Enough Already -- the US Needs to Drill Offshore

http://www.janereinheimer.com ^ | July 16, 2008 | Jane Reinheimer

[janereinheimer]

The domed ones on Capitol Hill have insisted that loosening up on those bans to drill offshore wouldn't make any difference for years and years and years.

So how come the price of crude (futures) went down $10 the very day that Bush signed an executive order repealing the ban that his father had put in place when he was in the White House.

Just imagine what the price of crude would fall to if congress did its part in repealing the ban that they put into place to appease the environmentalists! And further, I heard somewhere yesterday that the Chinese are drilling 30 miles off the coast of California, not 50 or 60 miles.

But that ban is only half the problem. The other part of the problem requires congressional approvals.

Apparently that's not going to happen. Both Pelosi in the Big House and Reid in the Senate say they're just not going to allow such a nonsensical thing as a repeal on offshore drilling or drilling in oil-rich fields in Alaska. Here's what Reid had to say about that: http://www.newsholic.net/2008/07/no-drilling-votes-in-debate-over-oil-speculation/

Reid says rescinding the ban would be a gift to the oil companies. Actually, Mr. Reid, it would be a gift to China and every other country that wants to come in and drill in the oil rich fields off the coasts of the United States.

But wait! Isn't America supposed to be a representative form of government?

So you feel represented? I certainly don't. I live in Illinois and I am here to tell you that Senators Durbin and Obama don't do a thing to make me feel represented. They think they know what's best for all of us We the Peoples.

Well, 91% of us say the congressionals have it all backwards. Since they apparently aren't experts on anything but politics (instead of governing and legislating), I do not need for them to tell me what's best for me. Especially when it comes to the high price of crude.

And I'm no economist but I'd bet that I have more economics courses in my business administration undergrad than a lot of those politicians under the Dome have.

Pelosi's solution is the try to force Bush to use up all the oil reserves before authorizing any drilling anywhere. That would bring the gasoline prices down, she says.

Problem is, what she's advocating is specifically against the law. I learned that from our watching C-Span the other evening. The oil reserves cannot be used to effect an economic change.

That little piece of advice to the White House warranted the Investors Business Daily to call for Pelosi's resignation. Imagine that! Advising the president of the United States to do something that would specifically be against the law.

And, of course, she and Reid say that it's Bush's fault that the approval rating for congress is only 9%.

Click on this website and you'll see a map that shows where China is going to be drilling about 36 miles off the coast of the Florida Keys. Cuba gave them permission and they'll be drilling in areas where our nitwits in congress say US oil companies can't drill. Here's the map at this site: http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/05/its-official-cuba-hires-china-to-drill.html

Now, don't you feel represented in Washington?

The Senate did approve a measure in the Energy and Natural Resources committee that does open up 2.9 million acres for drilling as long as the drillers stay out about 100 miles off the coast of Florida.

So, let's see. The Chinese don't need permission from our "self-imposed divine right of kings congress" to drill off our coasts in international waters. They could go 40 miles off the coast of Florida and still be in international waters and there wouldn't be a thing we could do about it. They could put all kinds of oil rigs in a 60 mile zone before they even got to where the US companies were allowed to drill. http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2006/2006-03-09-10.asp

Here's a really interesting map that shows where the offshore oil potential is located (and where drilling is prohibited): http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/national_world/stories/2008/07/11/todrill_graphic.html

115 billion barrels is a lot of oil. Especially since the US only used 7.5 billion barrels last year.

Here's a map that showed up on Free Republic which shows the prohibited areas -- the "No Zones" where US oil companies are not allowed to drill. The map is at response #12 on the thread. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2029500/posts

Keep in mind that a barrel contains 40 gallons. And after refining, we get about 19 gallons on gasoline from one barrel of crude.

Of course, we'd need to get real busy and build more refineries. We could do that. We have lots of politicians running around the country lamenting the loss of jobs to outsourcing. So hire all these people who want to work. Approve overtime. Approve three shifts a day. If that's not enough, hire another crew and another one and another until the refineries are up and running.

This is America, folks. We can put up a house in less than 90 days and I'd wager that we could put up a refinery or two in less than ten years. Don't believe that doomsday "worst case scenario" that comes out of political mouths.

[RetiredArmy]

The Marxist Dimocrats said no drilling, let them pay $6.00 per gallon. So, no drilling. Countess Proveskiovich has spoken.

[Virginia Ridgerunner]

Just FYI...

Congressional Off-Shore Drilling Ban Expires Sept. 30, 2008 -- Unless Congress Renews

The question now is whether or not the Rats have the horsepower to renew the ban for Fiscal Year 2009 over a Bush veto. My guess is no.

[MaineConservative]

And King Harry of Las Vegas said we can’t drill our way out of this. But Why not TRY, King Harry!!!

[angkor]

It's less than 100 miles from the prospective ANWR drill site to Prudhoe Bay and the Alaska Pipeline. That's the amount of new pipeline that would need to be built.

