Why aren't we drilling for oil?

[RIROCKHOUND]

Take a read through Hubbards Peak, it's an interesting book written by a former oilman and at the very least has some interesting perspectives into the industry

Some reasons in my humble opinion (of my head, some of the numbers might be a bit off but I need to put the kid to bed and won;t be back on to spend an hour looking them up.

1. Environmental impacts, especially with oil shales. basically strip mining. Not including fracting and other potentially harmful impacts with gas and oil wells. I won't even bring up CO2 since you two will just dismiss it as leftist propaganda.

2. technically recoverable and economically recoverable are two different things. Many technically recoverable fields are only feasible at closer to $200 / barrel

3. If Chevron et al., starts drilling on leases in the Dakotas, it will go to world supply. they aren't mandated to sell to US only. capitalism at it's finest.

4. The USGS estimates of the Dakotas is higher than previously estimated, at a mean of ~4Bil. that's roughly 1 year of oil for the US at the current rate of ~10mil barrels/day. so we can have $0.99/gal for a year than back up to $4.00?

5. The recent USGS estimate of ANWAR has dropped considerably, to about 90 days (~1 Bil barrels). this is not voodoo; a lot of the new data came from additional exportation, so that line about 'there is always more than we thought.....'

6. Norway is smaller than MASSACHUSETTS population wide.

7. Fossil fuels are a 1-time use. So we should just use it all up as quickly as we can?

8. Should we really be advocating more offshore drilling after last summer's disaster... damn we have short memories... keep in mind, much of the oil they are mentioning are deeper than the DWH rig was in.

9. Most of us realize it is speculation driven, but a big upswing in the spring is refinery limitations as they change seasons or just refinery back-up So we should just add more refineries... where? I'd I didn't live a mile from one, how about you? have you been to northern NJ?

10. Jim, are you really advocating for state run oil? you lament the gov's ability to run anything, period, and want to put them in charge of this?
You are the only far-right socialist I know. At least when you finally run for office Jim, you'll have your own party...

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

3. If Chevron et al., starts drilling on leases in the Dakotas, it will go to world supply. they aren't mandated to sell to US only. capitalism at it's finest. Zimmy said the stuff about the Dakotas is a"ridiculous chain email"

4. The USGS estimates of the Dakotas is higher than previously estimated, at a mean of ~4Bil. that's roughly 1 year of oil for the US at the current rate of ~10mil barrels/day. so we can have $0.99/gal for a year than back up to $4.00? that's if we only use oil from the Dakotas which only exists in ridiculous chain emails

7. Fossil fuels are a 1-time use. So we should just use it all up as quickly as we can? before China does

8. Should we really be advocating more offshore drilling after last summer's disaster we are...for other countries..I think we're even financing it ... damn we have short memories... keep in mind, much of the oil they are mentioning are deeper than the DWH rig was in.

9. Most of us realize it is speculation driven, but a big upswing in the spring is refinery limitations as they change seasons yeah, 4 dollar plus gas has almost nothing to do with world demand and the troubles in the middle east...it's those damn speculators...who is "most of us" you and Zimmy?... or just refinery back-up So we should just add more refineries where? I'd I didn't live a mile from one, how about you? have you been to northern NJ?

10. Jim, are you really advocating for state run oil? you lament the gov's ability to run anything, period, and want to put them in charge of this?
You are the only far-right socialist I know. At least when you finally run for office Jim, you'll have your own party...

aren't you going to post a clip from a comedy routine to back up your assertions ?

[striperman36]

buy a diesel and run bio.

Oh that's right, new diesels can't run it and any other diesel in the fine state of MA has to be pre-07

[likwid]

Originally Posted by striperman36

buy a diesel and run bio.

Oh that's right, new diesels can't run it and any other diesel in the fine state of MA has to be pre-07

TDi's can run B5
You can buy TDi's in MA.

[striperman36]

Originally Posted by likwid

TDi's can run B5
You can buy TDi's in MA.

B95 not flex fuel. b5 is more expensive than dino

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I paid >$4.00 for 87 octane at the pump today in CT.

Our country is sitting on untold jillions of gallons of crude (Alaska, the Dakotas, the Gulf).

Originally Posted by scottw

I'm sure you get plenty of those emails targeting fruitcakes..... probably originated by JWB...you and Bryan mentioned the Dakotas...did anyone else? maybe you are both getting ridiculous emails from the same source

The "fruitcakes" that were targeted were potential McCain voters. You used that word, not me. I didn't get the email. Who knows, maybe Jorge himself wrote it. Please forgive me if I ignore you from now on ScottW since I have never seen you add anything worthwhile to a discussion. Everyone else is able to do that, even if I don't agree with what they say, the other members are at least worth listening to.

I think it is valid to ask Scott in CT where his info came from, particularly since I would like what he says to be true. The info I get from the person I know who's job was to find oil from exxon (and as a side note is very conservative), plus what I read from economists, says that our oil supply will not change prices based on the quantities of oil and the idiosyncrasies of the global market. Maybe socialized oil production would have an effect for a limited time, but I have not heard anyone suggest that route.

[Jim in CT]

Zimmy, I don't know what quantities of oil are in Alaska or the Dakotas. I just know that...

(1) there is some oil there
(2) that oil is sitting there, not doing anyone any good
(3) today, the world buys most of its oil from places other than the US, and some of those places cause a whole lot of problems for folks like me who would rather not see their children blown to bits
(4) our economy is hurting, we have lots of people out of work, we have lots of needy people not getting the help they need.

