So let's see, Trump arranges for public lands to be sold off to the selected bidders at very low prices - this is a surprise why?
1
"The B.L.M. manages more than 250 million acres of surface land and 700 million subsurface acres, mostly in the West and Alaska."
And drilling in areas that are the equivalent of a postage stamp on a tennis court are going to hurt the environment? We need more gas and we need more oil, and drilling for it in will not hurt the economy. Memo - there will be no drilling in national parks.
If this writer could find a way, he would ban all fracking of oil and gas, with the collateral damage being $5.00/gallon gasoline, soaring heating prices, and declining manufacturing jobs.
And drilling in areas that are the equivalent of a postage stamp on a tennis court are going to hurt the environment? We need more gas and we need more oil, and drilling for it in will not hurt the economy. Memo - there will be no drilling in national parks.
If this writer could find a way, he would ban all fracking of oil and gas, with the collateral damage being $5.00/gallon gasoline, soaring heating prices, and declining manufacturing jobs.
1
If I was trying to benefit my rich friends and supporters, maybe some future election contributors, wouldn't I make sure to make available for sale a commodity when it is dirt cheap? Clearly this is not about what is in the interest of the United States or its citizens. What did you expect from a robber baron?
1
The new USA American ambassador to Canada has huge holdings in KINDER MORGAN PIPLELINE..pushed through by our previous rightwing provincial and federal govt. It is being challenged on many fronts because of risks to the BC COAST.
The Alberta TAR SANDS HAVE HUGE HOLDINGS BY THE KOCH BROTHERS.
The Alberta TAR SANDS HAVE HUGE HOLDINGS BY THE KOCH BROTHERS.
2
It's not about gas/oil The US doesn't need.
It IS about
1. Vindictiveness & meanness: Trump sticking his thumb in the eye those who did not vote for him.
2. Payback: Trump rewarding the plutocrats and blue collars who voted for him.
It IS about
1. Vindictiveness & meanness: Trump sticking his thumb in the eye those who did not vote for him.
2. Payback: Trump rewarding the plutocrats and blue collars who voted for him.
2
Golly. Do you suppose DT is doing this so his friends can rake in a few more billions?
1
Trump and his reactionary lackies demonstrate how despicable they are by the minute. Unfortunately they are destroying our beautiful planet in the process.
NEWS FLASH ON RADIO.. Trump going to Texas...American lives are important...unless they are people of colour...female...democrat and muslim or jewish.
NEWS FLASH ON RADIO.. Trump going to Texas...American lives are important...unless they are people of colour...female...democrat and muslim or jewish.
1
The left is at it again, creating something out of nothing, misinterpreting the facts and instilling fear where there shouldn't be. Understand that over half of Russia's federal revenue comes from oil and natural gas production. 98% of that production goes to Europe and Asia. Russia could put these countries in a strangle hold very easily by cutting their supply. The US becoming energy independent and a net exporter of oil counters this strategy. Not that the US alone could supply Asia and Europe's oil needs but with Saudi Arabia we could certainly counteract Russia's intent. Flooding the market with oil compromises Russia's revenue stream while loosening their influence over their importing countries. Not all battles are fought out in the open and things aren't always as they seem or as others would have us believe. The left has got to get their head out of the sand, look around and understand the bigger picture.
1
Just one of the reasons to not listen to a man who has been bankrupt at least four times. Better to stop the oil depletion allowance, tax carbon emissions, and support green energy.
I remain influenced by my high school chemistry teacher who, despite teaching in a net exporting oil producer generating billions in export earnings, did not hesitate in voicing his disgust at the waste of burning, BURNING!!, complex chains of energy packed hydrocarbons for energy instead of using those molecules to synthesize all manner of products from food to clothing to furniture.
Beyond the disastrous consequences from climate change, future generations will curse our time for such wasteful use of a god given resource. Shame on us all.
Beyond the disastrous consequences from climate change, future generations will curse our time for such wasteful use of a god given resource. Shame on us all.
2
Message to Trump, the Kochs and other anti-diluvians (credit to Nan Socolow).
Coal is dead as an energy source. So, too, is oil as we blow up the Earth (fracking) to get at it and try to extract it from tar sands.
Some European countries are already on schedule to ban the noisy, polluting internal combustion engine in cars and trucks in favor of electric engines and high capacity batteries. Others will follow, and so eventually will
we.
Kochs! Wake up before you're too late. You're getting older and more ancient by the day. Get it through your enfeebled brains. You are in the ENERGY business not just oil. Your business model is as out-dated as your destructive politics. Get hip and call yourselves Koch Energy, or something, and find some new sources of the stuff. Your descendants will adore you down through the centuries. E=MC squared, an immense quantity, means the universe is nothing but energy, virtually inexhaustible.
Get on it now! And stop funding fascist politicians.
Coal is dead as an energy source. So, too, is oil as we blow up the Earth (fracking) to get at it and try to extract it from tar sands.
Some European countries are already on schedule to ban the noisy, polluting internal combustion engine in cars and trucks in favor of electric engines and high capacity batteries. Others will follow, and so eventually will
we.
Kochs! Wake up before you're too late. You're getting older and more ancient by the day. Get it through your enfeebled brains. You are in the ENERGY business not just oil. Your business model is as out-dated as your destructive politics. Get hip and call yourselves Koch Energy, or something, and find some new sources of the stuff. Your descendants will adore you down through the centuries. E=MC squared, an immense quantity, means the universe is nothing but energy, virtually inexhaustible.
Get on it now! And stop funding fascist politicians.
3
Zinke will make Teddy roll over in his grave. Perhaps he should read quotes from various Roosevelt speeches before he claims to be a Roosevelt Republican.
Two points -
We are good on gas, but if oil is so cheap and plentiful, why do we still import half of what we use? There are arguments both ways on self sufficiency, presumably, but if we can be, why not (assisted by further efficiencies and reduced demand)?
Second, the leases are just a small part of the much broader effort to shrink the commons, including the government, and transfer land and resources from "the people" to those who can buy them, in the end the plutocrats.
We are good on gas, but if oil is so cheap and plentiful, why do we still import half of what we use? There are arguments both ways on self sufficiency, presumably, but if we can be, why not (assisted by further efficiencies and reduced demand)?
Second, the leases are just a small part of the much broader effort to shrink the commons, including the government, and transfer land and resources from "the people" to those who can buy them, in the end the plutocrats.
2
Hmmm, BLM land will be managed for fossil fuel extraction rather than, say, cattle grazing? I'm not sure what that means, but if it means the land will support fewer elk, deer and antelope, I know a lot of rural hunters who are going to be very angry. Mr. Zinke could become very unpopular in his home state.
1
as I understand it, fossil fuels are increasingly being seen as 'stranded assets' by financiers, so fossil fuel companies are rushing to maximise their profits from them before their chance disappears with the increases in renewable energy.
follow the money - going into private pockets - usually the fossil fuel companies.
it's getting towards the end of days for some of those guys.
follow the money - going into private pockets - usually the fossil fuel companies.
it's getting towards the end of days for some of those guys.
4
The rush to pump is not an invention of the Trump administration. The oil companies thought of it years ago. I spent many years in Alaska observing this first hand. When gas or oil is discovered, it could be money in the bank but the producers either do not understand that there is a finite amount of petroleum underground or they do not care that their descendants will not have gas and oil to burn.
How about sitting on our reserves until the Arabs have pumped themselves dry? The big problem is that doing so does not increase the value of current stock options.
How about sitting on our reserves until the Arabs have pumped themselves dry? The big problem is that doing so does not increase the value of current stock options.
2
I think you have answered your own question "What's the rush?" By driving the price of leases down you are lowering the cost to produce. By lowering the cost to produce you lower the break even point for production. By lowering the break even point, you increase the ability for producers to turn a profit (or an obscene profit). As far as the environmental or societal cost, that is not a "quantifiable" cost so it has no bearing on the discussion (or so the Trump Administration and the oil producers believe). This is just another example of weathfare for the rich. Fascism, don't ya just love it?
4
Never mind Kim Sung Un; Vladimir Putin or Iran. Scott Pruitt is the greatest threat to the US today!
5
This is not development based on need or strategy. This is ideological development, spiteful development, meant to undo what many others, from both political parties, have set aside, for public values that exceed their worth for drilling or excavating. This is development meant to remove land, for any excuse necessary, from public control into private control--especially now that prices are low. Economics, especially in a soft market, is a feeble rationale, but it is the best justification to Zinke and Trump and the rest who are set on making public lands available to their wealthy friends and supporters.
What's so confusing about that term, Public Lands? Is it the word "Public"? The "Public" owners of the land are certainly not who will benefit from their control by private mining and drilling interests. Especially when they are sold at bargain prices.
And is anyone else bothered by the money it costs us to fly Ryan Zinke's horse around the country so he can have photos taken on the land he is about to rape?
What's so confusing about that term, Public Lands? Is it the word "Public"? The "Public" owners of the land are certainly not who will benefit from their control by private mining and drilling interests. Especially when they are sold at bargain prices.
And is anyone else bothered by the money it costs us to fly Ryan Zinke's horse around the country so he can have photos taken on the land he is about to rape?
10
Key word... 'speculators' Benefit his buddies (and likely himself) - those that are in the real estate buy-and-hold markets. Make America for Sale again!
RRRrrrrgg!
RRRrrrrgg!
3
He promised to help the fossil fuel industry, and thereby attempt to cripple, or slow down the renewable energy industry, while giving away OUR property. Just paying back favors, and not serving the country, usual. He's an autocrat and a criminal. Impeach him. Get him outta here.
5
A policy from a president who puts political expediency above rational action. But I am sure it pleases the Koch Brothers and their petroleum owning brethren.
2
Reading through the BLM's budget proposal, shows in no uncertain terms the distain the Trump administration has for our environment and how the moneyed interests are front and center. From loosening of environmental rules to shifting the funding for maintenance of the recreational parts of the park system to energy interests.
This is all about Trump's buddies making a killing on the taxpayers back.
Have no doubt about it!
This is all about Trump's buddies making a killing on the taxpayers back.
Have no doubt about it!
2
"The Rush to Develop Oil and Gas We Don't Need"
Reminds me of that story of the grasshopper and the ant. Maybe we should add a "yet" at the end of that title.
Reminds me of that story of the grasshopper and the ant. Maybe we should add a "yet" at the end of that title.
My father just returned from visiting relatives in Anchorage, one of whom directs some of the drilling crews up north. That business has really slowed down to a crawl in Alaska, he says. That relative has had nearly no clients request his help.
And the construction jobs in Anchorage, according to him, have likewise become rare. With the drilling wealth down, the housing is in a slump.
So not every place is drilling.
And the construction jobs in Anchorage, according to him, have likewise become rare. With the drilling wealth down, the housing is in a slump.
So not every place is drilling.
3
This is how Trump's millionaire buddies become billionaire in 10-20 years. And since they want to remove taxes from inheritance over $7 million it goes to your kids tax free. Trump & the GOP aren't stupid - these 4-years will be a gold mine.
4
My guess is that many progressive countries will push alternative energy sources lowering demand for fossil fuels. So all this effort will be used to make more of something that will be in low demand. Meanwhile, other countries will be inventing and producing alternative energy products that the rest of the world will buy.
I may be wrong, but Europe, China, India are not going to be captives of an oil producing USA for another 50 years after all this time dependent on Mideast and Russia. They will do all in their power to get off the oil dependence.
Bad investment in my opinion. Coal is another silly thing to go back to. Those communities should get a boost towards alternative incomes like alternative energy. Just delaying the inevitable.
I may be wrong, but Europe, China, India are not going to be captives of an oil producing USA for another 50 years after all this time dependent on Mideast and Russia. They will do all in their power to get off the oil dependence.
Bad investment in my opinion. Coal is another silly thing to go back to. Those communities should get a boost towards alternative incomes like alternative energy. Just delaying the inevitable.
4
Regarding "push alternative energy sources lowering demand for fossil fuels", it is important to note that Germany, the poster child for alternate energy, has built over 20 new coal plants since 2010 as their wind and solar alternates could not meet the demand. By the way, their coal plants burn lignite (brown coal), the worst polluting kind. The failed alternate energy program in Germany came at tremendous expense to the German taxpayer. Odd that the media doesn't report this stuff?
2
"Odd" indeed. I have no love for Trump, but his "Fake Media" slogan is right on target.
1
These new leases are speculative, meaning it's a fire sale of assets that will only be in the money with higher oil prices. How do you get higher oil prices? Restrict supply. How do you restrict supply? Start a war.
Do you trust the oligarchs NOT to drive foreign policy? The Venezuela "military option" comment is starting to make a whole lot more sense now...
Do you trust the oligarchs NOT to drive foreign policy? The Venezuela "military option" comment is starting to make a whole lot more sense now...
