Should Bush release some Oil reserve

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by W0UZR, Jun 2, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-3
ad: l-BCInc
  1. W0UZR

    W0UZR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Releasing the reserves will not bring down gas prices. Because there isn't that much reserves to carry over long enough to do it.

    From what I heard on the reports, the reserves if used until all gone would last only one or two weeks....
  2. KC8QMU

    KC8QMU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Actually I'd love to se the US become totally dependant on it's own supply even just for a year, I figure by that time the Arabs will have so much supply that they will be forced to lower their prices just to try to get rid of it.
  3. W4CGP

    W4CGP Ham Member QRZ Page

    No. Absolutely not. I wish that we could have financed our Iraq war with Iraqi oil money...think about it. We free them and acquire oil to offset the cost! The only downside? It makes it look like we were over there just for the oil.

    Let's face it, bad people will most likely stay bad.

    I've got my problem with GW Bush. I'm glad he's in office, but I could care less for a lot he's done. Guess it's the Libertarian in me.
  4. KC8QMU

    KC8QMU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Actually, we have enough oil of our own to run this country for a LONG time, if we want to drill it.

    I say we do this just to show the Arabs that we have the ability to tell them to shove it up their rears if we want.

    Watch how nice these 2 faced bastards become then and start giving us a bargain on oil again.

    They, much like the rest of the world, hate us, but love our money. [​IMG]
  5. WA5KRP

    WA5KRP Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm betting on cold fusion.

    In the mean time, those oil reserves are for an emergency. We don't have one.

  6. W5HTW

    W5HTW Ham Member QRZ Page

    Anyone remember Bill Clinton?

    He, too, was requested to release oil reserves, and he, too, was wise enough not to do so.

    The oil reserves are for "emergency." We hams tend to get confused over that term, defining it as anything that allows us to use an HT and look important. T'ain't so. High gas prices are in no way an emergency. Emergency is military attack, or wide area earthquake, nuclear winter, new Ice Age.

    Give the oil companies incentive to develop new oil resources and they will do so. They are, despite the claims of the liberals in this nation, businesses, in that line for profit. It's called capitalism. Make it attractive for them to locate new oil reserves, and put aside just a few of the environmental restrictions that keep them from doing so, and we can tell the Arabs where to stick it, how deep and for how long. Slope drilling can drill in the Alaskan wilderness and not affect one acre out of one hundred environmentally. Off shore drilling has proved itself in recent years as environmentally safe and capable of excellent production.

    So, a resounding "NO" to releasing oil reserves. Wait for the emergency. It isn't here.

  7. KC8QMU

    KC8QMU Ham Member QRZ Page

    One thing I think we need to remember..............

    we can access all the oil we need in this country WITHOUT touching the reserve, once again, all we have to do is drill it.............

    but there is too much politics and money going back and forth, and like so many things, I'm not holding my breath........ [​IMG]
  8. KG4ZQZ

    KG4ZQZ Ham Member QRZ Page

    - unfortunately, the price of oil is going to continue to rise no matter what OPEC's output...

    - oil is a market-driven commodity and the biggest consumer of oil next to the U.S. will be Red China...

    - for a snapshot of current oil prices across the U.S., see:

    - expect to see fluctuations in the price of gas over the short term, but the trend will be ever-upward...

    - it now costs me $53.04 to fill up... but i don't feel bad; if i lived on the Left Coast it would cost me $60.50!

  9. W5ALT

    W5ALT Ham Member QRZ Page

    I can't speak for all the men in Texas, but the fact that Californians have to pay more for fuel due to their own laws is not an emergency on a national level - no mater who the president is at the moment. Why don't you fellows get together and build some refineries there? Why don't you make it easier for the nasty, evil oil companies to develop your reservoirs? Why isn't California self-sufficient on fuel, since there's plenty of proven oil reserves there?

    Honestly, I would expect such suggestions coming from California. Thanks for confirming my suspicions. It's much easier to blame a president - any one will do - instead of fix the real problems.

    And, by the way, you'll note that Texas did not have electricity problems along with either the right or left coast. That wasn't by accident. We don't believe in relying on either the left or right coast for our resources. The Texas power grid is self sufficient and needs no power from other states. Maybe California should try that? Heaven knows there's more than enough hot air there!

  10. W0UZR

    W0UZR Ham Member QRZ Page

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N6WK @ June 01 2004,18:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kb0uzr @ June 02 2004,02:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">NO!
    Releasing the reserves will not bring down gas prices. Because there isn't that much reserves to carry over long enough to do it.

    From what I heard on the reports, the reserves if used until all gone would last only one or two weeks....[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    Why Don't we just open up the North Slope in Alaska and tell the ARAB countries to stick it.   Then they will BEG us to buy their Oil.
    You do realize that that is what it will come down to in the end...Right??  2 Weeks, that isn't crap with the way SUV's Guzzlegas!![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    It would be much cheaper to use Texas oil instead of Alaska's.

    The cost of using in  Alaska would be higher because everything is more expensive in Alaska. The people that would be working on getting us that oil, we would have to be paying them top American wages, would drive the price up higher than they are paying for gas in Europe.

    Even with the pipe line, the wages we have to pay our people would really drive the price on gas up. So we would be shooting ourselves in the foot.

    That's why we can only afford to sell Alaska oil to Japan, Taiwan, and Asia, and whoever we sell to because the price of gas over there is just as high as Europe or maybe higher.

    In order to make it to where we can use our oil, in Alaska or Texas, and to where it would be cheaper, and even cheaper than what the price of the oil was before it went up, we would have to hire nothing but Mexicans, or Chinese people to work in OUR oil fields....
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page