I also know this. If we tapped that oil, it would, TO SOME DEGREE, alleviate the concerns identified in (3) and (4). Maybe it would help a little, maybe it would help a lot. I also know that there are private companies who would love to be given premission to tap that oil, so that tells me that there are some experts who believe it's worth doing. Those companies don't invest huge sums of money without convincing themselves that there will be a good return.

Where am I wrong, Zimmy? Please be specific...

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I think it is valid to ask Scott in CT where his info came from, particularly since I would like what he says to be true. .

you have 13 or so posts in this thread and the only sources for your rantings provided are your sister's uncle and a "ridiculous chain email"....please...I'll try to include more pictures with my text...just for you

[likwid]

Originally Posted by striperman36

B95 not flex fuel. b5 is more expensive than dino

B5 isn't flex fuel.

Nobody warranties their vehicles for anything over 5% anyhow.

[Tagger]

You ever watch the history channel on diamonds or "blood Diamonds " ... Diamonds are actually very common ,, There's a huge amount of diamonds making them worth very little . So they control the flow making them valuble . Watch at the end of the year when oil companys have record proffits ,, Just like last time .. Other sources of energy ? They like it just the way it is .. High gas prices will make the economy tank again too..

[mosholu]

Interesting article in the 4/25/11 issue of the New Yorker on North Dakota oil situation.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by mosholu

Interesting article in the 4/25/11 issue of the New Yorker on North Dakota oil situation.

stop posting propaganda from evil right wing rags that's blood oil....we'll get about 4 days worth of 99 cent gas then it's right back to 4 bucks a gallon because the speculators will not stand for it and this is all part of some ridiculous email tageting potential McCain voters and originated by Jorge anyway, do the math... like "Hubbards Peak"
"the beginning of a 20 year boom"...that's silly, the greedy, evil oil companies will just keep the extra money, shut it down, like the gulf, it's of absolutely no benefit to US...at least until we have a good solid socialist system in place to manage it properly
... like Norway, where the government has made sure that it's citizens have no desire to drive anything other than a bobsled....with gas prices that are 2/3's taxes, no domestic auto production with high tarriffs and taxes on cars entering the country and confiscatory taxes for ownership,
if Norway didn't have oil, I guess they'd be Cuba, who has fabulous healthcare of course...


everyday it becomes more clear how Obama got elected......

[Swimmer]

People in brokerages are bidding up the oil contracts against the person across the across the aisle in the same office/agency. They did the same thing years ago in Cailfonia.

[Jim in CT]

RIROCKHOUND -

"Fossil fuels are a 1-time use. So we should just use it all up as quickly as we can? "

Not as "quickly" as we can, but as "best" we can. Furthermore, the revenue we collect from selling it is not a one-time event, it can be recycled through the system again and again. When you buy something at a store, do you think the store manager burns the money you give him? No, wealth gets created, wealth that was not there before. Contrary to what liberals believe, wealth is good.

Better to use up that oil, than to let it sit there gathering dust. The fact is, the world is buying jillions of gallons of oil. Today, much of that money goes to Middle Eastern countries, who use that money to train terroists and brutalize women and gays (which I would think liberals would have a problem with). I'd rather keep that money here. I don't see how any rational person could disagree with that, I just don't.

"Jim, are you really advocating for state run oil? you lament the gov's ability to run anything, period, and want to put them in charge of this?"

I said "I don't know". I am a free-market capitalist, when I believe the system allows for that. The oil industry does not represent, to me, a free market capitalist environment. There are limited players in the game, with enormous barriers to entry. There's nothing to stop them from price-gouging, because we can't do without that oil. So I think we need more regulation.

Oil is not the same as, say, hamburgers. If Burger King and McDonalds raise prices unreasonably, I can very easily eat Subway grinders instead...thus the free market works just fine. Oil is different by nature. We can't live without it, it's a legitimate national security issue (maybe you have heard of the troubles our planet has endured in the Middle East over the years)...

Furthermore, since the oil we have belongs to the citizens of our country (rather than some private entity), you could make a case that we all deserve a share of any revenue.

"You are the only far-right socialist I know."

No, I'm not. Even the most staunch libertarian recognizes that in certain scenarios, the feds have to play a role. I also know how to think for myself. I don't blindly regurgitate the talking points of any one party. I know how to think rationally and solve problems. And my conclusion is...Americans are going to spend a lot of money on oil before alternative fuels are available. We can continue to buy that oil elsewhere, which impoverishes us and enslaves us to sociopaths in the Middle East and that kook in Venezuela. Or we can refine it ourselves, and give our economy a major boost, and maybe use that money to help some people who really need it. I like the latter alternative, it pleases both my capitalism agenda and my Catholic agenda.

What's the harm in at least doing some studies to see how much oil we really have, and what it would take to get at it...

My own paty? I'll call it the "common sense with compassion" party. I've always said that will be my slogan. I'd rather give my money to an American company than to a middle eastern thug. I guess you disagree. I respect that, but I sure don't get it...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

6. Norway is smaller than MASSACHUSETTS population wide.

...

I'm aware of this. I brought up Norway es evidence that you can aggressively drill for oil, and not destroy the environment. Norway utilizes their oil, and they haven't destroyed their beautiful landscape to do it.