Reader comments
2 bills would hurt oil exploration in Utah by adding new restrictions

Why should the federal government continue to subsidize the oil companies when they are awash in cash? Over the past several years, they've enjoyed record profits while Americans have faced $3-a-gallon gasoline! Do you believe there's a correlation here? The purpose of these bills is to get oil to pay more of its fair share of taxes so that the government can invest more into 21st century energy sources -- something the oil companies are resisting to protect their current profits. It's true, America's oil dependency ain't working. Hatch is backing plug-in hybrid cars that will allow America to increasingly leverage its electricity sources to substitute for oil. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 gave so many tax breaks and subsidies to the oil companies, and they still refuse to invest into refineries, when that is at the heart of gasoline's high prices. Why do we let ourselves get burned again and again by oil and their political advocates!

Mr. Van Tassell's comments could have been a publicity feed from Halliburton. There is, of course, another view. He talks of "additional layers of regulation"; the truth is, President Bush made Mr. Van Tassell's district a "pilot project", a poster child for unchecked energy exporation. The BLM has been directed to stand down. All other resources - ranching, water, wildlife - take a distant back seat to energy exploration. And don't let's kid ourselves that the oil and gas produced will be anything more than a blip when set agains our national needs. The Uintah Basin is being needlessly sacrificed in a vain response to our national energy crisis. The final irony is, that if Utah instead judiciously spread out the energy exploration over a few decades, Utahns would have recieved more money. Instead, we are looting the piggy bank over night. After that, what will the Uintah Basin have to offer? A ravaged landscape for generations to come.

As one who lives in Mr. Van Tassell's senate district, I admire his views and actions, which I believe are in the best interests of his constituents and other Utahns. For example, he is one of the few legislators who simply said no to Real Salt Lake earlier this year. He was in the small minority, but he was right nonetheless. His views in this column are just as right. Too many Americans misunderstand the oil industry, the realities of energy production and use, and the reasons behind energy pricing. Mr. Van Tassell is not among them, thank goodness. More of us need to understand that the US petroleum industry is the most competetive industry in the world. Mr. Van Tassell's ideas would benefit not only those who produce petroleum and petroleum products, but all the rest us as well.

In my mind, Senator Van Tassels comments are based on a rather narrow based overall view of the energy problems. Right now we cannot refine the oil that we purchase and or produce ( not enough refinery capacity) ... hence the high prices. Enormous profits are ignored in the sense that they should lower rather than raise our petroleum costs. Obviously, as long as we buy foreign oil for 80+ bucks a barrel we can sell our own domestic oil for the same price, in spite of the fact that the domestic productions costs are a fraction of the price paid for the foreign products. The higher the prices go, the more valuable our domestic oil becomes ... kind'a neat rick ... HUH!!

In the long haul it won't make a bit of difference, we'll soon, in terms of historical time, have exhausted the availablility of "all" hydro-carbon products. Best we get cracking on "safe" nuclear and other alternatives ... we need a dedication to such products with priority levels as great as NASA's first moon shot ... taxpayers, in the end, will benefit.

OH! and how many "capped" productive oil sources have the oil Barons got in reserve today.

As a conservative, I'm disgusted at our nation's profligate energy use. While I realize the dire need to wean ourselves from foreign sources of energy, I can't stand the idea of scarring our beautiful state until we take real steps toward conservation. It's a failure of imagination, engineering, and leadership that our current average MPG hasn't improved much since the 1970s. There's nothing "green" or "liberal" about being smart with energy use and preserving our outdoor legacy for our children.