GOP Blocks DRILL Bill

[Charles_Main]

That's a good point, Care. If that is true, I'm almost tempted to give them the lease...if it means it won't be drilled.

Though if it's true, it means the oil companies are predatory...not that that surprises me given their continued record breaking profits.

Either way, we are being screwed, no?

Now wait, why would they be holding oil off the market, when everyone keeps telling us more oil will not lower the price one bit? Hmmm.

 

[wayne]

So why should they be given or sold new leases when they haven't yet drilled in what they already have leased?

And why... which was the crux of my TO, did the GOP vote against forcing the oil companies to drill on the lands they have already leased?

Should we lease them all of our lands and then let them pick and choose which ones to drill on and when?

My lord child oil is where you find it. Do you want to force them to drill where there is not enough oil to make a profit? Do you really want to sabotage American oil companies?

 

[Care4all]

My lord child oil is where you find it. Do you want to force them to drill where there is not enough oil to make a profit? Do you really want to sabotage American oil companies?

if there is no oil for them to drill, then they would have NO PROBLEM with releasing their leases....how come they don't want to do such?

Oil is where it is child and the usa gvt, USGS does geological research to determine where the oil is most likely and how much is most likely there...thus we have ESTIMATES of 10.4 billions of barrels of oil in ANWR and estimates on oil in the gulf or on the continental shelf....

It is NOT all willy nilly, with no science behind it? and the oil companies do not waste their time and money on useless leases....they have a pretty good idea of the amount of oil present and a pretty good estimate of how far down too...

They just have CHOSEN not to drill for our oil on some of these leases because they do not need to, with them just signing a 30 year contract with Iraq to draw on their oil, which is in the sand and near the surface of the ground, costing them very little to drill for it, while the gulf oil is 28k feet under the water and ground and very expensive to pull it out....not worth them drilling for at the present time with Iraqi oil avail cheaper....and by holding on to these leases, and not drilling on them, keeps the price of oil higher and more profitable for them.....if we lease the land to them to drill on, then they should drill or GET OFF THE POT and let someone else, another oil company, to drill on it....

the leases were not signed over to them for them to twiddle their thumbs and HOLD the oil off the market by not even exploring, let alone by not drilling.

If there is not oil on these leases then they would have no problem in giving the leases up....BUT THEY WON'T....wonder why if there is no oil on them as you imply?

Care

 

[wayne]

I have no problem with reasonable short-term time limits, but it is my party, the democrats, that have place our oil reserves off limits to production. They are just trying to muddy the waters now to hide their guilt.

 

[Tech_Esq]

If we lease ALL OF OUR LAND to the oil companies and the BIG oil companies continue to not drill on it because it is easier for them to drill for oil in Iraq than in Gulf areas or Alaska, then all we are doing is making things MUCH WORSE for us...they will own all of our oil reserve leases and keep the oil from being drilled by someone else who does not have the contract to drill oil out of Iraq EASILY out of the sand for the next 30 years...

we should NOT lease to them without some kind of assurance they are not taking these leases just to prevent some other oil company from drilling there....or in other words to HOLD OIL off the market...which it appears that this is EXACTLY what they are doing.

I am uncertain how the leases should be writen to assure something like this, but I know it can be done somehow, and should be done somehow, to protect us from this happening with our land and our leases to drill....

Big oil signed leases for MILLIONS of acres of offshore drilling on the continental shelf 2 years ago that was opened up by Congress for them, and these Big Oil Companies in the last 2 years have NOT EVEN sent so much as a boat in to the area to analize the oil content is what i heard on C-span.... they are sitting on the leases...preventing others from drilling there so that the price of oil stays high imo....

This is slightly comical given that the Democratic party is doing precisely what you claim to fear. I think the claim that it is easier to drill for oil in a war zone on the other side of the world than in the Gulf of Mexico is wholly without foundation.

Look the silly vote (requiring a 2/3 majority) was only done to prevent any actual drilling but try to deflect their culpability for preventing energy exploration in this country and standing in the way of energy independence. This was a completely POLITICAL vote.

The Democratic party has carefully gotten us to a place where we are boxed into a corner. They've voted NO on every attempt to expand domestic production of oil and related industry for the last 30 years. They've thereby forced our dependence on foreign oil to grow for a similar period. They have done this to force us to develop alternative fuels that suits their vision of tomorrow. (Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of using them when they come on-line). The point being, you don't need to worry about the Democrats allowing any drilling, they didn't try for 30 years to get us here only to blink when they have us over the barrel (of oil no doubt). The only relief we're are going to see is when some non-nuke alternative fuel actually starts working.

 

[Care4all]

This is slightly comical given that the Democratic party is doing precisely what you claim to fear. I think the claim that it is easier to drill for oil in a war zone on the other side of the world than in the Gulf of Mexico is wholly without foundation.

Look the silly vote (requiring a 2/3 majority) was only done to prevent any actual drilling but try to deflect their culpability for preventing energy exploration in this country and standing in the way of energy independence. This was a completely POLITICAL vote.

