They had discovered that is a big stretch of oil in the vicinity and they are starting to dig right now.  I hope that it'll lower the gas prices to about a $1.31 a gallon.

Are you from the forgotten state? ;D

I'm against drilling any more oil. We need to change to something else.

More drilling is a good short-term solution, but yes, we do eventually need to switch to something else.

Link to this story?
???

BTW, the reason oil is so expensive has nothing to do with supply and everything to do with conflict of interest.  Bush and Cheney are oil men.  Under Clinton oil was as low as $15 a barrel.
>:(

sweet. war's over!!!!



right? :-\\

Maybe this will end the debate of drilling in Alaska.  We'll keep the beautiful wilderness of Alaska and drill the wasteland of N. Dakota.  I am completely ignorant about the state.  The only thing I know about it is that the Capitol is Bismark and that it is cold in the winter.  I also learned a little about the state from watching Fargo.  So, maybe they will be happy about the oil.  They might even get someone from Washington D.C. to step in the state and wave. 

Maybe this will end the debate of drilling in Alaska.  We'll keep the beautiful wilderness of Alaska and drill the wasteland of N. Dakota.  I am completely ignorant about the state.  The only thing I know about it is that the Capitol is Bismark and that it is cold in the winter.  I also learned a little about the state from watching Fargo.  So, maybe they will be happy about the oil.  They might even get someone from Washington D.C. to step in the state and wave. 

"Fargo" is one of my Top 10 favorite movies, but none of it was shot in Fargo.  Even the opening scene in Fargo was actually filmed in Minneapolis.  The Coen brothers chose the title Fargo because they didn't think anybody would go to a movie called "Brainerd."
:P

"Fargo" is one of my Top 10 favorite movies, but none of it was shot in Fargo.  Even the opening scene in Fargo was actually filmed in Minneapolis.  The Coen brothers chose the title Fargo because they didn't think anybody would go to a movie called "Brainerd."
:P


Hence my ignorance about North Dakota.  LoL.  It is a good movie though.

Link to this story?
???

BTW, the reason oil is so expensive has nothing to do with supply and everything to do with conflict of interest.  Bush and Cheney are oil men.  Under Clinton oil was as low as $15 a barrel.
>:(


The majority of what determines oil prices involves refining capacities vs. demand.  A lot of refineries are currently operating at near full capacity while demand still rises.

In short, if we want the price of gasoline to fall, then we need to build more refineries.

The majority of what determines oil prices involves refining capacities vs. demand.  A lot of refineries are currently operating at near full capacity while demand still rises.

In short, if we want the price of gasoline to fall, then we need to build more refineries.
if this is the case then i assume there is a surplus of unrefined crude oil accumulating somewhere. since gas prices have something like tripled since the bush administration took office the amount of gathered surplus unrefined crude oil must be enormous by now so i'm curious... where exactly is this vast sea of drilled but unrefined crude oil being stored? if what you say is true you should be able to cite a specific place where all this oil is being stored. also, since the world's stored quantities of extracted but unrefined oil are presumably so vast, why are we still engaged in extracting oil from the ground? seems like we shouldn't be wasting resources drilling and yammering about the arctic wildlife refuge and all that until we get through all the extracted oil we haven't refined yet.

More to the point, North Dakot oil blitz or no, the oil cartels aren't going to cut these ridiculous prices, which have yielded them record profits, out of the goodness of their hearts and the sweetness of their characters.  Big Daddy Government is gonna have to kick some ass because this market ain't free!
::)

  They've been drilling for oil in North Dakota for a long time, actually.  It's nothing new...

if this is the case then i assume there is a surplus of unrefined crude oil accumulating somewhere. since gas prices have something like tripled since the bush administration took office the amount of gathered surplus unrefined crude oil must be enormous by now so i'm curious... where exactly is this vast sea of drilled but unrefined crude oil being stored? if what you say is true you should be able to cite a specific place where all this oil is being stored. also, since the world's stored quantities of extracted but unrefined oil are presumably so vast, why are we still engaged in extracting oil from the ground? seems like we shouldn't be wasting resources drilling and yammering about the arctic wildlife refuge and all that until we get through all the extracted oil we haven't refined yet.



Well, it's easier to cite how demand is rising faster than refineries can keep up than it is to cite any vast reserves.  Although, it is true that America does have some rather large oil reserves that it stores just in case of emergencies.  If, for some reason, the oil trade completely stopped all of a sudden, we'd still have reserves to use -- but they wouldn't last very long.

