Therein lies the problem: the Democrats created a problem in fossil fuel supply. This recessionary period didn't even need to happen if they weren't so stupid.
Global Climate Changes
- Thread starter Beatle Bum
- Start date
That is misleading. I've seen interviews with scientist that signed on to the original climate change paper that said they thought humans contributed but either thought the amount was low or were unsure of what % humans were responsible. The only people crazier than people that think humans have zero effect on the planet are the crazy people that think we are responsible for 100% of the changes.
So you don’t believe it’s commie bs. Good for you. What unbiased source do you have that says it’s a problem? Guaranteed their hand is out.
100% of scientists believe that CO2 is heavier than air. They've all read stories of the men working in manholes or sewers who are overcome by CO2 because it collects in low areas. That should be a major concern when talking about car exhaust and the atmosphere. Certainly explains why they used to say there wasn't as much CO2 in the atmosphere as there should be. SUV's do not increase global warming.
I did see some truth in that bs. Liberals are stupid
So you read through 21 pages of this thread so you could reply and call me stupid twice? I only wish I had that much time on my hands. Have a good day.
The price of a barrel of oil drifted below $0 in April 2020 partly due to Covid, but also due to the fact that we were producing enough oil on shore to basically force OPEC into a negative position. We may be semi-dependent on OPEC but it should at the least be a symbiotic relationship and not the leach that they are on our economy when we decide we want to "Go Green" and stop production of domestic oil.
The price of oil drifted below $0 because demand fell off a cliff due to Covid and there was nowhere to put said oil that was coming out of the ground. So yeah, you could get a barrel of oil for -$37, but you had to physically take posession of that oil which required you to find a place to put it. Very difficult to do when all the tanks and rail cars were full.
Demand fell off a cliff from Covid and we had pumped enough oil out of the ground within the US that we had full oil reserves. When BIden shut down a upwards of 15% of US production of domestic oil the price of the barrel has constantly risen. Add the fact that we now have no bargaining chip to pull away from OPEC which has caused them to maintain low production levels which keep barrel prices high. This was all in place before the war in Ukraine, which obviously made it worse, but ultimately we can control our own prices when required if Biden would increase domestic production capabilities. Argue the war or Covid, but there is no argument that he could help the US citizens with action that he is obviously not going to take.
This is factually incorrect. We have a free market economy. Government in particular the president cannot order oil production increase or decreases except in national energy ie. times of war. Oil companies decide how much oil they wish to produce which is based on current and forecasted market conditions, price levels, futures prices etc. Second oil production has actually increased under Biden not decreased, but that's moot, because as I said the president has nothing to do with oil production.
Yes, on average oil production is higher under the Biden administration, but context is needed
Oil production has reached on average 11.2 million barrels per day during the Biden administration, according to 14 months of data.
www.wusa9.com
Quit listening to CNN. He absolutely impacted domestic production rates by pausing leases on federal lands and when overturned by judges implemented other EO's that make it extremely hard to meet any regulation that would allow for future oil production. This impact in and of itself was enough for OPEC to decline his multiple invitations (even before the Ukrainian war) of boosting production. Of course they wouldn't because they know he is going to force more of a reliance on them so they can make more money by not boosting production and pushing barrel prices up. Look at the entire picture and what he has done not only to further impact a strained economy at home, but to also give the competitive advantage back to OPEC and China.This is factually incorrect. We have a free market economy. Government in particular the president cannot order oil production increase or decreases except in national energy ie. times of war. Oil companies decide how much oil they wish to produce which is based on current and forecasted market conditions, price levels, futures prices etc. Second oil production has actually increased under Biden not decreased, but that's moot, because as I said the president has nothing to do with oil production.
Yes, on average oil production is higher under the Biden administration, but context is needed
Oil production has reached on average 11.2 million barrels per day during the Biden administration, according to 14 months of data.
I didn't reference CNN, the link I posted was from wusa9.com.Quit listening to CNN. He absolutely impacted domestic production rates by pausing leases on federal lands and when overturned by judges implemented other EO's that make it extremely hard to meet any regulation that would allow for future oil production. This impact in and of itself was enough for OPEC to decline his multiple invitations (even before the Ukrainian war) of boosting production. Of course they wouldn't because they know he is going to force more of a reliance on them so they can make more money by not boosting production and pushing barrel prices up. Look at the entire picture and what he has done not only to further impact a strained economy at home, but to also give the competitive advantage back to OPEC and China.
