Christ, I am so tired of seeing people expressing their opinions about this subject when they haven't a clue what they're talking about.
First, we are drilling in America, and have been for a long time. Second, there are thousands of acres of oil leases that are available, right now, in which there is no drilling occurring. Third, if we started drilling tomorrow in the areas that are in dispute, the amount of oil we're talking about, compared with world production, would make very little difference in the price of oil.
The main reason for the recent large and rapid increase in the price of oil, and by extension everything made from oil or which depends upon oil, is twofold: speculation and the declining value of the dollar. Speculation can drive the price of any commodity through the roof, out of all proportion to real value. We saw this in the housing price bubble that grew over the last several years and recently burst. We also saw this in the Dutch tulip bulb price bubble of the 16th Century (no, I am not making this up). Tulip bulbs, for Pete's sake!
The second reason, the declining value of the dollar, is a reason often overlooked. Oil is priced on the world market based on the dollar, so if the value of the dollar declines then the price of everything valued in dollars goes up, even if supply and demand stay the same. One of main reasons for the decline in the value of the dollar is the massive debt the US has racked up over the last few years trying to finance its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, after cutting taxes, by borrowing heavily from other countries, especially China. There is an advantage to devaluing your currency when you owe a lot of money, but there are ramifications here that extend beyond the debt issue, e.g., the rise in oil prices.
Let me be very clear: all this talk about how the US should drill in all these protected areas is nothing but political smoke and mirrors. It would take years to get any oil out of these areas, so it would have no impact on gasoline prices for a long time to come, and even then the impact would be negligible.
Look, the world is not going to wean itself off oil any time soon, but thinking that the solution is to drill in ever more inaccessble locations, or extract ever more difficult forms of oil (tar oils, shale oils) is misguided. We need to develop more fuel-efficient cars in the short term, but ultimately we need to develop better forms of energy.
One good thing about this current hoohah over oil and gasoline prices is that people now have the economic incentive to do both of the above. Remember, although petroleum has been in the ground for millions of years (or thousands, depending on your religious beliefs), the oil business as we know it didn't exist even 150 years ago. It began as a reaction to the rise in the price of whale oil as whales became scarcer. Economics drove technological innovation back then, and economics will drive it now.If oil dropped to 40 dollars a barrel do you think we should still drill in America?
Not that it will ever go below $100 again, but yes we should still drill to reduce dependence on foreign oil until we can develop all of the alternatives. And if we are off oil before we need what we're drilling, we can sell it to other oil dependent countries and be rich like OPEC.
I'm really tired of seeing the liberals rant about how everyone who wants to drill is an idiot and give a ridiculous list of reasons to justify their crusade against oil. Over 75% of Americans agree we should drill everywhere it's available.If oil dropped to 40 dollars a barrel do you think we should still drill in America?
Absolutely. The oil in the middle east won't last forever, so we need to explore all other possible sources of oil. Besides, our dependency on oil, be it foreign or domestic, won't go away anytime soon. We're still 50, if not 100 years away from having vehicles that can travel cross-country that aren't fully dependent on oil. The jet fuel that powers our planes comes from oil. And ethanol isn't a magic bullet, all it will do is raise the price of corn which will raise our food costs. We need all the oil we can get to get us through to the time where we no longer need it, and it sure as hell won't be in my lifetime, and probably not in my daughters either.
Yes. We should do all we can to be less dependent on the middle east for oil. Trying to create alternative energy solutions is fine. But that could take many years to figure out. So we should get oil that we have around our country while it's still there. China is getting exploration leases in the Gulf of Mexico. So they could start drilling there in the future if they want to. Why should we let someone else get the oil if it's there?
Drilling should be authorised regardless of price
The oil companies will drill when and where it is allowed and it is profitable. At 40 dollars a bbl, it isn't worth drilling in some places.
No, but it isn't $40 so we do need to drill more. We need to not rely on countries that don't like us for energy. We need to do whatever it takes to reduce that dependence.
I think we should drill here in any event, I think if we tap our own resources, stop buying from the middle east and become a self dependent country our economy would thrive and we would no longer be at the mercy of the middle east
oil will never drop that low, but if it did we should definitely drill because it'll just go back up again. if we had drilled in the u.s. 10 years ago we wouldn't be in this mess today.
Yes, the more oil, the better.
If we did drill when it was $40 then we may not be in the situation we are in now.
I highly doubt it'll happen so its better not to think about it.
Yes
no we shouldn't.
yes...i am tired of dishing out our money to other country's for stuff we can get right here at home
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Where are we looking to drill for oil in the US?
oil in the US?Where are we looking to drill for oil in the US?
The companies that find, extract, refine and deliver the petroleum products (not just gas and diesel) so vital to our economy aim to explore the outer continental shelf on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, reinvigorate drilling off the coast of California (like Santa Barbara), add capacity in the Montana/Dakota Bakken formation and expand recovery of shale oil the upper west.
I've added a link to a news story on the Bakken formation below.
By most estimates, the US is sitting on 2 trillion (that's 2,000,000,000,000) barrels of oil reserves. I would agree that we need to move towards renewable non-petroleum energy, but we should be using these resources together with nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, solar, etc. to carry us through to the day when we can leave petroleum based energy behind.
In closing might I suggest that the reason oil companies are not keen to drill on the 68 million acres of currently leased land is because there is little evidence to suggest the presence of oil and gas??Where are we looking to drill for oil in the US?
We aren't really looking to drill. This is a political game. We consume 25% of the world's oil and we have 3% of the world's proven reserves. Drill her, drill now is a joke. We could drill every drop we have and it wouldn't make a significant impact. It might make more sense to hold on to those reserves. The only sensible answer to our energy problems is to develop and use alternative energy sources. This will allow us more petroleum for the energy needs where we really need to use petroleum.
What we should do is allocate an amount equal to the fiasco, or to use Dick Cheney's word, quagmire, in Iraq to alternative energy and we would be looking good.
