Moderateman Moderateman

OIL SHALE, What is America waiting for?

OIL SHALE, What is America waiting for?

The vast extent of U.S. oil shale resources, amounting to more than 2 trillion barrels, has been known for a century. In 1912, the President, by Executive Order, established the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves. This office has overseen the U.S. strategic interests in oil shale since that time. The huge resource base has stimulated several prior commercial attempts to produce oil from oil shale, but these attempts have failed primarily because of the historically modest cost of petroleum with which it competed. With the expected future decline in petroleum production, historic market forces are poised to change and this change will improve the economic viability of oil shale.

Right now several companies have already started drilling in the shadow of the Rockies, they say that they can extract oil from the shale at about 10 dollars per barrel, we have more oil there than the combined total of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and Venzuale put together, doubled, Why have we waited so long to take action on this? Why has our leadership allowed us to be bled dry by people that hate the very air we breath? Why are we still funding terrorism through the pumps of foreign gas stations?

http://emd.aapg.org/technical_areas/oil_shale.cfm

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf   

11,120 views 30 replies
Reply #26 Top
i agree that Wikipedia isn't the best place for information, but they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources. And if there isnt a citation, it will show such.

Just as one can easily go in there and edit info, away from the truth or whatever, one can just as easily go in there and change it back.
Reply #27 Top
they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources.


The funny thing about the objection to Wikipedia In This Case is that they listed the history of specific actions by the US Congress and Presidents. we are not talking about opinions. These are records of official US GOV actions.

If this was an opinion of any kind, i would understand the objection, but i guess there is no limit at which spin stops.
Reply #28 Top

Reply By: ThinkAloudPosted: Monday, August 27, 2007
they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources.


The funny thing about the objection to Wikipedia In This Case is that they listed the history of specific actions by the US Congress and Presidents. we are not talking about opinions. These are records of official US GOV actions.

If this was an opinion of any kind, i would understand the objection, but i guess there is no limit at which spin stops.

\there is no spin in my article none, not one word of what I wrote is untrue. We are just trying to tell you start with Wiki then find other sources to back up your claims, if the info you got was gov, sourced, you should have done a little more research and source it through the gov sites, not wiki. that is all. so spin, no name calling.

Reply #30 Top
Reply By: Moderateman Posted: Monday, August 27, 2007

Reply By: ThinkAloudPosted: Monday, August 27, 2007
they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources.


The funny thing about the objection to Wikipedia In This Case is that they listed the history of specific actions by the US Congress and Presidents. we are not talking about opinions. These are records of official US GOV actions.

If this was an opinion of any kind, i would understand the objection, but i guess there is no limit at which spin stops.

\there is no spin in my article none, not one word of what I wrote is untrue. We are just trying to tell you start with Wiki then find other sources to back up your claims, if the info you got was gov, sourced, you should have done a little more research and source it through the gov sites, not wiki. that is all. so spin, no name calling.

I noticed just using a little kindness and common sense blew mr. thinksaloud away.