Seeking Alpha

With all the problems in the economy, this could someday prove America's saving grace: The U.S....

With all the problems in the economy, this could someday prove America's saving grace: The U.S. is closer than any time in 20 years to achieving energy independence. Domestic oil output is highest in eight years, natural gas production is hitting records, and the efficiency of passenger cars has helped limit demand. The transformation could mean the U.S. becomes the world’s top energy producer by 2020.
Comments (28)
  • Conventional Wisdumb
    , contributor
    Comments (1802) | Send Message
     
    Another thing to blame on Bush.
    7 Feb 2012, 10:14 PM Reply Like
  • Regarded Solutions
    , contributor
    Comments (17955) | Send Message
     
    I guess they stole my story, written back in December....http://seekingalpha.co...
    7 Feb 2012, 10:21 PM Reply Like
  • Terry330
    , contributor
    Comments (870) | Send Message
     
    Thank you President Obama, record US drilling under your leadership. Better economy yet is still to come with his re election in fall of 2012.
    7 Feb 2012, 10:23 PM Reply Like
  • Conventional Wisdumb
    , contributor
    Comments (1802) | Send Message
     
    That decision to approve the XL Pipeline made all the difference!
    7 Feb 2012, 10:26 PM Reply Like
  • coddy0
    , contributor
    Comments (1182) | Send Message
     
    Terry330
    record US drilling under your leadership.
    ======================...
    drill baby drill
    7 Feb 2012, 11:53 PM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    Yeah, ask everyone in Louisiana who lost their jobs during the moratorium about Obama's leadership....
    8 Feb 2012, 12:01 AM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    Terry

     

    You know nothing about energy and neither does Obama. We are suceeding in spite of Obama. His leadership has been green energy. Wow that is really showing us the way.
    8 Feb 2012, 02:16 AM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    Tomas, yes it is. Your viewpoint is backward as happens when we get older. So many put down green energy when in fact most of the world is moving in that direction while people like yourself continue to fight tooth and nail against it. It's all about change! Go with the flow!!!

     

    P.S. Drilling is at it's highest but you won't hear about that in the bubble.
    8 Feb 2012, 07:51 AM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    No one is fighting tooth and nail against "green energy", it simply can't produce enough energy to power the world (not even 10% in fact). Oil and gas can.

     

    http://bit.ly/A4r6fE
    8 Feb 2012, 09:09 AM Reply Like
  • TomasViewPoint
    , contributor
    Comments (4845) | Send Message
     
    ph

     

    The comment from bigbenorr below is on target never mind that you contradict yourself in the same comment touting green energy while observing that it is really drilling that is at an all time high.

     

    I don't mind GE it is just very marginal right now and as indicated in the article projects are being canceled. Obama has not done much of anything in energy.
    8 Feb 2012, 04:03 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    I agree greener energy is slow going, but I've heard that in some states, like Oklahoma for instance, it's growing substantially. Obama can only do so much. And I keep hearing "get out the way"!
    8 Feb 2012, 04:33 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    Obviously wasn't necessary!
    7 Feb 2012, 10:27 PM Reply Like
  • Lakeaffect
    , contributor
    Comments (1184) | Send Message
     
    Then why is it that gasoline is costing me $3.60 a gallon when in 2001 it was $1.00? And why can't I go out and buy a nice diesel powered car that gets 50-60mpg like they drive over in Europe? Or maybe somebody tell me why we're not driving around in automobiles powered by nat gas? If we have so much energy laying around then why do the oil companies still get taxpayer money in the form of subsidies?

     

    Drilling programs take a long time to get going and produce results. They were in the pipeline long before BO got into office. And since he's been there he hasn't done a damn thing about taking advantage of it. He's more interested in seeing us all pay $5 a gallon for gas, or perhaps, ride bicycles with windmills strapped to our backpacks.
    7 Feb 2012, 10:35 PM Reply Like
  • gdonelson
    , contributor
    Comments (36) | Send Message
     
    $3.60 per gallon...look no further than the devaluation of the petro dollar. The focus needs to be on Fed policy which is bending us all over.
    8 Feb 2012, 11:28 AM Reply Like
  • Swass
    , contributor
    Comments (419) | Send Message
     
    Perhaps a prime contributing factor is less consumption due to lower production and low employment.
    7 Feb 2012, 11:18 PM Reply Like
  • PeakOiler
    , contributor
    Comments (298) | Send Message
     
    It's all about technology folks, nothing to do with Obama, nothing to do with Bush, nothing to do with new discoveries. The Bakken and all the hot shale gas fields have been well delineated for at least a decade, all that was required was an efficient drilling technology to tap the energy. That technology involved horizontal drilling and fracturing, and cost and execution improvements in these areas have simply opened up the shallow oil/gas fields to massive production increases. If nothing else, America is the most innovative nation in the world, and innovation is paying off again.
    7 Feb 2012, 11:33 PM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    Excellent comment, you are so right. Of course the politicians will always claim credit for the innovation of others.....
    8 Feb 2012, 12:04 AM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    I disagree -- if you listen to the Prez. he always lauds the innovation and creativity of Americans. He is our greatest cheerleader. However, if he can be blamed for when we're not doing well he should be given credit when we are doing well!
    8 Feb 2012, 08:10 AM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    "And by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of 30 years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock –- reminding us that government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground."

     

    -Obama in his state of the union address.