The oil companies have 68,000,000 acres under lease to drill. 33,000,000 of these are offshore. Problem is, they just want more leases without using the ones thay already have.
offshore and ANWR
The companies that find, extract, refine and deliver the petroleum products (not just gas and diesel) so vital to our economy aim to explore the outer continental shelf on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, reinvigorate drilling off the coast of California (like Santa Barbara), add capacity in the Montana/Dakota Bakken formation and expand recovery of shale oil the upper west.
I've added a link to a news story on the Bakken formation below.
By most estimates, the US is sitting on 2 trillion (that's 2,000,000,000,000) barrels of oil reserves. I would agree that we need to move towards renewable non-petroleum energy, but we should be using these resources together with nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, solar, etc. to carry us through to the day when we can leave petroleum based energy behind.
In closing might I suggest that the reason oil companies are not keen to drill on the 68 million acres of currently leased land is because there is little evidence to suggest the presence of oil and gas??Where are we looking to drill for oil in the US?
We aren't really looking to drill. This is a political game. We consume 25% of the world's oil and we have 3% of the world's proven reserves. Drill her, drill now is a joke. We could drill every drop we have and it wouldn't make a significant impact. It might make more sense to hold on to those reserves. The only sensible answer to our energy problems is to develop and use alternative energy sources. This will allow us more petroleum for the energy needs where we really need to use petroleum.
What we should do is allocate an amount equal to the fiasco, or to use Dick Cheney's word, quagmire, in Iraq to alternative energy and we would be looking good.
The oil companies have 68,000,000 acres under lease to drill. 33,000,000 of these are offshore. Problem is, they just want more leases without using the ones thay already have.
offshore and ANWR
Should we drill for oil at ANWR or leave it alone to perserve the refuge?
of course we should drill there, i cant believe so many people are brainwashed into thinking that it is a good thing to leave it alone and that if we drill there, the whole place will be ruined.
we need to get off our addiction to oil, but as long as we dont accomplish that, we should drill everywhere, including off all of our coasts and in our national parks.
and we need to put up a lot more windmills.Should we drill for oil at ANWR or leave it alone to perserve the refuge?
I'm a bit ambivalent on the subject. I earn a living as an exploration geologist, and have worked the North Slope of Alaska in the past. I actually spend time working in wilderness areas and value them probably much more than most people, yet I don't think ANWR should be ignored forever. However, that oil has been there since the Cretaceous, so what's a few more decades?
I think that most of the people who object to drilling in ANWR are hypocrites. They all want to drive SUV's and they waste energy like it was water or air, but they think they should protect something they know nothing about (ANWR) from something else they know nothing about (oil drilling), because it seems politically popular. People listen to emotional appeals from organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council that has been known to promote causes for their own profit
(see: http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/Issues/20鈥?/a>
They have no idea that most of the common everyday products they consume are made from oil either as a raw material or energy source. Yet most people don鈥檛 want to change their lifestyle in order to make it possible to ignore oil reserves such as ANWR. For the record, I ride a bicycle to work and haven't bought a tank of gasoline in four months now.
The absurdity of protecting ANWR, from my point of view, is that it will necessitate drilling somewhere else in the world that is just as environmentally sensitive and precious. Would we rather buy Russian oil when we know the Russians are willing to let a pipeline leak oil creating a major spill, leaking for an entire winter onto Arctic ice because they aren't willing to fix it? Would we rather have Nigerian oil where the pipelines are cut into by thieves, causing uncounted spills and fires, severely impacting the local villages? Or would we rather strip-mine all of Northern Canada for tar sand? Maybe people would prefer to drill off the coast of California and Florida? As long as we keep burning oil, it has to come from somewhere, and so far no alternative fuels have the potential to completely replace oil.
I've seen lakes covered with foot-deep oil in some former communist countries; oil that was leaking from poorly maintained government-owned wells. This is the alternative that we are making inevitable when we refuse to use our own resources in a responsible manner. The Alaska North Slope has always been, in my opinion, one of the more environmentally conscious and responsible oil installations in the world (the Exxon Valdez being a major exception), probably because of the original controversy of the Alaska Pipeline. In my opinion there is likely to be more environmental damage caused by NOT drilling in ANWR than there is if it is drilled by responsible, highly-regulated companies. Withholding ANWR from oil production is not going to cause the suburban SUV drivers to buy hybrids.
It will be likely to take ten years or more to produce the first oil. This is because oil companies can only do seismic exploration and drilling during the dark Alaskan winter, when the ground is frozen and they can build ice-roads for equipment. In summer the tundra thaws and cannot be crossed. Alaskan oil generally supplies the west coast of the US, which is not supplied by pipelines from the Gulf of Mexico, so it tends to have its own oil market and pays higher prices than the rest of the US for this reason. The other major supplies to the West Coast US might be projects like Sakhalin in Russia, but more than likely the Koreans, Japanese, or even the Chinese will buy that oil before it is available to the US. The US West Coast will need the additional oil in a decade much more than it does now, and I think the people who object to ANWR drilling are failing to think about future need in the proper time frame. California is still the third largest oil-producing state in the US, but that is probably declining, as is production from Prudhoe Bay and other Alaska reservoirs.
There are ways to limit the footprint of oil installations. Directional drilling has become a commonplace technique that allows many wells to be drilled in many directions from the same small well pad. I think some companies have even considered directional drilling ANWR from offshore, although in the Arctic this is incredibly difficult. If the right controls are placed on the drilling and seismic (for example the Federal Government should make the seismic survey data public property so that it only has to be done once), I think drilling in ANWR can be done with minimal impact.
The other thing that always escapes this discussion because most people know so little about it, is that the NPRA, (the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, formerly the Naval Petroleum Reserve #4), is open for drilling. The NPRA lies to the west of Prudhoe Bay, while ANWR lies to the east. Oil companies have had an active interest in the NPRA and have been exploring new areas there in recent years. I鈥檝e never understood the logic of the environmentalists who are so adamantly opposed to ANWR drilling that never mention NPRA, which is probably even larger an area of the North Slope than ANWR. The USGS assessment of the petroleum potential of NPRA is about equal to that of ANWR in volume.
Another factor that few people outside of Alaska consider is that oil royalties are a major source of income for both the state of Alaska and the US Federal government. Alaska earned $3.5 billion dollars off of oil revenue last year. The government鈥檚 share of oil revenue in Alaska is about 60% of the total, according to the Governor of Alaska.
