Advertisement

Letters to the Editor

Drilling barrier

August 4, 2008

Advertisement

To the editor:

Why aren't the oil companies drilling?

Nancy Pelosi and others, responding to the "drill here, drill now" movement, have pointed out that the oil companies hold leases on which they are not drilling. This statement is true, as far as it goes. What is not stated is why the lack of drilling.

Chevron's experience in Florida in the 1980s may be instructive. Chevron had a lease over an area off shore of Florida. Studies showed that a major oil and/or natural gas deposit lay beneath the water. Chevron sank a few exploratory wells and found that the studies were accurate. But no production followed. While Chevron had permission for exploration, they did not have permission for production.

Chevron spent nearly 10 years attempting to get the needed permits to start production and never obtained those permits. Ultimately, they agreed to a government buyback of their lease. So, the reason those oil companies may not be drilling is that they know they have permission to explore, but not permission to produce. Why spend the dollars to explore if they will never be given permission to produce?

So, Pelosi's statement is accurate, but it does not tell the entire story.

Also, you "drill here, drill now" folks should make sure that IF any such law passes, that it grants production rights at the same time it grants exploration rights. Otherwise, you will be left with the same situation that exists now.

Brent Garner,

Lawrence

Comments

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

http://www.niledillmore.com/node/79March 5, 2007: Last week, the House sidestepped a vote on a bill that would remove protection for K-12 public and private school teachers when someone accuses them of using obscene materials: The bill, sponsor, Lance Kinzer, an Olathe Republican and attorney, then tried to re-refer the bill back to the Federal & State committee. That failed by a large margin. There was some suspicion among legislators that his bill was in response to a group of parents in Blue Valley school district that have attempted unsuccessfully to get the school board to prohibit teachers in that district from using 15 books that the parents find objectionable. The board refused. The books include:I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings by Maya AngelouThe Awakening by Kate ChopinThe Lords of Discipline by Pat ConroyOne Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest by Ken KeseyThe Giver by Lois LowryAll the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthyBeloved, The Bluest Eye, and Song of Solomon by Toni MorrisonBlack Boy by Richard Wright

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

"This is Kansas, and there are far too many people like you (dumb, flat-earthers, anti-suffragists, book-burners and outright bigots)" -max1"The supreme irony of the leftist bigot." -screedposterscreedposter, I'm not surprised to see you here defending your flock. "Barack Hussein Obama, closet Muslim (denies), black man-ain't happenin' : I'm afraid you're out of touch if you think America will elect a black man to the highest office. " -right_thinker[Kansas State School Board chairman Steve] Abrams himself still publicly admits he is a so-called young-Earth creationist - one who believes Earth is as little as 5,000 years old, based on a reading of the Bible."Anyone see the dinosaurs? These are metaphysical speculations."-David Awbrey (mouthpiece for the Kansas State Department of Education)http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug/01/obama_too_good_be_true/malcolm_x_obama (Anonymous) says: The 19th amendment should never have been ratified. Women should have been allowed to raise the children and serve the family. Their is no greater calling than to serve. Most of the social problems today stem from the ratification of the 19th amendment."The mission of women is to be beautiful and to bring children into the world. The female bird pretties herself for her mate and hatches eggs for him. In exchange, the male takes care of gathering food, and stands guard and wards off the enemy."-Joseph GoebbelsKay O'Connor is a "pretty bird":http://webpages.charter.net/micah/kay.jpgkansascity.comA prominent female state senator [Republican Senator Kay O'Connor of Olathe] has said that she does not support the 19th Amendment, which guarantees women the right to vote, and that if it were being considered today she would vote against it: when league co-president Delores Furtado asked her if she was planning to attend the league's "Celebrate the Right to Vote" luncheon."You probably wouldn't want me there because of what I would have to say," O'Connor told Furtado.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"Now that we have squandered our national wealth trying to secure oil fields for the president's friends,"I assume that this comment is related to Iraq. On a thread about domestic drilling. Man, you are really good at this reason and rhetoric stuff! I'm guessing you have a liberal arts degree even."More drilling will simply give us a blip of relief some years in the future. And not a bit of help today."As opposed to the Pelosi / Obama plan, which gives a blip of relief right now, at the expense of our Strategic oil reserve, in a time of War in the Persian Gulf, and provides no relief some years in the future.Prepare to lose your election, brilliant libs!"As long as we continue to ignore alternative sources of energy and continue to demand more and more oil, more drilling won't solve the problem."By "we" I assume you mean you and China, since The U.S. demand for oil has actually decreased in the last two years.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"with no stick to force automakers to create alternative/hybird vehicles,"Sticks and force! And Bush is the fascist! You people kill me!

