Republicans Are Lying About Need to Drill and Rep. Rahall Proves It! also Capito's Oil Price Fix

Rahall's statement (4.00 / 1)

WASHINGTON, DC - U.S. Representative Nick J. Rahall (D-WV), Chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee, today responded to President Bush's claim that opening more offshore areas to multinational oil and gas conglomerates will lower gas prices.
"At present, 81 percent of estimated oil and gas resources on federal lands both onshore and offshore are available for development or will be pending the completion of land-use planning or environmental reviews.  If the oil industry would drill those areas now, areas that are available for them to drill in now, today, the amount of oil produced would represent over 14 years of current U.S. consumption, and 30 years of current domestic natural gas consumption," Rahall said.

Rahall recently introduced the Responsible Federal Oil and Gas Lease Act of 2008 (H.R. 6251), which compels oil and gas companies to produce on the 68 million acres of federal lands, both onshore and offshore, that are leased but sitting idle.  The legislation is co-sponsored by Reps. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Ed Markey (D-MA) and 27 other Members.

Rahall's legislation gives Big Oil one option - either "use it or lose it".  The bill is a direct response to the facts outlined in the recent House Natural Resources Committee Majority Staff report, "The Truth About America's Energy: Big Oil Stockpiles Supplies and Pockets Profits", and the follow-up report, "Drilling Facts", that illustrate how energy companies are not using the federal lands and waters that are already open to drilling.

Rahall said that the oil industry is benefiting from the misconception it has helped to spread through costly advertising campaigns that the Congress is standing in the way of more drilling.   But Rahall's bill demands that companies drill now or give up their leases to companies that will.  The 68 million acres of leased but stockpiled federal oil and gas lands have the potential to produce an additional 4.8 million barrels of oil and 44.7 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day.  This would nearly double U.S. oil production and cut oil imports by one-third.

"We have found that the oil industry is sitting on 68 million acres of federal oil and gas leases, the size of Colorado.  They are stockpiling them.  Opening up even more areas only gives them an opportunity to speculate even further.  It is like your children trying to eat their dessert before the main course.  The oil industry needs to drill what they have now, drill in those areas available to them, and then we will talk about giving them dessert."

When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.

---

by: Carnacki @ Wed Jun 18, 2008 at 20:39:25 PM CDT

House Democrats call for nationalization of refineries (4.00 / 1)

"House Democrats call for nationalization of refineries"

Sounds like a plan to me...

From FOXNews:

   House Democrats responded to President's Bush's call for Congress to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling. This was at an on-camera press conference fed back live.

   Among other things, the Democrats called for the government to own refineries so it could better control the flow of the oil supply.

And of then they start in with their spin...

Not only that, but then - according to an Obama supporter who represents the non-profit group Oil Change International - the government can set prices! After all, what's the use of going Communist if you aren't willing to take it all the way to the hoop, right?

Granted, Maurice Hinchey, who joins Maxine Waters in the call to nationalize the oil industry, is, like Waters, something of a crank - but make no mistake: this being an election year, the very fact that two leftwing Dems in the House are even daring to voice such an idea is enough to make me shiver, and enough, certainly, to get Hugo Chavez' little tyrant stick all hard.

The question then, is this: have the American people, either through progressive bromides or an educational system that has been battling to turn government into a secular godhead, become so dumbed down that they will fail to recognize explicit calls for communism when they see them? I honestly don't know. But I will say that the fact that they've managed to pit Obama against McCain - two nannystatists with progressive tendencies - in the presidential election, makes me fear the worst. source
http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=12539

...no, the question is whether or not the American people have had enough of the oil and defense industry driven fascism?

The Bush administration and some members of Congress blame environmental rules for causing strains on refining capacity, prompting shortages and driving up prices. But in reality, it is uncompetitive actions by a handful of companies with large control over our nation's gas markets that is directly causing these high prices.

Fact: Environmental regulations are not preventing new refineries from being built in the U.S. From 1975 to 2000, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received only one permit request for a new refinery. And in March, EPA approved Arizona Clean Fuels' application for an air permit for a proposed refinery in Arizona.  In addition, oil companies are regularly applying for - and receiving - permits to modify and expand their existing refineries.

Fact:  The largest five oil refiners in the United States (ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, BP, Valero and Royal Dutch Shell) now control over half (56.3%) of domestic oil refinery capacity; the top ten refiners control 83%. Only ten years ago, these top five oil companies only controlled about one-third (34.5%) of domestic refinery capacity; the top ten controlled 55.6%. This dramatic increase in the control of just the top five companies makes it easier for oil companies to manipulate gasoline supplies by intentionally withholding supplies in order to drive up prices. Indeed, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concluded in March 2001 that oil companies had intentionally withheld supplies of gasoline from the market as a tactic to drive up prices-all as a "profit-maximizing strategy." A May 2004 U.S. Governmental Accountability Office (GAO) report also found that mergers in the oil industry directly led to higher prices-and this report did not even include the large mergers after the year 2000, such as ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips. Yet, just one week after Hurricane Katrina, the FTC approved yet another merger of refinery giants-Valero Energy and Premcor-giving Valero 13% of the national market share.  These actions, while costing consumers billions of dollars in overcharges, have not been challenged by the U.S. government.

Fact: Oil companies have exploited their strong market position to intentionally restrict refining capacity by driving smaller, independent refiners out of business. A congressional investigation uncovered internal memos written by the major oil companies operating in the U.S. discussing their successful strategies to maximize profits by forcing independent refineries out of business, resulting in tighter refinery capacity. From 1995-2002, 97% of the more than 920,000 barrels of oil per day of capacity that have been shut down were owned and operated by smaller, independent refiners. Were this capacity to be in operation today, refiners could use it to better meet today's reformulated gasoline blend needs.

Profit margins for oil refiners have been at record highs. In 1999, for every gallon of gasoline refined from crude oil, U.S. oil refiners made a profit of 22.8 cents.  By 2004, the profits jumped 80% to 40.8 cents per gallon of gasoline refined. Between 2001 and mid-2005, the combined profits for the biggest five refiners was $228 billion.

source
http://www.citizen.org/cmep/en...

bTW thanx for the update.

---

by: One Citizen @ Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 08:33:28 AM CDT