5
Fossil fuel energy is already a thing of the past yet this administration is proselytizing from the bully pulpit shameless quackery to those who just cannot think for themselves, read for themselves, decide for themselves. The reality is that solar, wind and other natural energy sources are being developed and implemented faster than a speeding bullet ~ certainly in other countries and in some of the states that have a much clearer, forward thinking vision of the future. The future always arrives. We can choose to be at the forefront of that future, or slip to the back because we did not draw a line in the sand and challenge a liar, cheater and power-monger, and his gang of looters.
3
Equally incomprehensible is the plan to sell off the strategic oil reserves..at bargain basement prices. Some people thought that they were voting for a shrewd businessman for President. He is showing that he is not shrewd at all, but it would be wise to follow that money to find his real motivations.
5
There is no "rush" but rather a process with guidelines replacing a process that wants to restrict. And who knows if we will need these resources, we might want to export gas to offset say Russia.
1
Pipe dream. Gas isn't oil, the economics of a pipeline will always beat liquification. Same reason the US will continue to import oil from Saudi Arabia when all the wells in the US are shuttered.
It's all about product and delivery.
It's all about product and delivery.
1
A few years ago when fracking was causing oil prices to dip precipitously, I could not for the life of me figure out why the frackers were in such a rush to extract their lode instead of managing the output in keeping with highest possible fuel prices.
Same questions with Trumps new programs.
Do the petro energy folks know something we don't?
Otherwise just leave it in the ground, we know where it is and when we need it we can extract it.
Same questions with Trumps new programs.
Do the petro energy folks know something we don't?
Otherwise just leave it in the ground, we know where it is and when we need it we can extract it.
3
No they don't know more. It's rational to sell your product as quickly as they can, before the lights go out and oil is no longer required.
Plus, if they can make a buck doing it they will.
Plus, if they can make a buck doing it they will.
2
The US taxpayer doesn’t need to guaranteed profits to any investor in oil or natural gas, especially not banks. What happens when this bubble bursts?
As long as we keep throwing money at oil and gas speculation - it will NEVER stop. IT being the speculation, the conflicts, the inequality and of course the damage. Damage both direct and indirect. Katrina cost $109 Billion. What will Harvey cost?
As long as we continue to throw money at oil and gas exploitation we will never make adequate investment in renewables where there are more jobs and much much more potential for positive growth and real energy independence.
As long as we keep throwing money at oil and gas speculation - it will NEVER stop. IT being the speculation, the conflicts, the inequality and of course the damage. Damage both direct and indirect. Katrina cost $109 Billion. What will Harvey cost?
As long as we continue to throw money at oil and gas exploitation we will never make adequate investment in renewables where there are more jobs and much much more potential for positive growth and real energy independence.
1
I much prefer to leave our resources in the ground until we really REALLY need them. Let other countries deplete their resources. The current glut adds emphasis to this policy.
2
Here's a quote from that Liberal rag Forbes: "In the United States, more people were employed in solar power last year than in generating electricity through coal, gas and oil energy combined. According to a new report from the U.S. Department of Energy, solar power employed 43 percent of the Electric Power Generation sector's workforce in 2016, while fossil fuels combined accounted for just 22 percent."
7
It ain't for us....
It is for EXPORT...we will force others to drink to maintain the empire..
If someone doesn't buy oil & gas from us...we will de-stabilize you
It is for EXPORT...we will force others to drink to maintain the empire..
If someone doesn't buy oil & gas from us...we will de-stabilize you
1
Just another example of the fallacy of Trump being a good businessman.
5
The fallacy is that Trump is working in the best interests of the US.
1
The EPA, now known as the Environmental Pollution Agenda.
Thanks, GOP.
Thanks, GOP.
7
The Trump motto: "God Bless the Super Rich".
3
Just more "in your face" stupidity by Trump. It's what validates him (in his own mind).
4
Trump and the oil and gas producers are expecting the future to be like the past, and it's not going to be. The demand for fossil fuels is not trending upwards, either in the short run nor in the long run. Currently Russia and Venezuela are hurting because oil prices are so low. That means demand for oil is down, not growing, and so the revenues from oil and gas sales are down. In the long run the biggest users will be China and India. Both countries are planning to reduce their use of fossil fuels because of the high costs to their GDP and their people's health from their high use of cheap fossil fuel energy systems, they intend to more towards more renewables. Both spell trouble for companies that expect the demand for oil to grow as they have in the past. Therefore, exploiting these lands is not justified.
4
Why the push? Because for everything Trump does and for everything he is about, he lives in the past. When he should be pushing for renewable energy sources, he's crazy about the past. When he should be leading a more inclusive society, he's focused on the past. In short, Trump has no ideas. He is no leader.
5
Please this is not about oil and gas (although I can imagine the Trump thinking that if he empties out all of the oil, coal will go up in value - NOT!). It is about states doing a Federal land grab...land that belongs to you and me. Next Executive order will be about grazing rights...and more.
5
Common sense and sound economics have no impact on the right wing nuts.
4
Wind and gas turbines are killing coal. The ability to expand oil production by fracking and the burgeoning electric vehicle industry hold down oil prices. Let me explain the first. The amount of frackable oil in the world is huge. It is a bit more expensive to get, but it can be done. If oil prices rise to a certain level then fracking becomes economic and will be done. The frackable resources are not necessarily distributed as the traditional oil resources are distributed. Therefore if fracking becomes common place then the distribution of wealth from oil will migrate. Additionally, the cost of oil from fracking caps the maximum that the traditional producers can charge. Charge more and you lose market share and strengthen the economic incentive for electric vehicles as well. The price of oil will remain low. The price of fracking and electric vehicles are going down and both will eventually reach cost equity with traditionally produced oil. This is just Trump and his fascist friends spitting on the country again. They are angry that things change and they may lose their place. Rich people are so babyish. They have never lived in the real world and so have never developed an adult brain.
2
Here we have the best opporunity in decades to get off the fossil fuel teat and what does this mendacious, bratty, man-child of a president do? He drives down the price of fossil fuels and ups the price of kicking the fossil fuel habit.
What a an irony that one of the worst hurricanes in years, largely thought to be particularly devasting from changes in the globe's climate caused by burning fossil fuels, hits the center of the American oil and gas industry in Houston.
What a an irony that one of the worst hurricanes in years, largely thought to be particularly devasting from changes in the globe's climate caused by burning fossil fuels, hits the center of the American oil and gas industry in Houston.
5
The worst hurricane in years was caused by a high pressure system that blocked in from moving in a typical speed, making it get stuck in Houston. And that high pressure system was not caused by global warming.
Size matters. Especially to Trump.
2
Zinke, like many of Trump's appointees, is a traitor to his department and to conservation.
5
Beyond over exploiting our own resources, we are also importing Canadian tar sand oil to our Gulf refineries. Neither the natural gas or refined oil has a market in the U.S.. It will be shipped out of our country and sold overseas. This may enrich the companies who exploit our resources, and provide some jobs in Texas an Oklahoma, but will do nothing for our long term energy needs. It is stupid of us to open public land to these abuses. It makes not sense for our energy needs now. Congress needs to wake up and correct these policy errors. I know Trump won't
3
The problem with oil--and fossil fuels in general--is that when you use fossil fuels, you are not paying for what you get. When you burn fossil fuels, you are dumping chemicals into the common air.
Do you dump your garbage on the side of the road? If not, you understand that throwing your garbage into a public place is not a moral "solution" to the garbage. You pay for garbage pickup because it is moral to do so.
A carbon tax is a payment for dumping into the common air. If you believe that you should pay for what you get, you should be for a carbon tax. If you don't believe in paying for what you get, you are an immoral thief and should be ejected from an moral and decent society.
Do you dump your garbage on the side of the road? If not, you understand that throwing your garbage into a public place is not a moral "solution" to the garbage. You pay for garbage pickup because it is moral to do so.
A carbon tax is a payment for dumping into the common air. If you believe that you should pay for what you get, you should be for a carbon tax. If you don't believe in paying for what you get, you are an immoral thief and should be ejected from an moral and decent society.
2
Why is Trump doing this? He must have something personal to gain, he always thinks of himself first.
It just does not make sense. He is not a constructive president but a destructive one, and he is destroying all the things that help make America different and great.
It just does not make sense. He is not a constructive president but a destructive one, and he is destroying all the things that help make America different and great.
3
Of course! It's all about greed and making more money. We don't need it but someone else will pay big bucks for it. Money, money...
3
'President Trump’s pursuit of “energy dominance” is likely to amount to a fire sale of oil and gas leases benefiting speculators who pay little up front, hoping to benefit when energy prices rise.'
Uh, huh? What ARE those "devoted" Trump kids and "friends" up to these days? Wait and see...
Uh, huh? What ARE those "devoted" Trump kids and "friends" up to these days? Wait and see...
3
Oil and gas (especially oil) is global marketplace. If the U.S. doesn't produce, someone else will. Then we will be a net importer, shipping hundreds of billions of dollars to the Middle East.
Energy independence helps ensure high-paying jobs within the U.S., a strong dollar and less reliance on countries that we tend to invade/go to war with.
Energy independence helps ensure high-paying jobs within the U.S., a strong dollar and less reliance on countries that we tend to invade/go to war with.
1
These leases are speculative. That means it's a fire sale of assets that will only be in the money with higher oil prices. How do you get higher oil prices? Restrict supply. How do you restrict supply? Start a war. Do you trust the oligarchs NOT to drive foreign policy? The Venezuela "military option" comment is starting to make a whole lot of sense now...
2
Rushing to develop oil and gas when the demand is down and the trends are already towards using more renewables is unwise. There is no reason to exploit the fossil fuels on government lands at this time. It serves no useful purpose to society. Even if these resources are exploited, the oil will be sold in the global market and global prices will still determine the cost of the crude oil. Locally, refineries will price their oil according to local supply and demand. The people of this country will just not see any significant benefit from exploiting these resources under the circumstances.
1
This change above all is about power. Whether or not anything useful comes from oil and gas development is beside the point, which is to delegitimize holding land in conservation and to make it available cheaply to those (presumably Republican donors) who think they can make a quick buck from it. Even if no one wants to use the land, taking it out of conservation is still a political victory for Trump and his allies, on the general principle that government cannot and should not do anything aside from facilitating whatever large businesses want. Republican-controlled state governments can salivate at the hope of acquiring control (meaning the chance to do as many as possible of any deals themselves). And the change can be sold to ordinary voters as somehow giving the land back to them, because, of course, they have nothing to do with the government, which is their enemy. Also, of course, major donors with oil, gas and coal investments relish having the government speak in favor of their industries in any context.
3
For context, it bears mentioning that Jason Chaffetz advanced HR 621, just as Trump was coming into office. That bill required the sale of millions of acres of federal land while blocking consideration of the land's value as other than a source of resource extraction.
Due to pressure from hunters, fishermen, hikers, campers, mountain bikers, wildlife enthusiasts, and other Americans who understood just what a rip off this was, the bill was soon withdrawn. A second bill, HR 622, which blocked the Forest Service and BLM from enforcing laws meant to protect federal land from the sort of abuse Teddy Roosevelt observed in his day, was also put forward by Chaffetz and not withdrawn. Fortunately, that effort has not yet succeeded but its intention remains alive in the Republican dominated legislature.
Trump shares the Republican wish to more or less give away public resources as a sort of corporate welfare program in which the wealthy get the spoils but the public remains on the hook for cleaning up the mess of mining, logging, drilling, grazing, and waste disposal activities of industry. This is a serious threat to the health, recreation, and financial interests of American citizens and competing industries such as tourism, fishing, and water provision. Trump is making matters worse, but the destructive and economically unsound push to turn public lands into costly gifts for industry goes back to at least the days of the Sage Brush Rebellion and Ronald Reagan.
Due to pressure from hunters, fishermen, hikers, campers, mountain bikers, wildlife enthusiasts, and other Americans who understood just what a rip off this was, the bill was soon withdrawn. A second bill, HR 622, which blocked the Forest Service and BLM from enforcing laws meant to protect federal land from the sort of abuse Teddy Roosevelt observed in his day, was also put forward by Chaffetz and not withdrawn. Fortunately, that effort has not yet succeeded but its intention remains alive in the Republican dominated legislature.
Trump shares the Republican wish to more or less give away public resources as a sort of corporate welfare program in which the wealthy get the spoils but the public remains on the hook for cleaning up the mess of mining, logging, drilling, grazing, and waste disposal activities of industry. This is a serious threat to the health, recreation, and financial interests of American citizens and competing industries such as tourism, fishing, and water provision. Trump is making matters worse, but the destructive and economically unsound push to turn public lands into costly gifts for industry goes back to at least the days of the Sage Brush Rebellion and Ronald Reagan.
4
The BLM report says they will be limiting clean up projects as time goes on.
