I think Senator Lamar hasn't been reading Opus (new window) lately.

One important point is that there is no single solution to the problem.

Good thing a cartel has nothing to do with controlling supply...

that's twice the idea that pelosi and her ilk have had.

THEY can keep gas prices up until november... but can YOU keep up with it?

If only the rest of the people who live in the country were that smart.

He gave a four word slogan followed by several paragraphs of explanation. Simple problems deserve simple explanations.

The world *is* finding more oil. It's just not enough to keep up with demand. Isn't this bozo a free market publican?

Bukharin: If only the rest of the people who live in the country were that smart.

Hell, I'd settle for the Democratic leadership being that smart. But apparently they aren't.

Lamar's blazingly obvious statement still appears to be a mystery to the majority of congress (judging by the way they vote), so perhaps restating it is warranted.

Yeah, the sad part is that he HAS to say ""find more, use less."

On the other hand, the Dem solution is "find none, use none, hope for a miracle."

flaEsq: Isn't this bozo a free market publican?

Find more, use less.

-"Use Less" - reducing imported oil by one-third by making it easier for millions of Americans to drive plug-in electric cars and trucks (four million barrels of oil savings a day). (The bill) also encouraging the government to increase its purchases of electric vehicles.

Seems pretty forward thinking to me. Pelosi and crew need to wake up or get voted the hell out.

cirby: Yeah, the sad part is that he HAS to say ""find more, use less."

On the other hand, the Dem solution is "find none, use none, hope for a miracle."

Existing technology (which has been under-funded because the Federal Energy Bills give billions to the oil companies) is a "miracle"?

I that case, your world must be filled with so much wonder and miracles. The wind and water can move blades and wheels. It's a miracle.

Hail Messiah.

And you are the Messiah, and I should know. I've followed a few.

Jackpot777: cirby: Yeah, the sad part is that he HAS to say ""find more, use less."

On the other hand, the Dem solution is "find none, use none, hope for a miracle."

Existing technology (which has been under-funded because the Federal Energy Bills give billions to the oil companies) is a "miracle"?

I that case, your world must be filled with so much wonder and miracles. The wind and water can move blades and wheels. It's a miracle.

Hail Messiah.

And you are the Messiah, and I should know. I've followed a few.

Obviously ethanol is not the solution. What other technologies are currently being used?

3_Butt_Cheeks: flaEsq: Isn't this bozo a free market publican?

Find more, use less.

-"Use Less" - reducing imported oil by one-third by making it easier for millions of Americans to drive plug-in electric cars and trucks (four million barrels of oil savings a day). (The bill) also encouraging the government to increase its purchases of electric vehicles.

Seems pretty forward thinking to me. Pelosi and crew need to wake up or get voted the hell out.

I'd be more willing to support drilling, etc, if it were specifically tied to a plan to wean us off of the stuff. This bill sounds like it could be a step in the right direction.

His plan sounds suspiciously like the formula for losing weight, "exercise more, eat less". Of course it works, but nobody's going to do it.

The fact that none of these guys address the weak dollar and it's ever decreasing purchasing power against commodities tells me they know fark all about economics.

InmanRoshi: The fact that none of these guys address the weak dollar and it's ever decreasing purchasing power against commodities tells me they know fark all about economics.

They are speaking to the people who want to know about reducing fuel costs in a language they will grasp. Economics, the weakness of the dollar and commodity trading will go straight over the head of the avg. voter.

3_Butt_Cheeks: InmanRoshi: The fact that none of these guys address the weak dollar and it's ever decreasing purchasing power against commodities tells me they know fark all about economics.

They are speaking to the people who want to know about reducing fuel costs in a language they will grasp. Economics, the weakness of the dollar and commodity trading will go straight over the head of the avg. voter.

If telling people that "Your dollar is 40% weaker than it was just a year ago, therefore it takes 40% more money to buy the same gallon of gas you bought a year ago" is seen as advanced Keynesian theory, then Jebus Christ are we farked.

This "more drilling" meme has been pushed relentless by the oil lobby all summer, and regurgitated endlessly by their bought and paid for politicians and right wing propaganda radio. If it were going to make a fark's bit of difference they could put an oil rig on top of Mount Rushmore for all I care, but it's all a shell game.

InmanRoshi: then Jebus Christ are we farked.

Something like that.

No "Lamar Alexander Number Two" comments yet?

/loves that SNL sketch

As obvious and stupid as it sounds, he is still speaking well above the average IQ of the American public. Perhaps he should say that there are more electrolytes in driving less.

Or, even better, the size of the vehicle is inversely proportional to penis size. Although true, that one has math sounding stuff in it.

InmanRoshi: This "more drilling" meme has been pushed relentless by the oil lobby all summer, and regurgitated endlessly by their bought and paid for politicians and right wing propaganda radio. If it were going to make a fark's bit of difference they could put an oil rig on top of Mount Rushmore for all I care, but it's all a shell game.

The funny thing is that the Energy Information Administration actually did a series of projections on how ANWR drilling would impact oil prices. The results were that in 20 years, the cost of a barrel of oil would be $0.50 to $1.50 lower. So you're looking at a price drop of roughly 1%.

, yes, but the douchebags who drive penis extenders just don't get it.

Sum Dum Gai: InmanRoshi: This "more drilling" meme has been pushed relentless by the oil lobby all summer, and regurgitated endlessly by their bought and paid for politicians and right wing propaganda radio. If it were going to make a fark's bit of difference they could put an oil rig on top of Mount Rushmore for all I care, but it's all a shell game.

