Well, at least Interior is selling 4.5 million acres of oil land leases in Alaska. That sounds like a fairly large area. I have heard that one of the issues on public lands has been that companies were just sitting on leases and not doing anything with them so a bunch were canceled to be reactivated, or something like that. Hopefully someone here is more knowledgeable and can clarify this issue.
I wonder whether these particular leases are the best leases?
Don' let em bamboozle ya kid!
What good is a lease if they won't let you have a drilling permit, won't approve the site construction, the well plan, etc.?
If you find oil, you still have to get it to market, no road, no pipeline permit, no EIS approval for the righto-of-way, you aren't going to make a dime, but the costs can run into the billions (right, with a 'b'). Oil companies are visionary in that they are always looking for 'the next big thing', but even so, dumping a lot of money into Exploration with little chance for payout is a great way to crash your company.
For now, the easier pickings are in the lower 48, on private leases, especially with the administration making noises about ending "subsidies" (which are the ordinary business expenses other industries deduct, not a payment by the government to the oil industry).
In reality, most oil companies pay three times as much in taxes as they make in profit.
As a rule, at least here in Texas, if a company leases property for production, they have to drill it within a specified time on the lease or they lose it. After they drill it they have to produce something(amount varies, I think) or the lease will still expire. They can drill, however and cut production back to a minimum and still hold the lease indefinitely. At least that is case with my own property that is leased.