Should we drill oil in America?

Question

Ever wonder who gets our money every time we fill up our gas tanks? Saudi Arabia, for the record. Dubai has so much money from foreign gas profits that they are now building ski resorts in the middle of their 140 degree deserts...indoor ski resorts that is...with synthetic snow. Oh wait...and The Palm Islands. I mean that's great that they can afford that...but...we're paying for it.

Right now...America imports 65% of the nation's needed petroleum...which costs more than $55.1 billion a year. They could exceed 80% import costs by 2010.

I think we should be drilling for oil in America, particularly in Alaska. Beneath the North Slope of Alaska there is estimated to be btwn 3-9 billion barrels of recoverable oil. This area of interest (1.5 million acres) is part of the 19 million acre American National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). Environmentalists argue that by drilling in this portion of ANWR...oh ****...we might kill a Caribou. However, the Central Arctic Herd, which calves in the Prudhoe Bay and Kuparuk oil fields, has increased from 3,000 caribous to more than 23,400 caribous over four decades of development, which shows that development and caribou CAN coexist...

More than 75% of native Alaskans support production along the Coastal Plain for ANWR.

What are your opinions on the topic?

P.S. If you want to blame Bush for gas prices, keep in mind that he is pressing for drilling in America, which would save us the cost of foreign oil, and also keep in mind that Obama is in support of a new gasoline taxes, which will only make gas more expensive in the long run.

Answer 1

U.S. oil companies produce very little of the world's oil, on the order of 3-6%.  We consume on the order of 25% of the world's oil.  This means that, even with drilling in ANWR and the outer-continental shelf, we'll still be importing several multiples of what we produce.

That means the world oil prices will still determine what we pay.

So why is this issue being pushed so hard by oil lobbyists?  Because what constitutes a very small increase of assets in the world market (and thus a very small influence at the U.S. gas pump), constitutes a huge effect on U.S. oil company asset valuation.  That's their motivation.

If it's any consolation, transportation will slowly become electrical, and energy sources will become decentralized enough so that we're charging our cars at home, off the grid.  We'll be able to do that with our own windmills and solar panels on our own property.  While wind power won't drop in price much, solar panels will, as it's currently a primitive technology with little information, but that information density is growing exponentially.  In this sense, it's like the semconductor business in the early days: few people could perceive that there was a revolution of exponential growth going on, not even Bill Gates.

I also know of another energy source in the pipeline that's really promising that's not in the press, and that would meet the country's needs for centralized energy sources (without burning biofuels or accumulating toxic waste), but, not being in the mainstream press, it's a little hard to provide links to back up what will seem like bold claims.

Answer 2

My back yard is available for drilling. I don't care when they start if they want. Drill, drill, drill.

Answer 3

We do drill in America...

And besides, there is plenty of oil-rich land open for drilling as well...

The oil companies and speculators would rather not drill but gain more real estate in our preserves and continue to charge you almost $5 a gallon...

Furthermore, why would you think the companies who drill here would sell the gas for low prices to Americans? They would make so much more money selling to the rest of the world...

Answer 4

WE should drill for the short term.  The oil we produce should be marked for DOMESTIC sell only.  While we are saving some $ and time there we should be exploring EVERY possible alternative fuel source that could help us become more independent of foreign oil.  

They say that we are 10 yrs away from being able to use any of these alternative sources--Well what's stoppin congress from getting started on that (I know Pelosi/Reid). Why don't we do something that makes sense instead of saying what we can't do and shooting down every possiblity before we get started?

Answer 5

Drill now so we can have a bridge to the next type of fuel. We are 20 to 30 yrs away from alternative fuels that would replace the existing oil burning cars, planes, trains, plastics, rubber,ect. get the point.Why do we sit idly by when we have oil here? Obama has no plan,just change.

Answer 6

Bush, and for that matter B. Clinton, Bush 41 and Reagan are all at fault for our current energy policy, or lack thereof.

There is not enough oil, particularly since most geologists say it will be heavy/sour crude, not light/sweet that we need, nor will it come on line fast enough to make a difference.  

But, I can get solar panels on my home in a few months.  And, if the Republicans who blocked the last tax credit bill would stop trying to manufacture wedge issues, we might actually achieve independence.

