The political winds have finally blown the Republicans (McCain, Bush) off the dime and they’re now advocating drilling in ANWR and offshore. Bush even went so far today as saying that we need to stop obstructing the construction of refineries and drilling in the oil shale as well.
Those who are going to blame this on the “Big Oil” lobby are burying their heads in the sand in order to avoid the popular hurricane that’s raised it’s ugly political head in the polls recently. The public is finally getting the economic education they didn’t get in government schools and realizing that the price of energy affects the price of everything else.
Even though it is getting approval there still will be stonewalling and if it does actually pass it would take a few years for any real affect don’t you think?
For those of us who in California who were manipulated by Enron, I smell a
rat. Why not raise prices, reap huge profits and then make a call for drilling in sensitive areas
which would create more huge profits, from an oil company standpoint, it is a win-win situation.
Only facts such as not much oil will be gotten from such drilling while it lays waste
to the environment can stop it. That is what keeping the arctic circle from being despoiled.
No more then a year of oil will come out of any arctic drilling.
I hope you all realize that drilling in the United States would not produce anything for 10 years, and that when it does produce something it won’t change the price of oil, as oil markets are fungible, and domestic oil that is not sold on the open market is not going to change this fact. Not to mention the fact that it is patently delusion to think that oil markets are free markets. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that oil companies would drill in an attempt to “alleviate” prices. Currently, oil companies have millions of acres of leased land that they do not bother to drill. Why, you ask? Because it is in there best interest to keep the price of oil artificially high. Need I remind you that Exxon Mobile broke the record for most profits by a company in history, just last year.
The idea that allowing oil companies to lease public united states land is going result in lower oil prices is pure unadulterated nonsense.
Let’s hope that the public is not as ignorant as McCain and Bush hope, or we’re going to lose our natural oil reserves, our land, and reap no benefits while giving even more money to the very people that cause the problem in the first place.
No, not neccessarily so. My nephew has been hired to find these reserves for an oil company. They are moving in place to start drilling. Yes oil price are kept artificailly high but, with our shaky politics in the middle east we may lose oil from them. If that happens then local companies will have to produce to keep up with some demand if demand is not met then alternatives would be found. That would be bad for oil companies. They must move into position now before its too late. They may not pump right away but, the drills must be set and ready to pump. Folks are getting pissed at paying cutthroat prices and our middleeast friends are getting the blame wether it is justified or not. The US citizens are getting primed for a real gas war.
The idea that we could “lose” oil from the middle east is ridiculous. And the idea that we could make up for such a loss with domestic drilling is even more ridiculous. Oil is traded in terms of the dollar, and the United States is the #1 consumer of oil. The middle east princes would destroy the price of oil if they cut us off, and would probably destroy themselves, or at least start a chain of events that would change the global balance and begin a war that they could not fight. The entire system works for their advantage, it gives them leverage, it gives them power, and it gives them money, they have absolutely no reason to change this balance, and will probably fight to the death to maintain it. They don’t even dare to stop using the dollar as the standard for oil, even when the dollar is plummeting.
Domestic drilling will not change the price of oil, that is simply not how the oil markets work, not in the slightest.
Naturally you assume that oil works within the broad boundaries of a free market(leaving out the wetdream of the self correcting market), that is simply not the case. You are confused.
That is absolutely how the oil market works, and the oil market is international. Not to mention the fact that estimates put viable production of untapped American oil reserves at 10 years.
Can we get some quotes from some reputable sources to back up what either of you are saying? I’m interested in the subject, but not so interested in watching a dung-flinging contest with no sources to back up your claims.
Oh I see, we should have our politicians disregard the best information available simply because it makes you feel good, and simply because it is inconvenient.
Wait, I’ve seen this methodology before. One decides the course of action based on a gut feeling, and then proceeds to muddle through all contrary evidence disregarding the best information available, and eventually enacts the original plan contrary to all reason, logic, and factual information.
That is about as weak as an argument can get…“Yeah, but experts aren’t always right”…
I assumed this is common knowledge, or at least widely available knowledge. We’re not exactly being specific here, if one hasn’t encountered the information, a quick google search will suffice. Anyway, apparently the assumption was incorrect, I’ll provide links next time I give attention to this thread.
Very well said.
d0rkyd00d, you ask a reasonable question, but forums like this don’t allow time for a lot of footnotes. One place to start finding out who’s telling the Truth is Exxon’s annual and quarterly reports. Last year, they only made a modest NET profit of 7%, and the first quarter this year only 4%. But all you hear about in most of the media is slanted news reports about the multi-billions they had in revenue–not even gross profits. It’s an emotional, manipulative ploy that works on 85% of the public that hears it. All I can suggest is when the “facts” start flying, look for yourself, then you can learn who to trust.
Kriwest, yes it will take years, but alternative fuels will take many years longer. The hard reality (or, ahem, painful truth) is that it would have been better if we’d started the drilling etc. years ago, but now (if and when the Democrats start feeling enough pressure) is still better than later.
The company reported Friday that it beat its own record for the highest profits ever recorded by any company, with net income rising 3 percent to $40.6 billion, thanks to surging oil prices. The company’s sales, more than $404 billion, exceeded the gross domestic product of 120 countries.
Exxon Mobil earned more than $1,287 of profit for every second of 2007.
The company also had its most profitable quarter ever. It said net income rose 14 percent, to $11.7 billion, or $2.13 a share, in the last three months of the year. The company handily beat analysts’ expectations of $1.95 a share, after missing targets in the last two quarters.
42 gallons in a barrel, 23 of which is gasoline. 1.44/42=3-4 cents 41/42= <1 cent. A one to 3.5 cent drop in a gallon of gas 10-20 years from now is the best estimate the government has.
I would seem that the current Administration’s DOE estimates that drilling in ANWAR would decrease the cost of oil by a whopping seventy-five cents a barrel
I think it is a rather sloppy and temporary fix to a long term problem. And at a decrease of $0.75/barrel, it isn’t even that effective a fix! Unfortunately, the way America is structured there won’t be a serious discussion about oil alternatives and energy independence until the prices hurt, and not just a temporary hurt either. We had an energy crisis in the '70s, took a lot of useful steps in the right direction . . . and then promptly forgot entirely about that sort of thing when oil was cheap and there were those really cool SUVs and Hummers. Capitalism demands consumption and new products (that is a value-neutral statement, even Adam Smith would agree with me on that one. He just didn’t realize that we’d ultimately have to rely on opening markets within our own market through consumerism, but it is the same principle he espoused). Even if ANWAR drilling does temporarily reduce the price of gas, so what? All that has done is delay the inevitable while allowing us to forget the problem entirely.
High gas prices force market based solutions. Furthermore, they make a lot of early technologies market friendly (solar power, for example, is currently at roughly the equivalent of $100/barrel, although I believe subsidies are still involved).
Now, if the government had the druthers to actually do something about the problem, I think a temporary fix would be acceptable. But the American system isn’t shaped to do that. The Rightists would scream “Big Gubament!” and they’d win elections doing that.
The market is a damned uncomfortable way to manage things, inefficient too in a case like this, but that is the way they want it to be played. I don’t see the other options as being viable at the moment. The sooner we get about pursuing that option, while ideally doing as little damage to the environment as possible, the better.