Should the US government develop oil fields in the US and not big business.

Your arguements are thoughtful, and I think I only disagree on one point that I will go over in a moment. According to the patent that Oil-tech submitted and according to the environmental impact study there is little to no environmental impact. Process Description "After shale rock has been mined, the rock is further crushed. This rock is then lifted via conveyor equipment to the top of an 80 foot building and deposited in a feeder bin setting on top of the heating column, known as a "retort". The retort heats the shale rock until the hydrocarbon vapors containing organic materials are released. These vapors are then vacuumed into a condensing unit, thereby producing raw shale oil. One ton of shale rock will typically produce between 30 and 60 gallons of shale oil compound. This oil is subjected to a process which creates two marketable products – refinery feedstock and pyridine nitrogen. Pyridine is a basic, organic, and aromatic nitrogen with many uses and markets. This may be used amongst other purposes as an asphalt additive. The pyridine makes up approximately 2% of the shale oil. The refinery feedstock has been shown to be low in sulfur content and is thus viewed as "sweet" or "light". The resulting spent shale has a large heat value that will be used as a source for heating new shale rock entering the retort. The spent shale also has residual carbon content that may be combusted to further produce energy. Finally, after all hydrocarbons are condensed, propane, which is non-condensable at atmospheric pressure, may be scrubbed, compressed, chilled and bottled as clean energy, ready for market. The spent shale has potential market value in various areas as building materials, industrial spill absorbents and for land fill. Such potential has not yet been fully investigated. Environment Impact The retort is a sealed unit, vacuum purged and environmentally friendly, with no toxic output. Propane/methane gas, the cleanest burning gas known to the energy industry, is a byproduct of the process that may either be flared off or used to support the cogeneration efforts. The raw spent shale has been tested by the State of Utah and found to be non-polluting. The State thus granted permission to store spent materials on the surface. The State is also interested in using the spent shale to fill old abandoned Gilsonite mines. Minimal water is required for the process. Unlike most other designs, the retort does not require water for its operation. The mining operations and spent shale operations will require a small amount of water for activities such as dust control and cleaning equipment." My only disagreement comes on the greenhouse gas hoax. I do believe in Global Warming, although, according to NASA the earths temp went down last year. I am not convinced that we are the cause, or more specifically, that automobiles are the cause. This is a different debate, but Stephen Hawking worked out a mathematical formula that proved that if everyone in the world stopped driving tomorrow, it would make no difference. It is possible that coal burning for electricity contributes more, but I believe this greenhouse gas thing is again, big business, global economy and global tax driven. However, As I stated, this would allow us to get off the OPEC teet in two years and give us the money to invest in cleaner technologies. Other side effects would be increased capital to the government, and a switch from a trade deficit to a trade surplus, thereby making your dollar worth $1.60 instead of $.60.