Political Discussions
Oil Production In America
Posted by theboyjlowe • 11/23/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: oil
Gas prices have gone down a lot, but couldn't they go down more? We have Alaska, Utah and the Gulf ready for massive oil production, but Congress stomps their foot and says NO!!! I am just waiting to see the prices going back up to 4 bucks like they were for most of this year, but this wouldn't happen with a greater supply of oil.
User Comments
-
We need to look more closely at rubber band power. All you have to do is wind it up and you shoot off down the road. No pollution. No oil. Why hasn't congress acted on this? What are they hiding? -
@TBJ: Do the math. Your gut tells you there is a lot of oil to be had, but how much is that relative to what we import and consume? A drop in the bucket is what. So then Congress dares to balance conservation and energy needs. And they're right to do so. McCain's drill mantra was never a serious energy policy, and he knew it. He flipped on it for the election in order to gain votes from the mathematically challenged.
-
More supply won't matter anyway. Why are gas prices so low right now? Its not more oil its the markets tanking and when the markets get going again it will be right back up where it was no matter how much oil there is.-
monkeysuit- you are right, supply does not matter. The OPEC countries were pumping barrels out in record numbers this summer and prices were still rising, but that was because demand was high. The price of oil has plummeted (almost 50% since July) because demand has gone down in the US quite a bit. There are not as many people driving so not as much gas needs to be used which in turn means that not as much oil needs to be bought. This is in part to the slumping economy since people are trying to save money everywhere they can. The public also feels that there is more supply here at home if we are to drill (how much remains to be known) which has also contributed to the lower demand in oil.
-
-
Our supply will not affect price much but it can keep some dollars at home. The drill here! Drill Now! Pay less! is a lie and makes the repubs look even more foolish.-
I imagine their saner representatives will not be chanting this again until 2010. It's merely for electoral politics.
-
-
it's not as if the government is going impose any price caps, so what's the difference? big oil will sell it for whatever the market will bear. we may be at the beginning of a deflationary cycle, so price hikes are probably unlikely right now and in the near future. and my guess is that since the prices aren't so high right now, the oil companies aren't in such a big rush to expend cash on exploration.
but there's going to be more domestic oil exploration sooner or later and the democrats would be smart to just allow it now and take this issue off the table. -
I think the attitude of whatever the market will bear partially got us into this mess did it not? We don't need to drill we need to get off oil. Offshore drilling, though more sophisticated than it was remains a complicated engineering feat, the first substantial amounts of oil would not begin to flow for ten years, we should if, we were smart, and should have already, have a booming green economy or the beginning of one by that time.-
@coop
i don't really disagree with you. my point is that i'd just as soon as see the democrats take the issue off the table.
if it takes a long time for any oil to come out of it, so much the better. i don't see it as likely that we'll get to wholly renewable fuel sources anytime soon though.
-
-
Knowing as little as I do about it, but more than I did a few months ago I think we could fastback it, the problem with most of it and the reason it has not been done is bureaucracy Lobby's, and oil companies - now the oil companies are going to try to convince us they are green and god knows we will probably fall for it. The people could demand it. It's just that green comes with a cost because the oil companies have made it expensive.
I know a man, 60-ish or so now, who started a green business in the mid eighties right here in this county I live in, he was selling green building supplies and doing small construction on the side - BP bought out all of his suppliers and other word business relationships and he had to shut down.
Sad but it is something we need to be aware of because until the oil companies can find a way to reap the profits of green they are going to do all they can to slow it down.
My father is what some call a green architect, he does only of his career only green projects, and part of the reason we lived Australia /Tasmania for so long was the oil companies either by buying out or their lobbying efforts and pressure on small local zoning commissions, made it so expensive to do green building here no one wanted to do it. As my father was an engineer and an architect, and he designed and build both bridges and buildings, and refused to do work which would damage the environment, the work here was limited to private housing.
