Comments (49)

Anybody get the feeling we are the next Roman Empire, or Aztec Empire, with a few (lucky? unlucky?) fully knowing we are going down the path of no return and most people doing nothing but hitting the accelerator?

That bit about oil companies paying revenue to the federal govt for taking oil out of the ground should be closely examined.

We've read a number of articles over the past 8 years (coincidence? I don't think so) on how oil and gas companies have actually NOT paid the agreed royalty rates and no one is going after them.

The country is out of control, literally. Bush/Cheney have presided over a monstrous give-away, from the actual oil to the lands that don't even promise a return.

Americans, in general, are too busy consuming to notice that their country has become a flea market for the connected.

Everything goes, and dirt cheap, or free.

The few win, the citizens lose.

Will everyone stop with the BIG lie! Pumping oil from American land does not in any way make the oil "sold" to American users cheaper! As many have pointed out; oil like other commodities is a world resource set my world economic factors and whether we pump 1 oz or a million barrels of oil will have zero impact on the price we pay for oil. NO American "producer" of "our" oil is planning to sell us "our" oil back to us for cheaper prices ...just because it was pumped from "our" land!!

This is pure political theater designed by sleazy politicians and their corporate sponors to use American consumer gullibility for one more swindle and to continue their ownership of our nation for lining their pockets with "our" wealth!

Mark, you are kidding yourself. You proceed from a false premise: That the oil under the ground of American soil actually belongs to us. It doesn't. It belongs to the entire world. Oil is a global commodity whether you like it or not. We simply do not have the techincal wherewithal by ourselves to develop these resources absent the intervention of Multi-National interests who control most of the other components of oil production: The vast resources that will be required to start up drilling operations are not available absent the injection of capital and equipment from other nations around the globe, let alone the unpleasant reality that we do not have anywhere near the refining capacity. Do you think these other nations are going to simply give us the capital and then let us keep all of the oil?

Look. Americans are largely stupid about such matters because our politicians want us to be. They don't want us to know the unpleasant truth that we are no longer the "big dog" in the world that we used to be. This would be a huge blow to macho typoes like yourself who are used to the delusion that we Americans are still the "big dog". But, we're not anymore and neither is anyone else. Like it or not, we are in a global competition and cooperation is the only way any of us are going to survive.

Look. Americans are like the spoiled, overindulged, pampered children of wealthy parents. The parents are those conservative republican politicians and their shrill mouthpieces in the media who seem to be insistent that we can have it all with hardly any sacrifice. We can have minimal taxes and all the government spending we want. We can continue to gulp global energy resources to maintain our oversized standard of living at the expense of other nations and their citizens who have already made the sacrifices and hard choices.

As long as we have in power the Bushes, the Cheneys and the McCains who love to pander to spoiled Americans who think somejow we are "exceptional" to all of those other citizens and nations of the world, this is how it is going to be. And there is only one end to this sort of extravagant self delusion. And trust me, it is not a good end.

Mark,

I don't understand why you keep asking how we are going to force Russia and OPEC to do anything. The point of pumping more domestic oil is to give foreigners less control of our economy. I can only suppose that your point is that they will pump less if we pump more , so the price will stay the same. That is what WILL happen if we drain the strategic reserve. If we pump more, more dollars stay in the US, the dollar becomes worth something, real jobs are created in this country supporting the drilling industry. Those are REAL jobs, not Senator Obama's 6 million phantom jobs.

As far as your comment about investors. It's called capitalism. Here is a news flash for you. You too can become a rich greedy fat cat oil man. Buy some stock in whatever evil oil company that you and your friends hate the most. Wait,,you would first have to sell your stock in wind and solar power. With all of the freebies the government is taking from the taxpayers and giving to the big alternatives, you will make more money there.

If there are 800 billion barrels of oil left on the planet (which is the current geological modeling estimate) and humanity consumes 20 billion barrels of it a year, what possible reason is there for relying on it as an energy source? Even if America and Europe begin saving the 200 million barrels that are pure waste (engine idling, unnecessary trips, single occupancy commuting, etc), they would only stabilize their price for a while through less demand. Note that when only 60 billion barrels remain and it is being consumed at 5 billion barrels a year, there will be no plastics, medicines, food transported over 400 miles, AND no capacity for constructing alternate energy sources. Does that mean that the remaining 2 billion people will live as they did in the late 1800s after about 2070? Are you really sure you want grandkids?

Nice to know 'investors' are more important than the public good. I knew someone would use the Good ole' boy Repuclican handbook. "We really care about the little guy" (wink wink. nudge nudge) Sorry you little people have to pay so much at the pump to line more importnat folks pockets. Especially on PUBLIC land.

Afer all, look at how well the uncontrolled, unpoliced economy (the GOP dream!) has turned out....

