Advertisement

Archive for Sunday, July 20, 2008

Bush: Congress should allow more oil drilling

July 20, 2008

Advertisement

— Responding to Americans' anger over gas prices and the housing bust, President Bush is stepping up pressure on Congress to open up offshore oil exploration and work to restore confidence in the housing finance industry.

"This is a challenging time for families across our nation," Bush said Saturday in his weekly radio address. "I know many families are worried about rising prices at the pump and declining home values."

Bush recently lifted an executive ban on offshore oil drilling. He said it's Congress' turn to act.

"The only thing now standing between the American people and the vast oil resources of the Outer Continental Shelf is action from the United States Congress," he said.

With soaring gas prices, public opinion on energy issues is shifting in favor of a more permissive stance on drilling, even though resistance remains to the idea of opening the Atlantic and Pacific coasts or the eastern Gulf off Florida's beaches to oil and gas companies.

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 5 months ago

The business of the major oil companies is making profits for its stockholders, not producing oil. Just because difficult to drill areas are opened for drilling doesn't mean that any drilling will take place there, because it's so expensive to do so. That's why so many leases they currently have on millions of acres of public lands are sitting idle. They'll likely just use their capital to make easier money elsewhere.

scott3460 6 years, 5 months ago

Wasn't it bush who, correctly, asserted in a State of the Union speech a few years ago that we were a nation addicted to oil? So his solution is to enable our addiction by increasing supply? Incredible. As sensible Progressives have been screaming for the last 40 years, the answer is massive government investment in the development of alternative energy solutions. Something akin to the space program of the 1950-60's (take a moment to look around you at all the innovation that government "interference" with the marketplace produced) Everyone knows we must develop these new technologies. I, for one, would much prefer my tax dollars be used in this manner than having the money funnelled to the usual war profiteers.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

"The IXTOC 1 blowout, the largest in world history, befouled Texas beaches."The point is that China and 14 other countries are already drilling in the gulf, and would care less for environmental catastrophe, than regulated U. S. Petro Companies. There is also going to be lots of drilling in the North Pole by Russia.Point being is that it will be done, and these countries that are and will be drilling are not and will not agonize over whether there is any "environmental damage". This will happen whether the U. S. drills in these places or not.In the meantime, the United States fleet (your car, your neighbors cars, the trucks and busses, and all the boats, motorcycles, ATVs and go carts give us an extimated fleet size of 250,000,000, and all of them with a gas tank that takes liquid fuel.It will take years to "turn over" this fleet to alts and electric. The best we can do for now is to drill, make the fleet more efficient (with hydrogen or methane boost) and cellulosic ethanol support.The problem is liquid fuels.BTW, just llok at the oil price drop jjust when President Bush vacated the Executive order banning the off shore drilling. Went down 28%, so supply is and issue the anti-oil cadre need to recognize and needs to quit being like the evangelicals. You guys are becoming so intolerant and closed minded.

dandelion 6 years, 5 months ago

If prices are so high then it would be profitable to start drilling in all those places that have oil, or at least wise to stop leasing the land. I'll bet if they open up the off shore drilling, the oil companies will not drill. Why do it now, if they are making lots of money already? Why not wait until the price goes up even further? We've allowed ourselves to become addicted to oil, and the companies have us by the balls and can twist them all they want. They don't have to do the patriotic or humane thing. They just have to get rich.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 5 months ago

So wonderful of you to come here to pump yourself up, Asby baby. Feel better?

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

"That's why so many leases they currently have on millions of acres of public lands are sitting idle."Negative and a lie stated by politicians and talking heads. The 68,000,000 "leased acres" on federal lands is being checked and most does not have any oil on it, or if it does, there is not enough there to develope, and that is not "too expensive to produce" as a simpleton response from Bozo. Any commodity has a set level upon where it is "economically viable to produce", the price just has to get high enough. Kansas is proof of that. Look at all the wells pumping like no tomorrow. The cost in Kansas to be "economically viable" is $58 per 40 gallon barrel in today's dollars. Yes, Kansas is cashing in on the oil boom, but those "68,000,000 acres" you are talking about are far below the Kansas productin economic levels and would not be viable until oil hits $300 per barrel. However in the gulf, we already know there is devlopment grade reserves and deposits there. Bozo you need to quit posting on things you know nothing about.

dandelion 6 years, 5 months ago

Bozo's point is that just because they allow the drilling doesn't mean it's going to happen. Reinvesting money in a business in the long run is best for the business, but today's companies and investors are looking out only for the here and now, not the future. If it's going to cut into the profits, then they are happy with the status quo. Why invest in drilling if you are making a lot of money? They can afford the price of gasoline, their shareholders are happy. They could care less about the economy. Their economy is just fine.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