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/061鈥?/a>
Not only would not drilling in ANWR cost the state of Alaska and the Federal government a possible income of many billions of dollars, it would add about $700 billion dollars to a growing US Trade Deficit, due to increased need to import foreign oil. I鈥檓 basing that calculation on a $70 barrel of oil, which may be a conservative price for oil in a decade.
I think we will eventually be forced to drill for oil in ANWR. Either it starts now, or twenty years from now. Either way it is probably inevitable.
To learn about the NPRA go to:
http://energy.usgs.gov/npra.html
The USGS assessment of ANWR is at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/Should we drill for oil at ANWR or leave it alone to perserve the refuge?
Leave it alone i believe. It's time to get off the oil bandwagon.
Sign this petition to protect ANWR.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeactio鈥?/a>
ANWR is a deserted wasteland and the only reason we don't drill there is a marxist plot to hamstring our economy.
Drill because we need oil for many more reason than just gas for are cars. Lots of things we use everyday is made from oil. Plus we have millions of barrels of oil. We use ours and no one else. Than watch the price of oil drop. We depend on the middle east to much
we need to get off our addiction to oil, but as long as we dont accomplish that, we should drill everywhere, including off all of our coasts and in our national parks.
and we need to put up a lot more windmills.Should we drill for oil at ANWR or leave it alone to perserve the refuge?
I'm a bit ambivalent on the subject. I earn a living as an exploration geologist, and have worked the North Slope of Alaska in the past. I actually spend time working in wilderness areas and value them probably much more than most people, yet I don't think ANWR should be ignored forever. However, that oil has been there since the Cretaceous, so what's a few more decades?
I think that most of the people who object to drilling in ANWR are hypocrites. They all want to drive SUV's and they waste energy like it was water or air, but they think they should protect something they know nothing about (ANWR) from something else they know nothing about (oil drilling), because it seems politically popular. People listen to emotional appeals from organizations such as the Natural Resources Defense Council that has been known to promote causes for their own profit
(see: http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/Issues/20鈥?/a>
They have no idea that most of the common everyday products they consume are made from oil either as a raw material or energy source. Yet most people don鈥檛 want to change their lifestyle in order to make it possible to ignore oil reserves such as ANWR. For the record, I ride a bicycle to work and haven't bought a tank of gasoline in four months now.
The absurdity of protecting ANWR, from my point of view, is that it will necessitate drilling somewhere else in the world that is just as environmentally sensitive and precious. Would we rather buy Russian oil when we know the Russians are willing to let a pipeline leak oil creating a major spill, leaking for an entire winter onto Arctic ice because they aren't willing to fix it? Would we rather have Nigerian oil where the pipelines are cut into by thieves, causing uncounted spills and fires, severely impacting the local villages? Or would we rather strip-mine all of Northern Canada for tar sand? Maybe people would prefer to drill off the coast of California and Florida? As long as we keep burning oil, it has to come from somewhere, and so far no alternative fuels have the potential to completely replace oil.
I've seen lakes covered with foot-deep oil in some former communist countries; oil that was leaking from poorly maintained government-owned wells. This is the alternative that we are making inevitable when we refuse to use our own resources in a responsible manner. The Alaska North Slope has always been, in my opinion, one of the more environmentally conscious and responsible oil installations in the world (the Exxon Valdez being a major exception), probably because of the original controversy of the Alaska Pipeline. In my opinion there is likely to be more environmental damage caused by NOT drilling in ANWR than there is if it is drilled by responsible, highly-regulated companies. Withholding ANWR from oil production is not going to cause the suburban SUV drivers to buy hybrids.
It will be likely to take ten years or more to produce the first oil. This is because oil companies can only do seismic exploration and drilling during the dark Alaskan winter, when the ground is frozen and they can build ice-roads for equipment. In summer the tundra thaws and cannot be crossed. Alaskan oil generally supplies the west coast of the US, which is not supplied by pipelines from the Gulf of Mexico, so it tends to have its own oil market and pays higher prices than the rest of the US for this reason. The other major supplies to the West Coast US might be projects like Sakhalin in Russia, but more than likely the Koreans, Japanese, or even the Chinese will buy that oil before it is available to the US. The US West Coast will need the additional oil in a decade much more than it does now, and I think the people who object to ANWR drilling are failing to think about future need in the proper time frame. California is still the third largest oil-producing state in the US, but that is probably declining, as is production from Prudhoe Bay and other Alaska reservoirs.
There are ways to limit the footprint of oil installations. Directional drilling has become a commonplace technique that allows many wells to be drilled in many directions from the same small well pad. I think some companies have even considered directional drilling ANWR from offshore, although in the Arctic this is incredibly difficult. If the right controls are placed on the drilling and seismic (for example the Federal Government should make the seismic survey data public property so that it only has to be done once), I think drilling in ANWR can be done with minimal impact.
The other thing that always escapes this discussion because most people know so little about it, is that the NPRA, (the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, formerly the Naval Petroleum Reserve #4), is open for drilling. The NPRA lies to the west of Prudhoe Bay, while ANWR lies to the east. Oil companies have had an active interest in the NPRA and have been exploring new areas there in recent years. I鈥檝e never understood the logic of the environmentalists who are so adamantly opposed to ANWR drilling that never mention NPRA, which is probably even larger an area of the North Slope than ANWR. The USGS assessment of the petroleum potential of NPRA is about equal to that of ANWR in volume.
Another factor that few people outside of Alaska consider is that oil royalties are a major source of income for both the state of Alaska and the US Federal government. Alaska earned $3.5 billion dollars off of oil revenue last year. The government鈥檚 share of oil revenue in Alaska is about 60% of the total, according to the Governor of Alaska.
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories/061鈥?/a>
Not only would not drilling in ANWR cost the state of Alaska and the Federal government a possible income of many billions of dollars, it would add about $700 billion dollars to a growing US Trade Deficit, due to increased need to import foreign oil. I鈥檓 basing that calculation on a $70 barrel of oil, which may be a conservative price for oil in a decade.