Drilling is not the answer: conservation and alternative sources is.  The fact that Neanderthal Palin is now the apparent VP nominee changes nothing.  Drilling is inadequate as a solution to our problems.

Answer 7

Why certain people and groups want us dependent on mid east oil is beyond any reasonable thinking. Of course we need alternative sources but what happens while they explore those avenues? Do Pelosi/Reid/Obama expect us to wait for decades for even a beginning at alternative energy? When we do get alternative energy, we still need oil-and once the mid east sees we are serious, they will stop fleecing the american people.

Answer 8

first off yes we should drill for oil we can;t kill the earth much more than we have(we didnt even do anything) alternative energy will follow soon enough. in my town and area they already put up 30 windmills.

and why blame bush. democrates in senate and congress run everything. bushs appovel may be around 27% but congress and goverment is around 7%

Answer 9

Drill here

Drill now

Save money

AND use the coal and the oil shale....

OIL SHALE

Shale, whether it's in-situ (its original location) or on the earth's surface, on average contains about 50% to 70% hydrocarbon (hydrogen and carbon – i.e. fossil fuels) and kerogen by weight making it the most abundant source of fuel in the USA next to the hundred of thousands of capped-off oil wells.

KNOWN WORLDWIDE RESERVES

    * Worldwide – 3.5+ Trillion Barrels

    * USA – 2.0 Trillion Barrels – based on 15 gallons per ton (1)

IMPACT - USA usage = 20M Barrels per day = 274 YEARS RESERVE BASED ON USA RESERVES

POTENTIAL

TO ELIMINATE DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. COMPARE THE TOP FIVE (5) LARGEST KNOWN OIL RESERVES (2)

    * 264B BARRELS – SAUDI ARABIA

    * 179B BARRELS – CANADA

    * 133B BARRELS – IRAN

    * 115B BARRELS – IRAQ

    * 102B BARRELS – KUWAIT

793B BARRELS – VERSUS 2 TRILLION BARRELS IN OIL SHALE

GRC TECHNOLOGY

The OIL SHALE is bombarded with our specific microwave frequency in the form of “molecular vibrations” which causes the “cracking” of the hydrocarbon chain. As a result, the hydrocarbon components in the OIL SHALE are gasified. The NATURAL GAS is then collected – the remaining gases are converted into OIL.

Answer 10

I think your spot on. Drill here drill now.

But for it to truely work i do think some of the profit that comes from supplying our own, should be flipped into researching other means of energy while we do it.

So in essence we dont set ourselves up for this to happen again by relying on the world market.

Oh, and for the OBOTS,

THEY HAVE BEEN exploring that "Leased land they allready have. it has NOT been ignored." as your messiah and his desciples wants you to think

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...

Answer 11

Drill early and drill often I always say..........

Answer 12

YES, YES, YES, and YES we should drill for oil... anywhere, everywhere.  It is so ridiculous to me with Iran and Russia acting the way we are that we are even having to discuss this topic...  

Answer 13

YES, we should drill, and let the liberal tree huggers adopt the caribou.

Answer 14

drill now.drill until we have everything else on line.this subject will be coming up in less than a week and will be heavily voted on during the election.

Answer 15

no lets keep hugging tree's and see where that gets us!!!!!!!!

Answer 16

"we" already drill here

i do blame Bush for his policies that led to the low value of the dollar which leads to high prices for everything

if we don't develop alternative energy in the next 20 years to 40% or so of our usage, oil will continue to go up and middle class life will cease...there will only be the rich and the poor

Answer 17

Yes but with one giant proviso-ALL the new oil recovered must be kept HERE and not sold out on the open market.

Answer 18

Elect McCain/Palin, her influence will help push for ANWR drilling.

Answer 19

I don't feel like reading all of that. But YES, we should drill.

Answer 20

GOD gave us the oil to use, so I think we should use it.  I have several solar panels and a wind generator.  They are not the answer where I live in Pennsylvania.  I doubt that I will live long enough to get my money back out of them.

Answer 21

Yes for all the reasons you cite - plus others!!

I expect this is a cause that Palin will take up with a passion.

McCain/Palin '08

Answer 22

Your rant would make sense if the oil companies were actually drilling millions of acres of leases they already have.