We can't be fooled by these companies, and we shouldn't and I think we have to take our eyes away from oil, as hesitant as we are to do so because it is what we know, it is important we do so.-
It isn't just one country that needs to get off oil, it is the whole world. Even if the rich countries fasttrack it, I doubt they can drop usage by more than 20 - 30% in ten years plus the 3rd world countries will grow demand. We should produce, if not for ourselves for export.
-
-
I don't see the hurt in seeing what oil we actually have. If the prices stay the same as they are now, then we really lose nothing. If the prices go down, then we have gained something. I don't see how it can hurt us.
-
Oil companies already have 100s of leases they're not using. Why aren't they drilling on them? Because it's more profitable to keep supplies tight.
No, it's time to get off oil. It would take ten years from exploration for oil until it gets to the pumps. In ten years, battery technology will be advanced to the point where we can all be driving electric cars and we can charge them from solar panels on our roofs or from the power grid with electricity generated from wind, solar, and fuel-cells. -
Also, the Democratic Congress offered oil companies drilling rights with the stipulation that any new oil found in the U.S. could only be sold in the U.S. market, but republicans filibustered that bill. Sold on the world markets, new oil drilling here would have no effect on prices.
-
-
Oil is facing the same problem which happened at the end of whale oil. It becomes harder and harder to find the oil so people have to go farther and farther to get it. Thus we will see all sorts of things tried out until something eventually happens. This took a long time for the whaling industry, it will take a long time for petroleum industry. Things don't happen on the magical snap of a finger.
I see the first hint at change from New Zealand. Aquaflow Bionomic has produced the first biocrude from algae. This is one of those steps along the way to a biofuel crop that will replace oil. www.stuff.co.nz/4759811a13.html Also Solix has claimed a 90% cost reduction in producing algae for biofuels. Within the next several years we will see biofuels like algae become much cheaper than oil. The aquaflow process promises commercial scale production of algae oil in the near future at much cheaper prices than oil. -
Satijournal: The democratic environmentalists are the one that pulls the plug on drilling. This has happened for years.
-
... and that's a good thing.
I was talking about offshore drilling, which was filibustered by the Republicans.
The environmentalist minded Democrats have been pushing for clean alternative fuel technologies since the late 70s. Had we continued on the path set by Carter, we might not be so reliant on oil right now. -
Yup, and the oil companies bought out most of the innovators before they got off the ground. Big Oil and Republicans are pretty much a pair and if you think that is not the case think again. We can thank the Buses for that.
-
-
Your implying that Republicans are not for alternative fuels. This is not the case. Alternative fuels such as ethanol raise the prices of other goods and that defeats the purpose. I think we should do both oil drilling and alternative fuels. The fuel companies are already doing that because they know that eventually they will have to switch to other sources.
-
The current CEO of Archer Daniels Midland was a vice president of Chevron. Some of the oil companies are all for alternative fuels, so long as they can remain in control. Make as much money as possible during the transition period. BP is also heavily invested in alternative energy. A lot of the energy companies are testing out alternative energies. Alternative energy receives much less subsidies than coal and oil.
General Electric is trying to corner the American wind market. It already has a lot of the hydroelectric market. Sharp electronics produces most of the solar cells.
It is all about control of the markets. It is much harder to control alternative energy than oil which is a commodity in a barrel.
A little push like cap and trade would even the subsidies for alternative energy. It would open up the energy markets.
Also a nice restructuring of the American automakers requiring a lot more flexible fuel vehicles would change the market as well.-
wp
-
-
We use 25% of the world's oil. We have 2% of the world's reserves. The math doesn't work; more drilling would have no impact on prices. If we sucked America dry, it wouldn't make a dent. In fact, since oil is a commodity traded on an international market, there's no way to guarantee that American oil would stay in the states.
All in all, the price of gas is a really lousy reason to drill. As always, reality has a liberal bias.-
whatever you say
-
What a wonderful philosophy you have.
-
Your argument is a little short in scope though.