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"With the exception of reducing sprawl, most of these things already exist."That must be why gas is so cheap.

0

texburgh 5 years, 8 months ago

Screedposter responds to my earlier post:"'Mass transit, alternative fuels, hybrid and electric engines, the reduction of suburban and exurban sprawl will do far more to impact oil prices than more drilling.'""Oh, yeah, that's much quicker."Actually it is. With the exception of reducing sprawl, most of these things already exist. Granted it takes investment to get them going but the policies of the Bush administration have decreased the incentives for private industry to make those investments (with no stick to force automakers to create alternative/hybird vehicles, the American companies sat on their hands, created the Hummer, and let the Japanese leap frog ahead of them in the area of hybrids.) Now the automakers are reeling from losses and frantically scrambling to make up lost ground.Mass transit is simply an investment. Local, state, and federal governments could have made all the difference with investments in mass transit. Instead, they assured people that the supply of gasoline was plentiful, cheap, and secure. And the American people, following the lead of our government, have failed to support mass transit investments. Once again we let the other developed nations leap frog ahead of us while we encouraged the individual use of the automobile in support of real estate developers, oil companies, and the American auto industry. Now that we have squandered our national wealth trying to secure oil fields for the president's friends, we have nothing to invest in real long term solutions. More drilling will simply give us a blip of relief some years in the future. And not a bit of help today. As long as we continue to ignore alternative sources of energy and continue to demand more and more oil, more drilling won't solve the problem.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

Bottom line:The Iranians are threatening to close the straights of Hormuz if the Nuke negotiations yeild more sanctions. And Obama's suggestion: Tap the Strategic Petroleum reserve.The worldwide supply of oil is tightening. And Obama's suggestion: Don't drill.The current suppliers are some of the worst environmental polluters on the planet.And Obama's suggestion: Keep buying their oil.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"Actually, that would be the prospect of decreased demand."And Iraqi Stability. And Nigerian Stability. And the news that the last hurricane didn't damage the wells. And the pressure to drill. Sorry, I was in a hurry. I'll repost:"We can approve offshore drilling or ANWR drilling tomorrow and it would be years before there would be any impact on oil prices"False. The prospect of increased supply will move many speculators out of the Oil Markets. It already has, Oil has fallen about 15 bucks last month, due to this prospect and other factors."Mass transit, alternative fuels, hybrid and electric engines, the reduction of suburban and exurban sprawl will do far more to impact oil prices than more drilling."Oh, yeah, that's much quicker.

0

chet_larock 5 years, 8 months ago

"False. The prospect of increased supply will move many speculators out of the Oil Markets. It already has, Oil has fallen about 15 bucks last month."Actually, that would be the prospect of decreased demand.

0

invictus 5 years, 8 months ago

What we have here is environmentalist and industry conspiring against the average person. Get ready for more and more. We now work to provide both with extravagant life styles. They meet at the same country club for brunch every Sunday.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"We can approve offshore drilling or ANWR drilling tomorrow and it would be years before there would be any impact on oil prices"False. The prospect of increased supply will move many speculators out of the Oil Markets. It already has, Oil has fallen about 15 bucks last month."Mass transit, alternative fuels, hybrid and electric engines, the reduction of suburban and exurban sprawl will do far more to impact oil prices than more drilling."Oh, yeah, that's much quicker.