Putting aside the environmental impact of drilling, the real issue here is economic 101. The US owns an asset (the right to drill on federal lands). The value of that asset is significantly depressed for the reasons stated (cost of oil production exceeds reasonable profit expectations at the current market price for oil). Should the US sell its valuable asset at depressed prices to "investors" who will simply hold the asset until its value goes up or should the US continue to hold (and thus invest in) its own assets until their value goes up. The risk of owning the asset of course is that its value will go down over time and that US taxpayers can get more for their asset today than they will be able to tomorrow. That does not seem likely, but economists rather than politicians should address the risks. It seems pretty clear that the Trump policy favors private investors over the interests of US citizens. QED.
2
Ok, I hear your argument, dlthorpe, but you are missing another part of Economics 101. I'm with you while you are limiting your argument to drilling rights, but this is LAND we are talking about here, and not just drilling rights. Land is an "asset" that has many uses, and to exclude the value of the other uses from your equation is to miss the important part of this argument.
The many other uses of this land are not being considered. Even when the Primary value of the land is recreational, cultural, or in the case of some native American land, religious, decisions are being made with the sole agenda of mineral extraction in mind.
Economics 101 talks about supply and demand, that the demand for something is short supply will increase. Each acre of fracked landscape increases the value of un-excavated public land.
The many other uses of this land are not being considered. Even when the Primary value of the land is recreational, cultural, or in the case of some native American land, religious, decisions are being made with the sole agenda of mineral extraction in mind.
Economics 101 talks about supply and demand, that the demand for something is short supply will increase. Each acre of fracked landscape increases the value of un-excavated public land.
Intelligent and cogent analysis of the case for reining in development of fossil fuel development on public lands.
Unfortunately, Trump is a fool who is intent on selling off public assets cheap to his cronies, regardless of the cost to national security.
Unfortunately, Trump is a fool who is intent on selling off public assets cheap to his cronies, regardless of the cost to national security.
2
This sounds like a giveaway to somebody.
Meanwhile, China is hurrying to become the number one exporter of solar panels and getting all the jobs that go with that.
Meanwhile, China is hurrying to become the number one exporter of solar panels and getting all the jobs that go with that.
5
The next administration may be handcuffed by leases started now, but a new administration can dictate the terms of lease renewals making them more attractive to continue use while not touching those that are environmentally sensitive. They can also let it be know that if the administration is in power when the "Trump" leases come up for renewal they will be denied. No one would want to set up shop knowing that they will be forced to move in a short period of time.
Meanwhile, Keystone XL Pipeline may never even be completed due to the lack of customers. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2017/06/keystone_xl_pipeline_oil_...
Why don't we get rid of ALL subsidies, require ALL energy producers to internalize their costs, and let a truly free market decide.?
Why don't we get rid of ALL subsidies, require ALL energy producers to internalize their costs, and let a truly free market decide.?
5
Proving once again that his so called business experience is a myth...he only "played" a business savvy man on TV. Ramping up supply when prices are low and demand is lower than supply is just plain dumb.
2
How exactly does Lyons define "oil and gas we don't need". He glosses over the fact that "America will soon become a net exporter of energy." That's a good thing - not a bad thing. The US is poised to hit 10 million barrels per day. That puts us on par with Saudi Arabia and Russia as the biggest producers in the world. That is a huge testament to the American energy industry and their innovation in horizontal drilling and extracting fuel from Shale. It wasn't that long ago when we thought that we would be running out of oil ... and be forever beholden to unstable oil oligarchs in the Middle East.
Now, we choose our own path. Of course, "fuels are being produced on less than half of the approximately 27 million acres of public lands under lease to energy companies". 59% of restaurants fail within the first three years. Only a fraction of movies are ever commercially successful. It's the same in the energy industry. You do your research and think there is oil in given land parcel - but after some testing, you discover for whatever reason that it's not feasible or that other fields are more profitable. That should not mean that you stop looking.
"Global oil and gas supplies are so abundant that these fuels are being produced on less than half of the approximately 27 million acres of public lands under lease to energy companies."
Now, we choose our own path. Of course, "fuels are being produced on less than half of the approximately 27 million acres of public lands under lease to energy companies". 59% of restaurants fail within the first three years. Only a fraction of movies are ever commercially successful. It's the same in the energy industry. You do your research and think there is oil in given land parcel - but after some testing, you discover for whatever reason that it's not feasible or that other fields are more profitable. That should not mean that you stop looking.
"Global oil and gas supplies are so abundant that these fuels are being produced on less than half of the approximately 27 million acres of public lands under lease to energy companies."
1
The demand for oil goes up, then? Or do prices go down because the supplies are not being sucked up by increasing demands? China and India are looking to replace fossil fuel systems with alternatives like electricity as time goes on. It really does not look like the greater production of fossil fuels is going to result in much higher profits with demand being what it is. Remember, Venezuela and Russia and states that depend upon Oil revenues and both are in trouble because the prices for oil are down.
1
Prices for oil and gas are generally down. As far as demand, your statement about China and India looking to alternatives is just propaganda. "Although China currently has the world's largest installed capacity of hydro, solar and wind power, its energy needs are so large that in 2013 renewables provided just a little over 20% of its power generation, with most of the remainder provided by traditional coal power facilities."
Moreover, this only addresses the power generation side of things. Oil is mostly not used for power generation - but rather transportation. It is the source of gasoline, diesel, etc. And alternative energy doesn't even move the needle globally re transport fuels.
Re profits, that's a tough one. American companies continue to produce natural gas even though they may not earn much by doing so. But by producing natural gas, they also get at the much more valuable NGL's (propane, ethane) that are fueling the huge surge of plastics production in the US over Europe (which produces plastic from the far more expensive Naptha - an oil derivative).
Sure, rigs are already significantly down - not because government directed it but rather because profits are declining. But why not let the markets decide when to produce or nor produce oil - especially given the huge innovation they created making the US an energy superpower.
Moreover, this only addresses the power generation side of things. Oil is mostly not used for power generation - but rather transportation. It is the source of gasoline, diesel, etc. And alternative energy doesn't even move the needle globally re transport fuels.
Re profits, that's a tough one. American companies continue to produce natural gas even though they may not earn much by doing so. But by producing natural gas, they also get at the much more valuable NGL's (propane, ethane) that are fueling the huge surge of plastics production in the US over Europe (which produces plastic from the far more expensive Naptha - an oil derivative).
Sure, rigs are already significantly down - not because government directed it but rather because profits are declining. But why not let the markets decide when to produce or nor produce oil - especially given the huge innovation they created making the US an energy superpower.
This may not be the politically correct answer to this problem, but is this a serious matter if energy prices continue to fall? Many were concerned that solar power and electric cars could not succeed with $2 gasoline, yet things are increasingly moving in that direction.We do have a looming challenge, the fight by all the utilities to restrict the growth of solar power by limiting the ability of consumers to sell energy back to the grid. However, this is being dealt with well by some states and this will result in severe consumer cost increases in those states that allow utilities to keep their power. Yes, this Zinke effort is mindless and may provide some short term gains for fossil energy, but in the long-term coal is gone, diesel for cars is gone and we all have to live with the well advanced consequences of climate change. these things will make little long term difference. Perhaps we should be focussed on where we will put all those people from Bangladesh and Houston when sea levels rise.
2
I think you answered your own question with the last sentence.
2
Old man Trump and the elderly executives at the head of these energy companies are only interested in trying to make big bucks quick and fast. They all know they are not going to live forever, so they have to do it now with no regards to future generations or the environmental impact 50 or a 100 years from now. Personal greed above all else is their main objective. To them entitlement is a right and to heck with the average American citizen and public-land resources.
69
China is taking the long view, while US has always been shorter term oriented, and with the idiot in the White House, it is all here and now, rape and plunder for personal and political profit.
2
They truly do not believe that they can't take it with them. He who dies with the most, is still stone cold dead.
What, if any, are your qualifications for your statements? I dare say that president Trump is better informed than you.
Nobel prize economist not good enough for you?
The qualifications for John Q Doe's statements are obvious: s/he writes in complete, correct sentences, while trump is unable to do so unless reading a statement written by someone else.
1
I daresay Trump is apallingly ignorant.
1
What will be left of the US for our children and future generations when Trump's grifting administration gets done with his reign?
Will no one rid us of this meddlesome Trump?
3
This is the result of electing the equivalent of "Joe Six Pack" as President, mindless angry ranting around the dinner table by an uninformed bully.
"Government by the people", in an unintended, inappropriate way, coined over 200 years ago. We are wasting our great inheritance as a country with abundant and relatively untouched natural resources.
"Government by the people", in an unintended, inappropriate way, coined over 200 years ago. We are wasting our great inheritance as a country with abundant and relatively untouched natural resources.
1
It's worse than that. Trump is a can short of a six pack.
6
Does anyone know whether an individual can purchase these lands for $2 an acre and just hold them?
2
The very idea that one unstable little boy can take office and make changes so profound is appalling. The media certainly did a great job of giving us a disaster. Thanks NY Times and others.
2
No you don't sell when the market's low, correct. What do you do? You buy, so now do you understand? Trump is not serving us, the people, and owners of the country's resources. He's serving the rich who want to buy these resources at bargain basement prices. He has no "energy strategy" only an insatiable greed.
3
Short-term profit, without regulation, is the alpha and omega of Trump* and the fossil-fuel oligarchs who pull his strings.
American voters imposed this destructive polity upon themselves, so we are getting what we so egregiously deserve - national self-mutilation.
American voters imposed this destructive polity upon themselves, so we are getting what we so egregiously deserve - national self-mutilation.
1
I have yet to understand how it is that a "president" has the right to sell land that belongs to the public to big fossil fuel. Those plots belong to all 350m of us. Why don't we have a say? What right does this fool have to sell them to anyone let alone private industry?
5
The agency solicits public comment, and then ignores the will of the people. Our "say" is meaningless. Corporate rights trump the people's rights. This system needs profound change.
3
You did have a say. You voted in the presidntial election, right?
It's a lease he's selling, not the land itself as I understand it. The big problem with this is the degradation cause by the exploitation of the mineral wealth located under the surface.
Trump, once again, proves he is an incompetent businessman, clueless about everything except his artistry for spite.
This is a fire sale and privatization of the nation's treasures to oligarchs - like they did in Russia - creating great wealth for the few connected "allies" at the expense of the entire country.
By the way, did Putin give his blessing to Trump to try and lower oil prices even more - thereby damaging the Russian economy even more?
This is a fire sale and privatization of the nation's treasures to oligarchs - like they did in Russia - creating great wealth for the few connected "allies" at the expense of the entire country.
By the way, did Putin give his blessing to Trump to try and lower oil prices even more - thereby damaging the Russian economy even more?
3
I have been on the "Husband Our Natural Gas and Oil Resources" band wagon for years. Export only to protect our Allies from "energy blackmail" Do NOT sell-off the oil in the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, husband it for what it was intended for, a RESERVE Energy Source.
The critical point is this...
"What’s not sold can be bought by energy developers at bargain-basement prices — $2 an acre for the next two years."
The whole point is for Donnie and Tillersons pals to buy low, turn over quick and make moola. We the citizen are selling our assets for bargain prices, with minimal or no thoughtof environment or the future. Ehy so the suits can churn the assets and make money. Not for a shortfall , or to save us from rampant exploitation by OPEC. The fracking industry is struggling, why, because the technology has advanced so fast.
Technology is both oil and gas and alternative i.e. Solar, wind even biofuels has advanced. ( My prior employer is in biofuals, it competes well in limited markets at 50 to 60 buck a barrel oil.)
Even The Donalds pals in coal are being scammed here.
Sell,low? Donnie and his friends are NOT supporting America but Wall Street and the suits, nothing new just the same old.
Ciao
"What’s not sold can be bought by energy developers at bargain-basement prices — $2 an acre for the next two years."
The whole point is for Donnie and Tillersons pals to buy low, turn over quick and make moola. We the citizen are selling our assets for bargain prices, with minimal or no thoughtof environment or the future. Ehy so the suits can churn the assets and make money. Not for a shortfall , or to save us from rampant exploitation by OPEC. The fracking industry is struggling, why, because the technology has advanced so fast.
Technology is both oil and gas and alternative i.e. Solar, wind even biofuels has advanced. ( My prior employer is in biofuals, it competes well in limited markets at 50 to 60 buck a barrel oil.)
Even The Donalds pals in coal are being scammed here.
Sell,low? Donnie and his friends are NOT supporting America but Wall Street and the suits, nothing new just the same old.
Ciao
3
"Imagine the businessman Donald Trump putting his real estate up for sale when the market was near the bottom. That’s the equivalent of what President Trump is doing with the oil and gas on our public lands."
He is treating our public lands the same way as the six bankrupt businesses he ran into the ground by sucking out all the profits.
He is treating our public lands the same way as the six bankrupt businesses he ran into the ground by sucking out all the profits.
6
This administration has the rare ability to attack all the wrong problems with all the wrong solutions.
