Register

Peak Oil is You


Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)


Page added on July 29, 2015

Bookmark and Share

Some U.S. senators want to start oil war with Iran

As Secretary of State John Kerry tried to sell the Iran nuclear deal to Congress Tuesday, some U.S. senators were ready to start an oil war with Iran.

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski is sponsoring a bill to lift the ban on exporting American crude oil. Send U.S. oil abroad, she argues, so America can “compete against our foes in a way that doesn’t involve sending our troops in and boots on the ground.”

In other words, let the U.S. and Iran go head to head on the world oil market.

It’s a timely debate. At a Senate Banking Committee hearing Tuesday, she asked why the U.S. would lift sanctions on Iran so it can export its oil, yet keep a ban in place on American oil exports.

Related: CNN/ORC poll: Majority wants Congress to reject Iran deal

“We’re going to let Iran go out onto the global market and engage in sales of their oil, allowing them to amass resources and wealth as a benefit of this,” Senator Murkowski of Alaska said.

How we got here: The ban on U.S. oil exports has been in place since the 1970s. It was created to keep gas prices low at home and for national security reasons. The thinking was to keep U.S. oil at home in case anything happened to prevent America from importing enough oil, especially during war time.

We should “make sure we hold the key to our energy security, rather than exporting it to the world,” New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez, a Democrat, said Tuesday.

But Murkowski called U.S. oil exports a “diplomatic tool” to pressure Iran. Currently, the U.S. only outright bans exports of crude oil, horse meat for slaughter and Western red cedar.

Iran has the fourth largest oil and gas reserves in the world, according to U.S. government estimates. One of Iran’s priorities in the nuclear deal is to have sanctions lifted so the country can export its oil freely again.

Related: Oil prices have plunged nearly 20% this month

Energy experts believe oil prices — which are near their lowest levels since the Great Recession — will fall even further if Iran can export oil again.

Little chance of change: It’s debatable what would happen to gas prices for American drivers and consumers if Murkowski’s bill passes. Global oil prices would likely fall, but U.S. prices could rise slightly.

U.S. oil producers want to export oil overseas to take advantage of higher prices abroad. The world price (known as Brent Crude) is often a few dollars higher than the domestic U.S. crude oil price, known as West Texas Intermediate.

The bill has 14 co-sponsors in the Senate, mostly from big oil and gas drilling states like North Dakota and Oklahoma, but it would be a heavy lift to get it through Congress.

“I don’t think it has a chance in 2015 or 2016,” says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst at GasBuddy.

As important as Iran is, domestic concerns matter more for most politicians.

As Republicans and Democrats position themselves for the 2016 election, they will both be courting voters in key swing states like Ohio and Pennsylvania. Those states have seen a resurgence of manufacturing and oil refineries — the very jobs that could be in jeopardy if the U.S. started exporting crude oil abroad to be refined elsewhere.

“Those are states that are going to be very pro U.S. refineries and anti lifting of the export ban,” says Kloza.

CNN



44 Comments on "Some U.S. senators want to start oil war with Iran"

  1. Jimmy on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 8:19 am 

    We’re number one! We’re number one!

    http://www.dailyimpact.net/2015/07/27/american-exceptionalism-not-the-rule-any-more/

    LOL Losers

    I wish you guys would try have a little toe-to-toe with Iran. Get your asses kicked. Again.

  2. Davy on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 8:41 am 

    Jimmy the doushebag speaks again. Jimmy dumb ass what dumb ass country are you from? Don’t you have idiots too? You must because you are one. Don’t friggen generalize Americans because of a few idiots when you do you look like one too.

  3. penury on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 8:44 am 

    Some U.S. Senators are stupid enough to agree with anything there paymasters want. And no that does not include the voters just the persons created by the SCOtUS,

  4. Makati1 on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 9:11 am 

    Jimmy, I know that the US could not even begin to beat Iran in a fight. With their losing record of, what, 5 countries in 15 years and not even a draw in ANY of their invasions, the US is a faux paper tiger. For example, after 14 years and $400,000,000,000.00+ dollars, they are about to pull the plug on the F35 that they can never get to work. A 40 year old F16 can fly rings around it in mock dogfights. We no longer have real engineers. They all retired and the new generation cannot think without a super computer.

