Although they have land leases that they hold they still need a permit for drilling. That is a whole other political football arena. They cannot drill on most that land because of environmentallist arguement has prevented them from getting permits. Thats what oil companies say.
But even if they did get the permit they will hold on it because the profit from this current market is more profitable than if they were to dump oil on it.How much land did the oil company's lease from the government and not drill on yet?Why?
Maybe the land is not profitable enough. The Govenor of Alaska wants them to drill in Anwar. The whole state of Alaska wants them to drill in Anwar. The Alaska pipeline is already in place. While we play around with electric cars the chinese are set to drill in the gulf off the coast of cuba and suck our oil out from under us. The dem. congress is a dud with a 6% approval rating. we will not continue to prosper in the world with them in control.
There have to be certain variables present for drilling. If those variables are not present, then any company would waste their time on money. This question has been asked over and over again. I find it interesting you don't seem to have considered the fact that just because a company has a lease on land doesn't mean there is oil there to extract through drilling.
They have leased thousand of acres both on shore and off. I do not know why they don't drill on land but part of the reason they can not drill off shore is they do not have the resources. Oil tankers which are required to get the oil to refineries are booked solid for the next three years, and they cost about a billion dollars to buy one.
Drilling is not an issue...adequate refineries is an issue! Be sure to write in your notes the democrats are too busy trying to rebuild their party .... oil drilling is for big oil to decide on ..we live under a capitalistic type government but congress however, seems to forget they can come to the aid of John Q. Public if they want to...apparently, they don't want to.
Um, and Bill Richardson did what when he was Sec. of Energy? The answer would be nothing. And, this canard about the ENERGY companies already having millions of acres leased to drill is pure crap/err Richardson.
Try getting educated first before bloviating garbage.
It does not matter because the liberals are totally against drilling anywhere because a few deer they would rather depend on foreign oil and keep our economy screwed up!
Environmental laws block drilling on most leased land.
Ok course they want to buy the oil from other countries first so America is sure to still have some when everyone else runs out
The lease alone, does not give them the green light to develop, drill and process.
Well I'm an oil and gas landman (google it) and you are ignorant.
A Lease is contract between mineral owner, otherwise known as the lessor and a company or working interest owner, otherwise known as the lessee in which the lessor grants the lessee the right to explore, drill and produce oil, gas and other minerals for a specified primary term and as long thereafter as oil, gas or other minerals are being produced in paying quantities. This lease gives the lessee a working interest. The oil and gas lease is granted in exchange for royalty payments to the lessor.
If a well isn't drilled, AND PRODUCING in commercial quantity at the end of the primary term, the lease expires. This clause is in there because the farmer who is leasing the land wants a well drilled...he doesn't make any money off the Lease, he makes his money off the royalites. SO back around 1900 when the first leases were being cut down at Spindletop (google it) the landowners insisted on a clause that would make sure that a well got drilled. Nobody wants to be the guy who's land is leased up but doesn't have a well, while all your neighbors have wells that are draining out all the oil.
The oil company though wants to make sure that it doesn't loose a commercial well just because the lease runs out... so they added the clause ';and as long thereafter as oil, gas or other minerals are being produced in paying quantities';. That way as long as the well is working they know they won't loose it...of course if the well stops producing and they don't go in and rework it then they loose the lease and someone else can come in. There are leases up around Dallas that have been producing since the late 1930s.
So your theory about ';oil companies just sitting on land'; is BS. If the oil company did that, they would loose the lease. The Lease is designed to prevent that...and has been since about 1901....long before the government got into the leasing buisness.
Right now, the oil companies are so desperate for places to drill they are drilling horizontal wells over a mile deep under downtown Forth Worth. They are pulling natural gas out of deep shale, rpck that has almost no porosity (google it) and no permeability (google it) something that was thought impossible 10 years ago.
Go here and learn something, before you make a fool of yourself infront of the whole internet again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnett_Sha鈥?/a>
http://www.bseec.org/
http://www.thebarnettshale.com/
even tough the demand for oil has grown, keeping oil as unabundant its a way of keeping prices high.
if they drill it all know, oil would get back to 70 dollars a barrel and if they build some more refinaries, it will go back to 40.
about mcain and bush.. i dont know much.
my advice, vote republican or democrat, but make sure your candidate does not own stakes at energy sources, food , water or is a war contractor.
look what the bush family and friends have done.
No comments:
Post a Comment