Thanks for posting this chart, which clearly shows that the drop in oil production occurred during the previous administration not the current one which didn't take office until Jan 2021. However as I previously pointed out the level of production has next to nothing to do with who was in the Oval office. The drop that your chart illustrates was due to a sever drop in demand during COVID, not then President Trump. Oil companies took a beating on price during that time as there was a world glut. And now oil companies are understandably very cautious about ramping up production to pre COVID levels again.
It is true that Bid stopped new federal land leases but that's not really why oil production levels dropped.
This article from Bloombergs is pretty fair in it's analysis and explains what Biden did and how the oil companies are dealing with production in the changing world markets. From the article:
Oil and gas companies are fully able to drill using roughly 9,000 already-approved drilling permits on federal lands in addition to obtaining permits for undeveloped oil and gas leases on 12.3 million acres of federal land nationwide, Interior communications director Melissa Schwartz said Monday.
The fact still remains were are still a net exporter of oil.
We are still well below where we we’re before COVID. I know you guys love to use COVID as an excuse for everything else Joe has done wrong so it will be interesting to see how you spin this one. Fact is we are well below during a time where we embargo Russian oil and are challenged with high barrel prices. So exactly what I said, the actions take by sleepy Joe have directly impacted the US consumers. And as far as the “Approved” permits they may be approved but the regulations have gotten significantly tougher due to Joe and company enforcing EO’s that they know many companies could never meet so they can continue to tout their green agenda. Again, just another way to screw the consumer for the purpose of green energy. Keep trying though, but the facts are there for you to look at when you decide to open your eyes to how absolutely horrible the current administration are managing our resources. Give away as much as you can and also over regulate which also impacts Americans. Pathetic.
The most basic primal purpose of a man is to protect his family. His children go to school and his wife goes about her day whether at home or at work all under the assumption that a man is and will always do everything in his power to protect them. It is so basic of an agreement that it is virtually never spoken of. The family, oblivious, assumes they are being protected by a watchful vigilant man they will always depend upon for their safety. It has always been that way and not some other.
The "men" you see day after day after day scoffing at the very real existential threat Climate Change represents to the families they would protect, dismissive at the clear present obvious danger the entire combined scientific world warns them of, and their families oblivious to their dereliction.
No wonder they wrap themselves in every *manly* pretense they can soothe their wounded failures over. The guilt at failing gnaws at them at a primal level and they are desperate to beat it down so as not to even acknowledge it. Yet innocent eyes looking upon them for protection and safety are betrayed by their lazy ignorance and indifference. They never cared enough to learn. It was easier to just pretend it away. These "men" they call themselves.
"if we lose the Arctic, we lose the globe." - Finnish President Sauli Niinistö
The "men" you see day after day after day scoffing at the very real existential threat Climate Change represents to the families they would protect, dismissive at the clear present obvious danger the entire combined scientific world warns them of, and their families oblivious to their dereliction.
No wonder they wrap themselves in every *manly* pretense they can soothe their wounded failures over. The guilt at failing gnaws at them at a primal level and they are desperate to beat it down so as not to even acknowledge it. Yet innocent eyes looking upon them for protection and safety are betrayed by their lazy ignorance and indifference. They never cared enough to learn. It was easier to just pretend it away. These "men" they call themselves.
"if we lose the Arctic, we lose the globe." - Finnish President Sauli Niinistö
Last edited:
Those leases are pretty worthless when 1) the other infrastructure needed to grow production (pipelines being a key one) can’t be built due to regulatory and judicial (lawsuits by a ton of climate group) roadblocks and 2) the lease areas arent profitable to drill in, especially when the commitment to grow production is based around multi-year paybacks and the current administration has noted they want to put oil companies out of business.
Such an eloquent and pretentious way to say "we just know more than you so I am not going to answer questions". Typical. There are still facts that you and most others glaze over in all of your data. If you look at pretty much any data point in history we are typically below the mean for everything from global temperature, to ice caps size to CO2 levels, etc. Temps were supposed to rise 5-6 degrees according to the "experts" 30 years ago but it has risen less than a full degree and that's even questionable. All forms of human created CO2 (manufacturing, fossil fuel use, etc.) account for 2.5% of the total amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and that includes China and most other Asian countries who are significantly worse than the US at CO2 output levels. I am like many who don't push back at better sources of energy, I am absolutely for any improvement. My point is that I am sick of seeing us throw bad many at lost money with no metrics to prove that the earth isn't just doing what it does and these slight shifts in any levels are mostly based on activity that we can't and never will be able to control.The most basic primal purpose of a man is to protect his family. His children go to school and his wife goes about her day whether at home or at work all under the assumption that a man is and will always do everything in his power to protect them. It is so basic of an agreement that it is virtually never spoken of. The family, oblivious, assumes they are being protected by a watchful vigilant man they will always depend upon for their safety. It has always been that way and not some other.
