Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Bush Lifts Offshore Drilling Ban, Lower Gas Prices Not Likely
ENERGY COSTS: President Bush lifted the presidential ban on offshore drilling that has been in effect since his father, George H.W. Bush, signed it in 1990 and President Clinton extended it in 1998. Experts say that even if Congress follows suit and lifts its ban, permitting offshore drilling will not significantly impact oil supplies or gas prices for at least 10 years.
The United States does have what President Bush refers to as "vast" untapped oil reserves along the Atlantic and Pacific coastlines and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. However, even if Congress lifts its own ban on the offshore drilling, which has been renewed annually for the past 27 years, it will take at least 10 years to find, drill and refine the oil. That won't relieve the current economic anxiety caused by $4 to $5 a gallon gasoline.
How Much Oil Do Offshore Reserves Have, How Much Will They Lower Gas Costs?
The U.S. Geological Survey estimates...
- There are 17.8 billion barrels of recoverable oil offshore—about 60% of proven U.S. reserves.
- This could increase crude oil production about 7% over the next twelve years.
How will this affect gas prices? According to the Energy Department...
- A barrel of oil now costs $140.
- Increased supply would cut that price to an estimated $138.60 to $139.60 a barrel.
- No one knows how this would affect the price of a gallon of gas for consumers at the pump.
Dissent within Republican Party Over Drilling
"The only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources is action from the U.S. Congress," President Bush said during a press conference. "Now the ball is squarely in Congress' court. Democratic leaders can show that they have finally heard the frustrations of the American people by matching the action I have taken today." (The Seattle Times, 7/15/08)
Bush also implied that Democrats are responsible for the current run-up in gasoline prices.
Republicans who favor renewed offshore drilling say that those who oppose it are...
- "[acting] at the behest of radical environmental groups," said Rep. John E. Peterson (R-Pa.) (Baltimore Sun, 7/15/08)
- "inventing excuses and obscuring the issue," said Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) (Baltimore Sun, 7/15/08)
But California's Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who supports developing alternative energy sources, said, "I know people are frustrated with the soaring price of gas, and I welcome the national debate on solutions to lower our energy costs, but in California we know offshore drilling is not the answer." (The Seattle Times, 7/15/08)
Democrats Opposed to Offshore Drilling Want to Consider Other Options
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said about Bush, "Once again, the oilman in the White House is echoing the demands of Big Oil. The Bush plan is a hoax. It will neither reduce gas prices nor increase energy independence." (Baltimore Sun, 7/15/08)
Democrats offer other options, including the following:
- drilling more in the Alaskan National Petroleum reserve
- opening some areas of the eastern Gulf of Mexico for exploration
- using some of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (see sidebar)
Lisa Speer, director of the water and oceans program for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, said she understands that the battle over the drilling ban is "a reflection of the pressure that politicians are feeling on gas prices. Everybody [opposed to lifting the ban] has to be very vigilant over the next few months until Congress goes out." (The Seattle Times, 7/15/08)
Copyright © 2010 Informify
Question for Readers:
Do you think Congress should lift its ban, too, and allow offshore drilling?
Presidential Candidates Respond to Offshore Drilling Ban
John McCain: "When people are hurting, and struggling to afford gasoline, food, and other necessities, common sense requires that we draw upon America's own vast reserves of oil and natural gas." (Bloomberg, 6/24/08)
Barack Obama: "If offshore drilling would provide short-term relief at the pump or a long-term strategy for energy independence, it would be worthy of our consideration, regardless of the risks. But most experts, even within the Bush administration, concede it would do neither." (San Francisco Chronicle, 7/15/08)
Alternatives to Offshore Drilling: Tapping Into Strategic Petroleum Reserve
Some offshore drilling opponents suggest that President Bush release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), a federally owned reserve of crude oil stored along the coastline in the Gulf of Mexico.
Here are a few facts about the SPR:
|
Current oil inventory: |
706.2 million barrels |
|
Cost of current inventory: |
$22 billion ($17 billion for oil; $5 billion for facilities) |
|
Average price paid for oil: |
$27.73 a barrel |
|
Current storage capacity: |
727 million barrels |
|
Length of time oil in reserve would last: |
58 days (given no other oil imports) |
|
Maximum drawdown capacity: |
4.4 million barrels a day |
|
Time needed to enter U.S. market: |
13 days |
(Source: U.S. Department of Energy)
Story Sources
Bush trumps Congress; moves first on drilling (9 News, 7/15/08)
Bush drops moratorium on offshore drilling (San Francisco Chronicle, 7/15/08)
Bush has Congress over a barrel (The Seattle Times, 7/15/08)
Bush lifts ban on offshore drilling for oil (Baltimore Sun, 7/15/08)
Show/Hide commentsUse less of it
mmurphy from Portland, Oregon said:
|
Use less gas. Drive down demand. It is the thing you, as a consumer, control. The market will want you back as a customer so they will make it cheaper. Moreover, we US citizens use average of 4 gallons per household per day. Use half of that and see the market response. Use capitalist and markets to your advantage. Or you can just keep giving them your hard-earned cash (whhich isnt worth as much as it used to be). Work with your community - carpool if you arent a farmer or contractor or someone who (really) needs your car/truck for work (to get cash) and providing for your family. If you stop buying something, they will make it cheaper to entice you back. But moreover, perhaps your needs aren't sustainable ... dont forget that 1.4 billion Chinese are entering a modern age. They all want to turn the key on their car just like you do ... that is about 5 times the people and cars that the US has ... the world is already strapped for oil. You think China will just not use it? They make everything! They need energy to make the stuff that we all buy!!! |
Not effective in the short or long term.