2
it takes over 4 years to get oil & gas from the well head into the system - and presently - WE the USA still import oil & gas - paying our cash to middle eastern & other countries. In 2016, the total U.S. trade deficit was $502 billion. That's because it imported $2.712 trillion of goods and services (ref: https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-trade-deficit-causes-effects-trade-partne... ) Pres trump should be driving sales from Cushing on overseas trips to quickly turn around the loss of over 100K + jobs from our oil patch. (ref: http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/04/investing/200000-oil-jobs-lost/index.html, https://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/15/layoffs-oil-field-workers-get-no-relief-...
1
The sheer stupidity of the headline is incredible. Oil and gas we don't need. What kind of a fool would write this? We need it. I could never afford an electric car. I don't want to fly a plan that has solar panels on them. And the list goes on.
He meant we do not need to develop and consume these resources at the maximum possible rate now. It would be wise to leave them in the ground for future needs. The same for the strategic reserve.
Instead of burning these reserves now for the thrill of burning rubber in 707 hp Dodge sedans, driving around the country in RVs the size of greyhound buses towing SUVs, etc., just because fuel is cheap now and the effects of climate change are only beginning to be appreciated.
Instead of burning these reserves now for the thrill of burning rubber in 707 hp Dodge sedans, driving around the country in RVs the size of greyhound buses towing SUVs, etc., just because fuel is cheap now and the effects of climate change are only beginning to be appreciated.
3
This is absolutely disastrous, and the democrats sit with their tails between their legs! There is a heavy price for burning up finite resources with the insouciance displayed by the Trump administration. Not only will it discourage investments in new clean and more efficient use of existing resources, but it will also bring us sooner on the brink of irreversible destruction of large tracts of natural habitat. Another point to ponder is, that even when we have viable alternatives to oil as fuel, we will still have a need for plastics, fertilizers and other non-fuel petroleum based products. This is an insane strategy!
1
“Ramping up the issuance of drilling permits during a time when so many approved permits are not being used would thus seem to be irresponsible,”
..."irresponsible" is the byword of this administration.
..."irresponsible" is the byword of this administration.
It is like the world will end tomorrow unless we go full speed ahead and export the same product we have imported for the past century. It is insane thinking, but the norm for Trump and his GOP allies.
Two bucks an acre for an oil lease is not exactly the return we the citizens should get for our investment in the public lands.
Two bucks an acre for an oil lease is not exactly the return we the citizens should get for our investment in the public lands.
1
This isn't about energy policy its about winning. Under the democrats, oil industry access to public lands has been stifled. The presumption is once you open up the doors to the industry in pristine areas you can't successfully close the door on those interests in the future. The oil companies may not drill on leased land while prices are low but once they have a leasehold interest it is harder to undue to give away.
You can't restore mother nature's virginity once you give it away.
You can't restore mother nature's virginity once you give it away.
1
To set a proper example, I think Trump ought to drill a well in the middle of each of his properties. And locate them prominently to show he's serious about his energy policy! In the banquet hall at Mar A Lago, on the 18th green at Bedminster, and in the lobby of each Trump Tower. What? There's no oil or gas under those properties!? Pish posh - don't quibble about minor details when the symbolism is the important thing! Drill baby, drill!
2
It's obvious "what's the rush?" They want to get the drilling started with long-term leases so that if control of any of the branches of the Federal government should change it won't be possible to stop.
2
Yes, thus the rush. As you know from dealing with hucksters, urgency is a trick.
1
Sarah Palin's "Drill Baby Drill" mantra is economically irrational and irresponsible while a global glut of fossil fuels is holding oil prices around $50/ barrel.
Facts, science, logic, matter not to Trumpistas. Only reversing everything done by President Obama is their mantra.
1
Why the rush?
Because if Luddites like the author come back into power, these sales and leases will never occur. Seize the moment.
The same nudniks that claimed the world was running out of fossil fuels are always searching for new reasons as to why development should not occur. Their gods demand nothing less.
Because if Luddites like the author come back into power, these sales and leases will never occur. Seize the moment.
The same nudniks that claimed the world was running out of fossil fuels are always searching for new reasons as to why development should not occur. Their gods demand nothing less.
This, as the writer explains, has nothing to do with energy dependence. It has nothing to do with being an exporter of fossil fuels. It has nothing to do with economics. All it has to do with is playing to the base.
Trump has no policies, He has no vision. He has no philosophy. All he has is Twitter and dog whistles. All he wants are large crowds to cheer and chant as he throws out his old, tired, and untruthful barbs on anyone he can think of.
I wonder if we could get him to resign if we offer him a weekly "rally" free of charge, where he could rant and rave along with his ignorant supporters? Do you think he would take the deal?
Trump has no policies, He has no vision. He has no philosophy. All he has is Twitter and dog whistles. All he wants are large crowds to cheer and chant as he throws out his old, tired, and untruthful barbs on anyone he can think of.
I wonder if we could get him to resign if we offer him a weekly "rally" free of charge, where he could rant and rave along with his ignorant supporters? Do you think he would take the deal?
2
This article does not help. What is need is cheap clean alternatives (Hydrogen-Boron fusion etc.) to kill (or rather 'creatively destroy') polluting industries.
Also the price of oil is so low that it now hinders American producers. Trump did that to keep his Oil buddies 'happy in the abstract'. Are they going to rush? I do not think so!
Also the price of oil is so low that it now hinders American producers. Trump did that to keep his Oil buddies 'happy in the abstract'. Are they going to rush? I do not think so!
When oil and gas become "too cheap to meter" will they so arduously support it then?
Trump's swamp has no interest in the public interest.
Trump's swamp has no interest in the public interest.
Not a bad article. Its just that it ignores the elephant in the room, ethanol. Democrats jammed food for fuel in around the time of Carter and the OPEC cartel embargo. Do away with it now, get us better fuel mileage, end the food for fuel mandate and quit subsidizing the corn, soybean agribusiness cartels.
Ethanol, the solutions still looking for a problem.
Ethanol, the solutions still looking for a problem.
New Title. The rush to develop oil and gas we don't need yet.
The whole world is moving to cleaner sourcing...what do we do with these amazing but destructive resources of gas and oil? We burn them. We don't even burn garbage anymore but we burn what we say we value more than garbage. We are losing our place in the world because the oil and gas hegemony is over no matter (what Bannon and Limbaugh say and) no matter how much you rip up the countryside. We need real leadership, pretending that coal, oil and gas extraction is going to save us is short sighted and shows the stunning ignorance and immaturity of the reprobate currently occupying the office of the president and the fawning sycophants called congress.
They're not even rational.
Literally nothing he does makes any sense for the American people. Just a money grab for speculators and cronies.
$2 an acre? Put me down for five hundred acres. I'll sign the permit back over to the BLM for conservation once Trump and Zinke are gone. Does anyone else want to join me? We can organize a kickstarter.
3
The rush by the Trump Administration to despoil our irreplaceable national heritage seems to make the Teapot Dome scandal a "tea dance" by comparision!
Another reason not to trust anything The Clown does.
More obtuse reporting from the NYT. The leases that are undeveloped are not being hoarded, many are not economic at today's prices or entail significant legal roadblocks for midstream (pipeline) delivery of any hydrocarbons produced. The blockade on leasing distorts the market for oil and gas development and raises the cost of production in aggregate. Will the NYT say and do anything to inhibit the energy industry?
1
The rush is because these men are selfish, stupid and uncaring for anyone beyond themselves.
What's the rush? To get the oil leases out there before someone else can change policy. Strike while the iron is hot.
Conservation is not our mantra these days. 90 day maximization of profit and stock price is. Short term thinking and long term problems, that's the American way.
For whatever reason, there is a strain of libertarian in the GOP that sees every resource as something a Republican should be able to turn into profit *right now.* They see no value in community use, preservation, or the conservative value of saving something for a rainy day. And they see no value in preventing terrible environmental damage if it gets in the way of short term profit.
If we all use the commons for our personal benefit, we end up destroying it so that no one benefits. That is the tragedy of the commons, and the common sense argument against the Libertarian belief that everyone should be left alone to do whaever they want.
Conservation is not our mantra these days. 90 day maximization of profit and stock price is. Short term thinking and long term problems, that's the American way.
For whatever reason, there is a strain of libertarian in the GOP that sees every resource as something a Republican should be able to turn into profit *right now.* They see no value in community use, preservation, or the conservative value of saving something for a rainy day. And they see no value in preventing terrible environmental damage if it gets in the way of short term profit.
If we all use the commons for our personal benefit, we end up destroying it so that no one benefits. That is the tragedy of the commons, and the common sense argument against the Libertarian belief that everyone should be left alone to do whaever they want.
59
Politics, not policy, drives everything Trump does. He is doling out favors to the fossil fuel industry which owns many Republicans. All he thinks about is appealing to his "base", which means he's more worried about getting re-elected than serving all Americans. And of course he needs to be seen as the hero, the man behind all the "wins", and the man in front of the camera.
39
"President Trump’s pursuit of “energy dominance” is likely to amount to a fire sale of oil and gas leases benefiting speculators who pay little up front, hoping to benefit when energy prices rise." Since we do not know of Mr. Trump's investments or the content of his tax returns I will assume that he is one of those speculators and this plan, like most of his actions, are to benefit his bottom line. Grifter in Chief.
Don't we all wish we had speculated on Microsoft stock back in the early 1980s?
1
Yes, the US has plenty of oil. But the world does't. And it shows incredible chauvinism for the US to preach to the rest of the world that it should not develop oil reserves to better the lives of its people.
Think what you will of Vladimir Putin. Yes, he may have murdered other politicians. But he is popular in Russia. Why?
Because he recognizes that the Russian people want better lives. And the path to economic improvement involves development of vast oil and natural gas reserves in the Arctic.
By developing oil resources in the Pechora Sea and natural gas resources on the Yamal LNG project, Russia is attempting to provide oil that will generate revenues that will better the lives of its people.
Make no mistake. The US has high living standards. But the UN estimates that 800 million humans on planet earth suffer from chronic malnutrition. They need oil for tractors that help generate higher yields of crops and oil for transport of food to places where hunger is prevalent.
Yes, global warming is real. But liberals have it wrong when they blame oil on the internal combustion engine. Global warming is but one of the symptoms of population growth.
Other symptoms include starvation in Somalia, civil war in the Congo, ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, the rise of dictators in the Middle East, diminishing living standards in India and Bangladesh. And lack of health care in the US.
It is population growth, not drilling for oil, that is the problem
Think what you will of Vladimir Putin. Yes, he may have murdered other politicians. But he is popular in Russia. Why?
Because he recognizes that the Russian people want better lives. And the path to economic improvement involves development of vast oil and natural gas reserves in the Arctic.
By developing oil resources in the Pechora Sea and natural gas resources on the Yamal LNG project, Russia is attempting to provide oil that will generate revenues that will better the lives of its people.
Make no mistake. The US has high living standards. But the UN estimates that 800 million humans on planet earth suffer from chronic malnutrition. They need oil for tractors that help generate higher yields of crops and oil for transport of food to places where hunger is prevalent.
Yes, global warming is real. But liberals have it wrong when they blame oil on the internal combustion engine. Global warming is but one of the symptoms of population growth.
Other symptoms include starvation in Somalia, civil war in the Congo, ethnic cleansing in Rwanda, the rise of dictators in the Middle East, diminishing living standards in India and Bangladesh. And lack of health care in the US.
It is population growth, not drilling for oil, that is the problem
Wrong. Russia needs oil revenues to pay for Crimea and 2300 Armata tanks. Naif.
1
Imagine if Donald Trump follows up on his threat to boycott Venezuela's oil. Even if it is only a partial boycott, experts writing for the Times have predicted a dramatic rise in oil prices. Which will, in turn, result in a dramatic increase in drilling in America. That would result in a dramatic increase in refining capacity and oil and gas exports. All of this would fulfill Mr. Trumps desires. If the oil industry gives any indication that they favor a partial Venezuelan boycott President Trump is sure to act. The thing is that drilling, refining and exporting will mean a lot of jobs for Americans and profits flowing into the American economy. How do you say no to good paying jobs and profits, even if you detest the President?
6
We say no to good-paying jobs when they are unsustainable after 20 years. We're in reach of peak oil, as evidenced by the increasing amount of oil we're getting from risky and environmentally-damaging processes, as opposed to just well-drilling. At a certain point, there will not be enough oil to sustain the push Trump is preparing. Additionally, green energy sources are increasing their viability, between offshore wind and domestic solar. At this point, anyone clamoring for fossil fuels either already has their own capital in the industry, relies on it as a worker, or is too beholden to "tradition" and a veneer of "American exceptionalism" to see the future isn't in the ground.
1
There's no reason to believe trump's belligerence to Venezuela would be limited a boycott. He also a military option, which would produce identical effects.
Are you still OK with that scenario, too, for jobs? Are you confident Trump will keep his cool and if so, why?
Are you still OK with that scenario, too, for jobs? Are you confident Trump will keep his cool and if so, why?