I think we will eventually be forced to drill for oil in ANWR. Either it starts now, or twenty years from now. Either way it is probably inevitable.
To learn about the NPRA go to:
http://energy.usgs.gov/npra.html
The USGS assessment of ANWR is at:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/Should we drill for oil at ANWR or leave it alone to perserve the refuge?
Leave it alone i believe. It's time to get off the oil bandwagon.
Sign this petition to protect ANWR.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeactio鈥?/a>
ANWR is a deserted wasteland and the only reason we don't drill there is a marxist plot to hamstring our economy.
Drill because we need oil for many more reason than just gas for are cars. Lots of things we use everyday is made from oil. Plus we have millions of barrels of oil. We use ours and no one else. Than watch the price of oil drop. We depend on the middle east to much
So if we don't drill for oil now and no alternative has come to market in10 years, How much will gasoline cost
your question calls for a high degree of speculation, and as such, i doubt anyone answering (including me) can give you an accurate answer. That said, you might have better luck asking a trusted, intelligent, knowledgable friend this question. As with any commodity, gasoline is subject to the economic laws of supply/demand, so the likelihood of much higher prices is certainly within the realm of possibility. The way to reduce price is either to increase supply (which advocates of drilling seem to think will help) or reduce demand (which higher cost will do naturally). A more common sense approach seems to be searching for alternative sources--wind, solar, water, biodeisel, hybrids, ethanol, none of which will be the ';magic solution';, but taken together will reduce our use of strictly one energy source (oil). Coal is touted as an energy source, but will further destroy the planet (some won't care) and nuclear energy can be utilized (but the radioactive waste is still an unresolved issue), so all in all, we (the world) is in deep do-do, so to speak. To answer your question, $10/gallon gas is within reasonable expectation, but were it to happen, the nation's economy would put us into a 1930's style depression. Whatever the future holds, tighten your seat belt; we are in for one heckuva bumpy ride.So if we don't drill for oil now and no alternative has come to market in10 years, How much will gasoline cost
The same as it would if we did drill now and no alternative fuel came to market.So if we don't drill for oil now and no alternative has come to market in10 years, How much will gasoline cost
10$/gallon
I don't know. How much would gas be now if there was a million barrels a day rolling down from ANWR?
More than I'm willing to pay....I ride my bike whenever possible.makeup ideas
The same as it would if we did drill now and no alternative fuel came to market.So if we don't drill for oil now and no alternative has come to market in10 years, How much will gasoline cost
10$/gallon
I don't know. How much would gas be now if there was a million barrels a day rolling down from ANWR?
More than I'm willing to pay....I ride my bike whenever possible.
500,000 Gal. Oil Spill along Louisiana/Texas Coast lines due to Ike. Will McCain change on drilling for more?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081005/ap_o鈥?/a>500,000 Gal. Oil Spill along Louisiana/Texas Coast lines due to Ike. Will McCain change on drilling for more?
Lord I hope not.
The world doesn't run on happy juice and good intentions, kid.500,000 Gal. Oil Spill along Louisiana/Texas Coast lines due to Ike. Will McCain change on drilling for more?
McCain? The Democrats in congress (including Obama) just voted to allow drilling.
Lord I hope not.
The world doesn't run on happy juice and good intentions, kid.500,000 Gal. Oil Spill along Louisiana/Texas Coast lines due to Ike. Will McCain change on drilling for more?
McCain? The Democrats in congress (including Obama) just voted to allow drilling.
But if we start drilling now, we wont see a drop of oil for 10 years......right?
Well first of all, that's NOT true. The actual oil people (not the tree hugging environmentalists that we see all over the liberal mainstream media) say we'd see oil in 2 - 3 years. And, for liberals sake, lets say it does take 10 years, Bill Clinton used that same ';10 year'; excuse when he denied drilling leases when he was in office. Guess what, we'd be seeing the benefits of that right now wouldn't we?
Here's the question, and for all of you people that like to hit the ';report it'; button and claim anything you disagree with ';isn't a question but a rant';......this is CLEARLY a question.
What do you think oil prices will be like in 3 years from now, 10 years from now? $6 a gallon, $10 a gallon? When is the right time to start drilling?But if we start drilling now, we wont see a drop of oil for 10 years......right?
Even if it would take ten years, that's a lot sooner than the ';sit and stare at the oil'; approach.But if we start drilling now, we wont see a drop of oil for 10 years......right?
Not really a five star answer, but it is simple, clear, and to the point. Overall, a good choice with which I fully agree. Report Abuse
I think the main problem facing this country today is how short sighted we have become. That goes for oil and gas refineries, to terrorism. We need to be thinking about our children and our grandchildren a little more. No, we may not see an immediate change in prices, be it 2 years or 10 years, but we must reduce our foreign oil dependence. We've known it for years, but have not done what it takes. Maybe this is the time our country really starts to resolve our addiction.
Sorry, but America needs to have high oil prices to force it to change and become more efficient. Oil will become more and more scarce in the future and what's left will be very expensive to extract. Let's say we did drill our own oil and somehow (not likely) gas prices were reduced to $1.89 a gallon. What would be the response of the American people? Buy more giant SUVs!!! No, we need to learn to conserve oil NOW and have the incentive for private enterprise to come up with long term solutions.
Let's see... a projection of 10 years by ';treehuggers'; who don't want any drilling and never will, and a projection of 2 or 3 years by an overly optimistic oil industry PR machine which has been spoiling to get their hands on domestic oil resources in public lands for decades.
Whom to believe, whom to believe...?
We're SOOOOOO screwed.
So you think that a little incremental supply will have a major effect on oil prices which are set by the INTERNATIONAL demand and supply ???
This is extremely naive.
Unless you cut free trade with other countries, the impact on prices will be limited.
So what, at least it will be there for our future generation, you sound like Barry Soetoro, if we had done this 10 yrs ago we wouldn't be tied to all those damn forgein countries. We need true INDEPENDENCE.
What is your problem?
MCCAIN 4 PRESIDENT 2008!!!