"Much of it is also speculation (actually, a really big part of it),..."I agree with you on that Das. But the price did drop from the highs of 147 to 120, which shows the speculation for what it is. Just the mere mention made a $20 per barrel drop."As sensible Progressives have been screaming for the last 40 years, the answer is massive government investment in the development of alternative energy solutions."Progressives are not the only ones screaming about the energy policy (and lack thereof), the conservatives have been as well. If you remember though that ALL of the administrations and Congresses since Jimmy Carter have not addressed energy policy. President Clintoh had the Whitehouse, the Senate, and the HoR (appropriate to the 'w hore s" they are) with Democratic Majority and President Bush has the Whitehouse, Senate, and HoR as well with GOP majority, neither of these administrationd did anything other than divide the country.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

At $120 a barrel the Oil companies will want to sell even more, and produce more. SO your arguments is not very objective or fact driven.Nobody seemed to notice that the refineries are running at 138% rated capacity now with gas the price it is. Right before Katrina they were running at 98% rated capacity.None of the politicians or talking heads noticed that at all, and neither did you. That means that the refineries are getting product "out the door" at a very high rate, and that they were "bottle necking" production a couple years ago to drive up prices. SO you were right 2 years ago, but now they want to produce while the getting is good.Start think for yourself, it works much better than getting your thinking and opinion from Daily Kos.

Frank Smith 6 years, 5 months ago

There's not all that much oil on the Outer Continental Shelf where McBush wants to drill, it's difficult to extract, it's dangerous. It would take about 10 years to come on line.The IXTOC 1 blowout, the largest in world history, befouled Texas beaches. The worst thing we could do is exactly what BuCain wants: To exploit our remaining resources and leave ourselves completely at the mercy of OPEC in 15 years or so.How responsible are these corporations? Well, EXXON is still fighting the 1994 judgment against it for the 1989 EXXON Valdez spill, captained by the drunken Hazelwood. It's had the settlement reduced by 90% by its friends on the Supreme Court, yet it still doesn't want to pay the 32,000 plaintiffs, 20% of whom have died since the judgment was entered. That's less than five days profits for EXXON, the world's richest and most rapacious corporation.

Sigmund 6 years, 5 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says: "If this is such a great idea, why didn't Bush propose this a few years back when he had the numbers in his favor in Congress?"Umm he did. "In 1996 the Republican-majority House and Senate voted to allow drilling in ANWR, but this legislation was vetoed by President Clinton. In the 2000s, votes about the status of the refuge occurred repeatedly in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, but as of 2007 efforts to allow drilling have been stopped by amendments, filibusters, or vetoes."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Refuge_drilling_controversyA large majority of Alaskans support drilling in ANWR, including every governor, senator, representative, and legislature for the past 25 years."Republican leaders failed to rally the 60 votes needed to override a filibuster, falling four votes short. The vote was a defeat for the White House and GOP leaders, who have failed for a fifth consecutive year to boost domestic energy supplies by opening the refuge on Alaska's north coast."http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/12/22/ANWR.TMP&type=printable"Senate blocks oil drilling push for Arctic refuge: GOP leaders hoping to override filibuster on defense spending bill fall 4 votes short", Thursday, December 22, 2005

Bob Harvey 6 years, 5 months ago

I believe it was the sage of our times, Jay Leno, that said. "Yeah but congress said it would take 10 years to make an impact with new drilling, same thing they said 10 years ago".

FairgroveJayhawk 6 years, 5 months ago

What is amazing to me is how we continue to consider oil as the only means of energy that can power our vehicles. The government has the knowledge and ability to produce alternate fuel sources but has declined to do so for the past 30 years. In the number of years it will take to drill in these prestine and offshore areas to see a difference at the pump (unlikely anyways), we could be strongly rooted in alternate energy. It only makes sense from a monetary standpoint, international realtions standpoint and environmental standpoint for our future generations.Too much big money and corruption.

scott3460 6 years, 5 months ago

Asbestos:Agreed on the lack of true leadership.....The fact remains, new ideas, new technologies and, most importantly, I think, governmental backing of the transition is desperately needed & all we are getting at the moment (and it is this moment that matters now) is more nonsense in support of Exxon, BP Oil, Shell, etc.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 5 months ago

China is actually not drilling in the Cuban area in spite of the chatter.... so I read. I heard last night that off shore rigs take years to get underway. Then there is always the idle untapped sources that have been given the green light yet no action from oil people. Anyway oil and gasoline pollute no matter the price.Also that Nuke plants require about fifteen years to bring on line and the energy they produce is wayyyyyyy too expensive. Nobody out there willing to finance high dollar energy when wind,solar,geo-thermal and hydro cost so much less and so very local thus quick payback time.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 5 months ago

Stop buying so much gasoline is one way to save money.Start saving for a hybrid, new bicycles and two new pair of walking shoes. The bike and shoes estimated mpg is at 1,000,000,000 and will allow an incredible number of dollars to be saved.Does anyone really believe politicians and oil cartel executives? One produces tons of special interest campaign dollars,the other accepts the dollars and voters are not demanding a new way to finance political campaigns. Since when has George W. Bush become the economic genius of our time?