    Yep! The US has the best stupidly insane government that corporate money can buy. What is this new sideshow called the Presidential Election supposed to cost? I read that they expect it to top $10,000,000,000.00 of corporate money. Funny, not too long ago a few million would cover it nicely. Interesting times…

  5. rockman on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 9:23 am 

    “Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski is sponsoring a bill to lift the ban on exporting American crude oil. Send U.S. oil abroad, she argues, so America can “compete against our foes in a way that doesn’t involve sending our troops in and boots on the ground.” In other words, let the U.S. and Iran go head to head on the world oil market.”

  6. Nony on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 9:37 am 

    Brent has a six dollar spread on WTI. Brent is what tracks with U.S. retail gas prices, not WTI (because refined products trade freely). Eliminate the export restrictions. Free trade is for the best for consumers and oil producers and the nation overall. Refiners are getting unfair crack spreads.

  7. Davy on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 9:49 am 

    I have to agree with you NOo if for no other reason then to shut the idiots up claiming US energy independence and US energy as a tool and a weapon. Lets let the markets work efficiently. It won’t change much anyway.

  8. Adamc18 on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 10:31 am 

    as I understand it, the US is around what, 50 or 60% self-sufficient in oil. Much of that is produced from fraccing at a cost well above it’s selling price by companies which are expected to start going bankrupt very soon. The US level of self-sufficiency will then fall. So where is the US going to obtain the oil which it will need to replace that which it exports in a price-war against Iran, which can produce oil very cheaply indeed.

    I am not an American, but would like to ask why you have politicians with such a poor grasp of reality?

  9. BobInget on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 10:39 am 

    Alaska’s Republican senator is looking at approval for Arctic drilling. She would get her wish if a either a Democrat or Republican gains the White House beginning 2017.
    Last week we imported 7.6 million barrels about 100,000 more p/d then last year at this time.
    IOW’s our import needs are increasing.

    It’s cheapest to ship oil from Alaska to Asia.
    If Alaska doesn’t develop more oil quickly,
    Alaska pipeline will need to stop pumping for dearth of cargo. Don’t kid yourselves, people
    put immediate interests before something “in the future’ (perhaps) like climate changes. The Arctic will get exploited (and ruined).

    http://www.newsweek.com/alaska-pace-worst-fire-season-ever-357814

    Most ironically Alaska is enduring more problems
    with climate changes then any lower 48 state.
    None of which will effect oil still under melting permafrost. Talk about ‘feedback’ or karma like we called it a half century ago. Fact, more people live in Alaska (736,000) then Wyoming,
    (570,000) which is why it’s so cheap for oil companies to control politics in those two great states.

  10. BobInget on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 10:54 am 

    Due to recent events in the Middle East, it’s no longer profitable to go to war at Iran.
    I believe the article refers to ‘oil wars’ not hot wars. (I believe the two are the same)

    In any case the Video clip and text is intended to further along the myth that the world is oversupplied. “I’m not a journalist, I work on TV”
    (goes double for the internet machine)

    WE are already in Hot Wars, over oil, on way too many fronts as it is. Iran would not be ‘just another’ little police action. Iran is not Yemen and yet it will be years and years eventually taking down Saudi Arabia to ‘defeat’ (kill em all)
    barefoot Yemen.

    Iran has something more powerful the nuclear weapons, oil and gas.

  11. Plantagenet on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 11:14 am 

    Obama and Kerry want the Iranians to be able to export their oil but not their fellow americans.

    There’s something kooky about that. If exporting oil to make money is good for the Iranians, then why isn’t it good for Americans too?

