My dad said that there is alot of oil on american ground and we should drill it.

[Smith_3]

So, I know the democrats are opposed to domestic drilling. What is the reason?

[EmperorHasNoClothes]

1. Um.... because there's not?

There's enough oil on American territory to make a ton of money for Bush and his buddies, but not enough to make any difference in gas prices or substantially reduce our imports. If they drilled ANWR and gave that oil away for FREE, it would lower the average gas price by a few cents per gallon. There just isn't enough to make a difference.

Now, shoo.

[ingac70]

2. 'Cause the oil companies...

are just going to sell it on the global market... it will be subject to the same speculation and manipulation, and we will still be getting ripped off.

The only way I would want more drilling in the US is if there is a law with it that stipulates every drop must be sold in and consumed by the US!

[gratuitous]

13. Precisely: We're not getting the oil from our own fields now

A substantial portion of all that lovely, lovely crude coming out of the south end of the Alaska pipeline never quite makes it to California for refining. It's going to the Asian markets where the major oil companies can sell it for more, despite all the promises in the 1960s and 1970s that every drop from Alaska would go to the U.S. market.

So, if we destroy the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the oil companies will bump their profits further, the oil will go to Asia, a handful of politicians will pocket fat campaign contributions, and the price at the pump will nudge up another quarter a gallon. Oh, and the people who depend on the annual migration of the caribou herds in and out of the Refuge for their sustenance will either be wiped out by starvation, or have to leave the area they've lived in for 10,000 years.

Maybe they can all stay at the poster's dad's house.

[TreasonousBastard]

28. They're not selling it for more. They have been...

exporting to Asia since the North Slope opened simply because there is not enough refinery capacity on the West Coast and it's cheaper to ship to Asia than the Gulf or East Coasts. This would still happen with ANWAR drilling.

Crude is fungible in many ways, and so we export what we can't use to Asia, which pays for oil imported to the East and Gulf coasts.

[gratuitous]

41. Well, perhaps someday . . .

The oil companies will make enough money to build another refinery or two. Since they're barely scraping by as it is, it's probably unrealistic for the public to expect them to do anything about limited refinery capacity. Maybe if they were to receive some tax breaks or something as an incentive . . . ?

[Oerdin]

16. A few mis conceptions I want to clear up.

"Cause the oil companies are just going to sell it on the global market."

Actually it has been illegal to export crude oil from the US since the 1970's. I realize it takes time to keep up to date on laws but common it's been 30 years.

"So, where's this oil that the Dems are supposedly not allowing the oil companies to find and get out of the ground?"

The federal Minerals Management Agency conservatively estimates 10-12 billion barrels of oil and approximately 10 times that amount in natural gas off the coast of California but unfortunately local laws have made it illegal to drill off the cost since the late 70's. The west coast of Florida also has a significant amount of oil and gas (just like the rest of the Gulf coast) but once again state law blocks drilling. ANWAR has at least 10 billion barrels and there are numerous other small scale drilling opportunities across the country. The problem is NIMBYs block most of it even though it is relatively safe and environmentally sound.

[ingac70]

22. from '95 to 2000..

Alaskan oil was shipped to Asia. Fact. That ban was lifted in '95, and only reinstated on the order of Pres. Clinton. Any Pres. could lift the "ban" now.

http://www.anwr.org/features/issues/oilexports.htm

I realize it takes time to keep up with the law, but this has been common knowledge since Congress lifted the ban in '95.

[Mojorabbit]

23. I read the website

but I don't see anything that says what is happening now. Is the oil being kept in the US or not? I'd love to know.

[ingac70]

26. It isn't being sold right now...

but the Pres. can decide at any time that the oil companies can sell Alaskan oil overseas. That ban from the 70's was lifted 13 years ago.

[Lasher]

30. Ouch!

That hurt, and I was just watching!

[ingac70]

32. If someone is going to be...

a smartass, he better know WTF he is talking about.

[knitter4democracy]

3. So, where's this oil he's talking about?

It's not like American oil companies aren't looking for it. I know, when I was a kid, several companies came through our small town and tried to buy up mineral rights and wrote up fancy leases and all only for there not to be much there and most wells to peter out in a year or so. There are other areas in Michigan that have wells, too, but I've heard most of them aren't producing anymore.

So, where's this oil that the Dems are supposedly not allowing the oil companies to find and get out of the ground?

[Blue Diadem]

12. There are small and I do mean small oil wells around here.

I never see them pumping. There's only one that I can recall ever seeing operate and I have no idea if they were getting anything or not. A couple years ago, my son came close to buying a small farm but decided against it due to restrictions because of an old oil well on the property.

If I have my local history correct, the oil boom for our area was in the late 1800's. Production was never all that high compared to what the big oil wells produce.

