAR!

RMC1618 on June 11, 2008 at 7:28 PM

Let me get this straight. We should prevent and discourage Americans from profiting off of our oil and we should invest in technologies that will make that oil worthless. Yeah, that’s the secret to success!

</sarcasm>

viking999 on June 11, 2008 at 8:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2