  12. penury on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 11:51 am 

    Plant: If exporting oil to make money is good for the Iranians, then why isn’t it good for Americans too? Read the remarks which provide actual production per day and actual utilization per day and verify which oil you would like to see Americans exporting. Fantasy is fun, but reality sucks, give up the fun for a day and try the reality its scary.

  13. ghung on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 12:02 pm 

    OK, Plant, repeat after me: “The United States is a net importer of crude oil”.

    C’mon, say it! NET IMPORTER!

  14. Plantagenet on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 12:14 pm 

    @ghung

    Its childish of you to insist that other people repeat little phrases that you’ve devised. Why not at least try to discuss the issues intelligently?

    Now lets look at the facts.

    The US is a huge place. Some areas produce more oil then they use and other regions are “net oil importers”. Dropping the US oil export ban would allow US oil producing regions to export their oil. Oil importing regions would continue to import oil from other US regions and from overseas producers.

    Get it now?

    CHEERS!

  15. Northwest Resident on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 12:17 pm 

    Plant never fails to demonstrate complete idiocy in all its glory. We owe Plant a debt of gratitude for playing the role of forum idiot here. From Plant, we learn much about the dark and moronic tendencies in human nature.

  16. Plantagenet on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 12:18 pm 

    Think about it.

    The US is a “net car importer”. Do you want to outlaw exports of US cars?

    The US is a “net shoe importer”. Do you want to outlaw exports of US made shoes?

    The US is a “net clothes importer.” Do you want to outlaw export of US-made clothes?

    etc. etc.

    Sheesh…….the lack of logic shown by people here is really disappointing.

    CHEERS!

  17. rockman on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 12:41 pm 

    NR – “Plant never fails to demonstrate complete idiocy in all its glory.”. As you know I do try not to make personal negative comments about some folks. I just like to present facts. But I would imagine it has become blatantly apparent to most that plant won’t respond to the FACT that the US is currently exporting oil at a rate on 200+ million bbls per year and is also exporting the products made from 1 BILLION BBLS OF US OIL EVERY YEAR.

    I don’t consider his position “idiocy”. I have no doubt he has a good grasp of the English language and clearly understands the DOCUMENTED DATA I’ve posted. It’s simply a willful effort to ignore FACTS and keep tossing his spin out. Simply a pure propaganda effort. And not a very clever one IMHO. Not very logical, eh? LOL.

  18. BC on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 12:54 pm 

    Export oil? 😀

    We are extracting unprofitable, lower-quality, costlier shale oil at a 5-year average price of $100/bbl vs. $47/bbl at a 5- and 9-year rate that is the fastest since 1927 and 1930, whereas US oil production per capita is down 45% since 1970 and at the level of the late 1940s.

    The shale boom/bubble has not even made a blip in the long-term, post-1970, log-linear depletion regime’s trajectory to date.

    We would be exporting unprofitable oil that we can’t afford to extract and burn at the price of production that has not allowed real final sales per capita to grow since 2007.

    The net result would be accelerating depletion per capita of our primary energy resource that we can’t afford in order to sustain the domestic economy, leaving even less per capita in reserves and net energy per capita for the future.

    That’s the definition of national energy and economic suicide by the Red Queen Race off the Seneca Cliff.

    Good grief. 🙁

  19. ghung on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 1:34 pm 

    Plant lecturing others about being childish. That’s rich in a Jerry Lewis sense. I guess he’s right. Trying to get through to him on his own level is, indeed, childish, as is expecting the village idiot to understand the difference between various manufactured goods and a critical finite commodity from which all of those goods are derived. My apologies to all.

    In this case I expect that Plant’s real concern is for his State oil-funded stipend which he needs to enjoy his utterly useless consumer lifestyle. I can fully understand that. We’re all on the oil tit; some more than others.

    Time to go plant a genet in his honor, if I can find one.

