Arctic drilling dropped from House bill

PMSNBC ^ | 11/09/05 | www.msnbc.msn.com

[ktvaughn]

It still seems like a lot of hooey for 10 billion barrels. And speaking of pork, is there any of our money going to development, roads, pipelines etc.? Or do the oil companies foot the bill? I'm seriously curious. Of course the oil companies want to drill there! There is money to be made no matter HOW MUCH they have to pay to get it out of the ground, because we will pay whatever they charge.

If the USGS says there is 10 billion barrels, I believe them. What I don't believe is that it will give us any relief from our Saudi friends.

from:

http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/energy/saudi-energy-reserves.html

"Saudi Aramco's oil and gas reserves conform to industry standards. Reserves attributable to enhanced oil recovery (EOR) processes are excluded, underscoring the conservative nature of the Company's reserves. Year-end 2003 proved oil reserves totaled 260 billion barrels. Incremental probable and possible reserves (over and above the 260 billion barrels) are estimated to be 103 billion barrels. Exploration, delineation and development efforts have increased Saudi Aramco's oil initially in place from 600 to 700 billion barrels during the past 20 years. Vast unexplored acreage exists in the Rub' al Khali desert region, the northern basin (along the border with Iraq) and the offshore Red Sea Basin. US Geological Survey 2000 projections point to additional recoverable oil resources ranging from 29 to 161 billion barrels to be discovered in Saudi Arabia by 2025. The Company projects its oil initially in place volume to reach 900 billion barrels by the same date."

Well, won't we be sitting pretty with our cute little 10 billion?

Just Sayin'

[pointsal]

Gutless b*****ds

[pointsal]

Gutless b*****ds

[quantim]

Obviously the gas prices didn't stay high enough, long enough to pressure the leftists, dems, RINOs into doing something.

[Edit35]

Their is no such thing as a fiscal conservative.

I've been saying that exact thing for years (and thusly have been attacked by many wimpy Republicans who claim they ARE fiscal 'serves and that I don't know what I'm talking about).

I say that in fact you CANT be a fiscal conservative and social liberal at the same time because it TAKES MONEY to pay for the socially liberal policies such as big-ticket public education, abortion on demand, gasoline alternatives, etc. BIG MONEY.

That "fiscal conservative" argument is made mostly by those who are ashamed or afraid to admit they are conservative (like Arnold, among others)

[NYorkerInHouston]

Well at 10 billion barrels ANWR doesn't match up to the Saudi's largest Ghawar, but than nothing else has been found that matches up to the king of all oil fields. 10 billion is a major oil field though, definitely worthwhile to produce, though it will never make us independent from foreign oil. As to the pork, I'm pretty sure that we (the American taxpayer) would handle the infrastructure costs (pipelines, roads) and the companies would handle the production end.

The bigger question is the situation in Saudi Arabia. There are questions being raised as to how much oil really is left in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi's have not been particularly forthcoming with regard to the current status of their aging giants. There is some evidence to suggest that they have begun to use secondary recovery techniques on some of the world's largest producers like Ghawar that produces about 5 million barrels a day. The USGS is reliable in areas that they can test, but their Saudi estimates are guessing at best, wishful thinking at worst. Aramco's own exploration efforts have been disappointing for many years.

http://www.iags.org/n0331043.htm

If Simmons is correct, we are likely to be in for rocky times ahead. ANWR will be drilled, perhaps in desperation but it will be drilled, if Saudi's oil production is indeed poised to decline. This country is used to having its 20 million barrels a day and while we could probably manage with minimum hardship on 18 or 19, much less than that could be rather unpleasant. Unconventional oil sources (tar sands, shale, coal) will be tapped in increasing amounts but it is an open question as to whether production growth will be able to keep up with production decline.

[ktvaughn]

Hmm--may have to buy that Prius after all;)

Thanks for the info! Nice to have a serious chat about oil without the all the politics-very eye-opening.

Not happy about the taxpayer part in all this, though.

[Recovering_Democrat]

Your info on ANWR is skewed. The footprint there created by exploration is so small as to be hardly recognizable. For perspective, picture a single page of notebook paper on a tennis court. That is a rough approximation.