Since no 1 seems to have a clue%26gt; Nobody moves nobody gets hurt%26gt;So do nothing nothing get's done %26gt; So lets drill and see just what does happen%26gt; At least we will see more fuel%26gt;
Isn't that the idea of drilling for oil??But that make to much since%26gt;
Actually it is completely true. It would take at least 10 years. Email a company like BP or Exxon. They will tell you this and all the reasons it takes that long. I didn't believe anyone either, so I went right to the source.
In 10 years China will own us and they will drill ANWR anyways, and in the gulf, and off of California, and anywhere else they find oil, because anyone that protests will be shot.
There is no oil shortage this is being driven by greed, period.
Greedy oil producers, greedy oil companies and greedy speculators.
Regardless, we won't see lower oil prices. The issue of oil prices has to be attacked directly and not deflected through chants of more drilling.
You'll never convert the enviros, and the Dems are on the take.
You and people like you just don't get it do you? It doesn't matter that you have gotten accustomed to your lifestyle, or for that matter me mine. Oil is a finite resource, and you and people like you think drilling more holes into the ground will solve our energy challenges, it won't. Oil is still eventually going to be gone. OPEC grabbed our balls and started squeezing in the early seventies, they gave us our warning decades ago. Did we listen? No, and here we are thirty five years later still talking about oil when we have had more than enough time to change our own energy policies and structures in this country. At four dollars and going for a gallon of gasoline I can't believe you still have faith in the oil experts. Wake up already.
Oil isn't the problem. There isn't a shortage of oil yet. The real reason of why the price of oil has gone up is based on monetary values.
Oil is traded in US dollars as the standard. So, when you fund a War that is costing 10 Billion a month in operations, have reduced taxes on the wealthiest, the only way to raise money is to 1) Float more bonds and T-Notes (which China buys up) 2) Just make more money at the Treasury. This causes the dollar to 'devalue' in monetary markets. Therefore the prices of all things valued by US greenbacks cost more.
Drilling for more oil won't change a damn thing. We have oil wells in Texas that have been capped because years ago they were deem not worth the costs.
Things cost more because our money has less value. Ron Paul was talking out his butt on returning to the Gold standard.
2-3 years is nonsense. Who are the ';actual'; people you are referring to? What right wing blowhard have you been listening to? The Alaska pipeline is nearly at capacity and there are already problem with sections of it. How would the oil get from Anwar to the ports? Do you think another pipeline can be built in 2-3 years? Aside from Anwar there are leases that the oil companies have that they have chosen not to explore, so your attempt to blame it all on Clinton fall flat.
I never hear the people who chant ';drill, drill, drill'; ever say a word about reducing consumption. That would have the most immediate impact on the price of crude as would forcing the oil speculators to actually take possession of the oil they buy. Right now they can buy and sell oil without ever having to touch it, damaging our economy in the process. There is virtually no control on the buying and selling of crude oil futures.
Drilling for more oil isn't necessarily going to ease the prices. What you're thinking is true that the oil will be refined and ready for use within 2-3 years (a decade at most). But here's the thing. Drilling for oil is an extremely expensive process. The oil companies just aren't willing to risk that much money on drilling just to reap a few cents. From a business point of view, it's crazy.
Let's say the oil companies DO drill. The costs of drilling (which are pretty high esp. if they have to drill deep) will reflect that at the pump. You don't expect the oil companies to just take the costs all in by themselves do you? Unless the government funds the drilling (with our money by the way), they'll just charge us a bit more at the pump to make up for the drilling costs.
Also, you're assuming that no other country will increase their consumption of oil. That's the only way prices will go down, if no other countries' demand for oil increases. But that won't happen either. China and India are demanding a ton right now and they're not going to stop anytime soon. Their economies are booming and it'll be a fairly safe assumption that they'll just demand more as time goes on. So even if we DO drill, increased demand will probably keep prices higher anyway.
What you say makes sense. But you're assuming too many things. First, you're assuming drill costs will be absorbed by the oil companies completely. Second, you're assuming demand will decrease or stay stagnant, which it won't.
The best alternative is to adapt to the higher gas prices and begin looking at alternative fuels. We're going to have to look for alternate fuels eventually anyway. Why not start now ahead of everyone else?
Even if we were to rush drilling operations with greater risk of environmental damage it would only reduce gas prices by a couple of pennies. There is no reason right now for prices to be so high anyway, it is artificial. Speculation on oil futures is driving the prices, not supply problems. In fact, there is greater supply than demand right now and the cost of producing oil has not risen, only the price and profits. Over a ten year time period it would make more sense to develop alternative energy sources which would reduce demand and directly drive down the price of oil and make America more secure in our energy resources. We don't need MORE oil DEPENDENCE, we need to be independent from oil.
This is a security issue as well as an economic issue. Oil funds terror.
What people have to understand is that there is no ';quick-fix'; solution. It will take time once we start drilling to see an effect on the price of a gallon of gasoline. However, it will take even more time if we rely purely on alternative sources of energy.
What we need to do is drill in the short term, as well as producing new refineries to get us off our dependence on foreign oil. In the long-term, however, let's research alternative energy sources, and not limit our horizons to sources like Solar energy. Let's open up research on others, like clean coal, wind, nuclear... and the list goes on.
When is the right time? The right time to drill and build is NOW!
When is the right time to research? The right time is NOW!
Exactly, oil prices will be astronomical if we can even still obtain the foreign oil! Clearly the Democrats made yet another horrible decision 10 years ago 1998, because guess what? We're there, we're ten years later and look at us. If it takes 2-3 years or 10 years we have to start.
And I agree that it's also a matter of national security. Do you realize when you fill up your tank at any number of gas stations you are sending money to countries who harbor terrorists who want to kill us???? Sunoco and BP currently do not rely on foreign oil, and that's where this girl buys her gas.
Liberals do not see into the the future with the same clarity that others do. They looked into the future and saw the elderly living comfortably on social security, they did not see what they should have known, SS going bankrupt. They look into the future today and see in ten years a wonderful new technology of green energy powering the nations cars and heating and cooling our homes and there no longer being a need for oil so why start drilling for it now when we won't need it then? And you know that Liberals have never been wrong!