  20. Northwest Resident on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 1:51 pm 

    rockman — Yes, you definitely do set the standard very high on how to (not) deal with obnoxious and idiotic posters. I admire your ability to withhold righteous retribution where it is so richly deserved — that shows class. I can exercise restraint when needed, and in my initial back-and-forth dealings with Plant I exercised a lot of restraint. But then I decided that hey, here is a either a Koch Bros employee working to spread big fat lies, or a total and complete moron, or both. And my urge to retaliate against Plant’s special brand of stupidity (or propaganda, or both) just got the best of me, and I figured what the heck, I don’t have a professional image to uphold, so just say what I think.

    Plant is a special breed, that’s for sure. Thankfully, Darwin’s Law has insured that there are very few of Plant’s type among us.

  21. Plantagenet on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 1:58 pm 

    1. Rockman is being disengenuous. Of course I acknowledge that the US is already exporting crude and processed oil. I’ve done so many times in my posts here. I considered posting about it here, but I’d discussed it so many times before I didn’t mention it. Its really very disappointing to see such a blatant disregard for reality from someone who is normally cogent and worth reading.

    2. nrodent is being his usually dopey self. One looks in vain for anything other than trolling from nrodent.

    3. ghung thinks that demanding that others say some pat phrase that he has come up with isn’t childish, when it is exactly what children do. Its very common for three-year-olds to insist that grownups say the words the three year old wants them to say. Well, ghung, you can insist all you but and even throw a tantrum and hold your breathe and turn blue, but I’m not interested in saying little phrases that you demand I say.

    4. BC claims that exporting oil will lead to the “Seneca cliff”, i.e. rapid disappearance of all oil and a global collapse into chaos. Think about it BC—it doesn’t accelerate oil use an iota if we export oil to Japan and import oil more from KSA. Think about the math—there is no difference in oil use. Get it now?

    Really—you all need to get a grip. Oil is just a commodity used to make products like any other commodity and its products. Its not some totemic substance that we must worship and preserve in the face of all logic. Its not as though we will lose all our vital fluids if we legalize the export of oil.

    SHEESH!

    Cheers!

  22. nemteck on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 2:58 pm 

    The US is an oil importer, about 5Mbd. So, if the US is exporting oil, then they have to import more, given that the shale oil production is not increasing.

    The exporting idea is form the oil companies to get a world market price and let the consumer pay for more imports. As is say above, the congress people are mostly simpletons and are easily directed by the lobby.

  23. Plantagenet on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 3:07 pm 

    @nemtek

    If the US wants to reduce its oil use and reduce its CO2 emissions, then increasing our oil prices to match the world levels is a good thing. Higher US oil prices means less US oil consumption.

    Or you can keep on with the same policy of distorting the market to promote cheap oil in the US to maximize our oil use and boost US CO2 production, I suppose.

    —————-

    Funny how so many people who claim to oppose climate change suddenly go ballistic when the idea of exporting US oil comes up. Of course their claim to oppose global warming is a sham. What they really wind up supporting is lower US gas prices to maximize US oil consumption and US CO2 production.

    Cheers!

  24. GregT on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 3:46 pm 

    “Oil is just a commodity used to make products like any other commodity and its products.”

    As usual Planter. Not a friggin’ clue. You’re about as smart as a sack of hammers.

  25. Plantagenet on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 4:27 pm 

    @GregT

    So oil isn’t a commodity?

    Oil isn’t used to make other products?

    What is the matter with you people? Are you all incapable of understanding what you read? Or are you dumber then a sack of hammers?

  26. GregT on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 4:50 pm 

    Oil is not like any other commodity Planter. Oil is what fuels modern industrial society. No oil, no modern industrial society.

    Have you ever wondered why it is you, that is always in conflict with almost every other poster on this forum? Perhaps you should take a long hard look in a mirror. It is you that is incapable of understanding Planter. Most of the other posters on this site are intelligent and rational.

  27. apneaman on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 5:44 pm 

    Greg, you guys all settled in?

  28. Davy on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 7:48 pm 

    Greg, Planter just wants to be loved and needs attention. He just doesn’t know how to go about this. He is maladapted and everyone here knows it but him.

