It's all the rage. Bush is for it. McCain is for lifting the offshore ban, but he's not for drilling in ANWR. Suddenly Charlie Crist is for lifting the offshore ban, even though just weeks ago Charlie Crist was against it. Mel Martinez is now for it, too, even though he was against it. Jeb was against it. Who knows if he'll get on board now?

The argument laid out, both on here and by supporters, is that this is the way to lower gas prices and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. I just saw some dope on Fox suggest that if Congress announced that they'd lifted the ban on offshore drilling gas would drop to $2.50 in the next few days. Which is more evidence why you should get your news from Fox.

Truth is, even if we opened up both ANWR and the OCS to drilling it's not going to have much of an impact on gas prices in the future, and even less of an impact on gas prices today. Nor is it even clear that if Congress lifted the ban the states with the most oil off of their shores - California and Florida - would even go along with it. And then whatever impact the drilling or future drilling has on prices would even smaller.

The benefits, should drilling go forward, seem mainly to be in the form of jobs created to pump and process the oil and move it to market. And it's good for the oil and natural gas companies. And you'd have a larger supply of oil, and oil from domestic sources - how much depending on where/how much they'd be allowed to drill.

Then there are the costs: environmental, greater potential for oil spills, potential loss of tourism revenue, aesthetic concerns, etc.

Some other facts to help you along: ANWR, once pumping at full capacity in the year 2025, will lower the price of a barrel of oil by 75 cents, according to the Energy Department. A barrel of oil closed at $136 today.

The OCS is thought to have twice the amount of oil that ANWR does, or 18 billion barrels. (We use about 21 million barrels a day, or 7.55 billion barrel a year.) And that's assuming they have access to and can recover all 18 billion barrels, which isn't going to happen. So you can make a rough estimate of the benefit you'd be receiving at the pump in a few decades.

Anyone think lifting the ban on OCS drilling, or in ANWR, or both is something we should do? If so, why?

Or would anyone like to talk about this as a political exercise, as in "a more credible way to look like you're doing something about the problem than a gas tax holiday"?

I don't know man, I think using the environment as a reason not to is kinda weak.

I look at it this way.


1. We have a demand for a product, and right now that product is putting an incredible financial strain on our economy and those who live here.

2. We potentially have this product in our own backyard, but we don't want to drill for it because we don't want to harm the environment.

3. We could care less about the environment in the part of the world that we get the oil from at the present moment, as long as it's not in our back yard.


Am I close here?

quote:

Originally posted by heckofajobBrownie:
Or would anyone like to talk about this as a political exercise, as in "a more credible way to look like you're doing something about the problem than a gas tax holiday"?

I think its an act of desparation for Bush. To try to save face as a Republican, or something equally as silly.

As for the drilling, I say go for it. China is already interested in drilling "off of Cuba." Diplomatically, if the US is "demanding" that OPEC/etc. increase its production, then we should attempt to "walk the walk" also. Petroleum will go the way of the buffalo, but until it does, we might as well use our own stuff. I'd feel slightly better giving my money to our country than the Saudis/etc. Slightly.

Kind of related: anyone else hear/read/ see where GM was ceasing Yukon/Tahoe/Suburban production?

The amount of money we give to foreign governments and foreign oil companies won't really change any if we drill these wells. You'll still be giving a hefty chunk to the Saudis and Iran and everyone else. In fact, since they have most of what is left the percentage of foreign oil that we have to buy will most likely grow over time, not shrink, even with these wells coming online.

You may be able to physically use more of the oil that is produced closer to home because it costs less to get it here than it does to ship it from Saudi Arabia, but you've still got to buy it on the world market. And oil doesn't cost any less per barrel because it comes from the coast of California or from Texas or Alaska or Saudi Arabia. It's just easier and cheaper to get here.

Think of a big keg with a tap on the bottom. Drilling in Alaska and the OCS is like pouring another beer into the top of the keg. But we still have to take from the spout at the bottom.

Tupa probably knows more about this stuff than I do, but I think that's right.

Besides, you don't give your money to your country; you give it to ExxonMobil, or Shell.

The reason you have to give some to the Saudi government is because the Saudi government owns Aramco. Iran has their own state-owned oil company, etc.

This is the kind of action I am in favor of:
McCain calls for 45 new nuclear reactors

quote:

"Every year, these reactors alone spare the atmosphere from the equivalent of nearly all auto emissions in America. Yet for all these benefits, we have not broken ground on a single nuclear plant in over thirty years," he said. "And our manufacturing base to even construct these plants is almost gone."

Instead of this finger pointing bullshit:
Bush Says Dems to Blame for High Gas Prices

quote:

"I'm a fcuking joke."

-G.W. Bush 6-18-08

quote:

Originally posted by heckofajobBrownie:
Besides, you don't give your money to your country; you give it to ExxonMobil, or Shell.

