This is a continuation of a thread below on oil and gas. It was Harry 5390 that said last week, and I quote.

"The electorate will finally realize who it is that is keeping us from drilling our own and thus increasing supply. Hint: ITDS = It's The Democrats, Stupid.

Harry - you were right. See the link below

http://www.cnbc.com/id/25105982

Yes the weak dollar, increased demand, geopolitical events, and I'll even throw in a bit of speculation for the rise in oil & gas. You would honestly think our government would do everything and anything to drive the price of oil down.

This time we can thank Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic majority. They struck down an important  bill that would allow drilling on the outer continental shelf. 27 years and counting and we still can't drill.

If you are an shareholder of any of the companies listed, you would think these companies are missing out on some great opportunities w/in the U.S. Don't worry, because companies like Transocean have most of their resources drilling for oil outside the U.S. like in Brazil, Angola, Russia, etc. They will still make a ton of money, and their shareholders, including me, will continue to be rewarded.

What really pisses me off are the number of high paying local jobs lost because of Pelosi and fucking pinheads.

on the very same companies we need to find and produce more oil. That makes a lot of sense. We have an energy crisis so their solution is to tax the living daylights out of the very companies that can reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Let's see if we can increase our dependence to 80% and put thousands of Americans out of work at the same time.

I guess that makes sense in some kind of fucked up liberal, socialist kind of way. Fucked up as the Republicans are, they are our only defense against these rabid, lets tax everyone who's productive, liberal idiots.

The article states "Estimates for the reserves there were as high as 8.5 billion barrels of oil".

How long will that last?  The CIA source states that the U.S. consumes 20.8 million bbl/day while generating 8.322 million bbl/day.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/us.html

20.8 mil bbl/day = 7.59 billion bbl/year

So that upper end estimate of 8.5 bil bbl will last a little more than a year.  Of course, not all oil consumption will come from the new offshore reserves.  However, we need to extract a significant amount to increase total supply to have a significant impact on the prices.

How about drilling enough to increase total oil supply by at least 10 percent?  How long will that last at best?  11 years.

I'm not sure how much lower gas prices will drop as a result (perhaps gas being $3.00 to $3.50 a gallon), but after 11 years, what's the next plan?

How about cutting demand by 10 percent instead that will last well beyond 11 years and a lifetime?  But then again, the repubs have a very strong opposition against energy conservation...

shorted USO and OIH thinking that rationale minds in Congress, the Fed, and the Treasury would allow expanded domestic drilling, prop up the dollar, and release reserves from the SPR. Thank God I didn't pull the trigger.

I wonder if our liberal friends on the board know what the above acronyms mean, and if they invest in USO, OIH, similar ETF's, or individual stock plays. What better way to convert someone to free market capitalism through investments. It will really hit home when they get their brokerage statements and realize how much in taxes they will owe. My first paycheck 30 years ago convinced me to change parties.

Let's do nothing.

Irrespective of either a lack of energy plans, or energy plans submitted that Congress time and time again would not approve, the free market has a unique way of responding as long as the profit motive is there. Have you looked at the solar plays and the number of companies getting into that space? Have you seen the dramatic rise in coal companies stock price? How about natural gas.

Gas prices will be $5 this summer. Demand in the U.S. is down 2% yoy. That number surprises me. Demand destruction will continue. Try selling your SUV. Sounds like conservation to me. But if oil drops significantly, followed by lower gas, soccer mom's will be out in force driving their SUV's.

At the end of the day, I'll put my money with the free market vs government.

One is not exclusive of the other. That would be the best of both worlds.

Fact is, the people who are selling us oil at inflated prices are mostly able to do it because they do drill where the oil is. Eleven years worth here, five or six there.

I didn't say do nothing.  I believe we should to more to conserve energy, and I think reducing the U.S.' energy demand through conservation and efficiency by 10 percent is a realistic goal and it will not cause any job losses.

About offshore drilling.  Just my opinion, I think it should be done if it can be proven (not speculated or deceived) the oil reserves will last at least 25 years.  It seems like 10 years is more likely and way too short.  It must take months, if not years, to build the offshore oil rig, and if oil only lasts 10 years, that oil rig will have no more use and cause pollution problems and a major eyesore.

Has anyone thought that the Democrats are doing this to keep the rural red states down?  High gas prices affect everyone, but the hardest hit are the rural red states - the Republican stringholds.

