They want all remaining leases.
Its not about what is good for America.. its about what is good for their bank accounts.
That is anti- american.Why are oil companies opposed to drilling on land they already have leased?
It always has been about their bank accounts, as well as the politicians who let them get away with anything they want so they can see a boost in their bank accounts.
Dont' forget, sociopaths are overrepresented in politics. Look up the traits of a sociopath, and tell me that doesn't scare the crap out of you!Why are oil companies opposed to drilling on land they already have leased?
When an oil company wins a bid for an oil lease, they have a right to drill and take core samples. The geologists look at the core samples and determine the feasibility of making a well there economically worthwhile - ie, just because they have a lease doesn't mean there is oil on the leased land. A lease is like a lottery ticket - it's a chance but no guarantee.
If, they determine oil can be recovered, then they have to do environmentals and petition the governement. Then, they have to pay the government for a lease to take the oil out.
All along the way, government red tape can interfere and drag the process out making it more costly. Real life example is Chevron and the Destin Dome.
I981 Chevron pays millions for leases in the Destin Dome to see if natural gas is there. Over time they drilled 3 wells. They found 2.6 trillion cu feet of natural gas. In 1996 Chevron submitted a plan to the state and to the federal government to take the gas out. After 2 years, Chevron was denied. Chevron appealed. Congress did nothing. In 2000 Chevron went to court to try to force action by the government. With a pending lawsuit, the government finally agreed to buy back the leases and put a moratorium on drilling in the Destin Dome. It took 20 years to learn there was enough natural gas in there, but the government didn't want to allow Chevron to take it out.
Read up on it some more. In most cases, the oil companies CAN'T get oil on the leased land. They can explore and in some cases drill to find oil, but then when they try to get approval to actually pull the oil out they get denied by the government. Then of course in some cases there isn't any oil on the leased land.
The whole ';why don't oil companies drill on the leased land they already have'; thing is one big misleading propaganda campaign. If they could get more oil, they would. More oil means more profits. They make a whole lot more on quantity of sales than they do on price itself.
THE ANSWER YOU'RE LOOKING FOR WAS ON THE ';GLEN BECK'; SHOW LAST NITE. GLEN, IS A POLITICAL COMMENTATOR AND SPOKE ON THIS WITH OTHER HOSTS.
I thought the same as you 'until' last nite!
The reasoning behind it is that the Land they've already leased has been tested and no significant amount of Oil or Gas is underneath!
It's been proven to be a Political ploy! Our Govt. makes it look like it's the Oil companies fault while they (The Govt) HOLD BACK and make the Leases more difficult and keep the OIL prices going ever HIGHER.
FYI, please check on his website Glen Beck.com!
some of the leases have questionable ammounts of oil some are in very had to get areas and are expensive to drill in.it can cost huge sums of money to drill several hundread million per hole and you dont strike oil every time.they want areas that have greater chances of hitting a big reserve before spending a few billion to develop a off shore feild.
MOST OF THE LEASED LAND DOES NOT HAVE THE RESERVES THAT OTHER AREAS HAVE . THEY WANT TO ELIMINATETHE HIGH COST OF TIME AND QUANTITY BY DRILLING IN AREAS KNOWN TO HAVE HIGH RESERVES............TELL THE DEMOCRATS TO SELL THE LEASES TO WIND FARMERS
Exploration has shown that there is no OIL, they do not drill where there is no OIL if they did they would not find any OIL.
um, there is no oil in the land they have leased is the biggest reason...makes sense to me
It's a land grab scam.
No comments:
Post a Comment