Well, the US sits on about 3% of the world oil and at current rates consumes about 1/4 of the world oil. We are facing increasing competition from India and China. We are also looking at a commodities bubble. Beyond that, oil companies have access to 4/5 of land of offshore that is capable of being refined and 68 million lucrative untapped areas. There is a refinery on its way in SD as we speak while the older refinineries have increased production. Plus, we just put 4 big oil no bid contacts out on oil in Iraq. So, basically we've got a lot of control and a lot of oil, so if we continue consumption at this rate we're going to continue to see high gas prices no matter what.
Honestly, we're using way too much oil and I'm completely sure that next generations will have to find another source of power. For example, Electricity.
Cars and other vehicles that run on electricity won't be fast, at all, and today - speed is important because there are alot of races going on at all times throughout the entire world.
Hundreds, millions a day.
Whether it's a street race, or a proffessional race.
If we don't start saving oil, using less - there won't be any and our future generations will look down on us and hate us for what we are and what we've done. The only difference between this generation, and world war 2 will be the fact that alot more people died in world war 2 - but we're destroying our earth today aswel.
All this puts alot of trouble into next generations because of the damage we've caused to the atmosphere, and although Global Warming is mainly from changes in our sun - Our atmosphere is meant to prevent any extra heat from those changes and if we continue to destroy it, we'll be hated more by future generations even though we are humans and they will be humans.
There's alot of other things oil is used for, some type of oil for food - some for vehicles, other for machines and we're using alot. As we all may know, oil doesn't last forever and it certainly won't be around forever if we keep on using it as we are now. Gas prices are (ofcourse) going to increase due to the decrease of oil (ammount), they'll be making more money than ever but eventually it will all stop.
Those who save oil will be able to continue doing what they are doing, others will be left with barely any transportation or other machines. After some time, everything will run on electricity - and oil will be gone forever.
The oil companies will be drowning in money, as we'll be suffering from the disaster - many will lose their jobs due to loss of transportation, other's may even die.
Oil won't be around forever - that's for sure.
One thing missing from most of the debates I see about oil is the unprecedented effect of large scale speculation and price manipulation in unregulated markets, which amounts to at least 50% of the current NYMEX per barrel price of oil. One Exxon VP testified before the Senate that in his estimation the price of a barrel of oil would be around $55 if market manipulation were not taking place.
This is fact, and is now a part of the public record.
For accurate information and sound basis for discussion I suggest to anyone really interested, take a look at the Senate Commerce Committee hearing of June 3 2008, ';Energy Market Manipulation and Federal Enforcement Regimes';, and the testimony given there by people who are well-versed in futures trading and market regulation. I have provided the link below.
If Congress took immediate action on the facts revealed by that testimony, we would see a price drop of at least $1/gallon by next month. Obviously there needs to be more self-sufficiency in oil production, but if speculative leeching is allowed to continue, the price of oil will remain artificially driven by entities who have no interest in, nor allegiance to, United States citizens, and who have literally nothing to do with the physical delivery of gasoline.
Energy Market Manipulation and Federal Enforcement Regimes hearing:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.鈥?/a>
In particular examine the testimony of Greenberger, who served in high level capacity at the CFTC:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files鈥?/a>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EDIT: I'm betting that my ';thumbs down'; voters didn't even bother to go and read the hearing testimony. Tsk tsk. Well, good luck at the pump. Oh and give my regards to Morgan Stanley and Dubai. ;-)
Here's the question, and for all of you people that like to hit the ';report it'; button and claim anything you disagree with ';isn't a question but a rant';......this is CLEARLY a question.
What do you think oil prices will be like in 3 years from now, 10 years from now? $6 a gallon, $10 a gallon? When is the right time to start drilling?But if we start drilling now, we wont see a drop of oil for 10 years......right?
Even if it would take ten years, that's a lot sooner than the ';sit and stare at the oil'; approach.But if we start drilling now, we wont see a drop of oil for 10 years......right?
Not really a five star answer, but it is simple, clear, and to the point. Overall, a good choice with which I fully agree. Report Abuse
I think the main problem facing this country today is how short sighted we have become. That goes for oil and gas refineries, to terrorism. We need to be thinking about our children and our grandchildren a little more. No, we may not see an immediate change in prices, be it 2 years or 10 years, but we must reduce our foreign oil dependence. We've known it for years, but have not done what it takes. Maybe this is the time our country really starts to resolve our addiction.
Sorry, but America needs to have high oil prices to force it to change and become more efficient. Oil will become more and more scarce in the future and what's left will be very expensive to extract. Let's say we did drill our own oil and somehow (not likely) gas prices were reduced to $1.89 a gallon. What would be the response of the American people? Buy more giant SUVs!!! No, we need to learn to conserve oil NOW and have the incentive for private enterprise to come up with long term solutions.
Let's see... a projection of 10 years by ';treehuggers'; who don't want any drilling and never will, and a projection of 2 or 3 years by an overly optimistic oil industry PR machine which has been spoiling to get their hands on domestic oil resources in public lands for decades.
Whom to believe, whom to believe...?
We're SOOOOOO screwed.
So you think that a little incremental supply will have a major effect on oil prices which are set by the INTERNATIONAL demand and supply ???
This is extremely naive.
Unless you cut free trade with other countries, the impact on prices will be limited.
So what, at least it will be there for our future generation, you sound like Barry Soetoro, if we had done this 10 yrs ago we wouldn't be tied to all those damn forgein countries. We need true INDEPENDENCE.
What is your problem?
MCCAIN 4 PRESIDENT 2008!!!
Since no 1 seems to have a clue%26gt; Nobody moves nobody gets hurt%26gt;So do nothing nothing get's done %26gt; So lets drill and see just what does happen%26gt; At least we will see more fuel%26gt;
Isn't that the idea of drilling for oil??But that make to much since%26gt;
Actually it is completely true. It would take at least 10 years. Email a company like BP or Exxon. They will tell you this and all the reasons it takes that long. I didn't believe anyone either, so I went right to the source.
In 10 years China will own us and they will drill ANWR anyways, and in the gulf, and off of California, and anywhere else they find oil, because anyone that protests will be shot.
There is no oil shortage this is being driven by greed, period.
Greedy oil producers, greedy oil companies and greedy speculators.