I was making a sweeping generalization. I was implying giving the money to the guys getting it out of the ground (probably American contractors, US citizens regardless of who they worked for). Which, like you said, is only cheaper to extract, but doesnt really affect the world price like the Jokers in DC are trumpeting it does.

Beer keg analogy is spot on, I think. But I've been drinking.

And I'm about to start. See ya.

This has NOTHING to do with consumer relief. This has EVERYTHING to do with helping our the Oil special interest who gave them a ton of money to get elected. They are using the guise of the gas prices right now to see if they can slip this thru. Its the same playbook as using the fear envirement and the alert systems to get reelected and invade iraq.

This is made to look like its for us but it is a payback to the people who give them money. This is complete financial malarky, ANYone working in the financial fields knows this for what it is.

This is a lie and has really nothing to do with consumer prices.

Holy cripes, do you people have kids??? How jealous are you trying to farging make me?

God, I never drink anymore. I miss it.

I guess nobody took up my offer to view "crude impact".

Even if you didnt heck spells it out very well,oil is over.

We were once the envy of every nation for our industrial and technological innovation,its time to put that into high gear and bring new ideas and inventions to the table that will allow us to not worry about oil, and it just might create a few new jobs in the process.
It might be a good idea to outlaw speculators first.

Off shore drilling in Southern California. The more, the better. They can put up the phoney building scaffolding around the rigs like they used to have off of Long Beach.

Looks like DieHard's been drinking too.

Sev, for once I think you're right about this oil thing.

They can never get anyone to agree to drilling in Alaska or off the coast of California and Florida. But now we need to! Gas prices demand it!

They get to roll in record profits AND fool everyone into thinking we need them now more than ever.

Nice work if you can get it...

quote:

Originally posted by danamal:
Even if you didnt heck spells it out very well,oil is over.

We were once the envy of every nation for our industrial and technological innovation,its time to put that into high gear and bring new ideas and inventions to the table that will allow us to not worry about oil, and it just might create a few new jobs in the process.
It might be a good idea to outlaw speculators first.

Spot on. We're getting to the end of the period where we will be able to simply pull energy out of the ground, whether it's for supply or environmental reasons.

As to your point about innovation, the infrastructure at the college level is still there; it's not a coincidence that grad schools in America attract applicants from around the world. We need to focus on either making sure that a large number of those students stay here to work or, I dunno, increasing American students' aptitudes in things like math and science, so that they can compete more strongly (wrote the English major).

I'm thinking about that show "When We Left Earth" (or whatever the title is) on the Discovery Channel--it's a pretty good documentary on the space program. The point is that the Space Race and the effort to go to the moon weren't just a boon for NASA and the defense industry, but they captured people's imaginations and got a generation of kids hyped up about math and science. The issue is how to replicate that with environmental issues; cutting carbon emissions and keeping polar bears from drowning just isn't that sexy. Although I will admit that polar bears perched on ice floes, claws dragging in the Arctic waves, is a HUGE turn on.

But enough about my Google searches. If people can find a way to make the environment something that captures the imagination, we might see a Space Race-type explosion in math and science (and their application) here. The question is is how to do that. I mean, I saw "An Inconventient Truth," but it convinced me to combine errands when I'm in my car, not scrap everything and try to learn chemistry.

Dennis

[quote]We were once the envy of every nation for our industrial and technological innovation,its time to put that into high gear and bring new ideas and inventions to the table that will allow us to not worry about oil, and it just might create a few new jobs in the process.


Once warriors with broze swords were the envy of the world.
Soon eveybody learned how to make bronze swords and those who were less complacent more industrious and tougher took over.

We became the world's manufacturiong superpower when Englan and Germany faltered.
We thought of new ways to produce goods and brought poor immigrants and southerners to work in the factories.

Soon enough the newly emerging world learned our production techiques, improved on them and had a built in horde of people much poorer than what we have in the US.

Now they make the good quality things the world wants.

High taxes, union wages, regulation, foreign competition; all have contributed to the loss of our spot at the top of the manufactuing heap.

Try to keep in mind that though we want everything "changed" that this particular rise and fall has taken place in something less than a century.

WSS

quote:

Originally posted by shepwrite:
Holy cripes, do you people have kids??? How jealous are you trying to farging make me?

God, I never drink anymore. I miss it.

Ha! I put mine to bed - and that's when the bottle of wine started talking trash.

I showed him.

He is getting a few laughs in this morning though. He and my two year-old must have been in on it.

But back to the topic, I think McCain's "Lets build more reactors" carries a lot more water than "Lets have a gas tax holiday this summer."

And hey, who needs ANWR and the OCS when we just gave them no-bid contracts for Iraq.

Something tells me Sev is going to go nuts when he reads today's paper...

The Bush Adm no bid stuff drives me nuts. I hear the excuses of only certain types of companies can handle the massive amounts of services they provide. I dont believe that, but that is just how a our goverment now handles things and funnels money to companies like them.

To be completely fair its not just this administration its pretty much all of the repulicrats. This one however has gone further than most and dont really care.