What, WITLESS, no answer for how we are going to force Russia and OPEC to keep pumping the same amount?

Let's see, why wouldn't an oil company drill on land that it already leases? Why does it need more land in Anwr and offshore to drill? More slow writing required here.

It costs $$$millions to drill for oil. Even more in certain places. Many holes do not produce enough oil to cover their costs. Many holes do not produce anything ( kinda like a certain political party ).

Maybe an oil company or natural gas company might,,just might want to drill where there is the most chance to get a return on their investment. That last phrase " return on investment " is a Republican term meaning getting your investors their money's worth.

A Democratic equivalent would be a lobbyist getting a law passed for a freezer full of cash.

Interesting points of view below, but no one has yet explained to me why OPEC and Russia are going to blithely let their money and influence slip away because we drill a FEW more (again, we have less than 3% of all oil reserves) barrels of oil.

Again, it all seems like foot-dragging in what even you folks who are for more drilling admit is an inevitable shift to other energies. I am glad you guys weren't in charge of NASA during the 'moon years'. No doubt it would have seemed impossible, and there would be Russian flags on the moon right now...

It will take a lot of work and sacrifice, and I know that's a lot to ask in todays 'comfort society' but hey, ask Exxon and those companies to contribute and feel a little pain too!

Any comments on why big oil companies are not drilling on all the land they have leased already? Maybe they should use what they have before asking for more. It is, after all, the public's land they are leasing at well below market rates (where is that darn invisible hand of the FREE market when ya need it?) Looks suspiciously like somebody trying to lock in profits, not energy. I am sure the right wing playbook has an answer/excuse for that too.

Mark - It happens today that some domestic oil is shipped overseas instead of kept in the U.S. It is not the most inefficient thing you have ever heard. Quite the opposite. It is the market directing the commodity to the most efficient destination.

The arguments against offshore drilling strike me as particularly specious. Despite what this article implies, offshore drilling is environmentally sound. Look at hurricane Katrina, which went right through the Gulf offshore zone. MMS reports only 146 spills of a barrel or more, and only six spills of at least 1,000 barrels. Most importantly, "No shoreline or wildlife impacts were noted from these spills." That's a pretty amazing accomplishment if you saw any of the damage in the Gulf. And keep in mind, a good portion of the 4,000 platforms in the Gulf have been there for years. Platforms off the Atlantic and Pacific would use state-of-the-art technology.

And, as someone says below, even if new drilling doesn't reduce the price of oil $1, why wouldn't you want those jobs and tax revenue in the U.S. instead of being exported overseas. The result of the high cost of oil is that the U.S. will likely send overseas an amount of oil payments equal to the increase in GDP this year. That means, despite everyone's hard work, no net economic gains this year.

I also don't believe this article presents enough information to assess whether opening new drilling would affect oil prices today. The truth is, much of the cost of oil is no doubt based on speculation. New drilling sends a signal that the political environment has gotten to a point where significant efforts to reduce prices will be undertaken with public support. If I'm an oil trader, opening the Atlantic and Pacific to new drilling makes me take a hard look at whether it's time to move money elsewhere so I'm not the one left holding the bag when the bubble finally pops.

To be certain, we CAN and we MUST achieve total energy independence; but, our Nation can only extricate ourselves from this self imposed dilemma by a broad-based, comprehensive NATIONAL ENERGY STRATEGY that BLENDS all of the elements of: conservation; major increases in transportation efficiencies, such as increased mileage standards; exploitation of our indigenous petroleum resources; fast-tracking of regulatory criteria; a significant expansion of our refinery facilities; major investments in nuclear energy; supplementation of our electrical grid with solar, wind, geo-thermal, and hydro technologies; and, a major investment in Research and Development to bring a Hydrogen and Fusion based economy to fruition. Unfortunately, to dig ourselves out of this self-created coffin-corner will require TIME. Time which simply means that, in the interim, we must protect our access to unstable Middle East suppliers until we bring our own assets on line. The latter exigency which could readily be scuttled by the Cut-And-Run crowd on Iraq. The regional chaos which would be precipitated by an Iranian regional hegemony subsequent to a precipitous American withdrawal from Iraq would make the current cost-escalation in energy supplies from the Middle East seem like the Golden Age of Yesteryear by comparison; and, most certainly would induce a much wider conflict/conflagration. The myopia of the Left on these circumstances is astounding. As history has repeatedly taught with grim consequences, PEACE and STABILITY are won only THRU STRENGTH; and, NOT THRU the nebulous psychosis of HOPE.