     

    Of course it was Mitchell Energy that pioneered the shale gas boom in Texas, and many other engineers have done the work to make it viable on a large scale. I am a part of this group and I can personally attest to the fact that we do not and have not ever needed help from the government to do our jobs. (in fact all they do is get in our way).
    8 Feb 2012, 09:30 AM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    I am not familiar with Mitchell Energy and their pioneering in Texas but ask if you believe the present fracking method is perfectly acceptable? That no further research and development is needed? That evidence of chemicals leaking into water supplies or unusual earthquakes like last year in Ohio among other mishaps are not worthy of further investigation? I'm all in favor of drilling for natural gas but know that if left up to the companies themselves perfecting less harmful methods would be considered costly and a waste of time. Time is money after all!
    8 Feb 2012, 11:08 AM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    No of course the present method is not perfect, R&D is happening all the time to increase effectiveness. The water thing is bunk, 99.9% of the fluids pumped into the ground are harmless, and they are being injected at depths 10x deeper than the deepest known drinking water. The chemicals would have to migrate through a mile of solid rock to get into drinking water, and what fluids do you think currently reside in that zone?? You guessed it, toxic chemicals (oil, gas, and massive amounts of undrinkable water) which have been there for ages.
    8 Feb 2012, 11:19 AM Reply Like
  • Conventional Wisdumb
    , contributor
    Comments (1802) | Send Message
     
    Bigbenorr,

     

    You are wasting your time arguing with her - you are arguing with the NYTimes and the HuffPo by proxy.

     

    Obama could drop a nuclear bomb on Canada and she would say they must have deserved it.

     

    She doesn't see the irony of the fact that the new Oil Man In Chief is the person who will be most responsible for destroying the Planet through Global Warming caused by the massive new release of greenhouse gases from burning all these new fossil fuels. Assuming of course you believe in that fraud :)

     

    It must be tough to be a Liberal if you are smart, which explains why there are so many Liberals.

     

    If you believe in the scam of Global Warming then you should be protesting the President not praising him.

     

    Al Gore must be squirming.
    8 Feb 2012, 11:46 AM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    OK, you're right on that account, I use a Brita filter for drinking water and live far from fracking (I think) --- however, I just did a little research on Mitchell Energy (now Devon) and lo and behold came across this straight from the horse's mouth:

     

    "Mitchell Energy's first horizontal well was subsidized by the federal government, according to former geologist and Vice President for Mitchell. "They did a hell of a lot of work," said Steward, "and I can't give them enough credit for that. DOE started it, and other people took the ball and ran with it. You cannot diminish DOE's involvement."

     

    I don't know if the technique took 30 years to develop but President Obama's support for natural gas should be applauded not denigrated. As the economy gets better perhaps now we can all root for the home team and cut the disparaging remarks. He's done good!!
    8 Feb 2012, 12:36 PM Reply Like
  • bigbenorr
    , contributor
    Comments (866) | Send Message
     
    Well I was not aware of that, so I guess they did actually help somewhat, however I still resent the fact that the government still claims credit for doing all this stuff when they are really just taking my tax money, giving it to other people, and then taking the credit for the good it (rarely) does. As for Obama, I do not really think him any worse than any other politician. That said, I pretty much can't stand any of them, they do zero work and expect us all to love and respect them for it.
    8 Feb 2012, 01:37 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    Hey, somebody's got to do it! It's the way it's always been in our U.S.A. Let's just see who the other guy is and watch the debates, and may the best man win!
    8 Feb 2012, 02:04 PM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    ConWisdumb: You forgot the Wall Street Journal -- today's headline "Oil and Gas Boom Lifts U.S. Economy," a good thing, right? Jumping for joy good thing!

     

    Some of the least smart people I’ve met are rabid right wing conservatives; no curiosity -- all preconceived notions and prejudices, and totally misinformed. I don't claim to be smart but I am very interested in getting to the bottom of things. Pres. Obama is not as liberal as liberals had hoped. He is a moderate, left of center pragmatist who attempts to find middle ground, when the other side put politics first before the country’s economic health. I like him a lot as I suppose you liked the last administration. Funny, none of the GOP candidates ever utter their names.

     

    Also, I can't believe there has come a day when science is considered a farce. Climate change (global warming) is proven as fact by majority of scientists. I work full time and am not up on everything (as you are) but believe Pres. Obama is trying to promote green energy while continuing oil/natural gas drilling, and creating jobs in both. Why the heck not? Why does it have to be one or the other?

     

    I know you like irritating us liberals, so I'll take it in stride. After all we're here to talk about investing and making money and I don't see any conflict in doing that and caring for the environment, in spite of how some see it as either/or.
    8 Feb 2012, 03:12 PM Reply Like
  • sethmcs
    , contributor
    Comments (3447) | Send Message
     
    More supply and less demand? Can't have that. Blow up a pipeline in Nigeria. Impose sanctions on Iran. Shut down some big pipelines for maintenance. Reverse the flow of pipelines at the delivery point. Keep those tankers at sea until the inventory stats are published. Publish a thousand articles about peak oil. Muhhahahahah!
    8 Feb 2012, 12:34 AM Reply Like
  • phemale60
    , contributor
    Comments (2910) | Send Message
     
    OK you guys, you can pick on me all you want, cause this liberal lady is too happy to care. My CSCO and WFM just reported earning and they both kicked butt!
    8 Feb 2012, 04:34 PM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Hub
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs