Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0


11 posts in this topic

WASHINGTON - Speculation by large investors — and not supply and demand for oil — were a primary reason for the surge in oil prices during the first half of the year and the more recent price declines, an independent study concluded Wednesday.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

yup, which is why if we started drilling, speculation would show that we would be able to supply our own oil (and natural gas) and if we started to build nuclear plants, speculatino would show even less need for oil.

Thus, oil speculations would drop cost of oil, and it would go down.

Good topic

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like health care that would be the left of center position.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Swill sounds like you are for nationalising our oil industry.

How did you come up with that conclusion? Nationalization is not what needs to happen. Swill is right though. On all fronts.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not for nationalization, we just need to get started asap on all engery fronts. Less talking, start driling, building the pipelines, and selecting sites for nuclear energy.

I think we can get it done very quick if it becomes (which i think it already is) a national crisis. Just take a look at the 35w bridge. Excellent job, and way ahead of schedule.

We Americans can do great things, when we unit, and accept the challenge.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was curious is all. It looks like the drillers will get their wish. May come down to the states saying ye or ne for oil being drilled in front of their shores. Sounds like a good compromise. Though I don't think it will do much for the market in the long run. That's my opinion. Its good you see a plan that may work stick to it and we may see if it does any good.I wasn't trying to be sarcastic or anything like that just understanding of point of view.

Besides I got my new fish finder from ProFishingSupply and amazed at the technology behind this equipment. GOD BLESS AMERICA

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting read on BIG WIND.

Pelosi And The Big Wind Boone-doggle

By Michelle Malkin

August 13, 2008

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently called congressional Republicans who

want up-or-down drilling votes "hand maidens of the oil companies."

Let's call Pelosi what she is: House girl of the Big Wind boondogglers.

Though she seemingly backtracked on labeling drilling a "hoax" this

week, Pelosi refuses to consider GOP energy proposals that don't include

massive government subsidies for so-called eco-alternatives that have

never panned out.

Which brings us to Madame Speaker's 2007 financial disclosure form.

Schedule III lists "Assets and 'Unearned Income'" of between

$100,001-$250,000 from Clean Energy Fuels Corp. -- Public Common Stock.

Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (CLNE) is a natural gas provider founded by T.

Boone Pickens. Yep, that T. Boone Pickens -- former oilman turned

wind-power evangelist whose ads touting a national wind campaign are now

as ubiquitous as Viagra promos.

Pickens and Pelosi share the same talking points downplaying the need to

drill and open up more access to American oil. Instead, the Pickens

pie-in-the-sky plan proposes to replace natural gas with wind power in

power generation and theoretically free up natural gas for America's

transportation needs.

All well and good in la-la land, but let's be real about the limitations

and costs of wind power. Past and ongoing experience demonstrates the

unreliability of wind and the miserably low operating capacity of wind

power facilities here and around the world. Depending on wind requires

supplemental fossil fuel plants as backup to be turned on and off to

compensate for wind power supply shortfalls -- nullifying any reductions

in carbon dioxide emissions, which are miniscule, according to the

National Academy of Sciences.

Not to mention the thousands of sliced-up birds and other wildlife that

have become wind power casualties -- a problem scientists say would be

solved by "repowering" old turbines at a cost of untold billions.

Fittingly, the environmental mascot of the Democratic National

Convention -- the showcase of their alternative energy approach -- is an

eastern Colorado wind turbine propped up with Democratic carbon-credit

funds that has never produced any substantial energy because of its

chronic equipment malfunctions.

But I digress.

Naturally, the Pickens Big Wind plan is proudly endorsed by Do-Nothing

Pelosi's friends at the obstructionist Sierra Club. Through another

company, Mesa Power, Pickens has committed upward of $12 billion in wind

farms on the Texas panhandle. CLNE and Mesa Power are separate entities,

but what benefits one piece of the Pickens puzzle benefits them all. The

wind venture, as Pickens himself acknowledges, depends on permanent

federal subsidies.

Pickens is banking on 'em. And Pelosi is banking on him.

As reported on, Speaker Pelosi bought between $50,000

and $100,000 worth of stock in Pickens' CLNE Corp. in May 2007 on the

day of the initial public offering:

"She, and other investors, stand to gain a substantial return on their

investment if gasoline prices stay high, and municipal, state and even

the Federal governments start using natural gas as their primary fuel

source. If gasoline prices fall? Alternative fuels and the cost to

convert fleets over to them become less and less attractive."

CLNE also happens to be the sponsor of Proposition 10, a ballot

initiative in Pelosi's home state of California to dole out a combined

$10 billion in state and federal funds for renewable energy incentives

-- namely, natural gas and wind.

Follow the money. Or, to put it in economist's terms as energy analyst

Kenneth Medlock III did in an interview with The Dallas Morning News

about the Pickens multibillion dollar wind farm investment: "A lot of

what he's trying to do is add value to a stranded asset ... he's

obviously got millions of dollars on the line."

And so, potentially, does the Democratic Speaker of the House -- all the

while wagging her finger at the financial motivation of others.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michelle Malkin ??? The same Michelle Malkin of FOX fame?

Weren't you the one giving me grief about posting something from the NY Times, calling it a partisan rag, or something? laugh

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Times, Us Magazine.

Like one and the same.

Michelle Malkin, very smart and easy on the eyes. wink

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0