0

texburgh 5 years, 8 months ago

All of this drilling debate is nonsense. We can approve offshore drilling or ANWR drilling tomorrow and it would be years before there would be any impact on oil prices - if there would be any impact at all! We have these prices today because of the foolish and failed policies of Bush/Cheney/Halliburton. They started an unnecessary and foolish war in Iraq by lying to the American public and congress. They certainly believed they would end up controlling Iraqi oil. Instead they have put the US military in the middle of a civil war/quagmire, seriously disrupted Iraqi oil output, spent our nation to the brink of bankruptcy, and ticked off every middle east oil producing nation. Oil prices are where they are because our president is a fool guided by fools. Add to this repeatedly backing down on fuel consumption standards for vehicles so American car companies produce Hummers and Suburbans and other gas guzzling vehicles while ignoring new technoligies that would reduce our dependence on oil. Ever hear of supply and demand? Even with new drilling allowed, the supply will not meet our demand in the near term. It's long past time for the US to stop whining about oil and shake our addiction. It's long past time to enforce fuel economy standards. It's long past time to invest heavily in alternative energy sources and alternatives to the internal combustion engine.When we keep doing the same thing, why do we think we'll get different results? Mass transit, alternative fuels, hybrid and electric engines, the reduction of suburban and exurban sprawl will do far more to impact oil prices than more drilling. It's too bad that so many of us have been duped into believing that offshore or ANWR drilling is the great panacea.

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"By the way, Mexico (Pemex) is predicted to export basically no oil at all within ten years. They're down 15% this year over last year alone."How about Iran? Same story i hear.

0

average 5 years, 8 months ago

Sorry, we consume 20 million barrels per day. The world consumes about 85.

0

average 5 years, 8 months ago

Cato: The most optimistic estimate I can find for ANWR "technically recoverable oil" is 16 billion barrels. Estimates for actual recovery are at about 4 billion. The US consumes over 20 billion barrels a day (and the economy isn't happy unless that's growing by at least 1.5% per year). 22 years??? Try 1 to 3.Now, we would be getting oil for at least 22 years, yes. The estimate for max flow rate from ANWR oil will be 500k barrels per day. Or, half what we import from Mexico today 1.2 mbpd. By the way, Mexico (Pemex) is predicted to export basically no oil at all within ten years. They're down 15% this year over last year alone.

0

Andrew Stahmer 5 years, 8 months ago

Oh, come on cato....don't you realize it would take at least 500 years to get anything from ANWR? ...and even in that 500 years it still wouldn't be enough to fill your gas tank 1/5th!!What is the big deal? We're not paying $15/gallon right now!! (...and even if we were; those cute little adorable creatures that might be inconvinenced by drillijng are far more important than you!!!)

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Average, the "last little bits?" We've got 22 years worth of oil in ANWR alone, which can be utilized while alternative sources are perfected. When offshore is added, we can greatly increase our independence from foreign sources. Yes, we do view things differently.

0

average 5 years, 8 months ago

cato_the_elder:Seeing the same thing two ways is obviously going to be subjective.My read is that Obama is seeking to use drilling options as bargaining chips to get other energy things he wants (investment in alternative energy, fuel efficiency standards, rebates, transit, etc). Things McCain, when he was chairman of the Commerce/Transportation Committee, did everything he could to prevent. The GOP is playing this as a problem-solver. It isn't. Drilling the last little bits extends the happy-motoring eternal-growth party for a couple more years. It doesn't help the inevitable hangover.McCain isn't seeking legislative bargaining to get something done. Hell, McCain hasn't been to the Senate since March.

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Average, point taken - but I view it as Senator McCain's simply having come to the conclusion that in light of what we were facing, a blanket ban on offshore drilling was a luxury that we could no longer afford. Conversely, it's quite clear that Senator Obama had to be forcibly dragged into announcing his "change of position" for political reasons only, because he and his party were getting killed on it - and, frankly, I don't believe him. There are a number of issues, including expanded drilling, that in my opinion would get flip-flopped back if Obama were elected with an even more Democrat-dominated Congress, the first of those being FISA - which would be hypocritically eviscerated as soon as they had the chance, with their prior votes this year counting for nothing.

0

scott3460 5 years, 8 months ago

Thank you Democrats, Obama and McCain for the lowering of oil prices (despite bush & cheney's best efforts.) Threats of regulation of oil speculators and the very real talk of a new approach and path toward energy independence has resulted in lowering prices. It is a combination of a number of other things too, such as bush's finally realizing that negotiation with an enemy such as Iran is not the wrong approach (remember he snuck this in right before Obama's huge tour of the Middle East and Europe,) a very real threat that the oil reserve may finally be tapped, American's reducing our consumption significantly (by inflating those tires and tuning up those cars) and the dumb luck of few hurricanes. So, thanks to all, now let's get to work on finding the right combination of resources that will get us quickly to independence.