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=63393&boardID=39&page=1

Perhaps dem damn Dems ain't so stupid.  But this is politics and it's all about power, and the Repubs would be eager to to the same if given the opportunity.

It's all about power. It's all about limiting what Bush can do. It's all about positioning the Dems for a win in November. Would the Republicans do the same? Of course they would. Didn't Pelosi use her clout to nix the Colombia Free Trade Agreement a couple of months ago? That trade would benefit the U.S. more than Colombia, but it's about power and marginalizing Bush in his last year.

Considering the electorate votes with their wallets, the economy will be the prime topic. If I was in the White House, I would immediately begin an aggressive public relations campaign about the Dems decision to kill the drilling bill. I would put a gun to Paulson's and Bernanke head's and tell them to repeatedly tell the world that a strong dollar is imperative. The comments alone will strengthen the dollar, and help drive down oil. I would release 100 million barrels of oil from the SPR. Not sure if the latter requires Congressional approval, but if yes, and Pelosi nixes the idea, begin an aggressive PR campaign against her.

You used the word AGAIN. When was the other time that I misquoted with misinformation? The only other time I responded to a post from you was on a similar topic about oil.

http://www.theeroticreview.com/discussion_boards/viewmsg.asp?MessageID=63497&boardID=39&page=1

My response was focused on refiners. Did you read my response? Have you researched Tesoro, Valero, Frontier, Sunoco, Holly, etc? Have you looked at their stock prices? Have you looked at their 4th 2007 and 1st 2008 financial results? Doubt it.

That is why partisans are by and large idiots. It does us no more good to conserve if we are still at the mercy of OPEC,(just because we conserve doesn't mean the rest of the world will) nor does it make any sense to drill our asses off just to waste it all. There are still billions of barrel left in this country, but whatever the actual number is, it is a finite amount.
Just for the record most oil fields do last for decades, but their production rates decline over time until they reach a point where there is still much oil remaining in the ground, but it is no longer profitable to produce it.

In the US which has a very mature oil industry, there is still more oil left in the ground already discovered than has already been produced. Eventually we will figure out how to get it out of the ground, but it won't come cheaply. If the dems have their way, and tax the oil cos into oblivion we'll never get that oil, because no one will ever invest the money to extract those many billions of barrels of oil.

BTW I do know what I am talking about, it's what I do for a living.

"worth it"? Or at what rate oil can or will be extracted?

If someone or some company wants to make the investment and they can show that they will meet all environmental standards, why should they be resrticted?

What other production do you think would benefit with government control?

BTW, not all oil fields are created equally. The pumping rate must be limited to prevent damage to the field, thereby reducing it's yield.

Anything that makes economic sense will naturally be sought. Government funded research is fine for long term things like shale oil collection, grass enzyme alcohol production, coal conversion, etc., but when we subsidize anything at the commodity level, it’s a mistake. (Most of the huge agriculture bill is a mistake.)  Even subsidizing the very inefficient electro-voltaic solar cells is stupid. If something can’t stand on its own economically then it’s a mistake. Higher energy costs will naturally cause conservation. Taxing energy companies will only reduce supply.

Oil platforms, contrary to what you believe are actually good for the aquatic ecosystems in which they are located. They act like artificial reefs and provide cover for aquatic life. Not to mention the fact that they create great sport fishing locations

As far as your arbitrary number of 25 years, what difference does it make whether an oil field produces 1000 BOPD for 25 years or 5000 BOPD for ten?

I wish just for once you would think about what you post instead of just spouting stupid shit. Try doing a little research before making statments.  

One other question, just how the fuck does an oil rig that is not producing any oil, oil rigs don't actually produce oil, but that's another subject,  back to my question, if there is no production, what kind of pollution problems do you envision? Are you really that stupid, or do you pst before you think?

Then how is a guy named Bush who did not win the popular vote and election, and deserted military service, illegally authorize a war in Iraq?

We all have a voice and we live in a nation and world filed with laws.  If corporations had no regulations, it would be most cost effective to freely pollute and make work conditions negligantly hazardous.

But the laws has to set the stnadards somewhere.  So you want to build an offshore oil rig to produce oil for a few years, then permantly abandon them?  There are laws and people to deal with, and the environment that affects us all.