Cliff LyonOffshore Drilling Just More Republican Bull Shit
As I right this, the Republicans are on the floor of the House yelling and screaming about offshore and drilling. How ironic. In the midst of the playing out of the disastrous Republican energy/economic policies and in the midst of the great American wakening…THAT REPUBLICANS ARE LIARS…they continue with their hysterical accusations against democrats while openly pursuing the oil companies agenda.
It is truly unreal. Not even the talking-point-parrots on this blog are pushing the canard that somehow offshore drilling will do anything for our current energy needs.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:32 am
If figure the price drops we have seen reflects the drop in consumption as many Americans change their habits. Saudi has promised to supply oil to the customer in disagreement with other members of OPEC as of last week.
Now is the time to set the trend for the future, and get currently capped wells in the US that are just waiting to be tapped open and ready. What’s more, if the oil majors want to invest in offshore drilling now, let them. Oil exploration is never about the “current” need(the straw man). It is about future need. We will need new sources as we transition from fields that are dropping in production, and then towards the alternatives, whatever they may be.
Do you wish to rely on unstable Arab countries for our oil after 8 years of what we have just lived through?
For the foreseeable future we need the oil, demand in the US will remain how, and something has to give. We are sending far too much money overseas for the product, and are enabling states run by people you wouldn’t invite home for dinner, extremely rich.
It is more than just need, it has to be done for fiscal and national security reasons. Many nations where we get our oil from have nationalized, and the oil majors no longer have a free hand there. What we see is them returning home, to an environment that will be more friendly to them. No one democrat or rep can get out of the reality that we all use oil. Cliff I believe has a 6 cylinder SUV. It is just irresponsible by now to continue to militarize areas of the world, just so people like Cliff can drive Stupid Useless Vehicles(SUV).
We have to get our own oil out of the ground, and incorporate into out own economy. It can a has been done responsibly, moreover, it will be done. There is no way it won’t be…someday.
September 16th, 2008 at 9:56 am
At the very least we should find out how much oil is offshore. At this point, we are dealing with guess work. Willful ignorance is not a good national policy. That will mean exploratory drilling.
I agree that it is likely we will exploit these off shore resources. By doing it later rather than sooner we have the advantage of better extraction technology. Also, it is a good thing that we didn’t exhaust these resources back when oil was cheap and used to propel inefficient automobiles. That said, as Cliff’s chart points out, off shore oil is only a small slice of a real energy solution.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:09 am
OO said:
Yeah, the oil companies are pushing to lease everything before Bush leaves office and someone starts enforcing the rules again.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:26 am
The chart neatly shows that to become energy independent, we need to cut oil consumption by roughly two thirds. It could be done, but it would require massive changes.
September 16th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Leo,
How much of the supply is for fuel which can be reduced only to a point? After that, given current technology limits, we run into issues with lack of transportation.
How much of the supply goes into durable goods that if we reduce manufacturing will adversely impact our economy.
Like it or not, we are currently a consumption based economy. I would also ask how much of what we produce with that petroleum is then sold overseas, keeping our trade balance down.
I agree with you, we need to reduce consumption. I just don’t think given technology today we will ever be independent of petroleum; do you?
September 16th, 2008 at 10:56 am
The average Leo has no idea the dependency we have. I work at sea, the only thing that will propel a tanker besides bunker oil, is nuclear fuel. The navy runs a super carrier for years on a fuel load of uranium.
Heck, the fishing vessel I worked on at 96 ft. holds 12,000 gallons of diesel.
Trucks came to us at the dock, we didn’t go to the tanks/station.
We could drill our out of this problem, for a while, as we transition. What else do you suggest we do. Scale the economy back? That seems to be happening quite naturally.
Since there is plenty of oil now demand is down, there is less pressure to change, though many are making permanent changes in their personal lives. Hey surprise, the market does work in this case.
What are you going to do Leo, or have you done to promote this change at the personal level?
September 16th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Of course, cutting oil consumption by two-thirds wouldn’t reduce consumption to zero. We would still be talking 5 mb/d. I was talking about being independent of foreign petroleum, using Cliff’s chart as a starting point. We probably won’t be able to get that far, but every president since Nixon has had that as a goal.
Obviously, ships and aircraft present a different picture than cars, which is one reason we need to work towards reduced oil consumption. There are some things only petroleum can do well. If we move to rechargeable electric vehicles and electrified trains, we could seriously reduce oil consumption, since electricity can be generated without fossil fuels. A friend of mine owns a natural gas powered car, and I see natural gas powered buses frequently. Natural gas is a big part of the Pickens Plan.
What I have done at the personal level is arrange to live close enough to work so that I can walk to work. I also own a hybrid. Where I live now, I seldom need air conditioning or much heating. When I lived in a cold climate, I seriously insulated my house. At various times, I have lived where I used public transportation to get to work.
In any event, fossil fuels are a finite resource. We could try to reduce our population to reduce demand, or we could cut GDP per person, or we could cut fuel required per dollar of GDP. I prefer the third alternative.
As for our trade balance, is has been seriously negative since the 1970’s.
There is reason to doubt the Bush-McCain assertion that our economy is fundamentally sound. If McCain wins, though, I will likely get by. I hope to be like Paul O’Neill, who talked about being old enough and rich enough that Bush administration couldn’t hurt him.
September 16th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Not going to happen lest ye DRILL!
Get a alternative that you use that doesn’t consume hydrocarbons. Anything. Electricity comes from coal in your neck of the woods, so an electric car is yet panacea.
When you get something and describe it, then we’ll talk.
We all live on a greasy, shimmering, pool of hydrocarbons. Show me the actual way Leo.
September 16th, 2008 at 7:56 pm
No one is paying me yet to solve the nation’s energy crisis, so I am raising questions rather that providing answers.
I think we will drill, but it is like a family trying to balance its budget by looking for the change in the couch cushions and breaking open the piggy banks. It isn’t really going to solve our problems.
The chart shows that the new offshore drilling kicks in in about a decade. So we have a decade to look for alternatives, such as wind, solar, and greater energy efficiency. The U.S. also has plenty of coal and plenty of nuclear potential, and a fair amount of natural gas. It is all on the table for discussion now. Is there a serious discussion of the so-called Pickens Plan anywhere that someone would recommend?
The real questions are what sort of sacrifices are we going to make? Will we sacrifice the environment? Will we sacrifice some of our lifestyle? Will we continue to send our many overseas for oil and potentially sacrifice our sovereignty or the lives of our soldiers?