Bush lifts offshore drilling ban in symbolic move

[bowtieguy]

Originally Posted by Snax

Ok, here is the primary premise of all economic arguments I would make against not drilling more: Lower oil prices stimulate demand. Providing more supply may short circuit price increases in the near term, but it leaves us chasing our own tails.

Environmentally, you can either tolerate it or you can't. Any comparison of the environment to need for oil is arbitrarily in the eye of the beholder - which unfortunately is similar to dealing with second hand smoke. Personally, I won't tolerate second hand smoke in my home, car, or inside public places. Likewise, I don't want to see, smell, or deal with the environmental impact of oil drilling. You can't put a concrete dollar amount on what that is worth to me. Most people typically have the NIMBY attitude when faced with the proposition of having such infringements as an oil well actually IN their back yard. Just because one person is willing to sell out the health of their environment, does not mean that everybody else around them should have to bear burden of doing so.

No drilling. Economic cost is not the issue.

Snax,

i respect your view and consider you a person of integrity, however...

i feel like you are insulting the intelligence of those of us that support domestic drilling. the impact of drilling via new tech and location is extremely minimal. in whose back yard? one person vs everyone else? pay attention to the polls man.

it's becoming a bit redundant, but we DO IN FACT support conservation and alternative fuels. whomever you'd like to blame, they can't be mass produced quick enough. look at civic matic's garage, and mine for that matter. and you know i support stiffer fuel guzzler penalties.

and we've certainly discussed "hypermiling" our homes.

taxes and fuel cost induced inflation are really hurting a lot of people here and around the nation. my family is struggling for it's financial future brother. i would respect your argument more if you called me out as a breeder instead.

[trollbait]

You may support conservation and alternate fuels, but the powers that be never discuss them in conjunction with new drilling leases. I believe we will eventually have to tap these reserves at some point, but unless there is some compromise, and some form of energy conservation bill is attached with the opening of them up, I can't support doing it now.

I also would rather wait until the states and feds are in a better position to negotiate these leases. The middle of peak gas prices with the public crying isn't the time. It will take years, possibly decades, to get this crude to market, assuming the oil companies start drilling immediatly. Which they wouldn't have to. We can wait a few months.

[Snax]

On drilling, I will concede these two points which have no quick fix:

#1 We are perilously dependent upon oil imports.
#2 It is in the economic interest of the country to assure that domestic sources exist.

Given those points however, we are faced with the reality of too little too late. There is absolutely no way we can drill and pump the oil fast enough to prevent an economic catastrophy if imports dry up. Throwing up new oil rigs is simply like putting a bandage over an infected wound. It might make us feel better, but in the long run it just exacerabates the problem.

More domestic drilling is not an economic solution to anybody but owners of oil stock. It may be a national security solution, but I've yet to see any credible case for that by our politicians or anybody else for that matter.

And for the record in terms of 'back yard drilling', I consider an oil rig off the coast of Oregon to be within that rhealm. I could stand the eyesore of it, but one spill can take decades to recover from ecologically and can have huge financial costs for which the oil companies are succeding in avoiding allot of responsibility.

Tidal and wind power makes so much more sense if we are going to muddy the landscape. Such power can easily be transported inland for hydrogen generation or other forms of power that could run our transportation sector. No messy spills. No global warming. No fighting over a finite resource.

[thisisntjared]

i think they should start drilling everything they can and tax the hell out of it.

i think thats win win win right? the government gets more money, oil companies can drill locally, and the demand could remain constant because the price will still hang out where we need it. the best part is, we will no longer be importing.

[Jay2TheRescue]

Originally Posted by trollbait

You may support conservation and alternate fuels, but the powers that be never discuss them in conjunction with new drilling leases. I believe we will eventually have to tap these reserves at some point, but unless there is some compromise, and some form of energy conservation bill is attached with the opening of them up, I can't support doing it now.

I also would rather wait until the states and feds are in a better position to negotiate these leases. The middle of peak gas prices with the public crying isn't the time. It will take years, possibly decades, to get this crude to market, assuming the oil companies start drilling immediatly. Which they wouldn't have to. We can wait a few months.