The Democratic party has carefully gotten us to a place where we are boxed into a corner. They've voted NO on every attempt to expand domestic production of oil and related industry for the last 30 years. They've thereby forced our dependence on foreign oil to grow for a similar period. They have done this to force us to develop alternative fuels that suits their vision of tomorrow. (Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of using them when they come on-line). The point being, you don't need to worry about the Democrats allowing any drilling, they didn't try for 30 years to get us here only to blink when they have us over the barrel (of oil no doubt). The only relief we're are going to see is when some non-nuke alternative fuel actually starts working.

The oil execs said it themselves, in a capital hill hearing.....it is TOO COSTLY to drill down 28 thousand feet in the gulf compared to other oil they can retrieve and they also ''pretended'' if you wish, to NOT CARE about the drilling moritorium being lifted off our coast....

this war zone that you speak of is protected by our own military, they don't even pay for this security....we do, the tax payer....

And YES, these 30 year leases in Iraq is EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANTED from us and the military, and THEY GOT IT....thank you GWB!

 

[Care4all]

I have no problem with reasonable short-term time limits, but it is my party, the democrats, that have place our oil reserves off limits to production. They are just trying to muddy the waters now to hide their guilt.

in 2006 the democrats and repubs in congress released 60 million acreas of moritorium continental shelf gvt land for them to drill on....they AINT drilling on it, even though the geological surveys say there is boocoos of oil there....they ain't even exploring it, they just hold the leases so that no one else can drill on it either....

THIS should NOT be allowed and there should be some legislation to rectify it....

care

 

[Tech_Esq]

The oil execs said it themselves, in a capital hill hearing.....it is TOO COSTLY to drill down 28 thousand feet in the gulf compared to other oil they can retrieve and they also ''pretended'' if you wish, to NOT CARE about the drilling moritorium being lifted off our coast....

this war zone that you speak of is protected by our own military, they don't even pay for this security....we do, the tax payer....

And YES, these 30 year leases in Iraq is EXACTLY WHAT THEY WANTED from us and the military, and THEY GOT IT....thank you GWB!

Links please!

28 thousand feet? WRONG Gulf of Mexico Facts
At a depth of more than 12,000 feet, Sigsbee Deep is the deepest part of the gulf. It is more than 300 miles long and is sometimes called the “Grand Canyon under the sea.” Its closest point to the Texas coast is 200 miles southeast of Brownsville. (7)

I'm not fact checking your entire post, I can only assume the rest of it is a factual as this statement. Try to post something other than utter non-sense please.

 

[Care4all]

Links please!

28 thousand feet? WRONG Gulf of Mexico Facts
At a depth of more than 12,000 feet, Sigsbee Deep is the deepest part of the gulf. It is more than 300 miles long and is sometimes called the “Grand Canyon under the sea.” Its closest point to the Texas coast is 200 miles southeast of Brownsville. (7)

I'm not fact checking your entire post, I can only assume the rest of it is a factual as this statement. Try to post something other than utter non-sense please.

the gulf is 12000 feet deep, the OIL is 28k....i heard this in the c-span hearing, there is no link, other than going to c-span, look for the oil exec hearing on capital hill and view the video...i am sorry, they do not transcribe it in to a writen document! wish they did....so i could easily post a back up!

care

 

[Ravi]

The Chevron Corp. crew is developing a deepwater oil field 190 miles (305 kilometers) off the Louisiana coast projected to produce 100,000 barrels a day by 2008 and 500 million barrels overall. Each well willreach more than 26,000 feet (7,800 meters) below sea level.

Oil companies going deep in Gulf of Mexico drilling - OhmyNews International

 

[editec]

I suspect this whole drilling issue is a red herring, folks.

Of course since none of can find examples of the leases (which should be public documents) how can any of us really know what machinations are going on in the corridors of power?

 

[Tech_Esq]

the gulf is 12000 feet deep, the OIL is 28k....i heard this in the c-span hearing, there is no link, other than going to c-span, look for the oil exec hearing on capital hill and view the video...i am sorry, they do not transcribe it in to a writen document! wish they did....so i could easily post a back up!

care

Man, such laziness! Never fear, I proved your claim. Actually, at 30,000 feet (amazing 6 miles). http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/06/business/worldbusiness/06oil.html

... reported that they had found 3 billion to 15 billion barrels in several fields 175 miles offshore, 30,000 feet below the gulf’s surface.... The United States has reserves of 29 billion barrels, meaning that at the high end of the estimates, the discovery could increase reserves by 50 percent.....

The oil in the area is considered top quality, light and sweet, unlike the oil in many new fields around the world that is heavier and more difficult to process.

___________________

Although I've been able to help you out on drilling in the Gulf, I've been unable to find any support from reputable sources for what you said in the rest of your initial post.

On the face of it, it appears to be at least a paradox that oil drilled (and not protected by US troops, it ain't what they do), half a world away and then shipped to the US is more cost effective than drilling 175 miles from the refinery. It may be true, but I couldn't find support for the contention and it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Care4all]

it was 1998 when the leases were signed to drill for oil....10 years later and we STILL do not have it flowing....deep water drilling is difficult!