The funny thing is that the Energy Information Administration actually did a series of projections on how ANWR drilling would impact oil prices. The results were that in 20 years, the cost of a barrel of oil would be $0.50 to $1.50 lower. So you're looking at a price drop of roughly 1%.

Yep, you guys can go right ahead trying to convince people that prices only move with demand, not with supply. Happily, everyone in America except for the congressional Democrats know how farking idiotic that is. Enjoy your delusions.

Manfred J. Hattan: Yep, you guys can go right ahead trying to convince people that prices only move with demand, not with supply. Happily, everyone in America except for the congressional Democrats know how farking idiotic that is. Enjoy your delusions.

Will they move with supply and demand both? Of course. But how much they move is relative to how much you change supply or demand.

Drilling in ANWR would have a negligible effect on the total oil supply -- estimates are that if we drilled in ANWR, it would increase the total world oil production by about 0.8%, which simply isn't enough to have a significant effect on prices.

Yes, but one could say that about every single individual field in the country. "Oh, more drilling is good, but we can't drill (ANWR/offshore California/deepwater Gulf/Rockies/wherever) because that wouldn't move the needle by itself."

Everyone's figured the scam out. No one give a crap what you say any more, and the stupid insistence on "protecting" that FSM-forsaken wasteland did not usher in a new era of happy Americans bicycling to work, it ushred in an era of angry Americans who will happily drill right down the gut of Old Faithful if it means they can afford to go to work.

Good jorb. Between the don't-drill idiots and the Global Warming idiots, both science and environmentalism have been set back more than 100 years.

Manfred J. Hattan: Yes, but one could say that about every single individual field in the country. "Oh, more drilling is good, but we can't drill (ANWR/offshore California/deepwater Gulf/Rockies/wherever) because that wouldn't move the needle by itself."

The problem is, we already produce almost as much oil as we're capable of. Even if we opened ALL drilling in the entire nation, it wouldn't move that needle, because there aren't that many untapped sources of oil.

Everyone's figured the scam out. No one give a crap what you say any more, and the stupid insistence on "protecting" that FSM-forsaken wasteland did not usher in a new era of happy Americans bicycling to work, it ushred in an era of angry Americans who will happily drill right down the gut of Old Faithful if it means they can afford to go to work.

If you really want to make gasoline cheaper, the easiest solution is to strengthen the purchasing power of the dollar. If you think the current high prices of oil are unrelated to the poor state of the dollar relative to other currencies, you're crazy.

It would be much, much easier to increase the purchasing power of the dollar than it would be to bump up world oil production.

Oh, I agree with that -- the Feds' dicking around with trying to prevent a teensy tiny recession and save a couple of banks that need closing while the dollar goes to pot is a constant frustration to me.

But if you move the buck back all the way to 80 Euros (which is too far) we've still got oil at ~$80. We're going to allow domestic drilling. If the watermelons are right and there's not that much oil out there, we'll find it out through dry holes, not legislative fiat.

Manfred J. Hattan: If the watermelons are right and there's not that much oil out there, we'll find it out through dry holes, not legislative fiat.

They wouldn't be dry holes -- there just wouldn't be that many more oil fields. The vast majority of our oil fields are already developed; the oil companies are just pushing to develop that last few percent that aren't.

To increase the world oil production by 10% we'd need to double our domestic oil production, and that's completely impossible. At best, we could maybe bump our oil production up by 15%, which would bump world production by 1.5%. It would have a negligible effect on oil prices.

In the end it just comes down to that many people don't want to despoil every last inch of oil-laden land to shave a few pennies off the price of gasoline.

I don't know how it is in other states, but gas has dropped at least 20 cents a gallon this week. It's $3.59 for unleaded at the closest station. Last week it started around $3.85 or so.

Still not happy, but at least it's going in the right direction for awhile.

We aren't even touching the edge on shale right now. It's finally getting to the point where it's worth developing.

The DBS: We aren't even touching the edge on shale right now. It's finally getting to the point where it's worth developing.

From what I know of current methods of utilizing oil shale:

1. It can't make gasoline, though you can get diesel fuel out of it.
2. It uses incredible amounts of water in the production process (some processes use five times as much water as they produce of synthetic oil).
3. The extraction process tends to be very polluting.

It's not just the economics of extracting fuel, but also the logistics of supplying enough water and dealing with pollution. The few countries that do use oil shale production tend to be places like China, where dumping a few million gallons of polluted water into the ecosystem is business as usual.

We found more, the democrats won't let us get it. They want their constituents broke. It'll mean they're angry and will vote for change.

Triaxis: We found more, the democrats won't let us get it. They want their constituents broke. It'll mean they're angry and will vote for change.

Yes, it's all a conspiracy.

I mean, the US would need to *more than double* its oil production to make any serious impact on world oil prices.

Are there oil resources we're not currently tapping? Yes. But not even close to enough to make a substantial change in world oil production.

Okay, anyone who went through life with the name "Lamar" and didn't at least try to change it shouldn't be taken too seriously. I mean, damn, what has he been called since grade school -- Lam ? Lammy?

"Find more and use less." Wow, that's, er... That's, ah.. Well that's really somethin' Lamar! Let us know next time you have a brain fart like that one, now...

I have to give him credit for recognizing that the demand side of the equation does have an impact. This has been missed by most of the Congress-critters regardless of party.

The DBS: We aren't even touching the edge on shale right now. It's finally getting to the point where it's worth developing.

Only if the Democrats let us develop it.

sheilanagig: His plan sounds suspiciously like the formula for losing weight, "exercise more, eat less". Of course it works, but nobody's going to do it.

Taa-daaah!