0

JHOK32 5 years, 8 months ago

We need a HUGE change. Bush & his big oil buddies have been financially raping this country. Exxon-Mobil posted the highest profits in U.S. history - $11 Billion dollars that WE are paying for, not to mention Bush's $ 500 Billion dollar deficit he is leaving -that WE are paying for. Not to mention his $ 560 Billion dollar war to profit big oil that WE are paying for. Wake up America. We are begging for change! At least Obama will return $1000 per MIDDLE class family to us working stiffs that big oil has robbed from us. Maybe we can get back a slivver of the $ 25 Million dollars that Ex-Mobil's CEO got last year

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

Re: Satirical's Oil comments;Here's a good reason to throw Obama's "Energy Plan" in the dustbin where it belongs:http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iran-threatens-to-shut-strait-of-hormuz/83142/?print=2330787121Iran Threatens To Shut Straits of HormuzSounds like a good time to burn through our strrategic oil reserve and not drill here!

0

75x55 5 years, 8 months ago

Brent - "Byzantine"One word perfection.

0

average 5 years, 8 months ago

cato_the_elder:Wouldn't you agree that since McCain was also opposed to expanded offshore drilling for years, including through March of this year (looking for primary votes in Florida and California), that his current position is also a major flip-flop?

0

George Lippencott 5 years, 8 months ago

Hey Merrill are we going to let them make money or just demand they spend their money for no return so as to avoid the problemYes, alternate energy sources need to be implemented - faster if possible. That said it will be about a decade before we get to 20% wind energy. Truely alternate fuel cars wil probably take longer. In the interim we need oil to run our industries as well as our transportation systems. Just think how fast we could progress if we weren't transferring hundreds of billions a year to the foreign oil producers at their price. This is a big problem and stupid slogans or class hatred will not solve it. Remember ECON 101. we will not get alternatives unless they are money making.By the by, any of you coming to the energy efficiency symposium later this year. Maybe you could offer constructive alternatives rather than Bush hating bull.

0

Richard Heckler 5 years, 8 months ago

July 18,2008New York TimesWASHINGTON - House Republicans on Thursday blocked a Democratic effort to pressure energy companies into drilling for oil on lands they already leased from the federal government.......

0

Alison Carter 5 years, 8 months ago

"Moderate" - keep posting those Econ 101 lessons on future stories about the economy. KISS KISS

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Monkeyspunk, President Bush said essentially the same thing in his State of the Union address on January 31, 2006. Where have you been?

0

monkeyspunk 5 years, 8 months ago

Some very educational and excellent posts by max1 and tolawdjk. Seriously, thank you.It's time to change how we think about energy and honestly, while the discussion about where to get oil is important, we should be arguing about what to do after oil. Again, these types of issues are placed in front of us by both parties to distract us from the real issue. That its time to kick the habit. Say it with me:"Hello, my name is Uncle Sam, and I am an Oil-oholic."

0

George Lippencott 5 years, 8 months ago

How about Econ 101. A company buys a lease and spends zillons to drill to determine if there is a profit to be had. Then somebody comes along (doesn't matter who) and says you can't get the return expected. If that were me I would not make the same mistake twice. Could that be why all those leases are dormantThe regulatory process needs to be simple and definitive. Either you can or you can't from early in the game. Unless we want the federal government in the oil exploration and development business with a hefty does of increased taxes we need to KISS.Lawrence has a similar problem. The plethora of rules pretaining to and groups that get to comment on an investment by business makes the planning expense questionable. Ottawa for example keeps it more professional.

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Max1, I'm delighted to have irritated you that much. Hope I can do it again soon.

0

madmike 5 years, 8 months ago

Now now Screed, the far-left is all-knowing and it is just the rest of the owrld that aren't enlightened like they are. The frauds with their "diversity" decals on their cars only mean different shades of the left. Everyone else will be sent to re-education camps when they take over!

0

screedposter 5 years, 8 months ago

"This is Kansas, and there are far too many people like you (dumb, flat-earthers, anti-suffragists, book-burners and outright bigots)"The supreme irony of the leftist bigot.

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

' And, by the way, I'm not at all "senile" ' -old_man_catoIf you are not senile, then you must be retarded, and chances are, the condition of your body resembles your mental state -- flabby and pathetic.Now get out there and elect some good ole Republican flat-earthers. Late-night comedians are depending on you.

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Max1, your 9:18 response was exactly what I thought you'd say. And, by the way, I'm not at all "senile" (your word from an earlier post), and chances are that I'm in significantly better physical shape than you are.

