Is oil a renewable energy source?
Oh, dear! What is President Barack Hussein Obama going to do now? Evidence is mounting that not only do we have more than 100 years (or more) worth of recoverable oil in the US alone, but that we also actually have a limitless supply of oil because it is a renewable resource that is being constantly created.
…
Article comments
26 - Dr Hussein Dreadful
Almost every statement in comment 24 is completely and utterly wrong. It's quite impressive.
Once the actual "Global Warming" "science" was shown to be a fraud
Cherry-picking a few graphs and out-of-context quotes from emails is not proof of fraud - except on the part of those doing the cherry-picking.
it has an effect - just not a "greenhouse" effect.
Carbon dioxide has been known to be a greenhouse gas for a century and a half. John Tyndall in 1861 demonstrated that CO2 trapped heat, and his observations have been confirmed many, many, many times.
Not only does more CO2 help feed the world, it helps support more life which, in turn, uses that Oxygen and produces more CO2. It's called an equilibrium and it's been proven over and over again.
Which would be all fine and dandy if human beings weren't adding extra CO2 from fossil fuel burning. Plants do consume CO2, it's true - but what you overlook is that it's not the only thing they consume. They also need, among other things, water. Plant life is already struggling due to lack of rainfall, and natural aquifers are running dry all over the world due to human demand. So even if more CO2 theoretically leads to more plants - what are they supposed to drink?
Additionally, greenhouse gas theory has be DIS-PROVEN when attempted on a planet because there is no glass ceiling.
Have you looked at Venus lately?
It's NEVER been repeated in an experiment
Mega-false. See above.
every attempt to do so has proven no link between CO2 concentrations in an atmosphere that thins and dissipates instead of a room that heats and retains.
Kindly explain why you think the physical properties of carbon dioxide gas change depending on where it is. You might also want to explain how it is that you are still able to breathe in this atmosphere of ours that "thins and dissipates".
27 - Igor
Plant life only uses about 2/3 of the CO2 available, the remainder just lingers on. Producing MORE CO2 cannot possibly increase plant life and it's beneficial byproducts because there's just not enough existing plantlife. Adding more CO2 to the atmosphere does not increase plant production.
Equilibrium between CO2 and O2 has long since been unbalanced by human activity, both by producing more CO2 and by reducing plant life, one of the principle ways being the destruction of rain forests for human use.
28 - Thatguy
interesting how a topic about renewable oil turned into an Obama bash...
29 - Igor
Experienced readers of Warrens articles always wonder where he plagiarized (stole) his article from without attribution, so here's the link to the WSJ article behind a paywall:
WSJ
And here's a cached reference with attribution:
Warrens victim
Didn't the BC editors put a stop to this kind of thievery by Warren awhile ago?
30 - C.M.
To Infinite Spiral: It has been proven that climate chnge is real. No because a few scientists said so...Please google all the many resources the World Health Organization, The World Bank or United Nations have published. You can find data, documents, trends and even coparison statistics from hundreds of years. It is all about education ourselves. I understand we have the tendency of being very "opinionated" about things that we do not have much knowledge. You don't really need a Harvard Master's degree to understand basic science but you need a higher degree to undrrstand climate change...unless you live in regions that are already suffering the consequences (Rio de Janeiro, Philipines, France heat weave-2003? Let's not make climate change a political issue. We can have jobs, nice houses, a great future and mitigate the effects of climate change. Thanks.
C.M.
31 - scott
Glenn Contrarian states:
(1) The way the oil market is set up, even if today we found an oil field under Kansas that would supply all America's needs for the next three centuries, we'd STILL be buying oil from the Middle East and funding people who don't like us. We know this because we're an oil exporting nation NOW - we produce more oil than we use - but we're STILL buying oil from the Middle East. That's just the way the oil market is set up.
According to the US EIA, the US consumes approximately 7 billion barrels per year and produces only 2 billion. Not sure how this equals producing more oil than we use? Am I missing something?