Matthew Gerring said:
|
As the article says, this will have zero short-term effect on the price of gas and will lower the price of a barrel of oil by a few dollars. The price of a barrel fluctuates that much on a daily basis anyway. This is stupid. We need to use gas prices as an opportunity to play catch-up to other industrialized countries on clean energy development and infrastructure. |
I say it's time to drill.
Michelle from thurmond N.C. said:
|
We americans need to stop depending on other countries for oil. They are robbing us blind. we can't afford it. I live out in the country, and I don't want to hear from you, WEll sell it. ! right now, I would not be able to sell, no one could afford to buy cos they can hardly pay for gas. God gave us enough resouces in this country. God gave us brains so we can find some other resource. I just wish that he would give us something besides liberals, they are killing this country. we need to quit feeding and supporting people's sins and we need to find ways to keep from being robbed at the pumps.! I am having to use my daughters college money. and the money that my husband put back for his retirement. it's all going to the pumps. people it's time to wake up! |
Absolutely not
Cassandra Kuennen from Folsom, Ca said:
| Offshore drilling might solve the short term crisis we are now having to face as americans, but it will create environmental impact that we simple do not know the full extent it will have on our coastal shore line. What would happen to the fishing industry when the offshore drilling causes a leak into our coastal shores having fish kills? How will they be able to feed their childern, then? Or what will happen when the leak effects the coastal tides along the shore where some American citizens and tourist spend their leisure time surfing, suba diving, swimming, fishing, and ect..? There are always economic cost and benfit to both sides of the coin, but will that benefit outweigh the cost to our coastal shores in California? We simply can not cut the livelyhood of some American residents in order to slow down the increase of gas prices. Our government needs to figure out alternative energy solutions to solve this problem, not by drilling offshore. Lets not as americans think of only about ourselves as individuals, but lets think of each other as a nation and what will benefit us all. Let us use our brains to figure out a superior solution that is sustainable. |
...
Bill Olson from Bodega Bay, CA said:
| I feel the outrage over soaring gas prices as I myself am a rural resident who has no other choice but to spend what it takes to drive to work or shopping. The realities of the facts are though that this push for more coastal drilling is only an opportunistic grab for more profit by the oil industry. Significant change will only come from regulation of energy speculators, increasing fuel standards and large investments in green energy. Our coastal economies, including tourist and fishing industry, are very much dependent on a clean and pristine coastline. The risk of catastrophic oil spills and regular oil platform discharge is not worth a few cents a gallon many years down the road, we need other solutions now |
how would that possibly ever effect anything
RW from Brooklyn, NY said:
| If you look at the statistics above, assuming these are correct, it states that 706 million barrels will last us 58 days. It also states that offshore we have 17.8 billion barrels. That is about 25 times as much 25x58=1460days = about 4 years. so if you think it is worth wasting the time and energy (yes it will take a lot of carbon based energy) to drill for that oil so that in 10 years we have another 4 years left as opposed to putting that effort towards working on other sources of energy or you stand to profit greatly I can see why you would be behind this. |
drilling is a hoax
Matt W from Billings, MT said:
| The argument that some use that we should expand offshore drilling is that in the long run it will lower prices. By most estimates even that savings will be miniscule compared to the cost of gas in the estimated 7-10 years it will take to bring this oil to market. This is because the price of oil is dependent on the global not the local market and even if we increase our output it will affect the cost of oil marginally. The truth is that whether or not the head in the sand Republicans want to admit it: OIL IS A FINITE RESOURCE. This should be abundently clear with the recent volitility in the market. The answer should have been in after 9/11 for the president to show some leadership and had taken steps to make Americans become energy independent. This does not mean more drilling but rather reduced consumption, economic subsidies, tax breaks for companies who invest in developing green energy, as well as direct investment into making more fuel efficient cars and buildings. By now we would be on the way to energy independence and our companies like GM and Ford would have vehicles which were ahead of the curve, not obsolete. This is type of plan is still the answer. With real leadership in Washington we can revolutionize the way we use energy, save our economy and stop putting money into middle east. It will take a lot of work, but this ruse of lowering energy prices by offshore drilling is the same old same old and will not solve a damn thing. |
Drilling offshore is not the answer
kent brown from Lafayette Colorado said:
| Let's not waste our time and money and risk the pollution. There is not enough domestic oil to support our current level of consumption. Let's get to work on solar energy and more efficient transportation. If we can put a man on the moon we can get off our oil dependence. To just keep pumping is lunacy. |
Just the facts
Mark from mead, wa said:
|
1.) The mere threat of us using nearby resources already has OPEC nervous. This will result in lower prices. The political motivated arguments against it only encourage them to hold out. The Saudi King was already talking about increasing production just days before Bush went public with his proposal. 2.) If Californians really don't want oil based energy, I challenge them to do without air conditioning this year. We in Washington who sell them Energy are running Diesel Generators to augment the Hydroelectric supply so they won't sweat. Hypocracy won't solve the energy issue. 3.) Obama cites "experts" who say there is no point to using our resources as it will take 10 years. Using the same logic, you shouldn't bother going to College because you won't benefit from your degree for at least 4 years. The fact is, the reach is actually closer to 2 years, hence the OPEC nerves. From exploration takes 10 years but there has been no stop to exploration and there are sites waiting for a platform to move in. The next problem is a shortage of refineries, something else that won't be solved by either party. |
Lifting of the Ban
Dennis Housepian from Fresno, CA said:
|
Absolutely, it is long over due. Maybe gas prices don't drop in the near future, but it will have an affect over the long term. Why should Middle East countries keep pumping when we ask and we don't even use our own? Isn't there a bit of contradiction here? If we can put men in space we can surely pump for gas and get oil out of the oil sands without polluting and violating habitats. Politicians need to do what is best for its citizens in the short and long term. To not start pumping and exploring is lunacy. |
Show/Hide comment form