  29. ghung on Wed, 29th Jul 2015 8:16 pm 

    Jeez Plant, I admitted that I was being childish and apologised to all. Not sure what else I can do. [goes off to pick his nose….]

  30. rockman on Thu, 30th Jul 2015 6:39 am 

    ” Rockman is being disengenuous. Of course I acknowledge that the US is already exporting crude and processed oil.”

    So you acknowledge that the US is exporting oil and in the next breath you say the US should end its ban on oil exports.

    Thank you. I rest my case.

  31. Nony on Thu, 30th Jul 2015 8:08 am 

    1. Crude oil exports are forbidden except for minor exceptions. This is sufficient to cause a several dollar split of WTI and Brent (WTI lower), when typically WTI has been about a half dollar higher than Brent.

    2. The Austin Chalk has much bigger pores than the Eagle Ford and more accumulation in pre-existing fractures. When Petrohawk and EOG proved out completion and production of the Eagle Ford, it was a significant advance. Even the Bakken is less of a challenge since there is the middle member there that is not a shale.

  32. rdberg1957 on Thu, 30th Jul 2015 11:36 am 

    I think Plant is talking about comparative advantage. Some American oil producers have comparative advantage and can make a good profit selling their oil overseas, while others can’t. Economically it may make sense to allow export of oil by those for whom it is an advantage. The US may have comparative advantage in other commodities and will be a net exporter of those commodities. Unfortunately, the probem with that is it leaves the US (and other net exporters) more vulnerable.

  33. Boat on Thu, 30th Jul 2015 7:50 pm 

    nemteck, They just don’t get it. Oil 101

    The US is an oil importer, about 5Mbd. So, if the US is exporting oil, then they have to import more, given that the shale oil production is not increasing.
    The exporting idea is form the oil companies to get a world market price and let the consumer pay for more imports. As is say above, the congress people are mostly simpletons and are easily directed by the lobby.

    1.the US does import oil and many types of petroleulm products.
    2. The 5 billion we import used to be 12 billion so ethanol, gas , fracking etc has made big inroads. But yes we import oil.
    3. Fracking became successful, WTI had a big discount over Brent, the oil was easier and cheaper to refine. Coming environmental regulations had and has CHP tech/nat gas use on the rise for heating the oil in the refining process. In 2011 the US became a net exporter of petroleum and now net exports close to 2mbpd. Dramatic difference for 5 years.
    4. The Republicans and a few Dem’s from oil states have always been known to have sympathy for the oil lobby and do and have lobbied for decades for market prices.
    5. Congress knows exactly what their doing. But the REP’s spin machine has won the Dem’s spin machine so far.

  34. Baptised on Thu, 30th Jul 2015 11:34 pm 

    Did some people or person on this site buy a lot of fracking companies stock?

  35. Makati1 on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 12:06 am 

    Baptised, I think you hit the nail on the head with that observation. Sorta shows in the comments, who is ‘invested’ and who isn’t. When the market crashes, the ‘investors’ will wish they had stocks of necessities instead of stocks of failing companies.

  36. Apneaman on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 12:20 am 

    More priming the sheep for war and authoritarianism from one of the biggest media mouthpieces of empire – The NYT. The pace of this propaganda really seems to be picking up lately. There is a whole smorgasbord of terror stories over there at the NYT. Shouldn’t be too much longer.

    Her Majesty’s Jihadists

    More British Muslims have joined Islamist militant groups than serve in the country’s armed forces. How to understand the pull of jihad.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/19/magazine/her-majestys-jihadists.html?_r=1

  37. GregT on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 2:22 am 

    “Greg, you guys all settled in?”

    Thanks for asking Apnea. My to do list is about a year long. The move went well and we are settled in. Quite the change. I can’t believe how quiet it is here, and the stars at night are unbelievable. I was in pretty good shape before, so I thought, but I’ve lost three belt sizes in 4 weeks. Haven’t worked so hard in years. Loving every minute of it. Should have opted out of the insane asylum a long, long, time ago.

