It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Those who say Drill, Drill, Drill are being Duped, Duped, Duped

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   
This has nothing to do with supply and these companies can care less about how much you pay at the pump.

IT'S ABOUT LAND!!

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.

Morton said the leases, which companies can lock up for 10 years with annual rents of only $2 to $3 an acre, are an economic boon to some companies because they count as assets that can make debt refinancing easier while also attracting potential investors.

For oil companies, vast holdings of federal oil and gas leases, even if undeveloped, show up in their financial records as assets that help attract investors.

“Absolutely,” said Mark Burford, director of investor relations for Tom Brown Inc., a Denver-based independent oil company. Tom Brown has more than 850,000 acres of federal land under lease, but just 22 percent is listed as producing, according to BLM records.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

If it was about supply, they can start drilling in land that they already have leases on tomorrow.

It's simple, they lease all this land from the government for pennies. Like 2 to 3 dollars an acre.

They then put it on there books as an asset and they will get the fmv for the land.

So if the land is worth 20 or 30 dollars an acre, then these companies have an instant profit on there books.

This attracks more investors and if there public it could help increase stock price.

Again, they can start drilling tomorrow in the unproduced land that they already have leases for.

ANWR and some of these other places that they want to drill, the land must be worth alot of money on the open market.

Just open your eyes and FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

Here's a list of oil companies and the amount of land they lease.
wid.ap.org...

Of course they don't want to produce more now, because they are MAKING A BUNDLE as global demand increases.

They will get these new leases for places like ANWR and then prices will come down and they will say they don't need to drill there now. They will also have the the leases on these lands for 10 years or more.




posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   
But, you still insist that we don't drill?
Not all of leased land is drillable...........
And we need more oil, or a better alternative....
So, we have no other option other than to drill...
Or get Congress to allow us to build some nuclear plants, or some alternative sources.

By the Way, how do you know that YOU aren't being duped?
The one pointing the finger and laughing, could be the most ignorant...



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThreeDeuce
But, you still insist that we don't drill?
Not all of leased land is drillable...........
And we need more oil, or a better alternative....
So, we have no other option other than to drill...
Or get Congress to allow us to build some nuclear plants, or some alternative sources.

By the Way, how do you know that YOU aren't being duped?
The one pointing the finger and laughing, could be the most ignorant...


They can drill on these lands tomorrow. I don't insist that we don't drill.

Like I said, all you have to do is follow the money.

These companies pay politicians well to make this an emotional issue in order to cloud judgment.

The land is an asset that they can put on their books and increase there bottom line.

If I can lease a 1,000,000 acres of land for 2 to 3 million dollars from the government and then turn around and do debt financing on land that's valued at 30 to 40 million, then my donations, lobbying and perks to politicians has paid off.

[edit on 19-7-2008 by polomontana]



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
This has nothing to do with supply and these companies can care less about how much you pay at the pump.

IT'S ABOUT LAND!!


Before i jump in and start disagreeing i must congratulate you with the good 'find'; i will most certainly make use of it even if i disagree with your conclusion.



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.


Land grabs are not new and i am in fact fascinated by the idea that so many people are willing to let private for profit companies exploit the valuable resources that are contained under OUR land ( 'we the people') when our tax monies could be used to exploit it for OUR gain.



Morton said the leases, which companies can lock up for 10 years with annual rents of only $2 to $3 an acre, are an economic boon to some companies because they count as assets that can make debt refinancing easier while also attracting potential investors.


And land grabs should really be considered as a independent crime from restricting the supply of oil on the world markets. There are no shortages now but it's not for a lack of trying.



For oil companies, vast holdings of federal oil and gas leases, even if undeveloped, show up in their financial records as assets that help attract investors.


You need help to attract investors in the oil business?



“Absolutely,” said Mark Burford, director of investor relations for Tom Brown Inc., a Denver-based independent oil company. Tom Brown has more than 850,000 acres of federal land under lease, but just 22 percent is listed as producing, according to BLM records.

www.msnbc.msn.com...


A land grab which cost you almost nothing while allowing you to restrict global oil supply while keeping the screws so tightly on your average consumer that they have little hope of ever being able to shift their resources to alternative means of energy generation.....


If it was about supply, they can start drilling in land that they already have leases on tomorrow.