0

Alison Carter 5 years, 8 months ago

I like to read bkgarner's thoughtful, nearly nonpartisan writing on this subject matter. Congress, the press and the public continue to parrot one another's misleading sound bites. Oil and other economic issues are difficult subjects to understand, write about and read. Right now it seems easier to bash one another than encourage a bipartisan discussion and development of policy.

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

"Or do you even vote?" -old_man_catoI keep my voter registration current, so that when I refuse to vote my non-vote is reflected in the voter-turnout statistics. I think that's important.Why should I bother to vote? This is Kansas, and there are far too many people like you (dumb, flat-earthers, anti-suffragists, book-burners and outright bigots) for my vote to count on the national level, and as far as local elections go -- our local politicians always represent their very own self-serving special-interest groups rather than me, so that is why I rarely vote. Besides, I like to laugh at the dimwits you and your ilk elect to office anyway, and I enjoy the e-mail I get from all over the world that pokes fun at Kansans. That's why I'm hoping Alan Detrich gets elected. He sounds like a hoot!Incidentally, Matt Drudge doesn't vote, and he's political, so why should I participate in your silly reindeer games?http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2008/aug/03/evolution_issue_board_race/In the Republican Party primary for the District 4 position, which includes most of Lawrence, Robert Meissner, a dentist from Topeka, faces Alan Detrich, a fossil hunter from Lawrence.http://www.70disco.com/startrek/primedir.htm

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Max1, who says that I have to agree with every position that Senator McCain has ever taken? Do you agree with every position that Senator Obama has ever taken? Or, after the Senator's major flip-flop on offshore drilling, are you now voting for Ralph Nader? Or, perhaps, is even Mr. Nader not radically left enough for you? Or do you even vote?

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

"There is no comprimising the enviroment max1" -barrypendersAugust 2, 2008http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080103199.html"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, said in an interview with the Palm Beach Post. "If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well-thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage -- I don't want to be so rigid that we can't get something done." . . . The compromise "would repeal tax breaks for oil companies so that we can invest billions in fuel-efficient cars, help our automakers re-tool, and make a genuine commitment to renewable sources of energy . . . " Obama said.

0

Brent Garner 5 years, 8 months ago

The point of my letter to the editor is that there is, as in so many things that the government oversees, multitudinal layers of rules and regulations which make it difficult if not impossible to get many things done. One poster points out, accurately, that we need more refineries. This is true and the reason we don't have more refineries is a combination of corporate decisions to raise profit margins at refineries combined with government regulations combined with legal actions taken by environmental groups. All of these combine to cause the consumer to get gouged. The same is true for oil exploration and, more importantly, oil development in the US and its off shore areas. The envrionmentalists, rightly, are concerned about preserving the environment. The oil companies want to preserve profits. The govenment's system of regulating all of this is such a hodgepodge that it takes an army of lawyers to try to wade through things. Then there are the seeminly endless litigations that always ensue. The result is that special interest groups on all sides of this issue, adamantly and singly pursuing their own focused agenda, unwittingly or wittingly combine to wreck havoc on the consumer. I am strongly suggesting that this Byzantine system be reformed. I do not see why it cannot be changed and still make everyone more or less happy. But, until it is, I promise you, the net effect will be an ever increasing burden on the consumer, who ultimately pays the cost of this unwieldy system we live with.

0

tolawdjk 5 years, 8 months ago

rtwngr quoth, "The problem is not lack of oil or oil reserves but the lack of refineries. No new refineries have been built in 30 years. The EPA shut down a number of existing refineries under pressure from the environmental left. The EPA will not issue new permits to build new refineries or re-open existing facilities. So we have what we have."Complete, total, and absolute hogwash. EPA does not issue permits to any facility operating on state land. In Kansas that pretty much means that unless someone wants to build a refinery next to the Indian casinos, they have to go to KDHE.The rest of the US is in the same boat. Unless you propose to build on tribal land (and there is one refinery currently proposed to begin construction on tribal land in ND.) you have to submit a permit application to the state you want to construct in.As to EPA mandated shut downs? Again, hogwash. Small and middle sized refineries closed down because they could not operate economically given the price of refined product and the cost of crude at the time. Those small refineries still don't reopen because it is -still- uneconomic to reopen. 20+ years of neglect would have to be repaired before you could even begin to discuss expansion to a profitacble size facility and the required new units to make it so. Many of these little plants were straight run units when they shut down and lacked the cat cracking, reforming, coking, and impurity removal process units you need in a modern refinery to efficiently produce gas.And if we build a refinery today, so what? Oil is still $120 a barrel. Refining $120 a barrel gas costs, oh, just enough that the US average is still $3.90 -after- demand has gone down do to costs. So unless your new, fancy, dreamed of refinery capacity has a sexy new way of refining such that is can make profitable gas and sell it for less than $3.90, your arguement is pissing into the wind. But hey, its soooo much easier to throw around unfounded accusations than it is to educate yourself on an issue. I love these ignoramiouses that seem to think that more drilled crude or more refining capacity is going to magically bring back even $2.50 gas.Sorry people, China and India say differently. They want the American dream too, and thanks to offshoring jobs and manufacturing, they don't even have to jump the borders illegially to get it. The only way that the US is going to do jack squat about transportation costs is to fundamenatlly change the way we look at energy usage.

