President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%↑

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
July 10, 2010 09:04 AM UTC

Drilling Jane

  • 23 Comments
  • by: TheDeminator

Can one of the republicans on the list explain to me why in the hell with the oil spill Norton is going after being the Drill all over candidate?

http://www.janenortonforcolora… has a new front page with a new video and this language

Drilling Toward Independence

“I always scratch my head when liberals say you can’t drill your way to greater energy independence. More drilling means more homegrown energy, and more homegrown energy means we’re less reliant on thugs like Chavez, Ahmadinejad, and Putin to power our homes, our cars, and our industry.”

As your US Senator, I will fight for a robust energy program in the Rocky Mountain West as part of a broader national energy program. We must:

Drill the Roan Plateau

Drill in ANWR

Expand oil, natural gas, and coal production on federal lands

Continue offshore drilling programs

Fight Cap and Trade  

Tweet
Share

Comments

23 thoughts on “Drilling Jane”

  1. Watching Norton this past week is making me feel sorry for her.  People are leaving her because of her negativity.  The right wing bloggers at PPC are killing her.  She has less cash to spend to close this out than Buck. Even she can see the train has left the station.

    She has obviously not been able to stop the bleeding in the polls and she is searching to try to stay relevant.  How many people know that at the same time Buck had DeMint in, Jane was out campaigning with Hatch? To get any mentions in the media she has to post something on facebook about something said at a Buck campaign rally.  He had about 250 people there.  Jane’s rally was not even covered.

    How the mighty have fallen.

  2. I suppose.  I can’t make any other answer work…

    The Roan is targeted by drillers for natural gas–we get natural gas from North America. NatGas is currently glutted on the market, so not only will it not reduce our demand for OIL, but it won’t do much for heating and nat gas prices either.

    We get no oil from Iran.  Drilling Roan won’t reduce our need for oil, nor will all the oil in the US match our consumption.

    ergo: Jane is as dumb as a fence post.

  3. 150,000,000 = U.S. crude oil production (barrels per year)

    550,000,000 = U.S. petroleum products consumption (barrels per year)

    20,000,000,000 = U.S. proven reserves (barrels)

    .

    Q1. By how much would the U.S. have to increase production in order to meet current U.S. demand? (Answer below)

    Q2. At the rate of production necessary to meet current U.S. demand, how long would U.S. reserves last? (Answer below)

    Q3. At what date will U.S. energy independence be reached if a Jane Norton “drill, baby, drill” policy is adopted? (The solution to this problem is left as an exercise (in futility) for the reader.)

    .

    All data from U.S. Energy Information Administration – round numbers have been used for the pleasure of obtaining “rounding errors.”

    .

    A1. Over 250%.

    A2. Less than 35 years. (Decrease this number, as necessary, if consumption of petroleum products increases.)

  4. Remember, I’m talking about oil, not natural gas.

    .

    23,000,000 = Colorado average ANNUAL oil sales (barrels)

    20,000,000 = U.S. average DAILY oil consumption (barrels)

    .

    Q1. On average, at what time on January 2 of any year has the U.S. consumed the volume of oil that will be produced in Colorado during the upcoming year? (answer below)

    Q2. By how much must oil production be increased in Colorado in order to supply U.S. demand through at least April Fools Day of any given year?

    .

    All values calculated from data available for free from the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Averages were calculated for the period 2000-09, inclusive. As before, round numbers are used in order to introduce “rounding errors.” No data was obtained from any newspaper published in any city that begins with a ‘D’.

    .

    A1. 3:57am. This is well before you are even aware that you are going to wake up with a hangover.

    A2. Come on, were you really looking for an answer? The entire premise that this is possible is ridiculous.  

    1. presume you are answering this

      Can one of the republicans on the list explain to me why in the hell with the oil spill Norton is going after being the Drill all over candidate?

      Which part of her oil/energy position does Buck disagree with?  I thought they basically agreed.

      1. From his website:

        While I am in favor of moving as quickly as is practical to new energy alternatives to replace our dependence on foreign oil, I’m not in favor of sending our country on an economic suicide mission that would come with the passage of a “cap and trade” system.

        The so-called green energy potential has to be put in perspective. We can’t meet our energy demands with windmills and solar panels and other alternatives in the near term. We may get to the point in the next decade or two, but we’re not there today. For now, we must continue to depend on our traditional sources of energy — coal, oil and especially natural gas. It means we must aggressively expand energy production in our country, including stepping up off-shore drilling and looking to nuclear power as one of our best sources for non-carbon energy.

          1. “I am in favor of moving as quickly as is practical to new energy alternatives to replace our dependence on foreign oil” or “looking to nuclear power as one of our best sources for non-carbon energy” has Norton ever agreed with?

                1. You’re saying that Buck does not favor drilling in ANWR ot the Roan, right?

                  For now, we must continue to depend on our traditional sources of energy — coal, oil and especially natural gas. It means we must aggressively expand energy production in our country, including stepping up off-shore drilling…

                  So where is it he thinks we should be aggressively drilling? Just off shore?

              1. snark uncountable infinity

                (Yes, for all you non math people, there is a countable infinity. I could also say snark aleph one, which is the cardinality of the continuum.)

            2. So eFFing Hard I Can Hardly See To Type.

              (Not that there couldn’t be others. And not that it really matters.)

              Kind of my response whenever The Beej writes something like

              logic and coherency

              when he’s achieved neither. (At least not in more than a few posts on CO Pols.)

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

172 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!