The ability of a LEFT-WING minority, that has found an innate repository in the Democrat Party, that has repeatedly demonstrated the ability to whiplash the Democrat Party; and, to dictate such onerous/debilitating restrictions in the energy sector of the American economy has been made possible ONLY by the passive acceptance of these militant's demands by the more rational majority of the American electorate. The RATIONAL MAJORITY: that believes in the 2nd Amendment to our Constitution; that is proud of our Country; that daily expresses such pride by the furling of an American flag on their property, or the wearing of an American Flag lapel pin on their chest; that proudly places their hand over their heart at the singing of our National Anthem while even shedding a tear or two; that is unashamed to actively recognize the Judeo/Christian heritage of America; that believe that Judges should NOT legislate from the bench; and, that proudly proclaims the unparallel contribution of America to the protection and sustenance of democratic values throughout the pages of world history, as opposed to LEFT-WING FRINGE ELEMENTS that believe America to be the greatest EVIL in the world. As the Pope so eloquently proclaimed on his recent visit to our homeland, "God Bless America".

However, with the current composition of the U.S. Senate that believes we can TAX our way out of our energy crisis, our Nation doesn't stand a prayer of extricating ourselves from this self imposed dilemma. Simply review the recent Senate action on HR 3121 where Harry Reid and his minions such as Clinton and Obama, in sync with the Left-Wing Fringe Elements in our society, voted AGAINST the opening of a miniscule portion of ANWAR; AGAINST shale oil extraction of which America has the equivalent of ten Saudi Arabia's in recoverable reserves; and, AGAINST accelerated efforts to facilitate the gasification of America's abundant reserves of coal.

The task then for the RATIONAL MAJORITY in our Nation is SIMPLY to recognize the SOURCE that sustains and provides the base of support for the LEFT-WING FRINGE ELEMENTS in our society; and, to undertake a decisive role at the ballot box to isolate and relegate these FRINGE ELEMENTS THAT COMPRISE A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE BASE OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY to a decibel level that is barely audible. ANY TIME you vote for a Democrat, ANY DEMOCRAT, you're unmistakably multiplying the capacity of these LEFT-WING FRINGE ELEMENTS to continue to promote their radical agenda, and to bring our Nation to its knees. A circumstance that no external power ever could have accomplished.

The ability to restore our Nation's status; and, to sustain this Sacred Land that the RATIONAL MAJORITY so proudly calls AMERICA, resides in your hands at the ballot box.

GREG NEUBECK

Mark,

I am used to arguing with " you people " who have no experience or knowledge about energy or economics. You are so locked up in your green ideology that you refuse to let a ray of reality penetrate your closed mind. However, I'm up for the challenge. I will write slow, so you can follow me.

A major problem with importing huge amounts of oil is the large amount of dollars this adds to our trade deficit. If we export anything, that brings dollars back in to the country, supports the value of our currency, which can make the oil that we import cheaper. Following me so far????

You said that exporting Alaskan oil and using the foreign exchange it earns to help pay for other oil that we import, is the most inefficient and most expensive approach you ever heard of. OK, in detail explain what you mean. Afterward I will explain why you are wrong. It is counter-intuitive, if I can get away with using big words.

Wow. The post from "witless" (no comment) poses the theory we pump and ship more oil out to offset what we pump and ship in. Uh, that is perhaps the least efficient and most expensive approach I have ever heard or read. We are talking about the same resource, yes? Seems like the shipping cost, cost of administration, etc would all be waste. Maybe I am missing something...
Also, what does 'you people' refer to? People who are tired of paying the folks who fund your boogeyman radicals in the Middle East? Or people who believe that our masters of industry have been foot-dragging on this energy thing too long? I mean, these are the same folks who (in 70's) cried about fuel efficiency, saying that you would have to practically bankrupt our country to meet MPG standards of an amazing 12MPG! Meanwhile, it is just such foot dragging and non-inovation that has us in the position (over an oil barrel) we are now. For such chest-beating cheerleaders of American industry, they sound a little like a broken record of what CAN'T be done. Meanwhile, Japan and other countries are doing it, whether we do or not. So, what's it going to be America? Lead, or follow? Top dog, or lap dog? The choice is before us now!

-Chris, supply and demand does drive some things, but OPEC controls most of the oil production in the world (we have less than 3% of the reserves on Earth) and they have consistantly dropped production when we increase it, because they sell based on PRICE THEY CAN GET FOR IT, not demand. If we increase production, they will decrease production to protect their own interests (high oil price=$$$$ for them and political influence). As far as I know, no one has asked McCain (etc) if he has some agreement we don't know about with OPEC in which they agree to not drop production in the future, without which NO decrease in price will occur.

You folks who oppose drilling are amazingly ignorant of economics. Let's just deal with the the Alaskan oil supposedly going to Japan and China. I don't know know the truth of it or how much it is. But, look at the balance of payments question. If we actually export some oil, that helps offset a part of the dollars going overseas to import oil from somewhere else.