2
Venezuela accounts for less than 6% of our total oil consumption. My guess is that even a full boycott wouldn't have the impact you think it would.
1
It's simply Trump's mindset....if Obama did it, Trump is going to un-do it....there is no logic or knowledge used in making the decision..it's just ugly nasty vindictive politics. It's not even politics really, it's just spite, revenge, and Trump doesn't care if he harms people or the environment in the process.
93
Not that you are correct, but first the president ran on doing things and now as he can he is keeping his promises. And yes many Obama policies are bad for our citizens so doing something else is usually the correct decision.
alex-yes, Trump ran on doing things...many of which he is not doing, most of which he is not doing , even now he wants you to pay for the wall...day one he was going to give you the best, cheapest healthcare.
No doubt everything Obama did did not turn out well, or as planned....but, Obama had to do things with a GOP Congress, Trump has both houses.
THAT was my point, it would one thing if Trump made a change for the better because it was the better thing to do, but NO Trump simply will do something just in spite, just to stick it to someone, just like a 10yr brat.
No doubt everything Obama did did not turn out well, or as planned....but, Obama had to do things with a GOP Congress, Trump has both houses.
THAT was my point, it would one thing if Trump made a change for the better because it was the better thing to do, but NO Trump simply will do something just in spite, just to stick it to someone, just like a 10yr brat.
Oil and gas are the life blood of our democracy. Indeed the Iraq war was over oil. Oil and gas fuels the engine of our economy, industrial expansion and prosperity for all. We need a lot of it. Trump ran on drill baby drill. We need an expansion of offshore drilling. We need the Alaskan pipeline. No one cares about the spotted owl, global warming or the paris accords except the elite snooty sect and their ilk inhabiting the NYC upper west side. We need clean coal. We need fracking. The more raw energy the better. Liberals can have their windmills and thir Prisuses. I'll take my Challenger Hellcat and fist full of clean coal, thank you.
7
There's no such thing as clean coal
3
There's no such thing as "clean" coal.
3
Except we didn't actually get any oil out of Iraq. We did, however, get a lot of blood.
2
The glut of gas and oil make coal production even more superfluous. While this is not a bad thing for our air and environment it makes Trump's promise to bring back coal producing jobs almost impossible. Those who put so much stock in bringing back their jobs will once again need to find other possibilities.
1
Until the time comes when alternative energy sources are cheap we need to bring the price of oil down as low as possible.
$4 a gallon gas and even $2 something per gallon gas is outright criminal. This is what caused the economic depression the US went through and caused thousands of businesses to shut down.
Cheap energy is what allows business to manufacture and ship products.
Better to drill our own oil that finance countries that hate us and sponsor terrorism.
With much of the planet defoliated I don't think anyone can tell how much less oil burned will affect global warming.
Does the NYT think that only Trump, and Trump alone, is responsible for oil drilling everywhere? Is anyone helping Trump? Reminds me of Obama blaming Bush for his mistakes.
$4 a gallon gas and even $2 something per gallon gas is outright criminal. This is what caused the economic depression the US went through and caused thousands of businesses to shut down.
Cheap energy is what allows business to manufacture and ship products.
Better to drill our own oil that finance countries that hate us and sponsor terrorism.
With much of the planet defoliated I don't think anyone can tell how much less oil burned will affect global warming.
Does the NYT think that only Trump, and Trump alone, is responsible for oil drilling everywhere? Is anyone helping Trump? Reminds me of Obama blaming Bush for his mistakes.
6
Your statements miss several critical issues and demonstrate ignorance for how energy markets, if not markets in general, work. First, oil and gas prices are not set by the United States; they are set by the world market. Second, Economics 101: don't outstrip actual demand. Creating a glut will not make the price go down. Third, gas prices are not likely to ever go below $2.00 again, unless some unknown and untapped fields are discovered (highly unlikely), as well as increased refinery capabilities are constructed (highly improbable). Fourth, Trump is responsible for misguided policies and lack of any coherent energy strategies. His ignorance and stupidity deserve to be criticized when they are dumb, destructive, and disruptive.
2
Wrong argument. If oil is too cheap, it will cost too much to extract it and the oil drillers and purveyors will just close the sites. I was living in the part of Texas now ravaged by Harvey in the mid-80s when OPEC dropped oil prices so much that the Texas drilling sites closed down as it cost more to produce the oil than what it could be sold for. As this article states, we already have many leases out there that are not being used. Allowing more will just tie up these public lands until the price climbs high enough for the speculators buying the leases decide to actually use them.
2
You need to address the carefully laid out facts in this article, not shriek emotionally about politics.
This is dollars and sense and our national heritage.
Address the facts please.
This is dollars and sense and our national heritage.
Address the facts please.
The rush to develop oil and gas we don't need makes as much sense as the presidential commission created to find 5 million illegal voters who don't exist. But then we have a senselless "president" in the White House and an EPA chief bent on destroying our environment and catering to the fossil fuel industry.
98
True, we do not need more natural gas for domestic consumption. But now, the energy industry seeks to export more natural gas to Europe.
Europe's natural gas supply is dominated by supplies from Russia. Natural gas from North America would be delivered as liquefied natural gas, and would displace energy now supplied by Russia.
If Trump were to inhibit natural gas development in the United States, undoubtedly someone would claim he was doing so as a favor to his Russian friends.
Europe's natural gas supply is dominated by supplies from Russia. Natural gas from North America would be delivered as liquefied natural gas, and would displace energy now supplied by Russia.
If Trump were to inhibit natural gas development in the United States, undoubtedly someone would claim he was doing so as a favor to his Russian friends.
3
Most of the human brain developed before there were any humans, and the most powerful structures flood the limbic system with chemicals representing the most primal experiences of awareness, the emotions. These chemicals act quickly and decisively compelling the organism to react quickly and directly to whatever stimulated the responses. The frontal lobes of the brain while enabling us to think profoundly and to uncover the secrets of nature do not work that way, they give us understanding and compassion but no strong emotional reactions, but we respond to the emotions over the products of our reasoning minds. These characters from Trump to the oil and gas people see the federal lands as potential profits with little costs compared to private lands and by securing the rights to exploit them is emotionally exciting for them. They feel the rush of tremendous gains in their imaginations. As for the long term affects of their behavior, that's all frontal lobe issues, not exciting for them, no fantastic riches. Instead it's considering the fairness of squandering resources perhaps needed in the future and for sure destroying lands that have so far been protected from exploitation. Thinking brings to mind more destroyed ecologies that cannot be restore and the extinctions of more species, more global warming from over use of fossil fuels, which are all real downers, not as much fun as imagining the profits. Jerks.
5
Yes, and you have never been able to comprehend the impact on real lives of stifled developed, comfortably advocated by fools like you.
The impact of stifled development. I have seen enough developers trying to erase the last acreage undeveloped to know that the itch to build on and to sell property is like an addiction, it's a need for the developer more than anyone else, and it's never satisfied. The only thing that can stop a developer is the final bankruptcy that ends all access to credit.
1
How ironic is the climate catastrophe in Texas, that is disrupting the oil refining infrastructure and will likely result in higher gas prices, not to mention taxpayer money to rebuild the devastation. None of those private, profit-making companies which have gouged and inflicted public health horrors, should get any money at all from taxpayers. Instead, Texas should do what every other community has done that underwent such devastation: rebuild and transition to clean, renewable energy sources and sustainable, climate-friendly, low-carbon emitting structures.
4
Lets instead make sure we become dominant in transportation by cornering the horse buggy market. It would be equally useful and cost a lot less. Those who will “dominate” the energy markets are those who get to the cutting edge of wind and solar power. Unfortunately, the current US government has decided that we shall be reluctant followers not leaders in the energy markets of the future.
8
Facts simply don't matter to this administration. What they care about is pushing their own agenda and it doesn't matter who or what that agenda harms. All that matters is how they are perceived by their base.
7
We haven't seen enough climate change. The Guardian today interviewed Texans who will likely lose their livelihoods due to Harvey; they are still waiting for more climate data. A Houston official said Harvey is a 1 in 1000 year event.
Did he mean Harvey is a cyclical event and not a sign of one way changes? Interesting that he's abandoned the 1 in 100 year mark. The next climate disaster will be once in 2000 years. And how did he get climate records from the times of the Roman Empire? I didn't know they were so advanced in science.
Did he mean Harvey is a cyclical event and not a sign of one way changes? Interesting that he's abandoned the 1 in 100 year mark. The next climate disaster will be once in 2000 years. And how did he get climate records from the times of the Roman Empire? I didn't know they were so advanced in science.
4
We probably shouldn't rely on Houston officials for statistical analysis.
But it is clear that a couple of extra degrees F higher temperature in the gulf has created a humongous tropical storm. Tropical storms are essentially heat engines, after all.
But it is clear that a couple of extra degrees F higher temperature in the gulf has created a humongous tropical storm. Tropical storms are essentially heat engines, after all.
Fracking is short term. It quickly exhausts the resource. It is a method based on impatience, on forcing the resource out with fluids under pressure.
What is developed by fracking will be gone in something like ten years. It is draining already-depleted reserves to scrape the bottom for one last bonanza.
Then it will be done, gone. They are exhausting it as fast as they can.
That is one way to get us off carbon. In ten years carbon will be gone, although by then it will be in the atmosphere and the problem a lot more than just lack of oil and gas.
There should be some attention to total supply, making it last, and setting aside the money like Norway did. Instead, it is a huge give away, like Teapot Dome scandal giving away the Navy's oil reserves in the Harding Admin, but nationwide with our entire resource.
What is developed by fracking will be gone in something like ten years. It is draining already-depleted reserves to scrape the bottom for one last bonanza.
Then it will be done, gone. They are exhausting it as fast as they can.
That is one way to get us off carbon. In ten years carbon will be gone, although by then it will be in the atmosphere and the problem a lot more than just lack of oil and gas.
There should be some attention to total supply, making it last, and setting aside the money like Norway did. Instead, it is a huge give away, like Teapot Dome scandal giving away the Navy's oil reserves in the Harding Admin, but nationwide with our entire resource.
9
This reads about as honestly as an ExxonMobile or Sierra Club assessment of the health of Prince William Sound would, given vested interests with axes to grind. I truly doubt Mr. Lyons would have had any issues with Mr. Obama binding Mr. Trump,
If 7.950K drilling permits weren't being used, then what does it matter if 10K, or 12K aren't being used? Mr. Lyons may feel that energy development is bad, but one look at Venezuela's brilliant strategy should be sufficient to demonstrate the pitfalls of neglecting the future when planning for energy needs.
Low energy prices mean lower costs and therefore downward pressure on retail prices. As a result, those that can afford life the least are helped the most. That creates opportunities that otherwise would not exist for millions of people, improving their standard of living.
No one is suggesting that the environment be neglected, in fact, a zero external cost policy from the beginning of such resource extraction would have reduced environmental issues by orders of magnitude more than silly regulatory studies. By now, environmental reviews and impact statements are little more than extremely expensive boilerplate.
This is more accurate: The president’s energy strategy is more likely to drive down the overall cost of energy extracted from public-land resources. Rural communities, American taxpayers and our children will gain the benefits of energy self-reliance and a better life as a result.
If 7.950K drilling permits weren't being used, then what does it matter if 10K, or 12K aren't being used? Mr. Lyons may feel that energy development is bad, but one look at Venezuela's brilliant strategy should be sufficient to demonstrate the pitfalls of neglecting the future when planning for energy needs.
Low energy prices mean lower costs and therefore downward pressure on retail prices. As a result, those that can afford life the least are helped the most. That creates opportunities that otherwise would not exist for millions of people, improving their standard of living.
No one is suggesting that the environment be neglected, in fact, a zero external cost policy from the beginning of such resource extraction would have reduced environmental issues by orders of magnitude more than silly regulatory studies. By now, environmental reviews and impact statements are little more than extremely expensive boilerplate.
This is more accurate: The president’s energy strategy is more likely to drive down the overall cost of energy extracted from public-land resources. Rural communities, American taxpayers and our children will gain the benefits of energy self-reliance and a better life as a result.
1
"If 7.950K drilling permits weren't being used, then what does it matter if 10K, or 12K aren't being used?"
Ignoring all the rest of the distortion in your comment, here's the script :
The leases are sold at bargain basement prices, which means they can and will be bought on pure speculation in the hopes of rising energy prices. The only way prices will rise is if the US starts a war to cut off supplies and put the speculators in the money.
That means in the best case scenario there will be no activity at all on the land, not even grazing and certainly, no jobs and no middle class income. In the worst case scenario the jobs will be in uniform and overseas.
Now watch it play out...
Ignoring all the rest of the distortion in your comment, here's the script :
The leases are sold at bargain basement prices, which means they can and will be bought on pure speculation in the hopes of rising energy prices. The only way prices will rise is if the US starts a war to cut off supplies and put the speculators in the money.