  38. Davy on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 6:01 am 

    Greg, the stars in the sky are priceless. I have big sky and stars here at the farm. That is something you don’t get in the city. Good luck getting settled. I just sold my house in Hermann, MO and now full time at the farm. My wife moved out of here place in St Louis and is now full time on the farm. I know how the moving hurts. I am so done with moving. It started in April with the wife and my place in June. It feels good downsizing and consolidating for the coming descent. Keep us informed on your new life and its effects on you.

  39. GregT on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 11:55 am 

    Ya Davy. Moving sucks big time. Glad that part is over with.

    I had some mixed feelings before about the change in lifestyle, but now that we’re here, I couldn’t be more content. No regrets.

    The first night I stayed up late to check out the stars. There are so many that I had problems finding the constellations. The milky way itself is brighter than the stars were back in the city. I can see the Andromeda galaxy with my naked eye. Truly amazing. I picked up a 10 inch Cassegrain telescope before we left the city. I’m looking forward to the winter skies. I know them much better than the summer ones.

    I also can’t get over how peaceful it is. My ears are literally ringing from many decades of noise pollution. I can hear things that I’ve never heard before, like the sound of birds feathers in the wind. I can hear a car from about a half a mile away. They are incredibly loud. Four weeks ago I was surrounded by hundreds of thousands of them. It’s no wonder that people go bat shit crazy in the cities, and they don’t even know it. Human beings were never meant to live like that.

    Our water here is incredible. No chemicals at all. I didn’t notice it much before, but when we went back for the last load of stuff two weeks ago, I had a shower at the daughter’s place. The water absolutely stinks of chlorine.

    Until next year when we have time to get our gardens planted, we will be buying our produce from some of the local farmers down the road. No comparison at all with the stuff we used to get in the “super” markets. Even the meat here is mostly locally grown.

    I have so much to do, and I’m my own boss. I’m finding myself bouncing back and forth between jobs, and I’m getting stuff done. Working for myself gives me a real sense of accomplishment. No need to go to the gym after “work”, and my commute is now on foot. 🙂

    Yup, should have pulled the plug a long time ago.

  40. ghung on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 1:01 pm 

    GregT- Congrats on the move! You say: “I have so much to do, and I’m my own boss. I’m finding myself bouncing back and forth between jobs, and I’m getting stuff done.”

    I know that state of being well. My city friends (the ones I have left) always ask; “…what do you do out here?” Jeez. Over time I’ve developed a sense of balancing urgency with patience.

    I’ve been going full speed ahead the last couple of months getting our big high tunnel (greenhouse) finished, and the government dudes came out Wednesday to inspect. Passed with many cudos (“best we’ve seen; very innovative”). I got the full grant and then some; they threw in a few hundred extra dollars for my soil and water conservation efforts (stuff I’ve been doing all along; no sense sending my good soil downstream). My wife took the day off yesterday and we drove over to the next town to hand-deliver the final paperwork, had a nice lunch, visited friends, and, of course, did some shopping, mainly more stuff for the greenhouse. My wife pleaded to me to take a couple of days off for rest,, but…..

    Today I’m installing gable-vent fans, solar direct, since it gets really hot in there even with the sides and end doors rolled up, but the plants are loving it. I’ve been trying to figure out where/how to mount the PV panel (an old Siemens 75 watter in its 21st year of operation) and it came to me: Just set the panel in the cross-braces inside the high tunnel. Working like a charm. I guess the panel likes the diffused light coming through the plastic roof. I set it in the north end to avoid shading any plants and mounted the temperature switch directly to the panel, ran the wires and PRESTO! PV-direct vent fans (still have to build/install the ‘windows’ to close the vent openings. They’ll be operated by passive solar piston actuators (cheap on Ebay).

    Anyway, as I’ve mentioned before, any of you in the US with a bit of property and the desire/need, this grant is available through the Agriculture Dept. “EQUIP” program via the soil and water conservation branch. Not very hard to get; pays for everything. The primary catch is that you have to grow something in it for four years, not necessarily for sale.

