Print Page | Close Window

We need offshore oil drilling now!

Printed From:
Category: Outside World
Forum Name: News, Info and Happenings outside Middletown
Forum Description: It might be happening outside Middletown, but it affects us here at home.
Printed Date: Jul 23 2024 at 7:56pm

Topic: We need offshore oil drilling now!
Posted By: Middletown News
Subject: We need offshore oil drilling now!
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 3:30pm
Americans across the country are feeling the effects of high gas prices and our need to expand domestic oil production. - - - - - - - - - -

John McCain says we need offshore oil drilling and we need it now. Senator Barack Obama has consistently opposed offshore drilling - calling it a "gimmick." Senator Obama's solution to high gas prices is telling Americans to make sure their tires are inflated.

It's clear Senator Obama has no plan to address the energy challenges we face as a nation. He has said no to offshore drilling, no to expanding domestic drilling and no to nuclear energy. He has no plan to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

John McCain is prepared to lead our country as president to break our dependence on foreign oil with real solutions. John McCain believes we should lift the federal ban on offshore drilling, enabling you to decide where we drill for oil.

Today, I'm asking for your help in putting Senator Obama's "tire gauge" energy policy to the test. - With an immediate donation of $25 or more , we will send you an "Obama Energy Plan" tire pressure gauge. Will simply inflating your tires reduce the financial burden of high gas prices on your wallet?

Please like our" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page

Posted By: Ernie
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 4:16pm

I think some of us know that if we continue to tap all of our oil supplies then some day soon we will be completely dependent on foreign oil. This is the same thing Japan did by using and depleting its iron ore. They now are dependent on other countries for scrap just to have jobs. America has lived to high on the hog and we being the peacekeepers or police of the world will have more devastating effects on us than you think. No I say to drilling and using our oil first because when the day comes when our wells run empty, when we need the oil for our defense, whom will we turn to. I’m all for lets use everybody else’s even if it is at a high price. Besides...the high price of oil is our own fault. Exxon and Shell profit was over 12 billion dollars. It isn’t the’s our own countrymen selling us out.

Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 5:17pm

The U.S.' Untapped Oil Bounty

There's enough oil to power the nation for three centuries without OPEC's help -- IF we're willing to go after it.
By Jim Ostroff, Associate Editor, The Kiplinger Letter
Think the U.S. is running out of oil? Think again. What is running low, given soaring demand for energy worldwide, is oil in fields that have already been tapped and are in production -- in other words, the relatively easy-to-get stuff, which oil companies have proven exists and can get at with current technology. Those reserves are clearly being drained. The U.S. has around 20 billion barrels now, down from nearly 29 billion barrels a decade ago and about half the 1970 peak of 39 billion barrels. But...

The U.S. is sitting on the world's largest, untapped oil reserves -- reservoirs which energy experts know exist, but which have not yet been tapped and may not be attainable with current technology. In fact, such untapped reserves are estimated at about 2.3 trillion barrels, nearly three times more than the reserves held by Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) nations and sufficient to meet 300 years of demand -- at today's levels -- for auto, truck, aircraft, heating and industrial fuel, without importing a single barrel of oil.

What's the problem then? Why aren't oil companies jumping to pump the black gold? Contrary to what some conspiracy theorists would have you believe, there is no cabal of oil companies and foreign governments blocking the way, bottling up U.S. oil production. The reality is much more mundane. Those untapped reserves are located in places that either Uncle Sam has put off-limits for environmental reasons or are too costly to get -- or a combination of both.

Given current sky-high prices for crude oil and the likelihood that oil prices will remain high -- at or above $100 a barrel -- for the foreseeable future, it is now economically viable to tap some of those reserves. But environmental concerns -- ranging from preservation of pristine lands to worries about increasing the use of fossil fuels and accelerating global climate change -- remain a hurdle.

Here's a look at some of the largest untapped reserves.