That means in the best case scenario there will be no activity at all on the land, not even grazing and certainly, no jobs and no middle class income. In the worst case scenario the jobs will be in uniform and overseas.
Now watch it play out...
4
i sit on the shore of Boundary Bay and watch trains carry coal to be shipped to china it's not about "energy self reliance" it's about making money for the producers period.
7
The main issue I took from this article is that leases sold now would be sold off extremely cheaply since the market is soft, so that U.S. taxpayers don't get good value for the public assets being sold. If we are becoming a net energy exporter then overselling leases means that we're exhausting U.S. resources in a hurry to provide cheap energy to other countries. What is the point of that?
5
Strategy? What strategy? Only if it will make Trump money.
3
The headline misstates the case. It should go:
"oil and gas we need to leave in the ground"
If anyone has noted an increase in dar condemnations, it is because pro-fossil, fake skeptics, luckwarmers, people arguing against facts in favor of trashing, exploiting, and burning are putting us all in danger, and it's late. The handwriting has been on the wall since the early 1980s.
"Global Warming's Terrifying New Math: Three simple numbers that add up to global catastrophe - and that make clear who the real enemy is" http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new...
"Sometimes the irony is almost Borat-scale obvious: ... "Many of the predictions about warming in the Arctic are being surpassed by the actual data," ... discussions ... Scandinavia ... mostly about how to make sure Western nations get their share of the estimated $9 trillion in oil (that's more than 90 billion barrels, or 37 gigatons of carbon) that will become accessible as the Arctic ice melts."
"Almost every government with deposits of hydrocarbons straddles the same divide. Canada, for instance, is a liberal democracy renowned for its internationalism – no wonder, then, that it signed on to the Kyoto treaty, promising to cut its carbon emissions substantially by 2012. But the rising price of oil suddenly made the tar sands of Alberta economically attractive"
"The same kind of hypocrisy applies across the ideological board"
"oil and gas we need to leave in the ground"
If anyone has noted an increase in dar condemnations, it is because pro-fossil, fake skeptics, luckwarmers, people arguing against facts in favor of trashing, exploiting, and burning are putting us all in danger, and it's late. The handwriting has been on the wall since the early 1980s.
"Global Warming's Terrifying New Math: Three simple numbers that add up to global catastrophe - and that make clear who the real enemy is" http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new...
"Sometimes the irony is almost Borat-scale obvious: ... "Many of the predictions about warming in the Arctic are being surpassed by the actual data," ... discussions ... Scandinavia ... mostly about how to make sure Western nations get their share of the estimated $9 trillion in oil (that's more than 90 billion barrels, or 37 gigatons of carbon) that will become accessible as the Arctic ice melts."
"Almost every government with deposits of hydrocarbons straddles the same divide. Canada, for instance, is a liberal democracy renowned for its internationalism – no wonder, then, that it signed on to the Kyoto treaty, promising to cut its carbon emissions substantially by 2012. But the rising price of oil suddenly made the tar sands of Alberta economically attractive"
"The same kind of hypocrisy applies across the ideological board"
5
The reason is simple - drive the price of oil to the point where clean energy alternatives are economically uncompetitive without massive subsidies. Drown start-ups in an ocean of cheap oil and the laws of unrestrained capitalism will do the rest. The short term profit targets and longer term energy market dominance of the oil-coal industry will remain safe in America, while the remainder of the world addresses the threat of Global Warming.
17
The photo accompanying this column turned my stomach. Once these lands become industrialized, they will slip into the over-development that the rest of our country has reached. In the late 70's I used to travel from Boston to the mountains in Vermont. There were long stretches that were almost untouched by humans. Now it is almost a continual city. We can't undo the development that has already happened. We need to fight to protect the lands that so far have escaped the greed of industry, and to some measure us...we are the ones that are counted in the "demand", and industry provides the "supply". If we don't want to eventually become a third-world country, we have to show some discipline and self control, and be true guardians and stewards of our public lands. Remember that "public" means they belong to ALL of us.
11
TRUMP Needs to borrow a page from the Chinese and turn the US efforts into producing solar cells and other products needed to increase sustainable energy, rather than wasting time and economic opportunity giving away the mineral rights to produce natural gas and oil that is not needed and will both depress the value of fossil fuels worldwide, but increase global climate change more rapidly. Trump need only read the reports about the flooding in Houston TX to see evidence that sustainable energy must be mandated and developed if our coastal cities and populations are to survive the ever increasing rate of global climate change, the greatest global threat of our day.
11
Ultimately, it is the private oil companies in America that determine the amount of oil produced here, no matter from whom the oil leases are obtained. Many of the richest oil companies in the world hold the rights to acreage in the Gulf of Mexico, but have been putting their exploration projects on hold there because it is difficult and expensive to drill and produce oil there.
The Saudis started all of this partly in response to increased shale production in the US. It is my belief that they have sold millions of barrels of their most precious resource at prices that are less than half what they were in 2014.
The Saudis started all of this partly in response to increased shale production in the US. It is my belief that they have sold millions of barrels of their most precious resource at prices that are less than half what they were in 2014.
3
@Willy,
While weaker producers have shut down, US shale production hasn't been severely dented.
Here's a more credible explanation to Saudi produciton levels : Saudis aren't competing with other oil producers. They're trying to delay the transition to alternative energy technology.
The Saudis see the writing on the wall and they're selling what they've got before it becomes worthless.
While weaker producers have shut down, US shale production hasn't been severely dented.
Here's a more credible explanation to Saudi produciton levels : Saudis aren't competing with other oil producers. They're trying to delay the transition to alternative energy technology.
The Saudis see the writing on the wall and they're selling what they've got before it becomes worthless.
1
Here's the script :
The leases are sold at bargain basement prices, which means they can and will be bought on pure speculation in the hopes of rising energy prices. The only way prices will rise is if the US starts a war to cut off supplies and put the speculators in the money.
That means in the best case scenario there will be no activity at all on the land, not even grazing and certainly, no jobs and no middle class income. In the worst case scenario the jobs will be in uniform and overseas.
Now watch it play out...
The leases are sold at bargain basement prices, which means they can and will be bought on pure speculation in the hopes of rising energy prices. The only way prices will rise is if the US starts a war to cut off supplies and put the speculators in the money.
That means in the best case scenario there will be no activity at all on the land, not even grazing and certainly, no jobs and no middle class income. In the worst case scenario the jobs will be in uniform and overseas.
Now watch it play out...
27
If all this is true, and we have so much oil and gas available, then why are we still dealing with the Saudis? Something's missing here.
8
You assume that all crude oil is the same, but nothing is further from the truth. We deal with the Saudis because their type of crude oil , termed "sweet crude," lacks many of the impurities, such as sulfur, that taints American crude. What that means is that Saudi crude is easier and cheaper to refine into gasoline, kerosene, bitumen, , etc., than anything that we pump out of our own oil wells.
So no matter how a politician spouts patriotic-sounding nonsense about how America needs to be "energy-independent," America will be buying Saudi sweet crude as long as it's on the market. Trying to switch to American crude means you'll be paying about $5 a gallon for gasoline. Maybe more. When it comes to crude oil, patriotism is expensive. But try telling that to a loud-mouthed politician or some Far Right media outlet that knows nothing but assumes it has all the answers.
So no matter how a politician spouts patriotic-sounding nonsense about how America needs to be "energy-independent," America will be buying Saudi sweet crude as long as it's on the market. Trying to switch to American crude means you'll be paying about $5 a gallon for gasoline. Maybe more. When it comes to crude oil, patriotism is expensive. But try telling that to a loud-mouthed politician or some Far Right media outlet that knows nothing but assumes it has all the answers.
78
Because they oppose Iran.
4
You are half correct, not all oil is the same. You are incorrect in that we buy much Saudi oil. We don't. Our refineries are set up to work on lesser grades of crude, and it is incorrect to say that most US crude is of this type.
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=727&t=6
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/petroleum/crudetypes/
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=727&t=6
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/petroleum/crudetypes/
1
Since large portions of the Republican voter base will tolerate no source of information that doesn't tell them what they already know, and since they already know that the federal government has been sttrangling the energy industry to save the snail darter, no amount of facts and reasoned debate on this issue will mater to them. Trump is the embodiment of this 'no-nothing' crew, so the leases will be sold. I suspect that, for most of these voters, any subsequent ill effects will be the fault of environmentalists and liberals.
45
This is meaningless. Let's just reverse it:
"Since large portions of the Democratic Party's voter base will tolerate no source of information that doesn't tell them what they already know, and since they already know that the federal government has been pandering to the energy industry to strangle the snail darter, no amount of facts and reasoned debate on this issue will matter to them. Obama was the embodiment of this 'know-nothing' crew, so the leases weren't sold. I suspect that, for most of these voters, any subsequent ill effects will be the fault of businesses and conservatives."
Empty statements of opinion without reasoning, insight, or analysis are of no value in furthering the discussion.
Kearney's Son: I sleep in a drawer!
"Since large portions of the Democratic Party's voter base will tolerate no source of information that doesn't tell them what they already know, and since they already know that the federal government has been pandering to the energy industry to strangle the snail darter, no amount of facts and reasoned debate on this issue will matter to them. Obama was the embodiment of this 'know-nothing' crew, so the leases weren't sold. I suspect that, for most of these voters, any subsequent ill effects will be the fault of businesses and conservatives."
Empty statements of opinion without reasoning, insight, or analysis are of no value in furthering the discussion.
Kearney's Son: I sleep in a drawer!
1
You really underestimate the strong connection to the land that people in the West feel. If you had been paying attention, you would know that people of the West, of whatever political affiliation, have worked hard to oppose the efforts to trade public access to public lands for exploitation for minerals and grazing.
Trump knows what he is doing, he is basically giving away public resources to his master, the fossil fuel industry that he serves and helped put him in office. He also wants to show his contempt for the environment, for wildlife, and for natural beauty to please his vicious base of supporters. This has been a successful strategy.
46
The resources are not being given away. After they have paid for the right to drill, oil companies must risk their own money to drill, produce and sell any oil they find.
I agree that the decision to open up public lands for oil exploration should be done carefully, if at all.
I agree that the decision to open up public lands for oil exploration should be done carefully, if at all.
2
@Willy, the leases are fungible property. As such they require zero additional investment by the buyer to generate triple digit returns or better. It's entirely about speculation.
8
I thought Trump was an agent of Russia. Now, it's the energy industry? Make up your mind.
1
"The president’s energy strategy is more likely to damage public-land resources. Rural communities, American taxpayers and our children will pay the price."
I often wonder when the final tally of damages from "Hurricane Trump" is compiled whether the rural communities that supported him so overwhelmingly will appreciate how badly they have been played for fools. Trump, their "great white hope" is leading millions of his follower lambs to slaughter and they still overwhelmingly support him.
The tragedy is that the gullibility of so many Americans is going to harm my children and grandchildren too. In the end a birth certificate and some emails, seemingly innocuous items, will wreak a havoc upon us we may never fully recover from.
I often wonder when the final tally of damages from "Hurricane Trump" is compiled whether the rural communities that supported him so overwhelmingly will appreciate how badly they have been played for fools. Trump, their "great white hope" is leading millions of his follower lambs to slaughter and they still overwhelmingly support him.
The tragedy is that the gullibility of so many Americans is going to harm my children and grandchildren too. In the end a birth certificate and some emails, seemingly innocuous items, will wreak a havoc upon us we may never fully recover from.
25
Mark Twain supposedly said "it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled."
Which brings us to all those poor, deluded Trump worshippers who still hang on Dear Leader's every tweet, twitter, and empty promise.
Which brings us to all those poor, deluded Trump worshippers who still hang on Dear Leader's every tweet, twitter, and empty promise.
1
These rural trumpistes are too ignorant to make connections. At the risk of being a snob Canadians generally are much better educated, informed and involved than Americans. PLUS WHEN CANADIANS FILE THEIR INCOME TAXES ALL ONE HAS TO DO IS CHECK OFF A BOX TO BE REGISTERED TO VOTE. There is some gerrymandering done in rural.BC by our previous neo.con provincial govt.
1
Greed seems always to motivate the policies of the republican Party and they have the perfect man to lead them in greed. Because the issues here are below the radar not much real opposition exists, and so the trump administration continues its assault on America.
15
The most crooked administration since Grant. Drain the swamp? It took a special kind of ignorance to fall for that. If these people have their way they'll hand over every bit of land, water, and infrastructure to their cronies for free or at fire sale prices with none of it ever to return to the people of the United States. Please, someone keep an eye out for money under the table with the crooks making these decisions.
20
It will be amusing to see that these right-wing communities like those in southern Utah who have pushed the Trump administration to do this, will not only not see "more jobs" the dog whistle always used by Republicans, but will actually see fewer jobs. Since this is just land speculation, the jobs that have grown around these federal lands due to the multiple uses, as noted here, will disappear as the BLM focuses only on drilling permits. Like the anti-climate change Texans who just had it thrown in their face from hurricane Harvey, there is karmic justice. Usually though, these conservatives will just blame Obama and Congressional Democrats, but the pain will still be there. Thanks again angry white voters.