It is all about supply and that is why they are not drilling in it and aiding the government when it wishes to invade countries who could potentially produce 10 or million barrels of oil per day.


It's simple, they lease all this land from the government for pennies. Like 2 to 3 dollars an acre. They then put it on there books as an asset and they will get the fmv for the land.


Which is peanuts as compared to how much money they make by driving up world oil prices by restricting supplies...


So if the land is worth 20 or 30 dollars an acre, then these companies have an instant profit on there books.


But a relatively small one as compared to their main operations; even a million acre's are worth only 30 odd million and that's when you actually sell it.


This attracks more investors and if there public it could help increase stock price.


So you have a stock portfolio? I thought so..... When we speak of 'investors' we are not talking about the regular public and even those few who do would have made far more if their tax money would have been exploited to mine said resources.


Again, they can start drilling tomorrow in the unproduced land that they already have leases for.


But that would not be profitable as the market might soon become flooded resulting in oil again selling for 8 USD a barrel like it did in 1998?


ANWR and some of these other places that they want to drill, the land must be worth alot of money on the open market.


The land isn't worth much but keeping others from actually exploiting the oil resources there is worth a veritable fortune hence the fact that the US government is forced to lease it so cheaply to their friends in industry based on the understanding that it wont be exploited.


Just open your eyes and FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

Here's a list of oil companies and the amount of land they lease.
wid.ap.org...


The link does not seem o be working for me and since i am interested maybe you can check it again...


Of course they don't want to produce more now, because they are MAKING A BUNDLE as global demand increases.


Global demand is fast slowing due to the current excessive cost but what they do sell they do make a bundle with.


They will get these new leases for places like ANWR and then prices will come down and they will say they don't need to drill there now. They will also have the the leases on these lands for 10 years or more.


I think the ANWR think might be a bit of a giveaway so it's in my mind probable that the 'green's might be best pacified ( and the rest misinformed) by keeping as exploited as it currently is.

I hope my tone wasn't too patronizing and that you actually find some use for this information.

Stellar



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Follow the money, indeed.

Look at the political climate right now and the real money trail shines like a trail of excited fireflies on a cloudy ANWAR night. First a little history: All of the oil production equipment in the Middle East was initially furnished by US-based oil companies, years ago. You don't think a bunch of poor sand farmers had the cash to put in oil pumping equipment, so you? The deal was that the oil produced would always be sold for US dollars, nothing else. That held the dollar up in the lack of a gold standard for many years.

We set Saddam Hussein up as dictator of Iraq, as an answer to the problems we were having with Iran at the time. The enemy of our enemy is our friend. Riiiiight. Our 'friend' decided that he was gonna take euros for his oil, so we had to invade Iraq to overthrow him. Now Iran is actually accepting euros, rubles, whatever kind of cash the customer has. Combined with the obvious crazy debt, that's why our dollar took a nose dive. It's also why we will invade Iran... or at least try.

Now we can see the money trail clearly. If we invade Iran, we kill off a major oil supplying nation, and take a chance on disrupting more. During that time, where will our oil come from? It will come from wells already drilled, already full of oil, but capped. Time is short now to get the drills going in ANWAR and off the coasts, because Bush has only a few short months to get the invasion going.

We have no supply shortage right now, and haven't had since right after Katrina (and that was isolated). This is in preparation for the planned oil shortage that is to come.

Follow that money. Indeed. Follow the power, it runs the same path.

TheRedneck



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Stellar,

You seem to suggest that this land only brings in peanuts, so it's meaningless to oil companies.

That's not how Corporations work. Anything that can increas their bottom line by millions of dollars is a good thing even though you may see it as just "peanuts."

If it was just peanuts, why doesn't the government lease this land for at least 50% of the Fair Market Value? It's supposed to be the peoples land.

Does the government represent the people or the oil companies?

The oil companies lobby and pay these politicians to say drill, drill, drill and your gas prices will be lowered. This is just to appeal to your emotions and cloud your judgment.

There's not an oil shortage. They are restricting supply as global demand increases to make more money.

What people need to realize, is that Corporations are amoral. They don't care about you or if your paying alot of money for gas. They are designed to make a profit and there's nothing wrong with that.

The problem lies with government. When the people we elect are being bought, paid for and controlled by these corporations, then that's a HUGE PROBLEM.

Most politicians just raise money now because it's the money that secures their seats in Congress not the voters.