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

"When President Clinton vetoed the ANWR drilling bill blah blah blah . . . " -senile_old_man_catoWhy is drilling offshore preferable to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge?"Because the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge." -McCain

0

Daytrader23 5 years, 8 months ago

rtwngr (Anonymous) says:The problem is not lack of oil or oil reserves but the lack of refineries. No new refineries have been built in 30 years. The EPA shut down a number of existing refineries under pressure from the environmental left. The EPA will not issue new permits to build new refineries or re-open existing facilities. So we have what we have.---------------------------------------------And the head of the E.P.A is a former Exxon exec. appointed by Bush. So Bush and his friends are now left wing environmental radicals? Go on, blame the Dems for the last 8 years as we all know it's their faults. How about the real reason they are not drilling, There is NO oil, well not enough to make it profitable even with oil over $100 dollars a barrel. Every expert that is not financed by the oil companies agrees that we have reached peak oil. Even the actions from the oil companies themselves prove this point. They are either taking the money and running or they are investing in renewable energy sources, actions speak louder than words. They have the permits, they have the technology but they are not drilling because there is not as much oil as they claimed.

0

barrypenders 5 years, 8 months ago

There is no comprimising the enviroment max1.Obama is spinless.

0

rtwngr 5 years, 8 months ago

The problem is not lack of oil or oil reserves but the lack of refineries. No new refineries have been built in 30 years. The EPA shut down a number of existing refineries under pressure from the environmental left. The EPA will not issue new permits to build new refineries or re-open existing facilities. So we have what we have.

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

Max1, I take it then that if someone sends you to the store to buy a pair of flip-flops, you come home with hiking boots instead.

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=774062Between 1999 and 2007, the federal government increased the number of drilling permits by 361%. While the Bureau of Land Management issued 28,776 permits to drill on public land in the last four years, wells have not been drilled on over a third (9,822).With oil companies asking for more federal lands when they aren't producing oil on most of their current leases, it is time for Congress to step in and insist on some accountability. That is why I introduced the "Use It or Lose It" bill, which requires oil companies to show they are either producing oil or gas, or making progress with exploring and developing current leases, before they obtain more leases.http://www.alligator.org/articles/2008/07/22/news/local/080722_drilling.txtLegislation ["useitorloseit" bill] aimed at spurring domestic drilling on alreadyleased lands was defeated in the House of Representatives on Thursday.Democrats proposed the initiative in response to Republican calls for increased offshore oil and natural gas drilling . . . The defeated bill, alongside recent efforts in the House, called into question the 68 million acres of federally leased land that are not being drilled, according to a June report by the House's Committee on Natural Resources.Those 68 million acres could produce 4.8 million barrels of oil daily, nearly doubling current U.S. production, according to the report.The report states that oil companies are holding 10,000 drilling permits for land that is not being developed.