18
Fossil fuels and the fossils in Washington enslaved to their use are relics of the past. Up here in Alberta we produce the dirtiest and most expensive oil in the world and have had a giddy ride, but we see the writing on the wall. Two years ago we threw out the Progressive Conservatives because they were anything but and voted the so called radical Left NDP into power in a landslide.
Since then, despite the howls from the fossils still trying to 'Unite the Right" for all the wrong reasons, we are moving forward to a more diversified economy. The mighty giant Shell is selling off its stake in this filthy and dying business and investing in research and development in alternative energy sources. What does Trump and the ossified holdouts for the good old days know that Shell does not?
Just when so many of us in the world are getting it, this dismal administration decides it will not, on so many fronts. The good old days aren't good now. They're just old.
Since then, despite the howls from the fossils still trying to 'Unite the Right" for all the wrong reasons, we are moving forward to a more diversified economy. The mighty giant Shell is selling off its stake in this filthy and dying business and investing in research and development in alternative energy sources. What does Trump and the ossified holdouts for the good old days know that Shell does not?
Just when so many of us in the world are getting it, this dismal administration decides it will not, on so many fronts. The good old days aren't good now. They're just old.
24
We Americans don't need our federal and beautiful lands ravaged in the rush to develop fossil fuels. How horrific, Ryan Zinke's directive re using public lands to expedite oil and gas lease sales for President Trump's mad rush to provide unnecessary fossil fuels to America. Same with the moribund coal industry. Why do we have an anti-diluvian president?
137
Got to laugh out loud about 'beautiful lands'! Come to Pecos, Texas from West Palm Beach and talk about how lovely and wild and empty and dry it is and then fly back home and hope to never ever visit the places we drill for oil that you call 'beautiful'. this ain't pristine mountain peaks and densely wooded river valleys, Nan - it is hard, dry, mesquite scrub choked baked and bleached land. No painters here, with galleries in WPB, or NYC, or LA. Just guys drilling and paying for their families and themselves to live.
The 'president' is anti-American.
1
Because of an ignorant ill informed electorate and many who didn't vote or voted for the outliers.
1
What is the administration's long game here? Anybody?
6
There is no "long game" in a con. Get in, get it, and get out, that's the game. That's why don john dis's so many people, his M.O. has always been a con. He hasn't realized (maybe never will) that there is no other town to go to, no other con to work after the Oval Office.
1
Oil and gas production is a blessing for the people in the areas dealing with the boom, and for the nation's energy independence from Venezuela, Nigeria, and the Arabian Gulf (and sorry, Canada, you are a great friend, but we can produce oil more cheaply and less destructively than you do in your tar sands). The current fracking boom is a great American technological innovation, as important as Social Media, Car Ride Sharing, or Home Food Delivery of Ingredients for Meals Cooked at Home - to put the extent of the technology disruption into perspective New Yorkers can care about. Oil and Gas is still a business where a blue collar guy with a 9th grade education can make $100,000 a year drilling, supplying or driving, instead of making $10 an hour in a service business in a city. 12 hours on, 12 hours off, two week shifts on and off, and you can own a home, support a family, and feel good about what you are doing. God Bless America for these opportunities, and thank you President Trump for reversing the Obama Administration's attempts to hobble this industry.
2
The leases are sold at bargain basement prices, which means they can and will be bought on pure speculation in the hopes of rising energy prices. The only way prices will rise is if the US starts a war to cut off supplies and put the speculators in the money.
That means in the best case scenario there will be no activity at all on the land, not even grazing and certainly, no jobs and no middle class income. In the worst case scenario the jobs will be in uniform and overseas,
You've got the script, now watch it play out...
That means in the best case scenario there will be no activity at all on the land, not even grazing and certainly, no jobs and no middle class income. In the worst case scenario the jobs will be in uniform and overseas,
You've got the script, now watch it play out...
7
Or those guys could work on building and maintaining wind and solar farms, jobs that have a future unlike fossil fuels.
http://www.businessinsider.com/solar-energy-job-growth-2017-1
http://www.businessinsider.com/solar-energy-job-growth-2017-1
5
What blessings. The destruction of communities because the jobs are temporary? Because the cost of housing will go up? Outside workers with experience will be hired before locals. The long term industries like tourism may not pay as much but they are stable. In addition to oil field workers you also get some experienced hookers and drug dealers.
Further, there are health and safety issues. Pristine lands need to be kept that way. You cannot trust the gas and oil industry to do that. Pipeline leaks and chemicals introduced into the community are not a blessing. And the oil companies lie. California has a ground water problem because of contamination from drilling. If you trust these people you are a fool.
https://ww2.kqed.org/science/2017/01/17/california-says-oil-companies-ca...
Further, there are health and safety issues. Pristine lands need to be kept that way. You cannot trust the gas and oil industry to do that. Pipeline leaks and chemicals introduced into the community are not a blessing. And the oil companies lie. California has a ground water problem because of contamination from drilling. If you trust these people you are a fool.
https://ww2.kqed.org/science/2017/01/17/california-says-oil-companies-ca...
2
Trump is foolishly promoting development of coal, oil and gas while China is developing its solar and wind energy production industries. Our fossil fuel industries will decline while China's dominance of renewable energy will produce jobs and revenues.
It is just plain stupid to put all of our eggs in "buggywhip" industries and give away what could be our dominance in industries that will obviously be huge sources of jobs and revenues in the future.
It is just plain stupid to put all of our eggs in "buggywhip" industries and give away what could be our dominance in industries that will obviously be huge sources of jobs and revenues in the future.
13
Any way concerned citizens can beat them at their game and buy the leases to hold until we have a government that is considering the good of all instead of a few.
6
Years ago that happened hear in Colorado where concerned citizens went to the auction and bought up hundreds of leases. It was incredible to see the communities come together like that. Of course the oil companies cried foul.
1
@Daniel, auctions are fixed all the time and all parties get away with it. I expect a law forbidding individual persons from bidding, or a regulation imposing a minimum lot size to eliminate the competition to oil companies for leases. That happens all the time, too.
1
This administration has a hard time implementing a prudent strategy to maximize the public's interest in energy development.
Just a cash grab by wealthy friends of the GOP.
Just a cash grab by wealthy friends of the GOP.
19
This administration has never considered the public's interest very important, in energy development or anything else.
I think the rush to sell off oil and gas leases is driven not only by wanting to please the base but also by the oil companies' fear that it's now or never - that the next sane administration, of either party, will lock up these public lands forever. They want to get their hands on these leases while they can.
18
The oil companies' fear is well founded- unfortunately- due to the policies of the Obama administration. Wild swings in the political atmosphere force actions which might not otherwise be taken in a "sane" world- whatever that means these days.
1
I guess it's a question of priorities. Geostrategically, if you're supplying much of the world with cheap energy, that dramatically increases your leverage on how that world behaves. I expect to see federal facilitation in building ports and ships in the U.S. to move liquefied natural gas over oceans to markets -- heck, I wouldn't be surprised to see ExxonMobil offer to build Europe the de-liquefaction facilities there so long as they buy our gas instead of Russia's.
If that happens, expect to see a serious uptick in bidding on domestic energy-production leases. We'll just have to figure out how to optimize the balance of ALL priorities, including recreational land use.
It's not a question of "need": it's the recognition that rising global demand for cheap energy could largely be satisfied with U.S. supplies of carbon-based sources such as natural gas, and the marked choking sound we hear from extreme environmentalists at this prospect.
If that happens, expect to see a serious uptick in bidding on domestic energy-production leases. We'll just have to figure out how to optimize the balance of ALL priorities, including recreational land use.
It's not a question of "need": it's the recognition that rising global demand for cheap energy could largely be satisfied with U.S. supplies of carbon-based sources such as natural gas, and the marked choking sound we hear from extreme environmentalists at this prospect.
3
The word "extreme" certainly applies, simply not to "environmentalists".
I'll believe the LNG terminal story when I see shovels in the ground on these multibillion dollar projects in the US, Europe and Asia. The economics of these projects are uncertain, not to say downright shaky, and NA projects have already been shelved on that basis. Port capacity doesn't exist and likely won't in the scale imagined by some boosters.
In the meantime the tipping point is here, now. The rest of the world is learning how to implement increasingly large scale,efficient and productive alternate energy technologies, from production to storage and distribution.
I won't be surprised seeing ExxonMobil shift its acquisition capital to smart grids rather than new oil and gas reserves. As fantastic as it must seem to some, if it doesn't this giant dinosaur of the last century's technology won't be around in 30 years.
I'll believe the LNG terminal story when I see shovels in the ground on these multibillion dollar projects in the US, Europe and Asia. The economics of these projects are uncertain, not to say downright shaky, and NA projects have already been shelved on that basis. Port capacity doesn't exist and likely won't in the scale imagined by some boosters.
In the meantime the tipping point is here, now. The rest of the world is learning how to implement increasingly large scale,efficient and productive alternate energy technologies, from production to storage and distribution.
I won't be surprised seeing ExxonMobil shift its acquisition capital to smart grids rather than new oil and gas reserves. As fantastic as it must seem to some, if it doesn't this giant dinosaur of the last century's technology won't be around in 30 years.
27
LNG ports and not without major risk - they should not be placed in populated areas. Do a little reading on LNG accidents – don’t put one in my back yard. You are really dreaming if you think major ship building is going to return from Asia to the US. The plate for the aluminum tanks to hold the LNG may well be produced in Davenport, IA but that is about all – still good jobs it but the tanks and the ships will be built in Asia.
In any case LNG is better than coal as a fuel but even it is just a passing cash out industry as the world turns to other energy forms. Invest your money in batteries or other storage systems.
In any case LNG is better than coal as a fuel but even it is just a passing cash out industry as the world turns to other energy forms. Invest your money in batteries or other storage systems.
7
@Andy, Richard, Up here in Alberta, Shell already has sold its interest in the tar sands at pennies to the dollar, is divesting itself of others and has been investing in alternative energy sources, for years now.
The free market, embraced by successful titans of industry determines whether or not a product is a viable commodity. The smartest ones, like Shell, hedge their bets and play the long game.
The free market, embraced by successful titans of industry determines whether or not a product is a viable commodity. The smartest ones, like Shell, hedge their bets and play the long game.
4
I think the federal government should turn over mineral rights on federal land to the states. That way states like California (as a related editorial today notes) could take the lead on climate change by not selling oil and gas leases. Other states could take their own path, based on what their citizens wanted.
Seems like the most democratic approach to me.
Seems like the most democratic approach to me.
3
The tone of the energy debate needs to change. Oil, gas, coal etc. keep us weak, dependent and behind the times. Clean renewables will make us strong and independent.
28
It appears the age of peak oil has arrived, just quicker than speculators imagined, and in the wrong direction : demand. In 30 years the only important market that will remain for oil producers will be aviation. In 50 years even aviation will transition.
The U.S. needs to drive that transition or be left behind technologically and economically.
The U.S. needs to drive that transition or be left behind technologically and economically.
35
Trump is just playing to his base. The real news that gas and oil prices will remain depressed because of this means nothing to him. The environmental damage that will have to be dealt with in 10 or 20 years means nothing to him. The downside of giving away public lands and natural resources, as well as overdevelopment, means nothing to him. After all, it's not his money at risk, and it makes the base happy in the short term. He'll just rock on.
38
True enough--just like the NYT is playing to its base.
In the end, nothing good accomplished.
In the end, nothing good accomplished.
Trump is 71 in early stages of dementia...his dear old dad developed dementia at his age and I believe that his mother died of dementia also. One would think he would worry about the planet his grandkids inherit but maybe he believes that money would insulate them from a dying planet...like the billionaires taking out NEW ZEALAND citizenship.
1
$2.00 per year per acre to lease land for oil exploration is garage-sale pricing --on a Sunday afternoon to try to get rid of the odds and ends you couldn't talk anyone into buying on Friday or Saturday. It's not much of an auction when no one is bidding.
10
not even that...it's basically free...
1
The oil industry will bankrupt itself soon if it does not diversify. "Drill, Baby, drill" may fill all available holding tanks with oil that nobody wants to buy.
Technology and the market do not respect inflexible refusal to adapt to change. The Baldwin Locomotive company had produced over 70,000 steam locomotives, but it quickly went belly-up after GE introduced the diesel-electric locomotive.
The Studebaker company successfully transitioned to cars and trucks as demand for its horse-drawn farm wagons declined. As the combustion engine was refined, John Deere was quick to develop a farm tractor to pull its plows. News about European countries mandating only electric new car sales beginning in 2025 cannot be ignored.
If the oil CEO's and their paid-for politicians fail to recognize the electric future of vehicles and transportation, the market will "pull the plug" on them.