A politician knows if they raise enough money then they will not face a challenger to their seat unless that person is rich or has name recognition.

So, whaat you call peanuts a company will add as assets to their portfolio. If you can pay 2 or 3 million and get a return of 30 or 40 million, that's not peanuts.

Again, if the governmentis representing us, then why don't we getter a bigger return from the land that's supposed to be ours?

If oil companies don't discover oil on the land, why do they still get to keep these cheap leases on the land as the land increases in value?



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I couldn't agree more.

Instead of Drill, Drill, Drill... we should be chanting...

Refine, Refine, Refine....

Meaning, build the first new refinery in 30 years. Update all the refineries we have from Analog to Digital. Invest some of your record profits in the infrastructure of your industry.

Then once they have fixed the refining situation, drill/pump oil from areas you already lease. If those leases are not going to produce, give up the lease (legally, the oil companies are required to give back the leases if they don't find oil)

Then, after you get our current refineries modernized and fully operational, and new refineries built, then you will have room to refine all the crude you all want under ANWR. No Opening of ANWR till we have refining capabilities to better meet our needs.

I really recommend reading these two threads for some of the information and statistics I posted. I don't want to spam this thread with duplicate information.
White House: Bush to lift offshore drilling ban
H R 6515- Require Oil Companies To Drill On Lands They Own

DocMoreau



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThreeDeuce
Not all of leased land is drillable...........


No ThreeDuce. That is actually a misconception.

All the land that is leased is drillable, and has some indication that oil is present. These are leases that have been requested by the oil companies. The government hasn't forced them into a lease option or anything.

I think the OP is probably correct -- the oil companies have no motivation whatsoever to drill. Why bother? They are making money like crazy right now, so why upset the balance?

This drill, drill, drill talk is just a deflection. They need some excuse as to why the cost of oil has increased. The fact is -- OIL COMPANIES DON'T WANT TO DRILL.

#

Edit: While I'm on the topic, what is with this comment that it will be 8 to 10 years before we will see any results of drilling, if we start now. ABSURD! I can see two or three years delay. But 10 years?

Yeah -- maybe it will take that much time IF WE DRILL IN ANWR, which is precisely why they want to drill there. That is an extra 10 years of price stability for the oid companies.

This is what you get without regulation. Thanks Bush!

[edit on 20-7-2008 by Buck Division]



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by DocMoreau
I couldn't agree more.
I really recommend reading these two threads for some of the information and statistics I posted. I don't want to spam this thread with duplicate information.
White House: Bush to lift offshore drilling ban
H R 6515- Require Oil Companies To Drill On Lands They Own
DocMoreau


Excellent reading Doc! Thanks.



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
The oil companies lobby and pay these politicians to say drill, drill, drill and your gas prices will be lowered. This is just to appeal to your emotions and cloud your judgment.

There's not an oil shortage. They are restricting supply as global demand increases to make more money.

What people need to realize, is that Corporations are amoral.


Right on, Polo. I am sure that all this is hashed out in board meetings, in the penthouses of skyscrapers, by people drinking $100 bottled water.

These top managers say: "When people ask why gasoline prices are so high, tell people we need to drill in ANWR. That will slow things down a bit."

I have no doubt that is true.

EDIT: Except I question whether they are "amoral" or actual "immoral". I think it is probably the latter.


[edit on 20-7-2008 by Buck Division]



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 06:04 PM
link   
The only winners if we don't drill are the enviro-whackos.

Democrats are winning with this too, but that is only temporary. Democrats love the suffering at the pump, it keeps the poor people poor, and under their control. They will pay a price for their ignorance. They can only blame Bush for so long, then eyes will eventually turn on them.

Democrats always bring up the 68 million acres of leased land. They never bring up the 1.1 BILLION acres that are off limits. If you were investing your money, would you go with a "maybe" or would you go with a sure thing?

No other country on earth restricts its natural resources. It has become a matter of national security. We must become independent from other countries when it comes to oil. We need to do it now.



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheRedneck
First a little history: All of the oil production equipment in the Middle East was initially furnished by US-based oil companies, years ago. You don't think a bunch of poor sand farmers had the cash to put in oil pumping equipment, so you? The deal was that the oil produced would always be sold for US dollars, nothing else.


This is an outstanding point, Redneck. People often challenge and malign the USA for using up so much oil -- it is really important to consider very once in a while that WE INVENTED gasoline.