The Aleyska Pipeline took 3 years for 700 miles (including across the Brooks Range, the Alaska Range, the Chugach, and hundreds of lakes, rivers and deep tundra). An ANWR "connector" to Prudhoe Bay is more or less a straight shot across open tundra with none of the complexities of Aleyska. It could probably be built in less than one year, thus providing almost instant access to ANWR output via the Valdez oil terminal.

The AK Pipeline is currently running at about 1/2 capacity, and figures I've seen indicate it can easily move another 500K barrels per day (some say more than that).

[angkor]

>>>>>renew the ban for Fiscal Year 2009 over a Bush veto. My guess is no.<<<<<

I agree. They don’t have it.

[janereinheimer]

Thank you for the map. It gets a little tiresome to listen to the politicians make the claim that it would take too long to get the oil from Alaska transport.

What are they thinking? Building another pipeline? Don’t they realize that, as you point out, there’s one already there and running at only half capacity.

[janereinheimer]

All the more reason to make sure we overturn the majority in the House — that way we get two for the price of one:

1) Nancy has to go back to her regular hiding place desk and doesn’t get to sit up there on her “throne”, and

2) We would hopefully get some reasonableness as far offshore drilling goes. I mean, these nitwits in congress may think they’re prohibiting offshore drilling but they are not.

They are merely prohibiting US companies from drilling. When a whole bunch of rigs spring up off the coast of Santa Barbara, I’ll just bet the folks out there will be wishing they had allowed some US friendly folks drill.

[angkor]

>>>Don’t they realize that, as you point out, there’s one already there and running at only half capacity.<<<<<

When you discuss this with your ignorant and low-IQ Democrat friends, be sure to remind them that it’s ***LESS THAN 100 MILES**** from ANWR to the Pipeline, straight across a frozen, desolate, and featureless tundra with NOTHING living on it (except mosquitos in the summer). In the winter it’s a frozen wasteland incapable of supporting life.

[Cobra64]

"China is going to be drilling about 36 miles off the coast of the Florida Keys."

Bush should extend out sovereignty out to 300 miles.

[stuartcr]

A colleague today told me that the US exports roughly the equivalent of what is taken from Prudhoe Bay. Does anyone know if this is true, or where I could find the data on US oil exports?

[angkor]

Lots of good basic information here:

http://tapseis.anl.gov/guide/what.cfm

The pipeline transports crude oil produced in several oil fields on Alaska's North Slope. The largest of these is Prudhoe Bay; other fields include Kuparuk, Endicott, Milne Point, Pt. McIntyre, and most recently, Alpine. The pipeline system was built in 1974 - 1977 and has moved over 13 billion barrels of crude oil. The peak daily throughput of 2.03 million barrels per day was reached in 1988. The current rate is approximately 1 million barrels per day (2001).

[EdReform]

Bookmarking. Thanks for posting this info!

[MaineConservative]

"China is going to be drilling about 36 miles off the coast of the Florida Keys."

It is in CUBAN waters, thou.

Bush should extend out sovereignty out to 300 miles.

Cuban terrority, we don't have a say.

[RetiredArmy]

Correct. With a lot of things in life, you NEVER KNOW TILL YOU FREAKING TRY!!!! So, by golly, TRY!!!! Who died and left King Harry as sole word of what is and is not possible?

[Cobra64]

I know. I’d extend it anyhow just to piss off Raul Castro or whoever the new guy is down there.

[autumnraine]

Can’t you see the libs in California watching oil rigs out in the ocean. Calling the coast guard “Hey, I thought they weren’t supposed to drill in the ocean, it’s going to damage our beaches and scenery” Then the look on their face when they are told “Only American companies can’t drill. That’s Russia out there and we can’t stop them”. So they get to have the potential “damage” and oil rigs messing up scenery, but still pay $6 a gallon. Too bad you nitwit libs.

[autumnraine]

We need to get some photoshop pics out with a crowned King Harry and Queen Nancy telling us to “let them pay $10 for gas, I rule this nation!” Dang, I wish I had taken that computer graphics class.

[RetiredArmy]

Me too. My computer skills are that I can type. Thank God for those two years of typing in high school, which the football coach made us take. He said it was one class even the dummies could pass! :-)

[fabian]

why haven’t the oil companies drilled on 70% of the land that they pay big bucks for that they know have oil? If it was a problem of the government not letting they drill, why haven’t they had a pr campaign with some of their billions to have us contact congress? The oil companies benefit big time by these high prices in profits. Just look at their profit grows over the last five years. Take a look at an informantive site about the reality...
www.thetruthbehindhighfuelprices.com

[angkor]

So frustrating that the MSM also seems ignorant of the >100 mile distance (they think ANWR needs a new pipeline?) and doesn’t challenge pols (who are simply lying) when they promote this false story.

[EdReform]

Indeed. There’s method in their madness.

[cookcounty]

"Reid says rescinding the ban would be a gift to the oil companies"

Procedure is on our side. The ban will be rescinded unless Congress extends it. There are Democrats ready to vote AGAINST extending the ban.

[ravingnutter]

This entry at Snopes speaks in detail on the misinformation on exports. Alaskan exports ended in 2000 and even before that were only 7%. It also explains that almost none of what is exported from the U.S. is crude oil, it is petroleum coke.

[stuartcr]

Thanks. What is petroleum coke used for?

[WOBBLY BOB]

it’s like the lib argument against capital punishment:”it costs more to execute than incarcerate for life”.

Sure, but only because the same people ensure lots of appeals and a backups on “death row” of 15-20 years.
(IE: a self-fulfilling prophecy)

[autumnraine]

Where? Where do they know there is oil and aren’t drilling?

[cookcounty]

"And King Harry of Las Vegas said we can’t drill our way out of this."

The same Hopeless Harry who insists that the Surge is a failure.

If Hobbit Frodo had to work with Hopeless Harry, he'd have starved to death in the Shire.

[cookcounty]

"Bush should extend out sovereignty out to 300 miles."

LOL! Not gonna work. Though it would be fun to just say Cuba belongs to US!

Under International Treaty, China can drill that close to the US because as long as they are closer to Cuba than the US, Cuban "law" applies.

[WOBBLY BOB]

This is America, folks. We can put up a house in less than 90 days and I'd wager that we could put up a refinery or two in less than ten years.

"Extreme Makeover" does it in 5 days.

[Foolsgold]

There seems to be a question as to the validity of the claims about oil leases off Cuba, however Jimmy Carter signed an agreement back in 1977 allowing Cuba access to half of the 90 miles distance to Key West. - 45 miles from the United States of America sovereign soil!

Drill 4 oil now

[RightWhale]

Three major announcements appeared yesterday. Other factors could also be at work. It wouldn’t be unusual to pick one announcement as being key, but it would also be myopic.

[ravingnutter]

Petroleum Coke is used as a substitute for coal in the manufacture of blast furnace coke, in the production of cement and lime, and to generate electric power. In many cases, petroleum coke is blended with other industrial carbons to achieve an economical solution to rising raw material costs.

Source

[stuartcr]

Thanks

[cookcounty]

"why haven’t the oil companies drilled on 70% of the land that they pay big bucks for that they know have oil?

They don't know they have oil on that land. You have to get the lease first, THEN you can explore. THEN you can file with the EPA to actually drill. THEN you can drill, and if you've done your homework well, you MAY strike oil.

There is plenty of exploration going on out in the West, and a lot of drilling (Grand Junction, Colorado is a boomtown, same for western North Dakota), but the preliminary studies of the fields available are not nearly as possible as those the DEMOCRATS are tying up.

WHY do the Democrats PREFER that our oil come from areas BEYOND THE REACH of the stringent regs of the EPA? WHY do they favor sending our money OVERSEAS to purchase oil from places where the oil pollution is outrageous???

Because they are NOT global thinkers, and would rather pollute the planet than agree with George the Satan.

It's about political power. Sick.

[Cobra64]

Thanks! I did not know that.

[janereinheimer]

But it seems that Pelosi and Reid have the notion that our sovreignty includes the entire Pacific Ocean. We’re going to have foreign oil rigs closer in than our own rigs.

What rubbish is this that comes out of Washington?!!

[janereinheimer]

Thanks. I’m bookmarking this site.

[janereinheimer]

Nobody ever accused the libs of being able to think that far ahead or outside the box either, for that matter.

I listened to Diane Feinstein on Fox News the other day. All she was doing was repeating Harry Reid’s talking points. They keep saying we can’t drill our way out of this mess, but they don’t have any other solution that they’d be willing to take responsibility for.

But then, my guess is that We the Peoples are paying for their gasoline consumption. They’re already sticking it to us with their leased vehicles. Might as well fill up the gas tanks while they’re at it.

[janereinheimer]

It’s about time a whole bunch of us “We the Peoples” started flooding the mail boxes of congressionals’ e-mails and snail mails.

I get the idea that they think we’re out here in the Netherlands not painting any attention to anything they’re doing. We can fix that little erroneous thought.

[janereinheimer]

Thank you Mr. Carter.

This is news to me. And it’s also one of the things that Quint and I dearly love about Free Republic because we’re one big collective brain, it seems.

I wondered where Castro got the idea he could do this. Now his relationship with Chavez makes more and more sense.

[janereinheimer]

I heard on C-Span the other night that the oil company profits are in the 8-10% range. That’s not an obscene percentage for profits.

And this morning, on Fox News, I also heard that BP was drilling down 45 miles below the ocean floor in one location near Alaska. That doesn’t sound cheap to me.

My point is, big profits go toward some pretty big expenses. Although I do agree that the benefit packages of oil executives are what I consider way too high. But I don’t have a big enough brain to figure out what they figure out. I do know they don’t strike pay dirt every time they stick a drill into the earth’s crust, though.

Our priorities are turned upside down in this country. For instance, a CEO of an oil company can have a $400 million benefit package but school teachers and military personnel have to eke out a living on what they’re paid.

But that’s grist for the mill for another thread.

[janereinheimer]

painting = paying

sorry

[fabian]

here is some documented info from author and former gas station owner Richard Clough...
http://thetruthbehindhighfuelprices.com/blog/
Alot of leased land that cost much without any permits even filed to drill!

[EdReform]

Drilling in the Offshore