  • Oil shales: Oil extracted from shale fields represents the mother lode of untapped reserves, at about 1.5 trillion barrels -- or 200 years worth of supply at current usage levels. Roughly two-thirds of the U.S.'s oil shale fields in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah are in federally-protected areas and closed to development. In addition, getting the oil out of the rock is a challenge, requiring cooking or chemical treatment of rock located as much as half a mile under the earth's surface.
    To make oil shale production economically worthwhile, crude oil prices must remain above $50 a barrel for a protracted period. Given the outlook for continued high prices, oil companies such as ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell Inc., EGL Resources, Brazil's Petrobras and others are gearing up pilot projects on nonfederal lands. The potential is to produce 1 million barrels of oil a day within a decade from lands currently open -- and several times that amount if the lawmakers give the green light to development of lands now off-limits.
  • Tar sands: Around 75 billion barrels of oil could come from tar sands, similar to Canadian fields, which now churn out a million barrels a day. The sands are located predominantly in Utah, Alaska, Texas and California, as well as in Alabama and Kentucky on federal and state lands that, by laws and administrative orders, are closed to mineral and petroleum development.
  • The outer continental shelf (OCS): Something in the neighborhood of 90 billion barrels of oil sit beneath the ocean bed 50 to 100 miles off the Atlantic, Pacific and Gulf coasts. Presidential bans and congressional prohibitions have put the tracts off-limits to oil company exploration at least until 2012, although there's a chance that Congress may lift the moratorium before then. In recent months, several key policymakers, including GOP presidential candidate John McCain and Florida Governor Charles Crist Jr. (R), have reversed their positions on drilling in the OCS. Crist's change of mind may signal a new trend. Concern about potential damage to his state's beaches and Florida's critical tourism industry had dictated his opposition to drilling off the state's coasts. But the state's growing budget woes -- and the prospect of capturing some cash from off-shore leasing -- is proving alluring.
  • The Bakken Play: - With up to 100 billion barrels of oil, the reserves locked under rocks buried a mile or more beneath Montana and Saskatchewan, Canada, are more than twice the size of Alaskan's entire oil cache. New drilling and oil recovery technologies are overcoming production obstacles and petroleum companies are rushing to stake their claims. Marathon Oil recently acquired about 200,000 acres in the area and will drill about 300 oil wells within five years. Brigham Exploration and Crescent Point Energy Trust also want a piece of the action. EOG Resources alone figures it can produce 80 million barrels of oil from its Bakken field. But It will take at least five years before the oil starts flowing in large volumes.
  • The Alaska National Wildlife Refuge: About 10 billion barrels of oil are locked away here, with little possibility that federal lawmakers will open the door.

Of course, it isn't enough to simply get at the oil in these and other U.S. reserves. Providing major new supplies to U.S. consumers also requires a significant jump in refining capacity. But existing environmental regulations and community opposition make it tough to build new refineries. The last new domestic refinery was started up in 1976. And even if the technology and political will came together to allow oil companies access to the untapped reserves, they'll be reluctant to do so if the U.S. doesn't also have the capacity to refine the petroleum produced.

Posted By: Middletown News
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 5:33pm
Pacman thanks for posting that info. I had no idea we had 300 years of oil. All we need is enough oil to get us to the next energy source.

Please like our" rel="nofollow - Middletown USA Facebook Page

Posted By: .308
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 5:38pm

Drill now, drill later, drill here of drill there, all that is just a distraction to the real problem, that is our entire economy has been built on cheap oil sourced elsewhere. That horse has left the stable and we need another plan.

Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 5:55pm
Right on Jonathan.
.308 and Ernie I think you both miss the point.  The point is not to drill every last drop of oil out of the U.S.  The point is to start drilling now while we as a nation work on alternative fuels.  Whether that be Wind, Nuclear, Bio-fuels, fuel cells, solar, Natural gas, etc.
The point is not to just tie our hands and put our economy into the crapper by not drilling.  I don't see how it can be put any clearer than it has.  Do it all and do it now and stop this petty bickering and arguing.  Doing as Obama originally suggested and just sit here and suffer with High Oil prices, while we attempt to develope alternatives just ain't gonna cut it.

Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 9:21pm
Jonathan- I doubt that if McCain lifts the ban on off shore drilling that "you will be able to decide where to drill" That will be decided by your government, not the people. I agree with you on the drilling concept to ensure we have enough fuel for our economy. Now, will you be the first in line to volunteer for the potential cleanup if we have another "Exxon Valdez" episode on the oil rigs? Not taking the side of the environmentalist, mind you, but just trying to point out the impact to the oceans, wildlife and the land if a catastrophy occurs. Once that happens, there's no turning back on the permanent damage done. Just suggesting that we take a cautious approach to such an important decision for us and future generations. Refining- it's a shame that the big oil companies didn't get started on building additional refineries in the 70's. I guess the gas lines in the 70's, due to the lack of volume, didn't provide a clue to them that more fuel was needed. Perhaps 30 plus years ago, they could have built more refineries without the "not in my back yard" message now. Big oil companies are no friend of the working man and will get no praise from me. Just greedy corporate scum slowly choking the public financially. JMO

Posted By: .308
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 11:25pm
No...I do think we should drill now. That's a not a real question in my book. It’s like going to the Olive Garden and having the waitress ask: "Would you like some cheese on your entree?" The answer to both is a given. My point was we have to move past this and quick as it distracts us from focusing on a long term solution.

