Do you know that if we drill for oil in the US restricted areas

That the oil we receive from that would take at least 10 years to develop and then the oil would be placed on the world market for world consumption. This would not lower the gas cost very much because the amount of oil we would get from offshore drilling would only be a very small fraction of the amount of oil needed to significantly reduce cost. Source: Department of Energy finding last year that stated what the effect of domestic drilling would be on the world market.Do you know that if we drill for oil in the US restricted areas
This is a heated debate, so I decided to do some of my own research. All of this information came from the U.S. Department of Energy website. There is estimated to be as many as 18 billion barrels of oil in the outer continental shelf banned areas 4.3 billion barrels of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) = 22.3 billion barrels of oil, now divide that by the 20.7 million barrels of oil we consume a day and you get 2.95 years of oil. That is the BEST CASE scenario people.





All of this fighting for three years worth of oil. Is it really bad to protect the last pristine habitat on the continent (ANWR) if we can only get a fifteen month supply from it? Do you think maybe we should unbury our heads from the sand and admit we have a problem that drilling won't solve?Do you know that if we drill for oil in the US restricted areas
Your logic is flawed in several ways: One any increase in supply will lower the prices. Oil has fallen over 20$ a barrel and the price at the pump has fallen over 60 cents in some areas and this is just because Bush lifted the ban. Imgine what it will do if Congress does the same.


Second point is this. The govt wants to pay for all these social services and programs and makes more off of a barrel of oil than the BIG BAD OIL COMPANIES so if we allow drilling imagine the tax benefits to the govt that you put so much stock in? You also forgot to mention the Montana, ND and SD oil fields and the shale oil in the Rocky Mountins which total over 1 trillion barrels of oil enough for at least a century which could give us the time to actually impliment your precious alternative energies and give us time to study their environmental impact.
Under that logic, we should immediately STOP any drilling we ARE doing, since it doesn't do any good anyway. This demonstrates the ignorance behind the original question.





The US buys and sells on the world market. We import more than we export. But it's all one market.





Also, estimates are that much of the oil from Alaska could be flowing in as little as three years. And the market responds to anticipated increases in supply, bringing prices down.
We have lots of oil in the ground in the U.S.. The Big Oil companies have leases on 68,000,000 acres of land (33,000,000 are off-shore) but they are not drilling on it. I am waiting to see how the oil boys protest if Congress pursues the ';use it or lose it'; Bill to force them to drill or give up the leases. It will also be interesting since most places the oil people want off-shore drilling rights are States with Republican Governors who say they want to okay drilling, but, ';not in my State';. The reduction in the fine for the last big oil spill will not get any points for getting approval either.
I do not understand the logic behind your argument. SO WHAT if it takes 10 years to reap the benefits of starting to drill in ANWR? Why did you go to school for 12 years (I assume you graduated, LOL)? Did you expect to be making money in first grade from your education? In other words, you (or at least your parents) knew that an education was important for your LONG-TERM success. The same is true for becoming more energy independent. No one has a crystal ball. We don't know what the world market will be like in 10 years. Odds are... if anything... it will be worse... not better. So why wouldn't we want to invest in our future by making ourselves more independent? And I challenge that we won't see a financial benefit before then... if nothing else because the oil cartels will respond to the fact that they are not going to be the only game in town.





So, if you think anything you have written in any way negates the importance of drilling in ANWR or off-shore... you are quite mistaken.
If the numbers being thrown around above are reasonably accurate, we are talking about $2.7 trillion dollars worth of oil at todays prices. ($120.00 per barrel)





Whether we sell it on the world market or use it our selves, that's a nice reduction in our trade deficit, along with a lot of other economic benifits. If we build the refinery capacity to refine it our selves, the numbers go through the roof. It's dumb not to do this.
I do know it would become part of the world market and could increase world supply dramatically thus lowering prices for oil. As for the 10 years to develop and produce oil, that is a fallacy perpetrated by anti-drilling extremists, we would likely see results within two years..





We also are projected to have more oil available in the US, from all sources, than the entire Middle East..
It would not take ten years to recover the oil, although I agree it would be sold on the world market.





