muleskinner wrote:you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth and a benalli in the other.
Because not all leases pan out. Many of the leases turn out to be garbage with less oil or more costly than expected. No game of chicken, just a fact that there is not economic oil under ever lease. That was the risk they took. Should the government buy back these leases? I'll bet the oil companies would sell most of them back for what they paid for them.dudejcb wrote:If we need more holes in more places so badly, why haven't all those already awarded leases been developed? Kinda seems like a game of chicken going on, where oil companies simply won't develop what they already have available for development (or rebuild the necessary refining and distribution infrastructure) unless or until they have rights to put wells everywhere. and even then, why would they develop everything all at aonce and improve the refining and pipeline infrastructure if it only results in lower cost oil that carries less inthe way of profits?
Doesn't really matter what source fuel you use for heating as the costs for all are interlinked and tend to track one another to a large degree. But you are right. My home has natural gas for heat. but in the winter time I use the central furnace to keep the house at 50 or 55 degrees, and if my wife's whining gets too severe I then use an electric space heater to increase the temp in the ONE WARM ROOM where she and I spend most of our time... so there are no efficiency losses in th3e heater or the distribution system... and my utility is 60% hydro so my emissions footprint are less that yours... nanner nanner nanner... and with no long term spent fuel storage issues. Again: Nanner, nanner, nanner!SpinnerMan wrote:Problem is dude, I don't use one drop of oil to heat or cool my home. Natural gas and electricy and most of the electricity comes from nuclear in Illinois.
No I need a truck to trailer my barge to the ramp, and I need a barge for hunting in order to haul the tremendous number of dead ducks and geese I kill (not really. fact is I have too many decoys). But those things aren't at issue here as I haven't been bitching about how more drilling would afford me a more economical hunting commute.SpinnerMan wrote:I'm sure you are driving a small hybrid to tow your boat while you go duck hunting
What if investment bankers built a refinery and then didn't have any oil to refine? I don't think any investment banker would back any new refinery project unless it comes with 30-years worth of lead-pipe-cinch contracts for a stable supply of crude oil ready for processing. Now, where would someone (an investmetn banker) go to get a contract for long term crude oil supplies? Oh yeah, from Big Oil. And why would Big Oil let some investment bankers horn in on their lucrative action? I dunno. doesn't make sense. maybe that's why it hasn't happened.SpinnerMan wrote:If the profits of the oil companies are so far out of line with other industries, then why aren't we seeing investment backers backing new refineries, etc?. You don't think they like money as much as the existing oil companies?: