More BushCo headaches - Gas shortages on East Coast; Plague of locusts to follow

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by Revolt, Apr 21, 2006.

  1. Revolt

    Revolt Member+

    Jun 16, 1999
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    In fairness, this isn't BushCo's fault, but they will surely be taking a lot of heat here.

    Why will BushCo take the heat? Simply because they are in power; folks will be pissed and BushCo will take the brunt on this. I'd also add that dems will make note of the crappy energy bill, as well. I'd also say that BushCo should take some heat for not resolving the refining capacity issue, either.

    http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,192579,00.html
     
  2. fiddlestick

    fiddlestick New Member

    Jul 17, 2001
    The 4 8 0
    How is Bush responsible for solving the refining issue? Bush isn't the one who has to shell out millions and make a min. 30 year commitment to open a refinery. You certainly wouldn't want Bush handing out a bunch of corporate welfare to oil companies who have plenty of money should they decide to invest in refineries. And Bush can't overturn local municipalities who've repeatedly voted against having a smoky, polluting refinery in their backyard.
     
  3. NER_MCFC

    NER_MCFC Member

    May 23, 2001
    Cambridge, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Is refinery capacity part of energy policy?

    Given this administration's ties to the oil industry, there are only two logical reasons why there has been no visible movement: either US oil people don't regard the issue as important, or the methods they would accept to increase domestic capacity are not politically practical.
     
  4. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    You certainly can make the argument that he is not. On the other hand, there is a basic leadership issue with this president. Is he responsible for the problem? maybe not. Can he do something to fix the problem? Absolutely.

    One of his big selling points way back in 2000 was that he "knew" energy. He would create an energy policy that would have us on easy street. All his best buddies are in the oil industry. He takes romantic walks hand in hand with the House of Saud.

    What does that get us? Jackshit.

    It would be oh so refreshing if we ever had a major issue in this country (high fuel costs, hurricane relief etc.) where this president rolled up his sleeves and said, "this ain't my responsibility, but I am going to do something about it."

    Ask not what you have to pay to your country. Ask what in the hell does your country do for you.
     
  5. Claymore

    Claymore Member

    Jul 9, 2000
    Montgomery Vlg, MD
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I went out to look at a Honda Civic Hybrid today. Not bad....
     
  6. fiddlestick

    fiddlestick New Member

    Jul 17, 2001
    The 4 8 0
    After what happened in the 70's, where were Carter, Regean, Bush I, or Clinton offering up that type of leadership about this issue?
    The dangers of the dependence on oil have been very well known for decades.
    I'm no fan of W, but there is considerable culpability on the part of multiple administrations for not addressing this problem sooner.
     
  7. NER_MCFC

    NER_MCFC Member

    May 23, 2001
    Cambridge, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Which administration is in office now?
    Which administration claims to have unusual knowledge of and connections to the oil industry?
    Sure, a complete solution would be asking a lot, but have they done anything at all on this issue?
     
  8. Revolt

    Revolt Member+

    Jun 16, 1999
    Davis, CA
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Actually, Carter had a comprehensive energy plan - complete with sweater....
     
  9. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    Which is why I said this in the other energy thread: :D



    Originally Posted by Chris M.
    Still, the answer is in alternative energy, and significantly increasing energy efficiency. On that score, I would lay blame at the feet of bush, Clinton, Bush I and Reagan. Following the energy crisis of the 70s, it was criminal to allow this country to fall back into the oil trap with little public transportation improvements and massive family "trucks" that don't have to comply with car fuel efficiency standards.

    right now, we just need a little leadership in the area of energy. Perhaps the next administration will provide that -- republican or democrat.
     
  10. SgtSchultz

    SgtSchultz Member

    Jul 11, 2001
    Parts Unknown
    We are the solution. Repubulican or Democrat. Conservative or Liberal. Gay or Straight. We hold the keys, not some nutjobs in Iran or Venezuela. Enough is enough. It is time for all of us from whatever walk of life to demand change.

    It is easy to blame Bush, Clinton, Reagan and Carter. The sad fact is we are to blame. In a way I am glad this day has come. Instead of talking about American leadership. We can collectively as a society show the world how it can done. It is possible and I am willing to do my part.

    I cant wait for the day we tell the ME to take their oil and shove it up where the sund does not shine.
     
  11. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    I definitely agree with the sentiment, and I think many Americans feel the same way. A significant number of people are prepared to change their lives to some extent and to sacrifice for the greater good, but there needs to be some central leadership.

    Would you be up for a $1.00 gallon tax added on with proceeds going to the development of alternative forms of energy? That is the type of sacrifice that would make a difference. It's also the plan advanced by that lefty moonbat Charles Krauthammer in a column about a year ago.
     
  12. Barbara

    Barbara BigSoccer Supporter

    Apr 29, 2000
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I'd definitely support that.
     