Another factor to consider is that environmental laws have made it very difficult to build new refineries in America, so as our demand for oil rises here, we grow more dependent on foreign crude oil AND on foreign refined oil.  Here's an interesting wikipedia explanation:

Early US refineries processed crude oil to recover the kerosene. Other products (like gasoline) were considered wastes and were often dumped directly into the nearest river. The invention of the automobile shifted the demand to gasoline and diesel, which remain the primary refined products today. Refineries pre-dating the EPA were very toxic to the environment. Strict legislation has mandated that refineries meet modern air and water cleanliness standards. In fact, obtaining a permit to build even a modern refinery with minimal impact on the environment (other than CO2 emissions) is so difficult and costly that no new refineries have been built (though many have been expanded) in the United States since 1976. As a result, some believe that this may be the reason that the US is becoming more and more dependent on the imports of finished gasoline, as opposed to incremental crude oil. On the other hand, studies have revealed that accelerating merger activity in the refining and production sector has reduced capacity further, resulting in tighter markets in the United States in particular.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery

So, quite a few things are at work here.  While it is important to maintain a certain level of environmental cleanliness, it's also important to allow us to build more refineries to keep up with demand and to help ween us off of foreign oil.

seems like if the refinery regulations were so onerous, the oil corporations could just locate their refineries in countries that dont or cant protect the environment so carefully -- in central america, say -- and then ship the refined product in. corporations routinely do this to get around things like environmental laws, price controls, and to be able to reap the financial benefits of slave and sweatshop labor, so why not do the same to up their refining capacity?

everything i've read says the shortage of refineries is actually a ruse to drive up prices by tightening supply. and to me this theory jibes a lot more closely with observed reality than the idea that the selfless oil companies are dying to refine some excess supply of raw product (that doesn't exist) in order to come to the rescue of america (from which multinationals have actually been fleeing for at least the past two decades) but are being held back by evil environmentalists (who have actually been ruthlessly marginalized under the bush administration). it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

North Dakota is important again!  :o

Are you from the forgotten state? ;D

I'm against drilling any more oil. We need to change to something else.


No I'm from Missouri.

  They've been drilling for oil in North Dakota for a long time, actually.  It's nothing new...


Actually I have a cousin in North Dakota who works in the oil fields for Halliburton.

I'll have to ask him about this next time I talk to him.

seems like if the refinery regulations were so onerous, the oil corporations could just locate their refineries in countries that dont or cant protect the environment so carefully -- in central america, say -- and then ship the refined product in. corporations routinely do this to get around things like environmental laws, price controls, and to be able to reap the financial benefits of slave and sweatshop labor, so why not do the same to up their refining capacity?

They do actually use that strategy to a point.  The problem with this approach, however, is that it still makes us dependent on the stability of a lot of volatile areas.  For example, the world's largest oil refinery is currently located in Venezuela.  We buy a large portion of our refined oil from it, but that means we have to keep an eye on Chavez, because if he tries to screw us by selling us less oil than before or tries to jack up the price, it greatly hurts us.  So, in effect, our economy is somewhat dependent on Venezuelan leadership.

I argue that it would be preferable to have enough refineries in America to produce all of our own refined oil.  We obviously don't have enough crude oil to be self-sufficient, but we could actually build enough refineries to produce all of our own refined oil and petroleum products.  Then, buying crude oil would be our only form of foreign oil dependency.

everything i've read says the shortage of refineries is actually a ruse to drive up prices by tightening supply. and to me this theory jibes a lot more closely with observed reality than the idea that the selfless oil companies are dying to refine some excess supply of raw product (that doesn't exist) in order to come to the rescue of america (from which multinationals have actually been fleeing for at least the past two decades) but are being held back by evil environmentalists (who have actually been ruthlessly marginalized under the bush administration). it just doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

I'm not saying the environmentalists are evil, and I'm certainly not saying oil companies are selfless either.  I would agree with you that the current situation is definitely being taken advantage of in the pursuit of profit.  However, if we did have enough refineries to be self-sufficient, you'd see a lot less of this opportunism, because in the end, with rising demand, it's in their best interests to continue producing as much refined oil as is desired by their market.

Building more refineries will solve nothing. It will not wean the US off of foreign oil, because the new refineries will still need foreign crude oil to refine to keep up with the demand. And I think a lot of people here are missing the point. The point is not to wean any country off of foreign oil, it's to wean them off of OIL, full stop.

Actually I have a cousin in North Dakota who works in the oil fields for Halliburton.

I'll have to ask him about this next time I talk to him.


  Halliburton, eh..?

  They extract oil all over the state, many times in the central and western regions of North Dakota...

  I guess what I'm saying is is that it's nothing new that North Dakota has been doing this, as they have been extracting oil for decades; however, that being said, we should obviously be looking within our own borders for oil, but we should also look to alternative types of energy to lessen the need for foreign oil (there are also many wind turbines/"windmills" in North Dakota as well, for energy)...

  But of course, if the jobs are there, that gives more incentive to stick around...