As to how much oil is under the ground in Alaska, the lowest estimate is that there are MILLIONS of barrels. Other estimates say there are BILLIONS of barrels.

Then there is the what do the people want? aspect of this issue. Alaskans are FOR exploration in ANWR.

Holding our national security and economic development back because of the environmentalists is absolutely, positively STUPID.

IF you really do want some info on the potential for ANWR, go to http://www.anwr.org.

[thackney]

It still seems like a lot of hooey for 10 billion barrels.

By this standard, where in the world do you think it IS worth drilling?

[ktvaughn]

Hell, I don't know!--it's still only 6 months of our consumption regardless of how long they take to get it out of the ground-and why is it OK with you to spend our money on their roads and pipelines when they made more money in PROFITS as an industry last quarter in the HISTORY OF THE WORLD? Jeez.
Look, I'm all for making money, but they can build their own damn roads and pipelines, IMHO. I'm paying 2.50 a gallon AND I have to build their pipelines?? Come on! I don't know what is conservative about holding onto this oil dependence. As noted above, it's just a matter of time before the stuff runs out. Don't we need a plan to NOT be a third world country when the well runs dry? Necessity is the mother of invention, and nobody is better at invention than the good ol USA. Why aren't we as a conservative society trying to find ways to tell the Sauds to shove their oil? Plus, Prince Whatshisname holding hands with Bush just squicks me. Really.


Sorry for the rant, got on a little tangent there. I really do appreciate all the thoughtful comments here.

[thackney]

why is it OK with you to spend our money on their roads and pipelines

I work in Alaska on design teams for North Slope oil field facilities. Where did you get the idea taxpayers pay for oil field roads and pipelines?

they made more money in PROFITS as an industry last quarter in the HISTORY OF THE WORLD

Why do you think less than 10% profit margin is out of line? They also had the biggest expenses in the history of the world to use your descriptions.

Company..............Profit..........Sales.........% Profit
Exxon Mobile......$ 9.92 B.....$ 100.7 B.....9.9%
Shell....................$ 5.37 B.....$ 76.44 B.....7.0%
BP.......................$ 6.53 B....$ 65.76 B......9.9%
Chevron...............$ 3.60 B....$ 54.46 B......6.6%
ConocoPhillips.....$ 3.80 B.....$ 49.66 B......7.7%
Marathon.............$ 0.77 B.....$ 17.25 B......4.5%

All are third quarter 2005 numbers.

As noted above, it's just a matter of time before the stuff runs out. Don't we need a plan to NOT be a third world country when the well runs dry?

Same limits apply to coal, natural gas & uranium, why is crude oil to be treated differently? Have you looked at the trends of the worlds proven reserves? Technology improvements continue to allow us to produce oil from fields that were not even counted as viable a couple decades ago. Do you suggest we should ignore oil so that we produce even more expensive sources of fuel?

[ktvaughn]

I appreciate your comments and since you are in the industry I concede to your knowledge. Have a great day!

[thackney]

And I appreciate the discussion with you. I get very frustrated with the deceptions used to claim ANWR coastal plain is not worth going after. Let me give another example to compare it.

ANWR is expected to add 590,000 barrels per day by 2015. ANWR is expected to add 800,000 barrels per day to U.S. crude oil production in 2020 and could add as much as 1.5 million barrels per day.

The Effects of the Alaska Oil and Natural Gas Provisions of H.R.4 and S.1766 on U.S. Energy Markets, Energy Information Administration

There are four oil fields in the world which produce over one million barrels per day. Ghawar, which produces 4.5 million barrels per day, Cantarell in Mexico, which produces nearly 2 million barrels per day, Burgan in Kuwait which produces 1 million barrels per day and Da Qing in China which produces 1 million barrels per day.

As reported July 4, 2004

If the ANWR Coastal Plain, located ~25 miles from the Badami Pipeline, isn't big enough to produce, why is any other place in the world? Regardless of how the media and environmentalist try to spin it, this is a really big one.