Posted By: Pacman
Date Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 11:56pm
Vet when the first Gulf War ended and Sadaam lit up all those oil rigs and dumped all that oil into the Gulf.  The World was coming to an end according to the environmentalists.  It didn't. 
There are over 3500 oil tankers, and the Valdez is small compared to some of these tankers, cruising the oceans of the world loaded with oil.  There are 1000's of offshore oil rigs throughout the world some in much harsher environments than we have in the USA and they manage to work.  Are there accidents yes, that is the nature of the beast.  Will there be oil spills yup.  Will oil refineries continue to catch fire, yup.   Will fuel storage facilities have accidents yup.  Will coal mines have cave ins yup. Will trucks carrying gas get into accidents and explode, yup.  Will natural gas tanks catch fire, yup.    If we listen to the environmentalist we will never get out of bed in the morning and start our cars.  An oil spill, contrary to popular belief, will not be the end of the world.
There are about 1,717 producton platforms in the Gulf of Mexico.  We don't hear reports of  major oil spills from them do we, and they are in the path of hurricanes for 6 months of the year.  California has platforms off its shores and believe me if they leaked an eye dropper full of oil there, the rest of the world would hear about it.  While there is always the risk of a spill we can't live with "the sky is falling" mentality all of the time.
This economy can not sustain itself on $4-5.00 a gallon gas for even 12-18 months.   To much is impacted by this sudden rise in gas.

Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 5:05am
Agreed, Pacman!
And we cannot stop other nations from drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and doing so closer and closer to our shores.  Do any of you think that Castro or Chavez or Putin or the Chinese will be MORE environmentally conscientious than we will?
And use your heads for something other than hat-racks regarding electric cars!  Just imagine that practical electric cars were available TOMORROW, and everyone traded in their internal combustion models ASAP.  Do any of you think you will be able to re-charge them for FREE???  We will need the exact same ADDITIONAL amount of electrical energy as that petroleum energy which we are replacing!!!  Just WHERE would we get it???
The same nuts who are against drilling are against nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, and natural gas fired power plants!!!  (Also, all but the nukes are NON-renewable, fossil fuels as well!!)  And we already have black-outs and brown-outs every time we turn around WITHOUT everyone charging up their vehicles!!!)  Don't suggest hydro-electric...that's bound to get somebody's knickers in a knot because it will endanger the "habitat" of a minnow or two.
In fact, don't suggest ANYTHING until you actually "run the numbers" and actually realize how much energy being produced from petroleum that your idea must replace! 
You will find that most of the suggestions are downright SILLY!!!

Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 6:33am
OK then, points well taken-everything that was deemed off limits to drilling should be removed from the list- let's start drilling and working on increasing refiner capacity.

Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 7:42am
That's the only reasonable course, Vet, and we should do so with all due haste as well as all due precautions.
Along with that we should pursue energy alternatives. and we should renew our nuclear electric generation program, just as those darlings of the environmentalists the Scandinavians and French are doing.
Once battery technology does allow practical electrical cars, we will need all of the clean, safe, reliable electricity that we can generate to keep them on the road!  Thumbs%20Up

Posted By: VietVet
Date Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 10:47am
Alright Mike, I may have to draw the line on driving one of those electric cars in the future ,that is, unless they make them better looking than the hybrids. Mercy, are they butt ugly! A man's got to have some pride in his ride, right, especially if he lived through the 60's muscle car era.

Posted By: Mike_Presta
Date Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 11:06am
I've seen reports of some electrics that look downright slick...and they go from 0 to 100 mph in something like 3 (yes, THREE) seconds and top out at over 200 mph.
The downside??  They cost about a million bucks a copy and carry only 2 people and a bowling bag.
If I can find it, I'll send you the link.

Print Page | Close Window