|
From: John Coviello [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 6:19 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Are Big Oil Conspiracies Really Off-Base? The way I see it, our dependence on oil is the product of one of the most
far flung social engineering projects ever undertaken. From dismantling
trolley lines in the early 20th Century to ensuring auto efficiency standards do
not put too much pressure on the demand side of oil, to providing
$10 Billions of federal monies each year to protect oil supplies
overseas militarily, the federal government has engineered our
dependence on oil and has put alternative energy technologies and transportation
modes at a marketplace disadvantage.
If there was enough need for new refining
facilities, they would get built. We are now building LNG facilities, we
have continued to build power plants all over the place. New refiniers
aren't being built because the industry either doesn't want them to put more
supplies on the market and depress prices or more likely they don't see a
return on investment for a product that will price itself out of the market
within a decade or two.
see:
It may take 15 or 20 years to build a refinery, if you can get
past the political pressure from environmentalists. Power
plants can be difficult and nuclear power
plants are simply impossible to
site.
Barrons ran an article about this, quoting industry leaders
complaining that they simply can't site refineries in the US - it's nearly
impossible.
If you've been following the news, the Democrats
suggested building refineries at shut down military bases BUT the idea was shot
down almost
instantaneously by environmentalists. The
politicians just gave up.
Is this board so full of satisfied opinions that no one
even bothers to do a Google search on the facts? If these discussions
typify the depth of thinking in
alternative energy, we're in bigger trouble than I
thought.
|
Title: Message