Look at what the president lowering the executive ban on drilling on the continental shelf... Gas has come down about 20 cents so far in my area... Because of lower futures costs. If congress removes the legislative ban gas prices will drop again. When the oil companies start working out there futures prices will drop again. Allowing this will give us benifits we can take advantage of both now, and in the future. Lower energy prices to help the economy. Like it or not our economy runs on oil right now. Allowing drilling will give us the security of being less dependent on terrorist supporting nations for energy, keep more dollars here in the US to strengthen our economy, and while all this is going on we can be developing alternative energy sources. We need to use the energy we have in abundence. Solar, wind, coal, nuclear, natural gas, and hydroelectric. None of these can be implemented overnight though.

Right now we are stuck with oil, and we need to continue to use it until a viable alternative is brought to market. Right now the distribution is not in place for alternative fuel vehicles. The nearest fueling station for ethanol vehicles is 30 miles from my home. Within 200 miles of my home there are only about 3 ethanol stations. Same with CNG. Very few public stations for private vehicles. Hydrogen? I don't think there are any hydrogen stations within 200 miles. Everyone can't afford to buy a new Prius, and even if the Gov't outlawed large vehicles the automakers would not be able to make enough small cars fast enough. Everyone thought that the $5,000 Geo Metro was funny last month, try a $30,000 Geo Metro if all "gas guzzelers" were removed from the roads overnight. Then there are people like myself that need these large vehicles. I use my truck to move equipment and pick up supplies for my business. It would cost me a lot more to run my business if I did not have this vehicle, or one like it. I bought a Scangauge, educated myself on driving it right, and now I'm starting on aero mods. My goal is to get better mileage in my 4wd pickup than my sister is getting in her Ford Focus. That may seem unreachable in a 10 y/o 4wd pickup, but my sister is a "Hypomiler" in her Focus, only getting 23 MPG. With the small amount of driving I do (look @ my gaslog - only about 600 miles in the past month.) A high FE vehicle would still only save me maybe $100/mo. To me its more economical to just work with the vehicle I have, than spend $500/mo on a new vehicle so I can save $100/mo in gas. Plus, anyone can hypermile a Civic or Prius, but it takes skill and determination to hypermile a 4wd pickup.

-Jay

[bowtieguy]

Originally Posted by Snax

No global warming.

just wanted to illustrate how things can be taken out of context.

and the left is REALLY taking things out of context on this issue.

many years? decades? i've heard talk of motivated drilling and refining that can produce gas in 1-2 years. but that's capitalism at work, can't have that!

BTW, the GW argument is a moot point IMO. the so called evidence is so lame, i'll no longer discuss it.

[bowtieguy]

Originally Posted by thisisntjared

i think they should start drilling everything they can and tax the hell out of it.

i think thats win win win right? the government gets more money, oil companies can drill locally, and the demand could remain constant because the price will still hang out where we need it. the best part is, we will no longer be importing.

i heard in Michigan the road(gas)tax is underfunded. why? because the residents have cut back on their fuel consumption. so, the roads go to crap or another tax is increased/a new one created!

[Jay2TheRescue]

My logic is if people are driving less, and there's less total mileage driven on the roads, then there should not be as great of a need for highway maintenance. If they raise the gas tax again to make up for it people will drive even less.

-Jay

[thisisntjared]

yup, i am with jay.

[Snax]

Originally Posted by bowtieguy

many years? decades? i've heard talk of motivated drilling and refining that can produce gas in 1-2 years. but that's capitalism at work, can't have that!

My question is who has been doing that kind of talking? Oil drilling rigs don't go up overnight and while one rig may produce quickly, others may take significantly longer. Again, drilling is not going to fix our immediate problem or stave off the long term difficulties to any great degree.

I think it is a very valid point that lifting the offshore drilling ban may contribute to a drop in futures pricing. But actually going after the oil is another thing entirely and not likely to have a lasting effect. The math just doesn't play out with over 70% of our oil coming from imports. We are so far behind the curve that we cannot make an economically significant dent in that.