Now let's look at the drilling versus alternative energy question. Alternative energy has already had billions thrown at it, and it has failed to become a significant part of the energy solution. In the mean time, imported oil continues to increasingly fill the energy gap. We will have to drill offshore just to keep domestic production at it's current level.

If you people really hate oil so much, why don't you just ban oil imports. It would wreck the economy, but it would hasten the day that alternative energy rules.

On the safety issue, I would point out this. Most of the major oil spills have been tanker spills. You have to go back to the 1969 Santa Barbara spill, to find a well disaster. So logically, more offshore drilling means less tankers from the middle east, which equals fewer oil spills.

The oil from Alaska is sold to Japan and China.
The oil rigs in Alaska belong to British Petroleum. The oil companies sell American oil to American people at world oil prices. The concept that American oil companies drilling for more oil just off shore will have any benefit to the American people defies logic. The U.S. oil companies have their priority above our country's best interests, and they have repeatedly demonstrated they could care less about the American people than their own profits. It is clear what is in the best interests of our oil companies is not necessarily in our best interest.

We, the American people and government, need to embrace whole-hog Al Gore's Ten-Year-Challenge to generate all electricity by renewables within ten years -- and it's doable. . . . . But our government needs to get behind it with warlike zeal.

Think of it: . . The equivalent of $1 per gallon gasoline, the economic edge it would give America, the U.S. patents that would be involved, the health of our planet and ourselves, AND! the decreased importance of the madness of the Middle East. . . . . . . . It's not just that drilling doesn't cut the mustard -- it's that we don't need it! . . we just don't need that much off-shore drilling. The technology for renewables is far more advanced than we realize; we just need to get behind the Ten-Year-Challenge with zeal.

My feeling on the supply and demand analysis is that most journalists are repeating concepts gleaned from repeating sources. The supply and demand arguments appear to be an echo chamber.

The price of oil, in the short term, has nothing to do with actual supply and demand, because no large disruptions of supply and demand are occurring. Thus it is all about the perceptions of supply and demand by investors, at the best.

There is simply no safeguard that investors will base their decisions on the facts, will not try to manipulate the markets, and will be accurate in their predictions of the future. Ultimately, our market system is letting the hissie fits of large investors seeking to game the system control energy prices and wreak havoc on our economy. The oil market appears proof that the distribution of capital has gone seriously awry and that private interests are destroying our collective future.

Have we forgotten that the entire race to the moon, the entire space program was accomplished within a decade?

How can we now be unable to imagine converting to electric vehicles within 5-10 years with a concerted effort? All that really requires is some major advances in battery technology, that is energy storage. This would eliminate both our dependence on oil for transportation and also the majority of our greenhouse gas and CO2 emissions. Technically, this is a much less difficult problem to solve than space travel, and we have so much more technology at our disposal to solve it than in the 1960's.

Have we become unable/unwilling to focus our collective resources to solve our most pressing problems? If so, then the profit motive is as much to blame as anything for the current energy disaster we are living in.

my one question to offshore drilling is where are we going to get the necessary equipment? You need to build new rigs to actually drill, and the problem with that is you can literally count the number of companies with the capability of building offshore oil rigs on one hand.

The current drop in the price of gasoline suggests that reduced demand demonstates again a quick and significant effect on price. Of course, it would be better if that reduction in demand were more the result of greater efficiency of use and/or transitioning to other sources of energy for vehicles than the economic pressure of the higher price. Long term: greater efficiency should be a key part of our efforts to cope with "peak oil."

Looking forward without the political noise: Even with a "crash" program to maximize alternative energy sources and to reduce demand through greater efficiency, there will almost certainly remain considerable demand -- and a real need -- for oil. So, eventually, there will be drilling in the offshore and Arctic areas where drilling is now prohibited. So, to my mind the big questions are when these important reserves should be tapped and the conditions under which there is drilling.

I am confident that, with proper regulation and monitoring, the drilling can be done with minimal adverse impact on and risk to the environment.

As for the unsightly appearance of off shore platforms, perhaps this could be addressed, at least in part, by designers.

Obtaining energy requires the use of technology, and so there will always be impacts. Consider wind farms, a potentially important source of alternative energy. A large number of such farms will be required to make meaningful this source of energy. Some may view the platforms and their big blades as unslightly. The rotating blades definitely make some noise.
And the rotating blades may kill some birds. High voltage, high power transmission lines with their large, tall towers will also be required to take the electricity from the wind blown locations of wind farms to often far distant major cities and towns. Then, there will need to be provision for storing electricity for when the winds are slight or not blowing at all. Vast battery banks come to mind. Lots of impacts in this source of energy.

In sum, there are cons, including multiple impacts on the environment, for each source of energy.

