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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (244408)	8/1/2005 11:38:42 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575981

"If their cost of exploration goes from $3 per barrel now to $1.50 per barrel after passage of the bill, you don't think they are going to increase exploration?" No. "Explain that to me." If $60 plus a barrel isn't incentive enough, subsidizing oil exploration isn't going to do it. Since all of the small oil exploration companies went out of business during the Bust, oil exploration in the US has been at a pretty low level. During the Boom, when oil hit $30 a barrel, they were looking under every rock. Now they aren't, despite oil being a lot higher.

To: Elroy who wrote (244408)	8/1/2005 11:39:06 AM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575981

> If their cost of exploration goes from $3 per barrel now to $1.50 per barrel after passage of the bill, you don't think they are going to increase exploration? Explain that to me. Elroy, listen... the oil companies do not need to be encouraged to explore in the US. They're chomping at the bit to do so, and the administration has been doing their best to help them. Does ANWR mean anything to you? The "archaic" environmental laws are the only things keeping them from greater exploration. This is not about domestic exploration... this is about increasing the profits of the oil companies, as well as being able to say, "Nyah nyah nyah -- not only are we going to let them drill on protected lands, but we're going to pay them to do so!" -Z

To: Elroy who wrote (244408)	8/1/2005 12:11:11 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575981

re: It has little to do with current profit levels, its a redution in an expense. Profit/expense are related, no? The fact remains that there is very little oil left to find in the US; it's not going to have more than an incremental impact on the problem of oil imports. It does cheer the hearts of energy executives/political contributors. Where as conservation does not make them feel great... lower sales and subsequent lower energy prices hit their bottom line. Conservation/efficiency can have a major impact on the problem. So we should throw the money at the best potential solution, the biggest bang for the buck. John