Building more refineries will solve nothing. It will not wean the US off of foreign oil, because the new refineries will still need foreign crude oil to refine to keep up with the demand. And I think a lot of people here are missing the point. The point is not to wean any country off of foreign oil, it's to wean them off of OIL, full stop.

Unless you've got some enormous stock of magical energy that I don't know of, there's not going to be a sudden stop in oil consumption anytime in the near future.  These things take time and require practical thinking.  Right now, it would make more sense to build more refineries because they can be used to produce more than just gasoline.  Most current refineries are designed to make ethanol along with many other alternatives that aren't necessarily oil-based.

Unless you've got some enormous stock of magical energy that I don't know of, there's not going to be a sudden stop in oil consumption anytime in the near future.  These things take time and require practical thinking.  Right now, it would make more sense to build more refineries because they can be used to produce more than just gasoline.  Most current refineries are designed to make ethanol along with many other alternatives that aren't necessarily oil-based.



There won't be a sudden stop, but if the goal is reduction of consumption, then building more refineries is counter-productive to that goal. If you want to quit smoking you reduce your nicotine consumption little by little, you don't start buying cartons.

If your goal is to make oil cheaper, than once again this is counter-productive because the cheaper it gets, the more desirable its use becomes. But all that is moot anyway because building oil refineries in the States will do nothing to lower the price of a barrel of oil. Oil is sold on the global market to the highest bidder. The US is already one of the top oil-producing countries (#3 in crude extraction under Saudi Arabia and Russia), and yet they're still the #1 importer. This should tell you that just because the US produces oil doesn't mean it's US-made gasoline going into your average Joe Yank's tank. The same is true for a top exporter like Canada. Why? Because the oil in that ground doesn't belong to the citizens of the country, it belongs to whoever owns the mineral rights of that ground, and then to whatever company allowed to exploit it. That company is under no obligation to keep that oil in the domestic market. The company will sell it to the highest bidder.

Build all the refineries you want. Gas prices will only keep going up. You think gas is any less expensive in Alberta just because they've got oil sands in their own back yard? Not a chance!

Average price of one litre of gas in Alberta today: about CDN$1.02

If cheap oil never comes back, you can kiss the suburbs goodbye!
8)

There won't be a sudden stop, but if the goal is reduction of consumption, then building more refineries is counter-productive to that goal. If you want to quit smoking you reduce your nicotine consumption little by little, you don't start buying cartons.

Dude...  I just explained that refineries can use alternatives to oil.  We make ethanol out of corn and other crops.  In fact, Brazil has already proven that ethanol can become a road to energy independence. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

If your goal is to make oil cheaper, than once again this is counter-productive because the cheaper it gets, the more desirable its use becomes. But all that is moot anyway because building oil refineries in the States will do nothing to lower the price of a barrel of oil. Oil is sold on the global market to the highest bidder. The US is already one of the top oil-producing countries (#3 in crude extraction under Saudi Arabia and Russia), and yet they're still the #1 importer. This should tell you that just because the US produces oil doesn't mean it's US-made gasoline going into your average Joe Yank's tank. The same is true for a top exporter like Canada. Why? Because the oil in that ground doesn't belong to the citizens of the country, it belongs to whoever owns the mineral rights of that ground, and then to whatever company allowed to exploit it. That company is under no obligation to keep that oil in the domestic market. The company will sell it to the highest bidder.

Build all the refineries you want. Gas prices will only keep going up. You think gas is any less expensive in Alberta just because they've got oil sands in their own back yard? Not a chance!

Average price of one litre of gas in Alberta today: about CDN$1.02


Again, you're missing the point that the same technology used to refine gasoline can be altered to refine ethanol.  If we slowly push automakers toward "flex-fuel" and increase production of ethanol, then we'll wean ourselves off of gasoline in a way that actually creates jobs and reorients our energy consumption domestically. 

Less importation of foreign oil + More domestic production of ethanol = Better energy policy and independence.

Dude...  I just explained that refineries can use alternatives to oil.  We make ethanol out of corn and other crops.  In fact, Brazil has already proven that ethanol can become a road to energy independence. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

Again, you're missing the point that the same technology used to refine gasoline can be altered to refine ethanol.  If we slowly push automakers toward "flex-fuel" and increase production of ethanol, then we'll wean ourselves off of gasoline in a way that actually creates jobs and reorients our energy consumption domestically. 

Less importation of foreign oil + More domestic production of ethanol = Better energy policy and independence.



This is the first time you mention anything about converting oil refineries into ethanol distilleries/refineries. That might be a horse of a different colour, but I'm still unconvinced that any new oil refineries need building. Why not push for flex fuel and build ethanol-dedicated, green-friendly ethanol refinement centres as needed IF it proves to be worth while? 

Seriously, it's done wonders for Brazil's energy sector.  Isn't that proof enough?