Returning to offshore and Arctic drilling, I would like to know two things:

1 -- What are the terms for the current leases to drill within the U.S. I suspect that these leases are not costing the holders (oil companies) much, so they want to hold on to thie right in case future developments make drilling viable and economically worthwhile. Is this the case?

2 -- I understand that oil companies make more money pumping oil than refining and selling the products. But U.S. oil companies face declining reserves in fields to which they have access and reduced access to known and potential fields elsewhere. This is shrinking their capital base (oil reservoirs) and their capacity for profit. Access to offshore and Arctic fields would boost that base. Is this the case?

What is missing in this debate is the subject of refining capabilities. As others have stated, there is (currently) no shortage of oil on the market. If you look at the Weekly Petroleum Status Report, supplies are in the upper part of the normal range. But the reality is that existing refineries have been running at or near full capacity since the mid-1990s. And no new refineries are being built. The last refinery to be completed in the United States was in 1976. So if we suddenly increase the amount of oil being fed to the refineries by drilling here in the US, where would it go? It would start piling up on the dock waiting to go to the refineries.

And it gets worse. Many U.S. refineries today are geared towards refining light-to-medium crude grades of oil. But this grade of oil has already peaked in most areas (some say the world has peaked here), and what is being supplied to the market more and more is the heavier, more difficult to process grades of crude oil.

So, without a parallel increase in refining capabilities, increasing the amount of crude will likely have little to no effect outside of the immediate "feel-good" effect the market will enjoy for maybe a few months until it realizes that the oil is just piling up on docks and no increase in gasoline supplies are occurring as a result.

It's been estimated that 10 to 25 percent of the current price of oil is due to geo-political tensions, mainly with Iran. So, as others have mentioned, the best way to realize an immediate and substantial drop in oil prices is to ensure that our illustrious president keeps his mouth shut.

BS , Fate.

The reserve is for when we have an energency... and if Israel attacks Iran, a very real possibility, we will need that oil.

THe more oil that comes from the USA the better. It will create jobs, bring more supply to the table, and help alleviate the trade deficit.

The reason that oil is coming down is that it was speculated too much and Americans are consuming less.

Sounds like you need to revisit your economics classes in college , if you ever took them.

The law of supply and demand is alway in effect.

Even if increasing oil drilling in the US did not lead to any lowering of price ( I believe it is actually impossible that an increase in supply would NOT lead to a lower price but that's another post) why would we not want the many thousands of high paying production, transportation and refinery jobs to be created in the US rather than overseas? I thought the Dems were for the working man? These jobs pay VERY VERY well and should be done by our own people.

Nothing spells "idiot" quite like "supply an' demand."

If Obama wants to be more populist, hoo-raaa!! . . . . . But then he should take-up Al Gore's TEN-YEAR-CHALLENGE.

All electricity produced by renewables within ten years. The technology is in our grasp -- it's doable. . . . . . . . . . The equivalent of $1 per gallon gasoline. . . . Think of the benefits to the economy, think of the U.S. patents, the edge that would go to American businesses, the decrease in the madness of the Middle East, and the fact that we would be saving our planet.

Take a look at http://wecansolveit.org/

Geophys55: "Then, they buy permits to place the platforms and pipelines. Then, when production starts, 1/8 to 1/4 of that oil is OURS, we OWN it."
-----------------------------------------------------------
What a deal! Except for the fact that WE OWN IT NOW! 100% of it! Why should we give rich crooks 3/4 to 7/8 of OUR oil to pump it out?

And, don't the oil giants already have something like 600 federal leases waiting to be drilled? This is just another trick to get more of the National Wealth into the filthy hands of Dubya's oil buddies.

dimitry: "This is completely normal in the regime of non-elastic supply and demand."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, . . you are speaking of controlled markets. They're the favorite of Predatory Capitalists.

Chaotician,

You analysis is correct but your solutions are not.

Nationalization of oil would be a disaster. Drilling would not become cheaper, the price of oil would stay the same. Just where do you see a savings? But making the oil industry non-profit? Even with the record profits its a small amount of money when the nation's economy is considered. And consider that those profits go to shareholders, mostly Americans. So those profits flow back into the US economy.

You are correct that oil is oil. There are no shortages. If new drilling somehow miraculously increased American production by say 20 million barrals a day, other nations would reduce production or see the price of oil drop way down, something they do not want. Saudi Arabia keeps their hands on the spigot as do other countries for this reason. They do not want an oil glut resulting in $10/bbl oil. So if we drill more, others will pump less. Supply will remain the same. As I said before, supply is not the issue with prices today. Its the possible disruption of future supply (e.g., war with Iran or Nigerian oil field production disrupted).

As for the lies, you are correct about Murdock, but everyone already knew that. You only need to watch 5 minutes of Fox News to know nothing truthful comes from them. They still have not reported on the Unitarian Church shooting by a crazed lunatic who was a devote follower of Fox News commentators and their insane rhetoric.