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

Hey, old_man_cato, Obama didn't flip flop on the oil drilling issue -- he said he was willing to compromise to get an energy bill passed.July 31, 2008http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,395312,00.htmlInterview With New York Congressman Maurice Hinchey Rep. Maurice Hinchey: Brian, how are you?Yes, we're seeing a lot of votes on the floor today. And the oil companies have access to huge amounts of land that they can drill on. They can drill offshore. They can drill onshore. They can drill in Alaska. They have been given the permits to do so, but they're not doing it.Sullivan: That's because much of those parcels are simply not viable or too expensive, though, correct?Hinchey: No, no, no. That's incorrect. All of that land is very viable. They have already leased it. . . They have more drilling permits issued by this administration than any other administration in the past. Yet, they're only using a fraction of those drilling permits.They have 68 million acres down here in the lower 48 states, both on dry land and offshore, which they're not using. They have access to another 20 million acres up in Alaska they're not using. . . the land that's available to them now, both here in the lower 48 states, on dry land, and the land that's available to them off the coast, particularly in the Gulf of Mexico, is the least expensive, most readily available that they're going to find, the least expensive. . . Why aren't these energy companies using it? Why is this president putting out another example of the falsification of information?Hinchey: Brian, ExxonMobil last year made $40 billion. Did they put any of that $40 billion...Sullivan: Yes, and just sold all its retail gas stations because they weren't making any money on them.Hinchey: Did they put any of that $40 billion back in anything usable? No. They spent $32 billion buying back their own stock to put more money in their pockets.

0

cato_the_elder 5 years, 8 months ago

When President Clinton vetoed the ANWR drilling bill finally passed by the Republican Congress in 1996, we were denied access to 75 billion barrels of oil that would have been available for our use since that time. The good news is that they still are. The bad news is that the Democrat-controlled Congress won't allow a bill to get to the floor, and last week even shut down the Capitol building and turned off its lights to prevent Republicans from using the House Chambers to make their point. Americans have now awakened to the fact that the Democrats' leadership in Washington is bought and sold by the Sierra Club and other radical environmentalist groups, which has even caused Senator Obama to announce his recent major flip-flop on offshore oil drilling. Drill now, and drill often - and if the Democrats won't allow it, then remove them from office.

0

max1 5 years, 8 months ago

Merrill is correct.It was the State of Florida that stopped Chevron's Destin Dome development, and as a result of Florida's litigation, Chevron's drilling permits in the Destin Dome fields can't be renewed unless both the State of Florida and the Federal Government agree to allow them. Even McCain has said that permits for offshore drilling should be decided by the States where the drilling would occur, so Brent, take your complaints to Jeb and George.http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2008/jul/10/ha-more-drilling-wont-reduce-dependence-on-foreign/It was, after all, Republican President George Bush I who imposed the offshore drilling moratorium in the first place. And who was the ecocrazy who shut down drilling of the Destin Dome? Well, that would be George Bush II. He was acting to meet the concerns of the governor of Florida, that notorious environmental fanatic, Jeb Bush.01 Aug 2008http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/8/1/155257/2389"In fact I met with oil executives just a few days ago in California ... and the fact is that we can, using existing facilities, expand our oil production within months, according to these executives." -McCain"In an area like Destin Dome, offshore Florida, where there is a confirmed discovery of natural gas and infrastructure exists, supplies could come on more quickly, perhaps in less than five years. Frontier and deepwater areas with no infrastructure in place would take longer." -American Petroleum InstituteGuy Caruso, the Bush-appointed head of the Energy Information Administration, has said that offshore drilling wouldn't affect the price of gas very much, citing a recent report from his agency. This directly counters claims that drilling would bring down energy prices in the short term.

0

Richard Heckler 5 years, 8 months ago

Maybe Chevron could not drill due to a ban on drilling in environmentally sensitive areas supported by GW and Jeb while Jeb lived in Florida?McCain campaign is lying about control gasoline prices:so what's new?All of a sudden there is an endless supply of oil in ANWR:.bogus. Why then is the USA oil cartel trying to take control of mideast oil after they were booted out about 40 years ago?With 69,000,000 acres in the USA designated for drilling why are they not drilling?Once again consumers drive the price of all goods based are their willingness to pay what corporate USA decides what the market will bear.Since when can politicians decide the price of anything?Doesn't special interest funding of elections add to the cost of goods? It is after all an expense.Consumers/voters need to worry more about how campaigns are financed!Once people wise up and revolt against special interest funding voters will see a dramatic change in government.Until then McCain commercials are lying about Obama exactly how Bush lied about Kerry and McCain in previous presidential campaigns.Neither candidate can control the price of oil or gasoline!!!! It's up to consumers. Stop buying so much gasoline and find other practical means of getting around for shopping and socializing. Be Smart!Vote Obama! Vote Obama! Vote Obama!

0

VTHawk 5 years, 8 months ago

Wait...Pelosi would be deceptive?!?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.