Mainland Resources, Inc.(fka MNLU)

[Ecomike]

When we look inward in an isolationist perspective, and suggest drilling our way out of the problem locally as the ONLY solution, we ignore the reality of global economics. If we became self sufficient in oil, but let the rest of the world suck eggs so to speak, the rest of the world, like China and Japan, two of our major trading partners in the now global economy, could still suffer huge economic hits if the international commodity markets for something as important as oil was left in the total control of countries like IRAN. The cost of items we import, are tied to the world cost of oil, not just the local cost of oil. So if we did not use our super power status to do all we can to stabilize world governments and economies and thus prices and supplies, yes we might become self sufficient with our oil for a short while, but rest assure run away inflation would result as oil and products of the oil economy skyrocketed. World wide and local Economics is no where near as simple as your personal check book.

Here is an interesting news bit this morning:

Cheap natural gas looms over new US nuclear projects
BY Reuters
— 8:09 PM ET 06/21/2011

* Cheap natural gas seen as a roadblock to nuclear growth
* Regulatory risk also seen after Fukushima-S&P analyst
* "Ledge that nuclear is operating on is not that wide"
* All eyes on whether first two plants are on budget
By Roberta Rampton
WASHINGTON, June 21 (Reuters) - Japan's ruined Fukushima
Daiichi nuclear plant may slow the expansion of the U.S.
nuclear industry, but cheap and abundant supplies of natural
gas are a far bigger roadblock to financing new reactors, a
Wall Street panel said on Tuesday.
Financiers and investors are watching to see how much U.S.
nuclear plant costs are raised after a U.S. regulatory review
of the Japanese disaster, one of several challenges to nuclear
growth described at a conference of utilities, manufacturers
and suppliers in Washington.
"On top of that speed bump, you have the tire-slashing
metal spikes of gas," said Richard Cortright, a managing
director in Standard & Poor's utilities ratings group,
referring to cheap domestic natural gas, an attractive power
source for a new generation of electrical plants.
"I think that unless you have self-inflatable tires, it's
going to be a little while before nuclear gets back on the
radar screen," Cortright said.
S&P has a "stable outlook" rating on the utility industry,
but the sector is weaker than it was during the 1970s and
1980s, the last time it replaced aging power infrastructure.
"It's more like a BBB industry -- just two notches above
junk, is one way to look at it," Cortright said.
"Things happen very quickly, and if things were to go
wrong, the ledge that nuclear is operating on is not that wide.
It's not as wide as it used to be," he told the conference.
ALL EYES ON FIRST TWO PLANTS
The U.S. nuclear industry had huge plans for growth before
Fukushima hit, with more than 20 applications submitted to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission for new projects -- the first big
build in more than 30 years.
That optimism was overplayed, said Bruce Lacy, a consultant
who each year interviews more than 40 banks, institutional
investors and funds to gather research for his clients.
"If we were talking about much smaller numbers, we'd look a
lot smarter," Lacy told reporters, noting he is hopeful four
new plants will be built.
Wall Street is most concerned about the risk of massive
nuclear projects running over budget, and also ranks public
policy and regulatory risk near the top, Lacy said.
Investors are closely watching projects that could get
regulatory approval to proceed by early next year -- Southern
Co's Vogtle plant in Georgia and SCANA Corp's plant in South Carolina.
"This is an industry that absolutely needs to focus on the
success of two projects in the United States: Vogtle and
SCANA " Lacy told the conference.
"They want to see it succeed before they put significant
money at risk," he said.
(Editing by Carol Bishopric)