If we want to make fuel that stays in America we need to invest in local energy production that makes it directly to the American electric grid (coal, nuclear, wind, solar) or directly to the American car fuel market (ethanol, hydrogen).

We have the wealth in this nation to get off of foreign oil in 10 years. We have the know-how and necessary infrastructure to build what needs to be built. Such a program would stimulate the economy as the national highway system did and the Apollo program did. The problem is that it would require higher taxes, so you will not hear a republican speak about it. But if we are going to become independent of foreign oil, we need to raise taxes to build the infrastructure and new industries. That is the political challenge for the next decade.

Here's an idea: As the price of oil, and thus gas, drops due to Bush keeping his mouth shut about attacking Iran, the federal gasoline tax is increased so that gas is *always* $4/gallon. The tax would adjust daily to the new prices. That increased revenue would go to building these new infrastructures and energy sources. Keeping gas at $4/gallon no matter what happens to oil would also provide a sense of stability in the price of gas, which would benefit companies trying to budget their costs each year. It would also remain at a level where it has affected people to conserve. Hardship cases could be addressed on a state level with subsidies. Republicans could claim "no new taxes" even though that would be a lie, which they are use to doing, and democrats would get the needed revenue to build the new infrastructure. A political decision where opposing sides can both agree for completely different reasons. Ah, tha art of politics...

Dimitry wrote: "What's the reason of going through all these expensive trials and tribulations, just in order to recapture a small portion of the sun's energy? None!"

Correct. You might as well put solar collectors on your farm. They will return 20% of the sun's energy directly to electricity with no steps in between (well inverting, but that's a small step). And it will work all during the year, winter, spring, summer and fall.

The problem is that if farms started shifting to energy production with solar or wind in a big way, the nation's grid will need to be changed. It was built with centralized coal and nuclear plants in mind, not distributed energy production on farms and rooftops. We'll need to invest in rebuilding the nation's energy grid, but I doubt any politician will speak of it. Its boring, but essential for alternative energy to become commonplace.

There is a Shortage of Drilling Rigs and the Personnel to operate them. That is the only reason Oil Companies aren't drilling on the Leased areas they now have. More leases that CAN"T BE DRILLED will not help.

Part of the problem is there is no reciprocity in many circles to get more access to finite energy resources. We have companies like Rio Tinto, BP, Peabody that are foreign owned yet their home countries do not give us access economically to their local financial resources. Alot of the oil dollars do flow outward and there is not alot coming in.

I am disgusted with MSM, I am disgusted with Republican politicians, I am really disgusted with George, Dick, and McCain; I am disgusted with Democratic weenies; and I am disgusted with this wimpy article!