  13. fiddlestick

    fiddlestick New Member

    Jul 17, 2001
    The 4 8 0
    It's an ok plan, but it ends up putting a far greater strain on the poor and lower middle classes whose budgets are already being blown by rising gas prices.
     
  14. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago

    No doubt, but that is the case already. It's not easy for lower income families to pony up $60 to fill up a tank. In reality, the poor usually put a couple of bucks in at a time, so they are just driving less.

    The plan Krauthammer put forth was back when we were eclipsing the shocking amount of $2.00 a gallon. He said, bump in through a tax to $3.50 a gallon and leave the price constant with the amount of tax fluctuating based on the actual price. That drastic increase (which we are now about to eclipse even without the tax) would have immediately eased demand AND would have created demand for fuel efficient cars and hybrids.

    I feel for low income people even without a new tax, but I honestly believe they would be better off in the long run.
     
  15. Chris M.

    Chris M. Member+

    Jan 18, 2002
    Chicago
    Here is the column. Didn't take too much to find it.

    http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/charleskrauthammer/2005/11/11/175173.html

    He has a face for radio, and I often don't agree with his opinions, but I think this column is right on the money. I am not a big fan of the arctic drilling plan, but I could live with that as part of a comprehensive plan. He even touches on the refinery problem and using closed military bases. An idea I had forgotten about, but a good one.
     
  16. MattR

    MattR Member+

    Jun 14, 2003
    Reston
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    None of that will ever work. It makes too much ******* sense.
     
  17. HerthaBerwyn

    HerthaBerwyn Member+

    May 24, 2003
    Chicago
    Has refining capacity been deliberately restricted so as to manipulate pertol supply independently from the crude oil supply?
     
  18. TeamUSA

    TeamUSA Member

    Nov 24, 1999
    Tianjin, China
    Club:
    Borussia Mönchengladbach
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    The thought seems to say yes. The government better get off their arses and end the price fixing crap the companies are doing.
     
  19. Coach_McGuirk

    Coach_McGuirk New Member

    Apr 30, 2002
    Between the Pipes
    Do you think the dems will be able to convince folks on the East Coast that we have to build some refineries there? In addition to the 30 years it takes for a refinery to become profitable you've also got to get folks to get over the "Not In My Backyard" frame of mind that is common to that part of the country (although you would think that most Americans can see the problems presented by having all the refineries in the same geographic area, what with Katrina and all. Of course, we managed to avoid the real disaster by not losing that much refining capacity during that storm, so, much like the City of New Orleans thought before the storm, Americans will continue to think it just can't happen)

    America has needed to increase its refinery capacity for at least 30 years, so blame for this should be spread all around (although, like you said, Bush will take the heat since he's in office).

    I've been to the gas station twice in the last 2 weeks where they were out of regular and mid-grade unleaded, but my car uses premium so I was able to fill up.
     
  20. Attacking Minded

    Attacking Minded New Member

    Jun 22, 2002
  21. afgrijselijkheid

    Dec 29, 2002
    mokum
    Club:
    AFC Ajax
    i don't see why bush should take any heat over this, not that it means he won't
     
  22. MattR

    MattR Member+

    Jun 14, 2003
    Reston
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Maybe Bush should take crap over this because of his secret energy task force, headed by Cheney, that was made up of oil executives.

    No?
     
  23. afgrijselijkheid

    Dec 29, 2002
    mokum
    Club:
    AFC Ajax

    hmmmm, how droll... do they not still take buses, subways and carpool?
     
  24. afgrijselijkheid

    Dec 29, 2002
    mokum
    Club:
    AFC Ajax
    seems to me these particular distrubution problems have nothing to do with that other vile situation you mentioned
     
  25. MattR

    MattR Member+

    Jun 14, 2003
    Reston
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Actually, el Presidente noticed several years ago that state-by-state formulation of gasoline increases expense because refiners have to change their formulas and create different blends for different markets.

    George Bush's administration refused to ban MTBE (at the urging of its manufacturers), a component in gasoline that keeps accidentally turning up in drinking water supplies. This was done by his energy task force.

    The current distribution problem is that the northeast and California, where people know all about poisoned water, may make it harder for refiners to meet demand this year. Gasoline using [link href="http://www.epa.gov/mtbe/water.htm"]MTBE[/link], or methyl tertiary butyl ether, is being phased out. Refiners don't want to be liable for groundwater contamination caused by the additive and are switching to ethanol-blended fuel.

    So basically, this all could have been avoided if BushCo had banned a cancer-causing agent from gasoline that ends up in drinking water. They didn't and so the states that were being effected by it made it illegal. This, in turn, makes it more difficult and expensive for refiners and distributors to get this new blend out to the stations. And they still aren't sure what will happen to your car with the new blends.

    A REAL energy policy would require one blend for the entire united states based upon the current highest pollution and safety thresholds. Why people in Oklahoma should be allowed to die of smog and MTBE ingestion, but people in California are protected against it is bizarre to me.
     

Share This Page