Regardless, we won't see lower oil prices. The issue of oil prices has to be attacked directly and not deflected through chants of more drilling.
You'll never convert the enviros, and the Dems are on the take.
You and people like you just don't get it do you? It doesn't matter that you have gotten accustomed to your lifestyle, or for that matter me mine. Oil is a finite resource, and you and people like you think drilling more holes into the ground will solve our energy challenges, it won't. Oil is still eventually going to be gone. OPEC grabbed our balls and started squeezing in the early seventies, they gave us our warning decades ago. Did we listen? No, and here we are thirty five years later still talking about oil when we have had more than enough time to change our own energy policies and structures in this country. At four dollars and going for a gallon of gasoline I can't believe you still have faith in the oil experts. Wake up already.
Oil isn't the problem. There isn't a shortage of oil yet. The real reason of why the price of oil has gone up is based on monetary values.
Oil is traded in US dollars as the standard. So, when you fund a War that is costing 10 Billion a month in operations, have reduced taxes on the wealthiest, the only way to raise money is to 1) Float more bonds and T-Notes (which China buys up) 2) Just make more money at the Treasury. This causes the dollar to 'devalue' in monetary markets. Therefore the prices of all things valued by US greenbacks cost more.
Drilling for more oil won't change a damn thing. We have oil wells in Texas that have been capped because years ago they were deem not worth the costs.
Things cost more because our money has less value. Ron Paul was talking out his butt on returning to the Gold standard.
2-3 years is nonsense. Who are the ';actual'; people you are referring to? What right wing blowhard have you been listening to? The Alaska pipeline is nearly at capacity and there are already problem with sections of it. How would the oil get from Anwar to the ports? Do you think another pipeline can be built in 2-3 years? Aside from Anwar there are leases that the oil companies have that they have chosen not to explore, so your attempt to blame it all on Clinton fall flat.
I never hear the people who chant ';drill, drill, drill'; ever say a word about reducing consumption. That would have the most immediate impact on the price of crude as would forcing the oil speculators to actually take possession of the oil they buy. Right now they can buy and sell oil without ever having to touch it, damaging our economy in the process. There is virtually no control on the buying and selling of crude oil futures.
Drilling for more oil isn't necessarily going to ease the prices. What you're thinking is true that the oil will be refined and ready for use within 2-3 years (a decade at most). But here's the thing. Drilling for oil is an extremely expensive process. The oil companies just aren't willing to risk that much money on drilling just to reap a few cents. From a business point of view, it's crazy.
Let's say the oil companies DO drill. The costs of drilling (which are pretty high esp. if they have to drill deep) will reflect that at the pump. You don't expect the oil companies to just take the costs all in by themselves do you? Unless the government funds the drilling (with our money by the way), they'll just charge us a bit more at the pump to make up for the drilling costs.
Also, you're assuming that no other country will increase their consumption of oil. That's the only way prices will go down, if no other countries' demand for oil increases. But that won't happen either. China and India are demanding a ton right now and they're not going to stop anytime soon. Their economies are booming and it'll be a fairly safe assumption that they'll just demand more as time goes on. So even if we DO drill, increased demand will probably keep prices higher anyway.
What you say makes sense. But you're assuming too many things. First, you're assuming drill costs will be absorbed by the oil companies completely. Second, you're assuming demand will decrease or stay stagnant, which it won't.
The best alternative is to adapt to the higher gas prices and begin looking at alternative fuels. We're going to have to look for alternate fuels eventually anyway. Why not start now ahead of everyone else?
Even if we were to rush drilling operations with greater risk of environmental damage it would only reduce gas prices by a couple of pennies. There is no reason right now for prices to be so high anyway, it is artificial. Speculation on oil futures is driving the prices, not supply problems. In fact, there is greater supply than demand right now and the cost of producing oil has not risen, only the price and profits. Over a ten year time period it would make more sense to develop alternative energy sources which would reduce demand and directly drive down the price of oil and make America more secure in our energy resources. We don't need MORE oil DEPENDENCE, we need to be independent from oil.
This is a security issue as well as an economic issue. Oil funds terror.
What people have to understand is that there is no ';quick-fix'; solution. It will take time once we start drilling to see an effect on the price of a gallon of gasoline. However, it will take even more time if we rely purely on alternative sources of energy.
What we need to do is drill in the short term, as well as producing new refineries to get us off our dependence on foreign oil. In the long-term, however, let's research alternative energy sources, and not limit our horizons to sources like Solar energy. Let's open up research on others, like clean coal, wind, nuclear... and the list goes on.
When is the right time? The right time to drill and build is NOW!
When is the right time to research? The right time is NOW!
Exactly, oil prices will be astronomical if we can even still obtain the foreign oil! Clearly the Democrats made yet another horrible decision 10 years ago 1998, because guess what? We're there, we're ten years later and look at us. If it takes 2-3 years or 10 years we have to start.
And I agree that it's also a matter of national security. Do you realize when you fill up your tank at any number of gas stations you are sending money to countries who harbor terrorists who want to kill us???? Sunoco and BP currently do not rely on foreign oil, and that's where this girl buys her gas.
Liberals do not see into the the future with the same clarity that others do. They looked into the future and saw the elderly living comfortably on social security, they did not see what they should have known, SS going bankrupt. They look into the future today and see in ten years a wonderful new technology of green energy powering the nations cars and heating and cooling our homes and there no longer being a need for oil so why start drilling for it now when we won't need it then? And you know that Liberals have never been wrong!
Well, the US sits on about 3% of the world oil and at current rates consumes about 1/4 of the world oil. We are facing increasing competition from India and China. We are also looking at a commodities bubble. Beyond that, oil companies have access to 4/5 of land of offshore that is capable of being refined and 68 million lucrative untapped areas. There is a refinery on its way in SD as we speak while the older refinineries have increased production. Plus, we just put 4 big oil no bid contacts out on oil in Iraq. So, basically we've got a lot of control and a lot of oil, so if we continue consumption at this rate we're going to continue to see high gas prices no matter what.
Honestly, we're using way too much oil and I'm completely sure that next generations will have to find another source of power. For example, Electricity.
