Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Troubleshooter
I'm worried about the motivation of people who would profit from a limited oil supply writing the checks for the people who are supposed to be doing the research on this. Call me paranoid but...
|
I am quite willing to join you in a case of the paranoid jitters. In my case, however, my concern is over the folks in big oil writing the checks for research on alternate forms of energy, including synfuels. Again and again, "Big Oil" will cite some piece of research claiming synfuels, et al. are not feasible, and again and again it turns out "Big Oil" funded the research in question.
Colorado's Western slope is potentially awash in shale oil - not even "potentially"; IS awash in shale oil. How much longer must the good men of the 3rd Infantry Division have their blood be awash in the Persian Gulf before someone stands up to the various boards of directors of "Big Oil" and says "no more!"?
Why is it that the American people allow the blood of our sons and husbands; brothers and fathers to be spent on the dry desert soil of some foreign country; merely so Shell Oil's profit margin can look good to its investors? Does ANYONE have ANY idea of what the true cost of a barrel oil comes to these days? Throw in the expense of the 3/3 ACR at your beck and call plus the cost of rebuilding countries in the Middle East which we casually destroy, and oil shale PLUS reasonable environmental controls is a rip roaring bargain by comparison.
Just don't let anyone at Royal Dutch Petroleum hear you say that.