Oil is a commodity sold on the international marketplace and the whole dialog about drilling for oil is an endless stream of lies, half-truths, and misdirection!
BIG lie #1: Oil from American sources is around 8.5 million barrels per year which is almost 10% of the total oil available. “Oil is oil” and not even all of "our" current oil goes to American needs...and certainly, none of that oil is "sold" to America for cheaper rates than the "world" price because it comes from America! Therefore, adding a million barrels to the world supply from American sources has very, very limited effects on world prices or availability of oil for American consumers!! And note, a million barrels supplied is no different whether that oil comes from Iraq, Russia, Mexico, ME, or America...”oil is oil”.....and for that matter cutting a million barrels from American consumption would have at least as much effect as providing a million barrels of "new" oil!
Any increase in American sourced oil could easily be compensated by OPEC, Russia, or any other large producers; therefore there would be no effect on world prices because of increased American production! For example, Iraq has easily increased its oil production by well over a million barrels and oil prices have only increased!!
If Americans really want to do something useful with American oil; then consider: oil companies were able and willing to sell "our" oil for $40 a barrel and are quite happy to sell "our" oil for $140 a barrel with no additional cost or effort. Russia gets this increased monies; so do Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Nigeria, Venezuela, and most other producing countries! Who gets the additional monies in America? Why the oil companies, who use these monies for political control! If you want to get on board for the “naturalization” of “our” oil; then the increased revenues could be used to offset the costs of the 25 millions of barrels of oil we consume every year! That 100 Billion dollars for the last year could have been used to “subsidize” the pump prices or at least support a more controlled increase; or used to fund alternative energy sources to replace the need for oil…how many Republican politicians can get behind this “real” solution to our oil crisis??
“Oil is Oil! Drilling more Oil from American sources may be a good business decision for increased revenue from the “owners” of that American oil, but producing more oil to lower the costs to Americans is a Big Lie!
Big Lie #2: Oil companies must be given access to more potential oil sources so they can produce more oil! That lie is just pure BS! First off, all existing oil exploration and oil drilling equipment and crews are going one hundred percent…and are booked for the next ten years for existing projects! There is no capability to drill more or faster! At best, some marginally movement might be done if some of the new sources appeared to be easier or better than some of the current planned activities…and that would be very doubtful!! Everyone seems to acknowledge that it would be at least 10 years before any oil was realized from any new leases of “our” oil… so why is anyone giving any credibility to the notion that giving access to “our” oil to oil companies will address our current oil needs or have any impact on oil costs?? This is an incredible lie!
Big Lie #3: Oil companies are using their increased profits to get more oil and they need the government subsidies to make oil production worth doing! First, their “excess” profits are after deducting all of their current oil drilling and exploration costs, plus adding in the “costs” of the depletion of “our” oil from their “assets”, plus the costs of the salaries and bonuses of “their” executives, less the costs of all of their bribes of Congress, and their many, many foundations for telling the “truth” to the American people. And the cost of their advertising campaigns to convince us what “nice” people our oil companies are, and how much better “our” oil is if it comes from Exxon instead Standard Oil, and how hard they are working to get us “our” oil. And remember, they were doing quite nicely, thank you, when they were selling us “our” oil for $40 a barrel…now $140!! So, the notion, that they need their excess profits and subsidies to be motivated to get more of “our” oil is pure BS! Let’s “nationalize” “our” oil and hire the oil companies to do the work of exploration and extraction like Russia, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Nigeria, Qatar, and the rest of the world!! Then, the “poor” oil companies can eliminate all of their risk and just be paid to do work we request!! Problem solved!!
Big Lie #4: Main Stream Media cannot expose Lies 1,2,3 and the Lie of the ownership of “our” government by these oil companies; nor their ownership and control of MSM by themselves or interlocking corporations! Worse, MSM, especially the Murdock Empire, actively supports Lies 1, 2, and 3. So rather than being our protector from the rapine corporations and their corrupted politicians; they become the instruments of our ignorance and lack of action to address these criminal actions. Without the repeal of the laws enabling corporations to “own” all source of information in increasing concentrations of limited “owners”; we cannot hope to have the necessary information needed to have a democratic society rather than the Fascist system rapidly developing!

Dimitry has been smoking too much industrial hemp.

I believe in legalization, but that is another issue.

There are areas in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico that geologists and oil experts believe hold tremendous reserves of natural gas. These natural gas deposits can provide clean energy for electrical power plants that are now using coal, and natural gas for heating and air conditioning and vehicles like buses, etc. They can be brought online within 5 years if the government expedites regulatory issues.

Oil takes a little bit longer. If Clinton had pushed off shore oil when he was president - we would be using it today. Pelosi - Reid and Obama are political dinosaurs trapped in the past over fears about the environment and the China Syndrome.

==The high price of gasoline today is not due to a shortage of oil or refined gasoline. If it were there would be, well, shortages. When did you last go to a gas station and they did not have gas? There is no shortage.==

There is no shortage of eggs either, but the price is high...

I got it - must be "speculation"!

==And why has it dropped 15% in one week? Did someone just discover a huge supply of oil? Did demand drop by 15% in one week?==

The price of oil is highly non-linear with the supply/demand equation. A very small imbalance of a couple of percent can increase the price tremendously. A return to full balance of a small surplus can knock the price down by a significant amount.

This is completely normal in the regime of non-elastic supply and demand.

==Industrial hemp is the answer and the US AG dept says it's biomass.==

Ok, lets go back to school. Where does "biomass" energy come from? The SUN! How much energy is lost in the process of farming the crop, harvesting it, putting it into an energy intensive chemical plant to create a liquid fuel? Lots and lots! What is the final return? Very small or even negative as with much of corn gasohol today.

What's the reason of going through all these expensive trials and tribulations, just in order to recapture a small portion of the sun's energy?

None!

Oil from fossil fuels is outdated and is a drag on our economy. Industrial hemp can supply our oil needs and we don't have to destroy our home to get it. All profits and jobs would stay here because we have the farmland to grow our way to energy independence.
Fossil fuels had it's time and now is the time to move on with alternatives.
According to exoil industry scientists we've reached peak oil production for the world.
Why don't we get rid of all the welfare to big oil so people know what they're actually paying at the pump? It's probably between $7 and $8 a gallon. This way the people can make an informed decision as to whether to make a big push off fossil fuels.
Industrial hemp is the answer and the US AG dept says it's biomass. 26 states our trying to get the federal government to allow the growing of hemp. The time is now.

Just one more and I'll shut up.

The writer mentions spills. Tankers are much more likely to spill than pipelines from platforms. If the imported oil is not Canadian or Mexican, it came in a tanker!