Sigmund 6 years, 5 months ago

marcdeveraux (Anonymous) says:"Simple quick fix. nationalize the oil industry. Fire all over priced execs and hire new people at one tenth what the current robber barons make. Why not? Punish the rich and help the average joe."Only if the average Joe is Joe Stalin, III. Seriously, if you took all of the salaries of all the executives of all the oil companies in the World, not just US, the price of gas wouldn't drop a penny, a peso, or a euro. Scapegoating exec's for a failure of the American people to elect a competent government over the last 20 years isn't going to make things any better, and given the choice we have in 08 it isn't going to get any better anytime soon.

Sigmund 6 years, 5 months ago

Historical prices of oil (approx)2002- $30.002004- $40.002006- $60.002008- $120.00What makes sense in 2002 isn't the same as what makes sense in 2008. Offshore drilling might not make sense when the world supply is meeting demand without significantly higher prices. 2008 price is dramatically different.http://www.inflationdata.com/inflation/images/charts/Oil/Inflation_Adj_Oil_Prices_Chart.htm

janeyb 6 years, 5 months ago

I have been reading up on why oil prices fell last week--fuel consumption way off in the US, fuel consumption way off in Europe, a sagging economy in China--nowhere did anyone give George Bush the credit. Following the olympics China is going to stop subsidizing oil to its citizens. It has cost them 50 billion dollars this year and they can't keep it up. When this happens oil prices will drop drastically and Bush will have no chance in hell of getting the increased oil drilling. Time is running out for Dick and George. Their reign of terror is almost over.

Flap Doodle 6 years, 5 months ago

If you're talking about nationalizing oil companies, look south of the border to the financial disaster know as PEMEX."PEMEX, despite its current $77 billion in revenue, pays high taxes that contribute with a large portion of the budget of the federal government. Indeed, in recent years the company has only been able to make ends meet through massive borrowing, so that it now owes a staggering $42.5 billion, including $24 billion in off-balance-sheet debt because the Mexican government treats the company as a major source of revenue. The state-run company pays out over 60% of its revenue in royalties and taxes, and those funds pay for two fifths of the federal government's budget. If oil prices drop or there are no major new discoveries of crude, that could spell big trouble for PEMEX despite its immense revenue stream and expansion prospects. However, in 2005, with record-breaking oil prices (due to the Iraq war, economic expansion of the United States and the People's Republic of China) the company has seen an unexpected excess of funds. This tendency continued in 2006, but these funds have been used to pay salaries of bureaucrats and current costs, instead of being invested in projects of exploration and production; during President Fox administration, these funds represent around 70 billion dollars[2], yet the administration says there is not enough money to pay the debts.To help capitalize the company former President Vicente Fox brought forward the possibility of making shares of PEMEX available to Mexican citizens and pension funds, to complement a current project-specific investment setup known as "Proyectos de Inversión Diferida En El Registro del Gasto" or PIDIREGAS[3]; this proposal, along with alleviating PEMEX's heavy tax burden and a substantial budget increase, have met opposition in Congress.[4][5]President Calderon made clear at the beginning of his presidency that he would respect the constitutional mandate to keep Pemex in government hands, but that he would try his best to open up the sector to private investment.[6]"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEMEX(sorry, couldn't find a youtube clip)

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

You all tend to forget just who has an energy plan.That is T. Boone Pickens, and he has a pretty good plan for Wind, Solar, and natural gas. Although, he owns wind farms, and natural gas sources.His iplan is the only one in existance that can be called an "energy policy". The rest of the Political hacks of "rRs and D's" are stuck on division, and not what is best fot this generation and the next.We still have a U. S. fleet of 250,000,000 that runs on gas. We need some "conversions" technology. I have not heard on one peep here on that from the alt energy crowd.People are not going to spend 15 grand and ditch their current running auto. We need the liquid fuels.

gccs14r 6 years, 5 months ago

"The point is that China and 14 other countries are already drilling in the gulf, and would care less for environmental catastrophe, than regulated U. S. Petro Companies. There is also going to be lots of drilling in the North Pole by Russia."They're not drilling in our waters, though. We claim a 200 mile exclusive economic zone, but if another country's waters get in the way, we split the difference. The rigs 50 miles off Key West are in Cuban waters. We can't do anything about that, but we can protect our own ecology the best we can and part of that is not drilling here. Having all the oil we want to burn won't do us any good if we can't breathe the air, drink the water, or eat the plants. Just because China is an ongoing environmental catastrophe doesn't mean we should stop trying to be cleaner and more efficient.