The "men" you see day after day after day scoffing at the very real existential threat Climate Change represents to the families they would protect, dismissive at the clear present obvious danger the entire combined scientific world warns them of, and their families oblivious to their dereliction.
No wonder they wrap themselves in every *manly* pretense they can soothe their wounded failures over. The guilt at failing gnaws at them at a primal level and they are desperate to beat it down so as not to even acknowledge it. Yet innocent eyes looking upon them for protection and safety are betrayed by their lazy ignorance and indifference. They never cared enough to learn. It was easier to just pretend it away. These "men" they call themselves.
"if we lose the Arctic, we lose the globe." - Finnish President Sauli Niinistö
Not saying you're wrong but that leaves me with the question why would the oil companies spend money on worthless leases?
They don’t. Producers look at their portfolio of places they can potentially drill and base their decisions on where to invest in drilling on where they get the most return (tons of costs and other factors play into this equation). The leases given to them just aren’t profitable for one reason or another, hence why they don’t drill on these lease areas. Government can say they are helping but they really aren’t.
It’s like the government telling a company they can plant corn in parking lot the government owns but not the fertile field beside it.
Waiting for tech to make it profitable. Much like frac'ing made many areas that were previously unprofitable to drill, they are hoping something comes along and they can make money off them. They still need other permits especially water lines and roads to make any area feasible. If the government holds them up on water and roads all the other stuff doesn't matter.
Seems more severe to me with flooding, wild fires, tornadoes, and warmer winter temps compared to when I was a kid. It’s forecasted to be 65 degrees tomorrow in Birmingham. That’s crazy for January
The history of the apocalypse:
Least number of days with minimum temperature 32 degrees or below in a calendar year (1896 - 2021)
- 20 - 1921
- 22 - 1939
- 22 - 1931
- 23 - 1933
- 23 - 1923
- 23 - 1922
- 23 - 1907
- 25 - 1897
- 27 - 1911
- 28 - 2021
Birmingham over the next 10 days is forecasted to average highs around 60 degrees. We will not get within 5 degrees of 32. That’s odd for January. Doesn’t mean anything, but it’s odd
Says the guy who selectively picks his science and rejects the science he does not like. LOL!
Yet again I have to explain that I believe the science that an overwhelming majority of scientists believe and rejects the science of the small few.
Yeah, you reject the research results of studies performed by Moderna and Pfizer. Gotcha, chief.
Yet another example of you trying to pick a fight with someone for absolutely no reason.
I would agree that there is a lot of sensationalism that's surrounds the effects of Climate Change and with it comes hyperbole. From what I have read from repatuable sources there isn't much evidence to support a relationship of climate change and hurricanes and tornadoes at present although it is true that hurricanes are feed by warm sea water and the warmer the sea water the more severe the storm, and sea water temperatures are measurable higher so it's probably a good bet the storms will get worse as sea water temps continue to rise.
Regarding the terms, I'm not sure what "alarmists" have done but the two terms are correct and still in use. Global Warming is what is occurring, Climate Change is the result of global warming, and the changes are measurable and established.
Was making an observation that wasn't directed at any specific individual. If someone feels offended by that statement then maybe they know that it applies to them.
So he basically said there's no evidence of the ******** but "preach" lol man you guys dig your heels into so much ********, I can smell you from here.
Just curious.... We were in the little ice age from about 1300 to late 1800's. How do people think we got out of a little ice age?
Lol climate change is a white liberal money making scheme
It may touch 68 degrees today in Birmingham. For me, it’s not a political thing. The weather is overall warmer in my observation as any everyday golfer. I’m a registered republican church goer btw. Mentioning that because it’s political for so many.
Growing up in the 70/80s we didn’t have strings of 10-15 days of warm January weather. It was cold and un-golfable.
Growing up in the 70/80s we didn’t have strings of 10-15 days of warm January weather. It was cold and un-golfable.
There’s a chance kids today will complain in 30 or 40 years how cold it is and how great it was to golf in January as kids. Weather is cyclical and the only consistent part of it is change.