Cars and other vehicles that run on electricity won't be fast, at all, and today - speed is important because there are alot of races going on at all times throughout the entire world.
Hundreds, millions a day.
Whether it's a street race, or a proffessional race.
If we don't start saving oil, using less - there won't be any and our future generations will look down on us and hate us for what we are and what we've done. The only difference between this generation, and world war 2 will be the fact that alot more people died in world war 2 - but we're destroying our earth today aswel.
All this puts alot of trouble into next generations because of the damage we've caused to the atmosphere, and although Global Warming is mainly from changes in our sun - Our atmosphere is meant to prevent any extra heat from those changes and if we continue to destroy it, we'll be hated more by future generations even though we are humans and they will be humans.
There's alot of other things oil is used for, some type of oil for food - some for vehicles, other for machines and we're using alot. As we all may know, oil doesn't last forever and it certainly won't be around forever if we keep on using it as we are now. Gas prices are (ofcourse) going to increase due to the decrease of oil (ammount), they'll be making more money than ever but eventually it will all stop.
Those who save oil will be able to continue doing what they are doing, others will be left with barely any transportation or other machines. After some time, everything will run on electricity - and oil will be gone forever.
The oil companies will be drowning in money, as we'll be suffering from the disaster - many will lose their jobs due to loss of transportation, other's may even die.
Oil won't be around forever - that's for sure.
One thing missing from most of the debates I see about oil is the unprecedented effect of large scale speculation and price manipulation in unregulated markets, which amounts to at least 50% of the current NYMEX per barrel price of oil. One Exxon VP testified before the Senate that in his estimation the price of a barrel of oil would be around $55 if market manipulation were not taking place.
This is fact, and is now a part of the public record.
For accurate information and sound basis for discussion I suggest to anyone really interested, take a look at the Senate Commerce Committee hearing of June 3 2008, ';Energy Market Manipulation and Federal Enforcement Regimes';, and the testimony given there by people who are well-versed in futures trading and market regulation. I have provided the link below.
If Congress took immediate action on the facts revealed by that testimony, we would see a price drop of at least $1/gallon by next month. Obviously there needs to be more self-sufficiency in oil production, but if speculative leeching is allowed to continue, the price of oil will remain artificially driven by entities who have no interest in, nor allegiance to, United States citizens, and who have literally nothing to do with the physical delivery of gasoline.
Energy Market Manipulation and Federal Enforcement Regimes hearing:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/index.鈥?/a>
In particular examine the testimony of Greenberger, who served in high level capacity at the CFTC:
http://commerce.senate.gov/public/_files鈥?/a>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EDIT: I'm betting that my ';thumbs down'; voters didn't even bother to go and read the hearing testimony. Tsk tsk. Well, good luck at the pump. Oh and give my regards to Morgan Stanley and Dubai. ;-)
How much you willing to pay for gas ? Before we drill our own dam oil.?
I was ready a few dollars ago. The Democrats have not intention of leting us drill oil. The would like to see $6 gas. They want you to quit driving your car and save the earth and destroy our industrial capitalist economy.How much you willing to pay for gas ? Before we drill our own dam oil.?
We do drill our own oil. Lots of it. But the price of gasoline will NEVER go back down to $2/gal. Never. No matter how many wells you sink, we will never again be able to pump oil faster than the demand increases. The most we could do is slow down the rate of price increase. We will not be able to stop or reverse it.
The only solution is to develop alternative energy sources. More oil will be nothing but a leaky bandage.How much you willing to pay for gas ? Before we drill our own dam oil.?
Electric cars and trucks are coming and when they do I will never buy gas again, I am already switching everything to electric so I have to just run one gas engine, my generator and hopefully it can be switched to ethanol before long. Also solar is in my plans and wind power too, I just hate the idea of my money going to the middle east and burning that dirty ole oil.
How about we stop paying now. And besides people get real. Alternative fuels, come-on. If that was really the issue we should have started on alternate sources 20 years ago. Although the plausable answer is alternative fuels then why the rush now and why are the Hybrid Vehiles so Damn expensive that we cant even afford them.
$10. At that price we can invest in longer term, more secure and environmentally friendly energy. At the current price it is already cost effective. We won't need to drill for a non renewable resource!
We have quite a few choices....]nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, thermal, etc!
I am about there. We could lower the price of gas if we drilled off our coast and ANWAR and if we started to really develop alternative energy sources.
We need alternative fueled vehicles, not more oil.
Oil is the past. The sooner the US gets off of oil, the better.
I guess I will have to pay whatever they ask for it. I don't know where to drill or I already would have. :)
3.75 then I am breaking out the bike, permanently!
We do drill our own oil. Lots of it. But the price of gasoline will NEVER go back down to $2/gal. Never. No matter how many wells you sink, we will never again be able to pump oil faster than the demand increases. The most we could do is slow down the rate of price increase. We will not be able to stop or reverse it.
The only solution is to develop alternative energy sources. More oil will be nothing but a leaky bandage.How much you willing to pay for gas ? Before we drill our own dam oil.?
Electric cars and trucks are coming and when they do I will never buy gas again, I am already switching everything to electric so I have to just run one gas engine, my generator and hopefully it can be switched to ethanol before long. Also solar is in my plans and wind power too, I just hate the idea of my money going to the middle east and burning that dirty ole oil.
How about we stop paying now. And besides people get real. Alternative fuels, come-on. If that was really the issue we should have started on alternate sources 20 years ago. Although the plausable answer is alternative fuels then why the rush now and why are the Hybrid Vehiles so Damn expensive that we cant even afford them.
$10. At that price we can invest in longer term, more secure and environmentally friendly energy. At the current price it is already cost effective. We won't need to drill for a non renewable resource!
We have quite a few choices....]nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, thermal, etc!
I am about there. We could lower the price of gas if we drilled off our coast and ANWAR and if we started to really develop alternative energy sources.
We need alternative fueled vehicles, not more oil.
Oil is the past. The sooner the US gets off of oil, the better.
I guess I will have to pay whatever they ask for it. I don't know where to drill or I already would have. :)
3.75 then I am breaking out the bike, permanently!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)