beatrice 6 years, 5 months ago

If this is such a great idea, why didn't Bush propose this a few years back when he had the numbers in his favor in Congress? asbestos, when Bush came into office oil was around $24 a barrel. Dropping the last few days to $120 is nothing to brag about. We need to find alternatives, not just locate more of the same finite resource. I'm glad both Obama and McCain understand this, and I hope President Obama will actually do something about it.

gccs14r 6 years, 5 months ago

"What are you saying, that only the United States counsuer pollution is bad for the globe?"Our per-capita energy use is the highest on the planet. Our per-capita production of greenhouse gasses is also the highest on the planet. In fact, if it weren't for our rapacious appetite for cheap Chinese cr*p, the Chinese wouldn't be polluting as much as they are, either, so we have to count some of their pollution as ours, too. Yes, we're bad for the planet, but we're too ignorant to realize it.

gccs14r 6 years, 5 months ago

Local production and public transportation would fix a lot of our energy problems.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

"Do you mean a multiple day drop then?"YEs, it was a multi day drop.We will see if the "speculators" will be in still on Monday through Friday of next week.""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'"They're not drilling in our waters, though. We claim a 200 mile exclusive economic zone, but if another country's waters get in the way, we split the difference. The rigs 50 miles off Key West are in Cuban waters."Are you serious, or just that gullible? What are you saying, that only the United States counsuer pollution is bad for the globe? That is a pretty revealining anti american sentiment and clearly not a sound environmental policy. If China is going to drill there along with 14 others 50 miles off of Key West, and those countries are not too keen on environmental protections it is our business.What a loney statment!

Sigmund 6 years, 5 months ago

beatrice (Anonymous) says: "Sigmund, no Bush didn't do this before. Only this past week did Bush lift the executive ban on offshore drilling. He never did this before, and the Dems were correct in earlier preventing off-shore drilling from going to a vote. This isn't the solution."I didn't realize the discussion was limited to lifting the ban offshore, my bad. American produced oil from American resources is a partial solution to importing oil and sending those dollars overseas. Every additional barrel produced here is one less we have to buy from the Saudi's and the rest of the world. Doubling our current output of American oil would reduce by about a third the amount of oil we import. The positive economic impact of that cannot be overstated.

ASBESTOS 6 years, 5 months ago

Bea, where was ANY administration. Remember that Bil and AL had the capability as well to find alt fuels and energy."China is actually not drilling in the Cuban area in spite of the chatter:. so I read."Wake up Merrill, they have at least 200 rigs in that area. They have been since 2004, and are doing "slant" drilling, which means they are going after oil under our waters.http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/china_starts_oil_drilling.html

marcdeveraux 6 years, 5 months ago

Simple quick fix. nationalize the oil industry. Fire all over priced execs and hire new people at one tenth what the current robber barons make. Why not? Punish the rich and help the average joe.

beatrice 6 years, 5 months ago

asbestos: "Remember that Bil and AL ..." Do you by any chance mean former President Clinton and Vice-President Gore? Despite your lack of respect shown for the positions of President and Vice President of the United States of America, I agree that they should have done more to push for alternative fuels. And push they would have had to do, since the Republican controlled Congress during most of Clinton's Presidency wouldn't have allowed it. Sigmund, no Bush didn't do this before. Only this past week did Bush lift the executive ban on offshore drilling. He never did this before, and the Dems were correct in earlier preventing off-shore drilling from going to a vote. This isn't the solution.

Sigmund 6 years, 5 months ago

FairgroveJayhawk (Anonymous) says:"What is amazing to me is how we continue to consider oil as the only means of energy that can power our vehicles. The government has the knowledge and ability to produce alternate fuel sources but has declined to do so for the past 30 years."The government produces nothing but words. It is American people industries seeking profit that produce anything in this country. If a economically viable alternative energy source to compete with the cost of oil existed, it would have been invested in and developed privately. The government's one attempt to encourage the alternative, ethanol, has required record amounts of tax breaks and is at best controversial both ecologically and economically. FairgroveJayhawk (Anonymous) says:"In the number of years it will take to drill in these prestine and offshore areas to see a difference at the pump (unlikely anyways), we could be strongly rooted in alternate energy. It only makes sense from a monetary standpoint, international realtions standpoint and environmental standpoint for our future generations."Forcing a move to higher cost energy and away from oil, whether by legislation or by the market raising the cost of oil, is equally disruptive. The impact at the pump today does not require any oil reaching the pump today. The markets, especially the "futures market" are forward looking. If a huge oil find were to occur that doubles the amount of known reserves, the price of oil would begin dropping dramatically before a single drop was produced from that find. The exception, of course, is if we legislated against using that oil, then prices might even increase.

bondmen 6 years, 5 months ago

A wise old man once told me there are two times to plant a tree: ten years ago or right now!

Commenting has been disabled for this item.