Technology and the market do not respect inflexible refusal to adapt to change. The Baldwin Locomotive company had produced over 70,000 steam locomotives, but it quickly went belly-up after GE introduced the diesel-electric locomotive.
The Studebaker company successfully transitioned to cars and trucks as demand for its horse-drawn farm wagons declined. As the combustion engine was refined, John Deere was quick to develop a farm tractor to pull its plows. News about European countries mandating only electric new car sales beginning in 2025 cannot be ignored.
If the oil CEO's and their paid-for politicians fail to recognize the electric future of vehicles and transportation, the market will "pull the plug" on them.
69
My dad was an R&D engineer for John Deere at its tractor plant in Waterloo, IA. While he never owned a Studebaker, he was of the opinion the car was ahead of its time, and it was for that reason it eventually went under. (Look at the design of the Studebakers of the early and mid-'50's, and of its Gran Turismo models of the '60's and you'll see the ancestors of practically every car on the road today.) Good ideas don't always pay off in the short term.
Studebaker made its share of cosmetic design mistakes, with "mistake" meaning misreading the tastes of car buyers. John Deere is exponentially larger than it was 60 years ago. Survival is a combination of the fickleness and the loyalty of the American consumer. Read them wrong and you're out of business. Since Donald Trump doesn't read at all, Tweets excepted, he is following the Studebaker model. He is courting Big Oil (his loyal base) at the expense of ignoring the fickle, increasingly ecologically concerned and worried consumer.
Studebaker made its share of cosmetic design mistakes, with "mistake" meaning misreading the tastes of car buyers. John Deere is exponentially larger than it was 60 years ago. Survival is a combination of the fickleness and the loyalty of the American consumer. Read them wrong and you're out of business. Since Donald Trump doesn't read at all, Tweets excepted, he is following the Studebaker model. He is courting Big Oil (his loyal base) at the expense of ignoring the fickle, increasingly ecologically concerned and worried consumer.
10
This has more to do with technology innovation and trends and environmental imperatives than consumer preferences.
2
All "renewable" energy sources produce electricity. We can't store electricity. Thus, it cannot fly our planes, drive our ships, or even our ground transportation cars.
Until some vast, new technological breakthrough occurs, only oil will do that.
Our reserves, larger than any other in the world, would allow us to be energy independent, and sell energy to our allies cheaper than their current sources. That would end our need to deal with the Middle East and Venezuela (Not really our friends.) That would destroy Putin's restoration of the Russian bear without firing a shot.
It's hard to come up with anything negative about this at all, although the ideologues who write here will certainly try.
Until some vast, new technological breakthrough occurs, only oil will do that.
Our reserves, larger than any other in the world, would allow us to be energy independent, and sell energy to our allies cheaper than their current sources. That would end our need to deal with the Middle East and Venezuela (Not really our friends.) That would destroy Putin's restoration of the Russian bear without firing a shot.
It's hard to come up with anything negative about this at all, although the ideologues who write here will certainly try.
1
We can't store electricity! Really ? What do you think rechargeable batteries do? They power everything from cell phones to automobiles and, very soon, trucks. They are even available to store energy from solar panels on the roofs of homes, offices and other buildings. Of course there are other, mostly experimental, storage technologies as well.
1
False False False.
The technology for fuel cells and batteries has been hindered by this lie for decades. Patents and startups purchased by energy majors then shelved, forever.
But guess what? Batteries and fuel cell technology exist today and are being rolled out. The US can get in the action or it can stay hooked on cheap oil and get left behind. It's as simple as that.
You'll wake up one morning and know it's happened when your neighbours' children start emigrating to China and Europe for economic opportunities. But by then it'll be too late for you...
The technology for fuel cells and batteries has been hindered by this lie for decades. Patents and startups purchased by energy majors then shelved, forever.
But guess what? Batteries and fuel cell technology exist today and are being rolled out. The US can get in the action or it can stay hooked on cheap oil and get left behind. It's as simple as that.
You'll wake up one morning and know it's happened when your neighbours' children start emigrating to China and Europe for economic opportunities. But by then it'll be too late for you...
5
We can and do store our energy and the innovation you are referring to is not that vast. Even if fossil fuels with stored chemical energy is used to supplement renewables - as we do today - the demand for fossil fuels will continue to decline.
3
As long as we are importing even one drop of oil, especially from the Middle East, we do not have enough energy. We need to become energy independent while we develop alternative energy so we are no longer beholden to Saudi Arabia and other suppliers.
3
You are not keeping up, Jack. What about the many many extraction permits issued but NOT USED? See, it's about ownership and profits, not drops of precious oil. If we need it so bad, why aren't these developers busy pumping out what they already are permitted?
Taking away from the many to give to the few. THAT's what this is.
Taking away from the many to give to the few. THAT's what this is.
2
Also as long as we are importing even one T-shirt or sneaker from China, we are not independent. Or fruit from Mexico and the Philippines.
1
Trump is basically selling off public lands at firesale prices. He is creating an opportunity for speculators. the oil companies will not drill unless the price is high enough to justify the drilling. Because of hydraulic fracking, the world is awash in oil and gas. Keep in mind that because of war and turmoil, huge producers are off line or at low output. Countries such as Libya, Venezuela, Iraq, Iran and others are not contributing to the glut of global oil. Gasoline is $2 for a reason.
Basically, we more oil and gas than we know know what to do with. The world is awash in oil. We can produce more, but then the selling price will be below the cost of production. What Trump is doing makes no sense. But hey, we are talking about Trump.
Basically, we more oil and gas than we know know what to do with. The world is awash in oil. We can produce more, but then the selling price will be below the cost of production. What Trump is doing makes no sense. But hey, we are talking about Trump.
62
Unmentioned in this piece is the financial motivation of the energy companies to push for this. Much of the book value of oil companies rests on their "proven" reserves, or the amount of oil believed to be in the ground that they have access to. So if they buy up land and can "show" there is a probability of oil down there, the stock price of the company will rise.
Good for the stockholders? Of course, but even better for the executives.
Good for the stockholders? Of course, but even better for the executives.
80
The "known reserves" book value paradigm has already shifted. With that shift one would expect more productive use of capital generated by oil majors revenues, away from exploration leases and proven reserves towards more promising investments in alternative energy businesses and technologies.
1
And the truth has finally come to light that it's the fossil fuel companies that created the falsehoods about human caused global warming. The fact is the cost of not fixing the problem will prove to be catastrophic.
1
And the more reserves they own and the more pipelines they build tightens their control over prices and over the future of cleaner fuels. They are actually looking at the long term, when they will be able to control availability and price to assure that we remain addicted to oil and to obstruct renewable fuel development.
Another example of a subsidy for oil and gas. Leases far below market value are public gifts that ensure private profits.
Orwell would be proud of American Welfare - support for those who have paid for by those who have not.
Orwell would be proud of American Welfare - support for those who have paid for by those who have not.
57
Investing in oil today as a country is investing in certain economic decline. Despite historically low energy prices, US and global conventional and alternative energy production is up. There is a gigantic worldwide energy glut and OPEC is already obsolete. It's not even certain existing known reserves will be extracted *EVER* so why does the US need more?
China and other countries are leaving the US behind in the technologies that will end dependence oil, coal and even gas in your lifetime. They will sell this technology everywhere, including in the US. They already are. It is a dangerous fantasy to place vain hopes in resurrecting the dinosaur of an industry that is oil.
China and other countries are leaving the US behind in the technologies that will end dependence oil, coal and even gas in your lifetime. They will sell this technology everywhere, including in the US. They already are. It is a dangerous fantasy to place vain hopes in resurrecting the dinosaur of an industry that is oil.
59
Hoarding our natural resources is a national security strategy that present and past administrations have failed to grasp. The current export fire sale on LPG is just another manipulation of the energy market that benefits only a few in the immediate term.
23
LPG ?
If new leases are on offer at a fire-sale price of $2/acre, why don't environmental groups buy them and sit on them? Stop complaining, beat them at their own game.
Liquefied propane gas.
Has anyone considered this: If the US becomes more of a fossil fuel supplier and becomes more of a player in the world's energy market, that will mean less for Arab energy sales. To which many will respond that's a good thing. But impoverishment of other places will do exactly what for eliminating global terrorism and making the world a safer place? Since these other places have nothing to replace their energy economy with.
6
This is crazy! US energy independence and exporting is not going to suddenly or ever make Saudi Arabia or Kuwait 'impoverished', nor will it make any material impact in global demand. What it will do is help wean Europe off of dependence on Russia and Libya/Algeria. And it will make us less dependent on the dictatorship in Venezuela. Even the loony left should applaud those geopolitical realities.
"A better approach would be to develop an overall strategy" is beyond the capability of this administration. The only real question is how much damage can this bunch inflict on the nation and our public lands, and how long will it take to recover. If a recovery is even possible.
149
Energy independence...or energy dominance if you will is the right move. At least be honest. A supply disruption in Africa, a political standoff with Iran or a currency devaluation in South America and energy prices will explode. It's wrong ...even reckless to expose American consumers to that risk. The world is too unstable right now. We will have to work through the environmental issues, which are a definite challenge. But there is no question that many national security policy makers will believe they have much more flexibility and will think about the world differently if the United States is importing a lot less oil. “For decades, consumption rose, production fell and imports increased, ....that as we have seen is a terrible national security and economic danger we should never put ourselves in again. Now every one of those trends is going the other way. That's great! It' should be the goal of this country to to break up OPEC...they offer no value to the world. After all they are a cartel...I thought Democrats were against those. President Obama gave a great speech in 2012 on this subject. "Our dependence on foreign oil is down because of policies put in place by our administration, but also our predecessor’s administration,” Mr. Obama said h a few weeks after opening 38 million more acres in the gulf for oil and gas exploration. “And whoever succeeds me is going to have to keep it up.” I agree. There really is no rational argument against continuing this policy.
4
"A supply disruption in Africa, a political standoff with Iran or a currency devaluation in South America and energy prices will explode...The world is too unstable right now. "
When has this argument not ever been used, whether "true" or not? The perpetual fear mongering argument by the oil industry is weaker now than it ever has been. Despite historically low energy prices, US and global conventional and alternative energy production is up. There is a gigantic worldwide energy glut and OPEC is already obsolete. It's not even certain existing known reserves will be extracted *EVER* so why does the US need more?
China and other countries are leaving the US behind in the technologies that will end dependence oil, coal and even gas in your lifetime. They will sell this technology everywhere, including in the US. They already are. Investing in oil today as a country is investing in certain economic decline. It is a dangerous fantasy to place vain hopes in resurrecting the dinosaur of an industry that is oil.
When has this argument not ever been used, whether "true" or not? The perpetual fear mongering argument by the oil industry is weaker now than it ever has been. Despite historically low energy prices, US and global conventional and alternative energy production is up. There is a gigantic worldwide energy glut and OPEC is already obsolete. It's not even certain existing known reserves will be extracted *EVER* so why does the US need more?
China and other countries are leaving the US behind in the technologies that will end dependence oil, coal and even gas in your lifetime. They will sell this technology everywhere, including in the US. They already are. Investing in oil today as a country is investing in certain economic decline. It is a dangerous fantasy to place vain hopes in resurrecting the dinosaur of an industry that is oil.
116
Just wondering if anyone else personally remembers the Arab oil embargo in 1973? As Ed states, the world is a fickle place.
1
"Energy independence...or energy dominance if you will is the right move. At least be honest. A supply disruption in Africa, a political standoff with Iran or a currency devaluation in South America and energy prices will explode. It's wrong ...even reckless to expose American consumers to that risk."
And speaking of disruption and risk....the rain continues to fall in Houston and the fires continue to burn in Montana. When are we gonna wake up?
And speaking of disruption and risk....the rain continues to fall in Houston and the fires continue to burn in Montana. When are we gonna wake up?
5
Rural communities in states like Wyoming are filled with registered Republicans who applaud the continued exploitation of fossil fuels. It keeps their land values very high, provides some jobs and is welcome. Fundamentalist Christians whose influence is also high in the government as it's currently constituted would say that man has been given dominion over the world. Including all of its animal, plant and mineral resources. Try arguing with them about this or anything else when their minds have been locked down by an eclectic self-serving ideology.
181
Oh! And the end is coming soon anyway so it doesn't matter if we exploit everything and leave nothing intact! I have heard this voiced by fundamentalist Christians.
2
Can you see any event without asking if it benefits political or social enemies? Is your view of the world so twisted that jobs and money flowing to people who maybe are not living where you are, who you don't know, and who you do not otherwise think about has to be interpreted through some kind of anti-Christian, anti-rural and anti-Republican lens? How about "This part of the economy is booming and benefiting middle class, hard working rural people and isn't that great?" Or can't you think that way?
That's a weird opinion, NYC and LA is the best example of dominion over the world, both cities are liberal and both cities are the farthest thing from a natural habitat as you can get. The inhabitants have huge carbon footprints.
1