[endarkenment]

4. Did your dad mention 'extraction costs'?

I'm guessing not.

[Dogmudgeon]

5. Your dad isn't a petroleum engineer, I take it.

1. There isn't all that much oil on American ground. Most of what we THINK is there, is under several miles of ocean and several more miles of rock. It will be VERY expensive to get to.

2. Most of the undeveloped areas are sensitive to the effects of oil spills. The ANWR is in an environmentally critical section of Alaska, and many offshore oil sites are near beaches, fisheries, and harbors.

3. Why not develop other sources of energy? Single-sourcing is a bad business practice in any situation.

--p!

[Clovis Sangrail]

6. he's wrong

the biggest pool oil (estimated) we have is in ANWR... and there's not nearly as much there as the pro domestic drilling people think.

The DOE just did a study on how much oil was there and how much drilling it would affect oil prices.
$0.75 / barrel by 2025

That's not going to solve any problems caused by high oil prices.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/anwr-drilling-could-cut-75/story.aspx?guid=%7B26229D0C-EC53-4FF1-BC12-6CE405A403AC%7D&dist=msr_4

The solution isn't to continue extracting a resource that we know is finite.
The solution is to develop alternative/renewable forms of energy.

[Iris]

7. there seem to be some weird ideas about oil around lately

I've heard things like "Americans are paying for China's overuse of oil" and that "There is no oil shortage."

I'm not sure about how much oil there is around the world in general, but I'm pretty sure we don't have much here. Which is I guess why people make up stuff - it's a last ditch attempt at not having to think about how drastically we may have to change our lifestyles.

[havocmom]

8. the oil that is left here in US is very hard to get at, expensive and damaging to get at

Not much help at all. Your dad has listened to GOP/BIG OIL talking points without looking into the details.

Why destroy more of the world (and your neighbors' homes, farms, in the US) for more expensive oil? So much better to move on from oil and go toward real alternative.

Why waste time, destroy more environment just to maintain the status quo for a short time longer? Oil is FINITE. Period. Move on to something that is safe, clean, reliable, renewable and stop wasting time dinking around with trying to pretend there is not a problem to address.

[maui9002]

10. China currently uses less than 1/3rd of what the US uses each day

And they have more than a billion people; per capita, China is not even in the top 100. But, make no mistake, developing countries like China and India, which represent a large percentage of the Earth's population, will greatly increase demand for the black gold, and we better be taking steps now to deal with that reality (and drilling here, by itself, isn't going to have much of an impact).

<http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption>

[gatorboy]

9. Your dad's Jed Clampett?

Invite us to the cement pond sometime!

[Jeanette in FL]

11. This guy found oil in his backyard

http://www.marketwatch.com/tvradio/bcPlayer.asp?bcpid=203719194&bclid=86272812&bctid=1568033685

[dipsydoodle]

14. It's deep in the ground

and requires a lot of water pumped under pressure to get it out. Fine you might say. Well now - the problem is what do with the water which comes with the oil other than completely screw the local environment and trust me - that's exactly what would happen.

[Lex]

15. Your dad is wrong.

The amount of oil we have, let's say in the ANWAR in Alaska, would drop the price of gas by 1 or 2 cents per gallon, in approximately 20 years from now.

[riderinthestorm]

17. Best estimates are that "all that oil" would last the US just 3 months.

So we would destroy critical national areas and expend multible billions of dollars getting it out, and it would only last approximately 3 months.

It's not worth it. We need to move beyond oil since it's a limited resource anyway and get to other energy alternatives asap before we expend even one more single dollar trying to wrest more oil out of the ground.

[zbdent]

18. a side note ... in 2001, Bush wanted to extend drilling off the Gulf Coast.

However, a radical environmentalist screamed about how the damage to Florida's beaches would be an ecological disaster, and Bush nixed plans to drill in the oil-rich Gulf ...

The "radical environmentalist"? George's kid Brother Jeb ... and it wasn't because of an "ecological disaster" (although he did express a tiny concern about that) ... he was concerned that the "pristine beaches" would become oil-soaked and ruin the almighty TOURIST DOLLAR ...

[Johonny]

19. actually

I believe your Dad is correct. There is untapped oil in the Gulf, West Coast and Alaska. Most of this very expensive to obtain, and/or produces rather bad oil that requires more refining. Of course there is much, much more coal in the US. And coal can be converted to liquid fuel. The process is not very environmentally friendly. We could continue to burn our way through every drop of fossil fuel in the US or we can start thinking about the US energy budget post fossil fuels... many people are thinking about the future.

