Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Oil Close To $65 A Barrel

Written from Whitehorse, The Yukon--

As I drove across the Yukon today, a lead story on Canadian national news was that oil had edged close to $65 a barrel in U.S. money.

This is as big a concern in Canada as it is in the U.S. Canadian gas prices are actually higher than American.

At the same time, President Bush was signing an energy bill that does next to nothing to reduce American reliance on foreign oil.

Something is going to have to give here, and it may be the Republican majority in Congress in the next elections.

What is obvious is that the oil industry and the Arab oil producers write their own ticket these days and the Administration sits there and takes it.

At least the Clinton Administration used the oil deposit reserve to jockey oil prices a little lower. Bush has done nothing with that.

We read that Brazil is using a mixture of half ethanol in many cars. Some argue the energy input to produce ethanol is higher than using gas and not using ethanol. But this ignores the fact that at least the ethanol producers in America are Americans.

It does no good not to confront the oil producers on prices. We need to do so in some way, or see the price continue to rise, ruining our economy and costing the country ever more. We cannot assume the oil producers have good will toward us. Quite the contrary.

This Administration seems strangely quiet when it comes to defending American interests outside the War on Terror. Perhaps, if we did on oil, we could command more support from Europe and elsewhere.

Just some thoughts as I headed toward Telegraph Creek, BC and the Stikine River.

Meanwhile, congratulations to Tom Gorman on becoming a columnist for the Las Vegas paper.

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

While Europe depends 100% on foreign oil, the U.S. does not. The U.S. gets 30% from foreign sources. Look it up. So your wish that it would affect the makeup of Congress is not gonna happen.

The high price is actually very good for the U.S. because it is putting pressure on the Leftist governments in Canada and elsewhere.

As for the energy bill not doing anything to reduce reliance on foreign sources, WHO CONSISTENTLY REFUSES TO ALLOW OIL EXPLORATION IN ALASKA? Hmmmmmm????

You are even wrong about Clinton. They SOLD our strategic oil reserves at Elk Hills to Occidental. Look it up.

If you are going to make pronouncements, make them educated ones.

8/11/2005 3:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, this guy commenting above me must work for an oil company or maybe he's a Saudi Prince!

Reduce our dependence on Arab oil is a vital national security issue. Unfortunately our dear leader cares more about lining the pockets of his oil buddies.

How much oil is there in Alaska? Enough to make a tiny dent in the US consumption? NO. Look it up!

Is the demand for oil going up dramatically in China and the developing world? Look it up! Is oil a finite resource? Ummmmmm yeah...

The way to improve our situation is be decreasing demand by increasing efficiency and finding alternatives not increasing supply. Who is it who always kills any attempt at increasing fuel efficiency? Look it up!

So yes, I agree. If you're going to make pronouncements, make them educated ones grounded in reality not the fantasy land of the oil soaked Bush Cheney Republican party.

8/12/2005 12:22 AM  
Blogger Matt Weinstock said...

The good news is the oil companies are getting ready to develop some offshore tracts South of Santa Barbara. These are in federal waters. Besides the additional oil, the drilling platforms provide sanctuary for many forms of sealife, the larger feeding on the smaller.

In addition, if you buy yourself some Exxon stock, you can view increases in gas prices with mixed emotions rather than dismay!

The glass is half full. Enjoy.

MW

8/12/2005 3:12 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home