When it is said to be ';only a three year supply'; that means that if we used the recovered oil solely for America and didn't buy any foriegn oil during that time the supply would meet our current demands for three years. It is a very mis-leading statement becuase that is NOT what would happen.
You've been listening to Obama. the fact is, according to e.i.a, the u.s. has 216 billion of barrels of proven oil reserves, Saudi Arabia has 263. Some oil can be gotten much faster than 10 years because the infrastructure is already there. There is a bill that includes streamlining how environmental groups fight oil companies. They have been able to sue them for individual cases and that can take years. The new bill would require them to combine all cases.


But the most important reason to drill is because in 10 years we will still need oil and I would prefer it was U.S. oil.





It is completely false that the oil companies don't use their leases. There are 4,000 rigs is the western Gulf now. The other leased area is in the process or is being explored and the areas that don't contain enough oil are returned to the government. That is mandatory and has always been the way it's done.
When the information doesn't come out of Sean Hannity's or Rush Limbaugh's mouth, then it can't be true according to mass of republican voters. When a report is done by the Energy administration (a branch of the government) showing that drilling wont have an impact until 2030.....these repugs will not believe it until its mentioned on Fox news or on right wing radio. They have to hear it from their corporate masters who they so dutifully obey.
You are very wrong. If we tapped all of our options, the US could sustain itself for over 200 years. Prices would go down immediately. Speculators look toward the furture for oil supply. Prices went down as soon as Bush talked about oil exploration.





Also, it may be part of the world market, but it would only help our economy. Billions of dollars would stay within our borders other than going to the middle east.
You are wrong on every count. Looks like your only news source in Yahoo answers.





We could get more oil into the market in less than five years. Congress could restrict exports of this oil like they did with oil from the Alaska pipeline. It would lower costs by reducing the decline in the dollar, increasing worldwide oil supply, reducing the impact of speculators.
I don't understand that argument at all.





1. If it is going to take ten years, we should start as soon as possible.





2. If I save for my retirement, I won't see any benefit for another 20 years, so should I not bother ?





3. More supply will lower pricing.





4. We aren't going to need oil in 10 years ?
Yes most people realize that, the problem is that to explain that takes more than 6 words, so it can be hard for people to understand.





';Drill here drill now pay less'; is well recieved in our sound bite culture, even though it's total lie.
Propaganda! It can be up and running in a yr!





Besides becoming part of the world market will lower prices everywhere not just here.
that's true





the most optimistic estimate I've seen is a reduction in price of 0.25 per gallon.


and that would be short term !





but most say it would be far less, under ten cents per gallon.
only a tree hugger would want to leave $450 BILLION DOLLARS in the ground, just so we dont scare a couple of caribou in anwr. We can use the oil, we can use the money
Yes.


Did you know that doing nothing results in no new oil coming to market?
so what? lets do it anyways and find out cheif.
maybe %26amp; you radical tree huggin libs said the same thing 10yrs ago, so just where are we right now 10 yrs later?
You are correct. The oil would reach the market in about 10 years and maybe affect the price by .03 to .04 cents. Also, there are currently 817 open leases on about 68 million acres for the oil companies to drill, and they are only actively drilling on about 120 - so the whole thing about off shore drilling is a game. All we would do is add another 100 leases to the 700 that currently exist and are not drilling on.


The oil companies are posting record profits and not spending ANYTHING on future oil exploration and discovery.


The entire thing is rigged - its all inflated due to speculation - the same thing that bankrupted ENRON, that is where we need to start for the immediate adjustment of prices, then reduce the demand by alternative fules sources. That is THE ONLY way we as consumers get any relief. The whole off shore drilling line is a political game and tool.





**Edit: Ned S - Exactly! What does that tell you that Bush doing little more than a cermonial act and it lowered the price - Outlaw speculation write congressmen and senators and have them stop the speculation - start there and don't put all of your eggs in the ';offshore drillling basket'; that is all people are saying - simply drilling offshore does not fix the problem. The problem is only fixed when we no longer need to rely so heavily on oil - alternative fuel sources is the only thing that truly fixes the problem, everything else is just a band aid.