FEATURE-Deepwater oil drilling is not for faint-hearted | Reuters

Nothing about deepwater drilling is easy.

Currents associated with the Gulf Stream, which flows out of the Gulf and warms Western Europe, are troublesome and unpredictable in the deep. Sometimes drilling has to be suspended to keep the pipe string from breaking.

On the sea floor, water pressures are enormous and temperatures frigid, requiring heaters or additives to keep oil flowing. Deep in the Earth, pressures reach 20,000 pounds per square inch and temperatures 400 degrees Fahrenheit (200 Celsius).

Anadarko has not set a target date for Mission Deep production, spokesman John Christiansen said. It can take 10 years from the time the lease was purchased from the government -- 1998 in the case of Mission Deep.

To get the oil and gas to shore, companies have to perfect ultradeep water production equipment and lay pipelines or find other ways to market.

"As you go into deep water, it's mostly canyons," said Mike Conner, chief of technical assessment in the Gulf for the U.S. Minerals Management Service. "You have problems getting the path of least misery back to shore."

The U.S. Minerals Management Service is considering the Gulf's first Floating Production Storage and Offloading systems -- essentially big tankers that store oil until smaller ships can take it ashore. The system is in use elsewhere but has not been needed in the Gulf because pipelines are everywhere in the shallows.

None of these problems are show stoppers if prices stay high, Conner said. "It's just a matter of economics."

 

[Care4all]

WASHINGTON - Nearly three-fourths of the 40 million acres of public land currently leased for oil and gas development in the continental United States outside Alaska isn’t producing any oil or gas, federal records show, even as the Bush administration pushes to open more environmentally sensitive public lands for oil and gas development.

An Associated Press computer analysis of Bureau of Land Management records found that 80 percent of federal lands leased for oil and gas production in Wyoming are producing no oil or gas. Neither are 83 percent of the leased acres in Montana, 77 percent in Utah, 71 percent in Colorado, 36 percent in New Mexico and 99 percent in Nevada.

How much exploration has occurred on the nearly 30 million acres of non-producing public land leases is difficult to say. BLM officials could provide no details on the number of exploratory wells drilled on those leases, despite repeated requests for that information over the past two months.

Most oil leases on public lands go unused - Environment - MSNBC.com

 

[Wow]

the gulf is 12000 feet deep, the OIL is 28k....i heard this in the c-span hearing, there is no link, other than going to c-span, look for the oil exec hearing on capital hill and view the video...i am sorry, they do not transcribe it in to a writen document! wish they did....so i could easily post a back up!

care

What?
The deepest water in the Gulf of Mexico is 863 feet, with the exception of the Sigsbee Deep (14,383 feet deep), which is located off of the coast of Mexico.

Congressional Democrats are clueless or are making up lies to justify destroying the middle-class with energy costs.

 

[Care4all]

What?
The deepest water in the Gulf of Mexico is 863 feet, with the exception of the Sigsbee Deep (14,383 feet deep), which is located off of the coast of Mexico.

Congressional Democrats are clueless or are making up lies to justify destroying the middle-class with energy costs.

geez louise!!!! i'm not lying????


READ BELOW!

Chevron, Devon Energy and Statoil ASA, the Norwegian oil giant, reported that they had found 3 billion to 15 billion barrels in several fields 175 miles offshore, 30,000 feet below the gulf’s surface, among formations of rock and salt hundreds of feet thick.

 

[bornright]

Why did the GOP vote against it? They probably don't believe in forcing business to perform to the satisfaction of the population, for one thing. And they are heavily funded by oil lobbyists, so they'd rather not cross them.

I don't think they should be given new leases, and of course they would like to own the mineral rights to the entire country.

Oil leases are not given.......they are purchased.

What I'd like to know is if the oil companies can figure out the feasibility of drilling or not, why can't the government?

It is the oil companies business to figure out the feasibility of drilling. Why would they want to drill where there is no money to be made? The democrats have not taken over yet so it still is not the governments job to figure out whether it is feasible to drill or not. It is not the government that is risking money on drilling. It is the private companies that have the financial risk.

 

[Charles_Main]

This was a nice bit of Political games. The Dems only motivation here was to try and make it look like they were the ones for drilling, not the Republicans, and the Republicans were standing in the way. the Drill Bill lol.

 

[Wow]

geez louise!!!! i'm not lying????


READ BELOW!

I'm just pointing out you got your information from one of those idiots that is running this country. Hell, can't they google? lol

 

[Gunny]

What?
The deepest water in the Gulf of Mexico is 863 feet, with the exception of the Sigsbee Deep (14,383 feet deep), which is located off of the coast of Mexico.

Congressional Democrats are clueless or are making up lies to justify destroying the middle-class with energy costs.

I suppose you think the oil is just lying in barrels in the Gulf floor? How deep the water is from ocean floor to surface is irrelevant.

Try adding the depth beneath the ocean floor they have to drill to your total.