That is, the USA invented the tools to drill and refine oil, and greatly refined the many machines that require gasoline, most notably the automobile.

We are now in the process of inventing alternative fuels, and are pioneering many conservation techniques. Anger towards the USA for using so much energy? This anger is misplaced and nonproductive.



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
The only winners if we don't drill are the enviro-whackos.

Please consider, RR, that these whackos might be nothing more than scapegoats and diversions to the real issue. I don't think the true enviro-whackos have any power.

Consider, don't the oil companies win by limiting supply, and keeping their record breaking profits? And isn't it brilliant that they can divert the blame for these high profits towards other people, such as enviro-whackos?

Brilliant strategy on their part. It's working too.



posted on Jul, 20 2008 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Don't be re-duped into a loop of duped political garbage by oil-funded politicians that are specifically designed to make you wobble and fall into a pit-hole of confusion and distraction from the real issues at hand......Why would they waste money on drilling.....when you can just do some plumbing into the main pipeline and build an Oil Depot, with American Taxpayers petty cash.





posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 10:48 PM
link   
The oil companies have to deal with the enviro-whackos.
The first step is getting the lease then they have to spend years and money fighting the enviro-whackos just to get the permits to be able to drill.


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.


Just check and try to find one of these places that the enviro-whackos are not blocking the drilling.

The Associated Press is not checking the facts just looking for a story.
And they want a anti oil company story.
So they conveniently forget to check why the oil companies can not drill.

I know of one company that has been trying to get the permits to drill geothermal wells on privet land for a geothermal power plant for 20 years since 1988. and once they get the permits and prove the field it will likely take another 10+ years to get the permits for building the power plant.

If you want the oil wells drilled talk to the lawmaker about approving the drilling permits. then you have a complaint.

And that is only the first part.
the democrats now are saying we need to drill more oil in the US.

That is a trick to get votes,and make the oil companies look bad. They will then turn around and help the enviro-whackos block the same oil drilling. and blame the oil companies for not drilling.
Then raise the taxes on the oil companies because they are not able to drill.

NOW YOU KNOW WHY THE OIL COMPANIES IMPORT OIL.
ITS CHEAPER>then the stacked deck they have to deal with.


[edit on 5-10-2008 by ANNED]

[edit on 5-10-2008 by ANNED]



posted on Oct, 5 2008 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThreeDeuce
...Not all of leased land is drillable...........
...


Then why do they continue to lease it? If you rented a house that you never visited, never went to, and never used, at what point do you say "You know what, since I'm not using this, it's time to quit renting this thing."?



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by polomontana
This has nothing to do with supply and these companies can care less about how much you pay at the pump.

IT'S ABOUT LAND!!

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.

Morton said the leases, which companies can lock up for 10 years with annual rents of only $2 to $3 an acre, are an economic boon to some companies because they count as assets that can make debt refinancing easier while also attracting potential investors.

For oil companies, vast holdings of federal oil and gas leases, even if undeveloped, show up in their financial records as assets that help attract investors.

“Absolutely,” said Mark Burford, director of investor relations for Tom Brown Inc., a Denver-based independent oil company. Tom Brown has more than 850,000 acres of federal land under lease, but just 22 percent is listed as producing, according to BLM records.

www.msnbc.msn.com...

If it was about supply, they can start drilling in land that they already have leases on tomorrow.

It's simple, they lease all this land from the government for pennies. Like 2 to 3 dollars an acre.

They then put it on there books as an asset and they will get the fmv for the land.

So if the land is worth 20 or 30 dollars an acre, then these companies have an instant profit on there books.

This attracks more investors and if there public it could help increase stock price.

Again, they can start drilling tomorrow in the unproduced land that they already have leases for.

ANWR and some of these other places that they want to drill, the land must be worth alot of money on the open market.

Just open your eyes and FOLLOW THE MONEY!!

Here's a list of oil companies and the amount of land they lease.
wid.ap.org...

Of course they don't want to produce more now, because they are MAKING A BUNDLE as global demand increases.

They will get these new leases for places like ANWR and then prices will come down and they will say they don't need to drill there now. They will also have the the leases on these lands for 10 years or more.


The costs are much greater than that for the leases, which are purchased for the duration of the ten years, and cost MILLIONS.




top topics



 
3

log in

join