Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (191357)	10/12/2001 11:16:16 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769668

Hey, I'm all for opening up Anwar - even though that's only about 6 months oil supply for us, and wouldn't do NEARLY as much as extending efficiency standards to light trucks and SUVs.... Just so long as the oil goes to WHERE IT'S NEEDED (the midwest) unlike the last time when the oil companies lied to us about the North Slope. Most people don't remember it, but in the '70's discussion over opening up drilling on the North Slope, there were TWO PIPELINE ROUTES discussed! One went to the Alaskan port, and the other through Canada to our oil-short midwestern markets (Chicago, where it could tie in to most of our domestic pipelines). Canada offered us FREE RIGHT OF WAY for the central route, but the oil companies fought it tooth and nail. They said "Oh, we can get the oil to US markets ONE WHOLE YEAR SOONER by going to Alaska. That was a lie, and they knew it. They knew that once they got the oil on tankers they could take it to any port in the world that offered a higher price... whereas if the Canadian pipeline route was built the oil would have to be sold in AMERICA. Instead, they shipped most of it to Japan... great for their profit margins, but that oil is American oil, and shipping it to Japan does nothing for American energy independence. So yeah, pump Anwar (and off of Florida and NC too, where their is likely plenty of oil) but ONLY IF THE NEW PIPELINE GOES TO THE MIDWEST - which is really our only oil-short region. If they won't commit to the Canadian pipeline (which Canada has offered again), then screw 'em, they are lying to us again. In that case, leave the oil in the ground for now - it's safe 'in the bank'. When we are TRULY short (say, in 15 years or so, when oil is $100 a barrel), we can always pump it, we won't have lost anything... and we can send the oil to where it's needed in the US.