[Locrian]

21. thats the thing

Thats the thing that scares me almost more than NO oil being there. I have absolutely NO doubts that when things get worse that EVERY possible source regardless of environmental cost will be fair game.

[Gabi Hayes]

20. here's what the warcorpigs have in mind for the Great Lakes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aral_Sea









now remind me of all the things that COULDN'T have happened here....

[hunter]

24. There's still inexpensive housing in San Francisco too!

If your dad sends me $10,000 cash I might sell him a nice property like this:



Sorry, the easy oil is gone. We used it all up.

[spanone]

25. it doesn't matter where it is, we need to get oil behind us!!!!

[Fireweed247]

27. They are scamming us!

I know we need to cut back- but the oil companies are ripping us off- RECORD PROFITS every quarter. What they use to make in one year is what they make in a quarter now. Isn't someone going to stop them? Congress perhaps? Kucinich has a windfall profits bill...

[Indenturedebtor]

34. No let the high prices ride

They reflect the true market value of the oil that is quickly going away.

No one conserves when gas is 2 dollars a gallon.

The European economy has done just fine with 5 dollar per LITER gas for decades. People don't drive hummers and get trucks "cause they're cool".

We need to conserve because oil is running out. We need to conserve because the planet is DYING.

Better to ease into it with $4 per gallon gas than go from $2 per gallon to $15 per gallon over night.

[salguine]

36. Not to argue with you, but

the planet isn't dying. It's US that's dying. We're not killing the planet, we're killing ourselves. Believe me, when it gets worse, the planet will shake us off like a bad cold. And then once we're gone, the planet will set about righting itself and undoing all the damage we've done.

[Indenturedebtor]

39. It won't bring all those species back from extinction though

A new food chain will develop on the backs of salmonella and cockroaches. Wonderful.

[Fleshdancer]

29. too expensive and too short term

From what I understand, the large amounts of un drilled domestic oil is located located in deep, complex reservoirs or environmentally sensitive areas. If the cost of drilling the oil is more expensive than the oil itself, then there's no incentive to do it. Doesn't it seem odd to you that we have all this oil under our feet but oil companies only complain about not drilling in the one area that's protected? If they can't profit from drilling into the other areas, then they're not going to do it.

Even if the cost of drilling goes down and magically became environmentally safe, it would still be a short term solution for a long term need. We have an opportunity to create a highly profitable alternative energy industry and it would be stupid for us not to invest in the research to make this happen. This should have been our major focus for the past several decades already.

[sinkingfeeling]

31. He might have heard that 'oil industry' commercial where the nice lady says that

we get 2/3s of our oil from North America. What they're not saying is that we import huge amounts from Canada (#1 provider) and Mexico (#3 provider).

And why does anybody think it's a good idea to keep drilling at outlandish costs to get the very last drop? Why should those of us living today use it all? Why not take all that 'exploration' money and develop new technologies?

[Javaman]

33. I love these hit and run posters.

sure ask the question in hopes of stirring the pot.

Sadly, there is no pot to stir with this question.

Go peddle your "my dad said" questions elsewhere.

:eyes:

[salguine]

35. We have two major oil-related problems.

The first is our dependence on foreign oil. I'm just old enough that I can remember the gas lines when OPEC decided to shut off the spigot in '73. That was a relatively benign situation compared to what could be brought to bear on us, and it should have been a loud, clear wake-up call. We've had thirty-five years to address this problem...and not only have we done NOTHING, but we're in an even bigger hole now that we were then. As long as other oil-exporting countries have that hanging over us, they have us by the balls. That's the only way to put it. And that's an unacceptable national security situation.

The second is our use of oil, period. It's no secret that something drastic is going to have to be done to combat global warming and other environmental problems that stem largely from our continued burning of oil. We simply can't go on like this; the future of life on this planet demands drastic changes in our energy policy. It's unlikely that we'd be able to eliminate the use of oil entirely, but its consumption is going to have to be reduced to a fraction of its current level.

Domestic drilling isn't going to solve either of these problems in the long term. And as a society Americans are notoriously bad about thinking in the long term; God knows our politicians can't see past the next election.

If we're going to do anything, we should be working on ways to get off oil altogether, or nearly so. By taking on the second problem, we attack the first simultaneously.

And we'd better not waste any more time.

[Solon]

37. Oil production peaked in the Lower 48 in 1971...

of the fields that are new(including Alaska, and the Coasts), most are expensive to get out of the ground and far too small to make a difference in oil prices or prices at the pump. What your Dad said was basically feel good BS from Republicans who want to try to give subsidies to big oil companies for unprofitable fields.

[raccoon]

38. Just where the hell is it? DU'ers, it might be in yo' own backyard! nt

[demo dutch]

40. Because it's time to create alternative sources like the rest of the world, global warming remember!