704
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
704 points (98.8% liked)
politics
19072 readers
4523 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't recall pledging allegiance to Exxon or the house of Saud. Maybe the traitor is you!
That's what this move does. We can get our oil from ourselves or from them, your choice, but it's going to be one of them.
Balls to that. We need to get off of oil entirely.
No thanks, I've got way too many dino juice burning toys and vehicles to switch.
Well then you can kiss the Saudis' asses, but don't expect the rest of us to.
You might as well just say, "no thanks, I don't care if anyone lives or dies."
Some of you may die, but that's a risk I'm willing to take to fill up the fuel tanks on my wakeboard boat.
I think what you're saying is we should be energy independent, right?
I don't disagree with that sentiment, but I disagree on where that energy comes from. We should have invested in BOTH getting off of hostile nation energy sources AND alternatives to oil decades ago. Yet here we are. Both parties are to blame for this, yet only one of them seems to be pushing for non-oil energy independence.
We were energy independent up until a couple years ago, a net exporter even. Alternatives are fine, but we aren't going to all park our gas cars for 20 years while we wait for a cheap and plentiful alternative to take its place.
We are currently a net exporter of oil. We are also still currently energy-independent
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=727&t=6#:~:text=The%20resulting%20total%20net%20petroleum,million%20b%2Fd%20in%202022.
You're mad about things that are not true.
Bro you may wanna research your claims before you get all huffy about shit. You're not even right, and you're mad at the wrong people
Yeah, but we got there by shale oil which is ruining our water supply and raping the future land for the present. Hot take. Let's build more nuclear if energy independence is really the goal. Fossil Fuels are killing us.
Fossil fuels are fine, but yes I agree more nukes would be fantastic.
I'm not replying to to everyone posting the same thing multiple times, they can read the original response if they'd like. Have a great day as well.
I don't think that is realistic either. We're in a transition period and most people still drive gas powered cars. It could take 20 years like you said, or it could take 50.
That said, going back to the article here, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge doesn't currently have a lot of oil producing wells on it (if any at all). This is mostly due to the remote area, lack of infrastructure such as roads to get the oil out, and cost vs benefit analysis done by the oil companies. Blocking the drilling is really just slowing down -expansion- of oil production and does nothing to our current production levels.
Oh I know. Production takes time to ramp up no matter where it's located, some areas a just easier than others. Its a known energy reserve, well I guess technically not now that drilling is banned, So energy expansion and production will just continue to expand elsewhere. For global political, and environmental reasons it would be best to expand in the US if possible and not the middle east, russia, china. People cheering this decision don't understand that the oil will just come from dirtier, more evil places.