AND: It didn't bring any lease fees, jobs, tax revenues or royaly payments with it!

Here is a quote and reference about export of Alasa Oil.
Relatively small amounts - never more than 7% - of Alaskan crude have been sold to Korea, Japan and China. Korea imports about half of this oil. (ncseonline.org). That was allowed at one point when there was more crude available on the West Coast than could be handled by refineries there. For a while oil was sent through the Panama canal to Gulf Coast refineries and the US Virgin Islands. It proved to be more economically sensible to export to Pacific markets to avoid the canal trip which prohibits large ships and import from Mexico to Gulf Ports.

http://www.ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/natural/nrgen-25.cfm

As soon as the ban in not renewed, offshore leases will go to auction and billions will flow from oil companies to the Feds. Also immediately, the oil companies will have to start building new platforms, pipelines, ships, etc, making for a huge boost in employment and, of course even more taxes paid.

Then, they buy permits to place the platforms and pipelines. Then, when production starts, 1/8 to 1/4 of that oil is OURS, we OWN it. and it goes to the Feds as cash or the oil iself (this is where most of the stratigic reserve came from). And of course the feds tax the remaining oil and wind up with 40% - and we invested precisely nothing to get it. All that money (and more) is now going to Hugo Chavez, et al.

In other words, the tax burden is, in part, shifted off our shoulders and on to the oil companies. Oil companies pay to employ lots of people and for contractors to build stuff -all here in the US. The dollar gains strength and that makes oil prices drop. And that starts to happen immediately.

What part of that don't you understand?

Chris,
The price of oil has doubled in a single year. What supply/demand pressure do you see having caused that? Is there an oil shortage? No. Is there less oil on the market? No, there is more. So where is this supply/demand pressure that drove up this commodity 100% in just a single year?

And why has it dropped 15% in one week? Did someone just discover a huge supply of oil? Did demand drop by 15% in one week?

It is not just supply/demand.

Here's a question for you: If you drill more oil but are fighting a war with Iran, which will affect the price of oil more, drilling or the war?

We are currently in a bubble driven up by speculators who gambled oil would get even higher due to a war with Iran, as Bush/Cheney threatened. Now that it seems unlikely a war will happen, those holding $140/bbl oil are freaking out and the price is dropping fast. Add to that the lowering of demand in the US and that adds to the pressure to unload your oil commodities at a lower price. If no one threatens Iran the price of oil should be around $80 by Christmas and we can trade in our Smart Cars for the SUV's we sold :-)

Supply & Demand????Buck, Steven???? Simple laws of supply and demand determine global prices. I don't care how you slice it, if you increase supply to everyone (Asia) according to Buck, it will still decrease the price here in the states. Oil/Refined Gas is a global product that is determined by a global market place. It still boils back down to supply and demand!

Buck is correct. Most Alaskan oil is shipped to Asia, not to American refiners. Drill more and more will go to Asia. Drilling is about future profits, not more oil for America, today or in the near future, just pure profit for the oil companies selling more oil overseas. And McCain knows it.

The high price of gasoline today is not due to a shortage of oil or refined gasoline. If it were there would be, well, shortages. When did you last go to a gas station and they did not have gas? There is no shortage. This is not a supply and demand problem, its speculation that is driving up the price due to Bush/Cheney threatening war with Iran. Now that those threats have stopped the price of oil is coming down. If they start threatening again, it will go up again. So in a sense the price drop IS due to Bush since he is now keeping his mouth shut.

Anyone saying its a supply/demand issue is not just wrong, they are lying. Anyone saying that if we drill more the price will go down soon is not just uninformed, they are lying. Anyone who tells you that oil drilled from offshore sites will drop the price of oil this year is lying. Anyone who tells you that oil from new drilling would be made into gasoline strictly for the US market is also lying.

There are a lot of people lying about gas and oil, and all those lying will see profits if you believe the lies. That is their motivation.

As for Obama, he wants to open up the Strategic Oil Reserve (SOR). This is very different from drilling. Oil from drilling would be available in about 10 years and most likely be sold overseas. The SOR oil would be refined here in America and this year. It would drop the price of oil for American companies now since the oil is already here and would be available only to American refiners. You would see the change in price at the pump in weeks.

Obama is telling the truth. McCain is waving his hands and doing the oil companies' long term strategic bidding. I happen to disagree with opening up the SOR but at least Obama is not lying about what his plan would do and why he wants to do it. McCain on the other hand...

Why is there so much inanity about foreign oil when we sell so much of our own to foreign companies?

Shame on you for using the NewSpeak phrase "time horizon"--means nothing at all (also the obvious gibe that a horizon is something you never reach)

Why do none of the pundits ever mention the fact that there is a 5 year backlog of offshore drilling platforms? I had to hear it from the president of Enron, oops I mean Exxon