What are your thoughts on off-shore drilling?

It's been all over the news lately...the president lifted the executive ban on off-shore drilling, and is pressuring congress to do the same.

What do you guys think? Will this lower the gas prices? What about drilling in Alaska? Or building new refineries?

What about the fact that we import most of our oil? It seems that in our rush to become a 'service' country, we've let the manufacturing industry fall by the waistside.

I'm just curious about what others think on this subject...

It won't lower gas prices immediately, since first they have to FIND where to drill, THEN set up the drills and only then might we start seeing extra oil.

It COULD make a bloody environmental disaster. It did already the last time they tried this twenty or so yeasrs ago.

I mean.. the nuclear industry's come farther in the last 20 years too, would YOU like to see more Nuclear Power Plants appear?

Personally, I'm against it. I'd rather see us learn to manage how much oil we use, instead of trying to come up with better ways to temper it now so that our children can pay through the nose instead of us. (The way Ronald Reagan screwed our generation years ago when he ignores the lessons from the last Oil Shortage)

Original Post by hkellick:

I'd rather see us learn to manage how much oil we use, instead of trying to come up with better ways to temper it now so that our children can pay through the nose instead of us.

I second that.

Drilling for more crude oil won't do anything until we expand refining capacity.

Expanding refining capacity is poltically infeasible.

Therefore, drilling for more crude oil offshore or anywhere is silly.

I'm also all for more efficient use of the oil we do have or true, more environmentally-friendly alternative fuels (i.e. not ethanol).

offshore drilling is a flawed concept designed to create the illusion of economic stability.  all it will do is prolong dependence on oil.

I think it's stupid. They said that the oil that's there will only last a year. I think they should be focusing more on finding alternative fuels.

I'd prefer off-shore drilling to drilling in ANWR.

More off-shore drilling or drilling in ANWR is not the answer. Neither will reduce costs anywhere in the near future. Both will cause environmental problems that could be disastrous.

Our main focus should be to become independent of oil. We need to heavily invest in alternative fuels and become more energy efficient in everything we do.

Original Post by dnrothx:

Drilling for more crude oil won't do anything until we expand refining capacity. Why would we need to expand refining capacity if we aren't using our existing refineries to full capacity?

Expanding refining capacity is poltically infeasible. It's not, we've been expanding refining capacity for years, we just haven't build new refineries.

 

Offshore drilling wouldn't add any new oil to the market for decades (assuming anyone even looks for oil on offshore leases - we have tons of offshore areas open for drilling now and no one is looking for oil on them).  By the time any of that oil hits the market gas will be so expensive that everyone has moved on to other energy sources.

ANWR doesn't have the capacity to produce enough oil to have a meaningful effect on the price of gas.  The estimates I've heard say ANWR could potentially produce about a million barrels of oil per day, worldwide supply is currently 80-90 million barrels per day, so ANWR could increase worldwide supply by a little over 1%, and since oil has inelastic demand the corresponding decrease in price would be less than 1%. 

Sort of like the "gas tax holiday" I think it's just a political song and dance designed to make it seem like the people in power are accomplishing something or trying to accomplish something.  I don't think it's a real solution by any stretch of the imagination.

Why can't we explore all these options?  Why do we have to nit pick and decide on just one option?  I'm for offshore drilling.  I'm for drilling in ANWR.  Let's drill for oil!  Along with this, I think we should definitely explore nuclear energy, as France and Japan safely use this and make up a majority of their power.  I think wind power should be utilized, and we definitely need to find other innovative ways to be more self-reliant.  Let’s conserve our energy, and see if we can make due with less.

I’m all for trying every option we have, and let’s see what sticks! 

Well if you listen to everyone, there is no solution.  Add crude to the supply, nah no good. Add refineries, yea right. When was the last time that happened. 31 years ago?? We need them, we want them, but you have to put them in the magic 4th dimension so nobody will see it, hear it, know it's there... NIMBY. Not in my back yard.

Oh I know, lets pay farmers to grow corn for ethanol that wastes 8 times more energy to make than it produces, strangling our food supply, and causing inflation. 

 

Bah... our own government is sabotaging us untill MrFusion comes out or something.

i would also prefer off-shore versus in ANWR

i would also prefer developing wind, geothermal, tidal currents, and other clean energy sources

it's because oil has a near-monopoly that we have no choice but to pay thru the nose

the answer isn't to make the monopoly bigger and more developed -- it's to create a viable choice for the consumer so that there is true competition

also, refineries are operating at 89% of capacity according to bloomberg

T. Boon Pickens thinks we need to take the percentage of fuel usage currently provdied by natural gas, and use wind for that, then transfer the natural gas into transportation, thereby decreasing our dependancy on foriegn oil.

Granted he's not trying to replace fossil fuel, but he is trying to lessen our dependancy on foreign oil, which is the intention of offshore drilling.

which I am adamantly opposed to , BTW, since there are a large number of exisiting permits underutilized in the Gulf as it is.

that is true kathy, i would favor a use or lose it leasing arrangement so that oil companies can't sit on the leases and not drill

dumping more money into oil (whether offshore drilling, ANWAR, refineries, or tarsands) makes about as much sense as dumping money into steam power.  it's an obsolete technology.  we just haven't admitted it yet.

Just as an FYI, many companies have these leasing arrangements, but they only allow these companies to have the ability to search for oil, but not drill.  Or, they can drill, but they cannot collect.  So, to be fair, there are some legitimate reasons why these leasing arrangements are not all acted upon.

*reads #10*

yeah f it!! f this planet! let's drill giant holes everywhere we can so i can drive my hummer to work everyday! in fact, why don't we just chop down all the forests too, what good are they? we can just burn all the wood for fuel! who cares about the future, our future children and grandchildren. screw those chumps!

:/

Original Post by crazineko:

 Along with this, I think we should definitely explore nuclear energy, as France and Japan safely use this and make up a majority of their power. 

 Do you seriously not know that we already have nuclear power plants?

another reason why oil companies aren't drilling in some of the leased areas is that there is a shortage of ships required for deeper sea oil drilling  (and we outsourced steel production to china so, shoot, we're screwed on that count too)

i do agree with pg in that the govt shouldn't invest in oil at this point, but i would be surprised if oil companies didn't - that would mean walking away from a great deal of capital investment, not to mention profits -- i'd prefer for oil companies to continue in providing product but would like to end their monopoly

this would result in a shift toward other energies and the oil industry would die a natural death

 

"Do you seriously not know that we already have nuclear power plants?"

Please read more into to what I said.  Of course I know we have nuclear power plants. 

The last power plant I believe was built 20 years ago in the US.  France receives over 70% of their energy from nuclear power. Japan receives almost 40%.  Sweden receives almost 50%.  That’s half!  Mind you, these are very environmentally friendly nations that have found safe ways to utilize this energy.   Why can we not do the same, along with other sources of energy?