    I realise that this isn’t “degrowth” in any sense (countering big ag perhaps), but I plan to continue to leverage certain industrial age technologies to build some local resiliency, self sufficiency, etc. to ease the descent into general collapse. I’ll leave it to others to decide whether or not these qualify as ‘appropriate technologies’.

  41. Davy on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 1:19 pm 

    G-man, another copy and paste for my prep notes thanks for the info.

    I had a visit yesterday from the soil and water people. My grant has been approved for management intensive grazing improvements. This includes watering system, interior electric fencing, fence charging system, and cattle/goat handling area. 70% cost share on $15,000 project. Not bad for a country boy.

  42. ghung on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 2:27 pm 

    Davy; that’s my next project. Got to get goats first and make sure they can get into the creeks and erode the banks; all that. Then they’ll qualify us for the program, at least that’s how they explained it to me 😉

    My parents did all of that in the late 80’s and I’ve been collecting all of the abandoned fencing, posts and hardware from my siblings’ shares. The high-tension electric fencing (12.5 gauge with springs and ratchets) is great stuff, especially if you learn to build your anchor H-posts, etc. correctly. Strong stuff. I’ve run the tractor into it full speed and it usually doesn’t break the fence, just pulls a few posts out.

    I build so I can loosen the fence and mow under it. Also, add a switch to the lower hot wire and the livestock will keep it clean if you turn that bottom strand off occasionally. Not sure how they know if the bottom wire is hot or not. Maybe they can sense it, or they draw straws to see who gets first try. We use the PEL superchargers that’ll light your ass up if you mistakenly piss on the fence (did that once, in bare feet!). Even the bears won’t mess with it.

    Deer go right over the top. We have a healthy deer population and I like to give them free access except to the garden areas. Helps keep the freezer full in fall and winter.

    As for watering, I still have the old freeze-proof ball waterers. Anybody know if goats will use them (they have floating balls in sockets that the cattle push down to get water)?

  43. Davy on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 9:05 pm 

    G, doing Stafix energizer 12 joules dc or ac with remote. Pasture pro composite posts with 12.5 gauge wire. I am going to use a flood gate controller for bottom wire. The fence will need to be 5 wire for goats. I am doing all kinds of different bracing. I use well pipe welded into H braces and T post braces depending on locations. The waterer I am using http://www.cobett.com/. Goats will manage with ball waterers if they are not too high off the ground. I am putting a 2.5 HP well pump in the center well that was once an irrigation well in the 50’s. I have two other wells that are half hp. The 2.5 hp pump will be for expansion on other acreage. I am also looking at a solar DC pump I can put in the lake if we have power failure. There will be a total of 5 water stations and 8 paddocks. Just bought a 16 ft goose neck stock trailer to go with my 1 ton Dodge dually. There will be 15 cow calf pairs with 15 goats on this 60 acre site on our 400 acre farm. The goats are for weed and brush management and the cows will manage the grass. As far as doom and prep the goats would make a meal and a cow a season of meat. Both cows and goats of course could be sold or bartered.

  44. farmlad on Fri, 31st Jul 2015 10:26 pm 

    Davy, good to hear, things keep coming together for you .

    Have you checked into hair sheep instead of goats? From experience, I can say that hair sheep can handle being outside in rain and cold way better than the goats, no horns to deal with, love brush and weeds, though not quite as well like the goats. but then again its hard to beat some goat fresh of the grill.

    Them cows have got to cost a fortune these days. Are they a smaller framed cow, suited to thriving on grass alone?

    I know its none of my business, but by managing your grass, in your area you could possibly graze all year and only keep some hay to use in emergencies.

    Grassfarmer Magazine is loaded with inspiration, and the grassfed conference will be held here in Michigan this year http://www.grassfedexchange.com/.

    I understand, most of these guys are cornies but the knowledge they possess is crucial to any hope for humans post BAU.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *