Replies

I get a little stuck on #3.

Oil, wherever it is pumped from, enters a global market place for bids, and competition.

Unless the US is going to nationalize oil, socialist style, wouldnt any new oil coming online from a US source simply reduce the world price by fractions? For every consuming nation on Earth?

I dont see how that really helps the price situation, or the ‘foreign dependence’ situation, unless, again, we nationalize/socialize.

Am I wrong here? Im wrong a lot.

“Wouldnt any new oil coming online from a US source simply reduce the world price by fractions? For every consuming nation on Earth?”

This part is correct.

The rest is not.

It’s just more supply for the demand lowers price.

(It also helps the economy because the money stays in the USA, but that is a different issue.)

Oil is fungible, meaning it really doesn't matter what happens to it once pumped. If we keep it, we don't have to buy it on the open market so it doesn't give the world market any more or less oil. If we sent it overseas, then our market would have to purchase more on the open market. If a person goes to the NYMEX floor, they can see the actual buying and selling of oil all over the world. There is nothing to keep Chavez from buying tankers filled with oil for delivery to Venezuela.

The push to get more domestic oil isn't so much for price,( even though any new sources would help the price go down), but to protect the US from foreign blackmail. If we got most of our oil from the Gulf and Alaska, we couldn't be cut off very easily by dictators. This is about national security more than price. The Dems are leaving us in a precarious position of having to bow to our enemies. Just imagine Ach-minime-jad and Putin and Chavez all get together and decide to Opec us by themselves. Saudi and Canada can't make that much up, so we would have at least 7 years of 3rd world depression till we drilled in ANWAR. It is a matter of national security to get more American oil. Even if Mexico or Brazil found more oil, there is no guarantee that we wouldn't be blocked from getting it.

Much of the controversy of sending oil all over the globe is only certain refineries can handle sour crude. We may very well send certain crude to foreign countries to get refined because we are unable. Valero specializes in sour crude, so I still think we could probably handle any oil out there.

If we were able to drill in Alaska and off Florida, and other places, it would go a long way to reduce the risk priced into the oil market. We are not short one barrel of oil right now. As far as I know there is not one refinery waiting for one more barrel of oil. The price is rising because even a blown pipeline in Nigeria could leave us short some oil. Some, like Bill Orieley, have suggested we all sit home one day to screw the oil companies, but all that would do today is give more oil to China and India to buy. We can't grow crops to get out of this, we can't put up windmills or solar panels to get out of this, the only thing we can do is use less or find more. We could cover Nevada 100% with solar panels and not supply enough juice to light LA. We will either use coal more or drill for oil more and the Dems want neither. What they want is us on bicycles or mopeds like China. Americans( Dems) haven't thought this through yet because of Bush derangement syndrome. When they are walking or paying $10 a gallon for gas, then maybe they won't say drilling in ANWAR is a lost cause.