The US has 3% (my data differs from yours) of the worlds total oil reserve untapped.
The worlds oil reserve is expected to last 25-50 more years.
The US uses 25% of the worlds oil.
Now where you make the false leap is to assume that oil extraction is limited to your share of the worlds reserve per year. In other words that the us could only produce 3% of that oil until everyone runs out simultaneously. Which of course isn't true.
If the us were to tap the entire resource over the next 10 years. Assuming the 50 year span, that would be a 15% hike in oil production for those 10 years. Which would have a huge impact not only on prices based on the supply, but it would also make OPEC limited in their pricing strategies.
Also, to assume that adding production locally, wouldn't affect price of oil isn't exactly true. IMported oil carries with it a large shipping cost. Reducing the shipping needs will impact local prices. So oil drilled here, will most likely be sold here because of the shipping component of the price.
And even if we just tapped the production like you said, and drill the 3% every year. That is 3% of how many billion that stays in this country instead of going overseas?
Reality has a fact bias, not a liberal one -
Csi: Even locally the impact of additional drilling will have small impact on prices (at best). Of course we can get into a debate on the price impact but an easier topic to agree on is that drilling in the U.S. will keep dollars in the U.S. Those dollars will create jobs and help support the economy. Drilling = lower prices is a hard battle to win. Drilling = stronger U.S. economy is pretty easy.
-
Well there are arguments for anything. But you are right on that it's better to keep the money here to begin with.
As far as the global price on oil. My thinking is simply this. If a country that consumes 25% of the oil starts producing 3% of that will have an impact on prices. Say it's "just" 3%, that would have been a 12 cent diff when the price was at $4.. Not a lot, but ask any low income family if it adds up. -
Now where you make the false leap is to assume that oil extraction is limited to your share of the worlds reserve per year. In other words that the us could only produce 3% of that oil until everyone runs out simultaneously. Which of course isn't true.
Awesome! You've discovered a plan to make 25% input equal to 3% of the total! Whoo-hoo!
Unfortunately, you're screwing up your math. The total is the total. There isn't any more. As the reserves deplete, the cost goes up -- not down. The faster we use our reserves, the more they're worth. More global production = higher prices, not lower.
Oh well, you're the conservative money whiz. Seriously, it's geniuses like you who have made the American economy the towering accomplishment it now is. That whole total=infinity thing. Not stupid or irrational at all.
It's freakin' genius!
-
-
What we really need is not any of these things. We need to acknowledge the real problem, creating renewable energy sources that are cheaper and more abundant than coal or oil. It is doable. Google has the right idea on this one.
Renewable energy cheaper than coal.
www.google.com/corporate/green/energy/-
Weheiru,
You are absolutely right, But we can't forget that in the transition period we still need oil. That oil shoud be as far as possible produced and sold in the country, to avoid further draining of resources.
-
-
Wind power, Solar power and hydrogen. That is all he wrote.
-
Hydrogen is an energy carrier. It is not an energy source. It is also very expensive. Too expenive to really consider in the near future.
Solar is not the most reliable of alternative energy sources. It is very expensive. The only real exception to this so far is magnified solar concentrators a relatively new technology.
Wind currently has reached an inflection point with coal and oil. It costs the same amount to produce wind power as it does coal under the right conditions. This is why wind is growing so fast.
Hydroelectric Power currently is the most reliable source of renewable energy. Microhydro doesn't have the same environmental problems as large scale hydro. Also, a new type of hydro power called run of the river eliminates a lot of the damming problems.
Geothermal is non-intermittent. It needs to be developed more.
Wave power is almost completely undeveloped in the United States. They are testing wave turbines in New York Harbor right now.
Star Tech has plasma gasification technology which breaks down garbage at the molecular level leaving practically no residues. It produces biogas.
Aquaflow Bionomics is practically at the stage of algae biocrude commercial scale production. Solix is well on the way to producing algae oil.
There are other things available as well.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
