DrillGate - Obama Dragging His Feet - Offshore Drilling!

Originally posted by centurion1211
It's a good start. Now try looking at some sites that show opposing views.

What sites with opposing views? This is the energy information administration.

Why should I do your dirty work? Why dont you put the evidence where you mouth is? What sources told you there was enough oil to double the production here in the US?

Your telling us all these wonderful things about drill baby drill, but you have absolutely nothing to show for it. Why? Are to afraid to admit one of the pundits told you so?

[edit on 12-2-2010 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


article

The untapped oil reserves in Colorado are so big that many scientists estimate they are as large as 1 trillion barrels. 1 trillion barrels of oil would be enough to power the United States for the next 400 years. There has been a big shift in attention from oil to renewable sources of energy like wind, solar, hydroelectric, and biomass, but the fact of the matter is oil still powers most of what we do.

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Doesn't matter...

If Obama tried to pass a bill to offshore drilling, republican senators would simply fillibuster it.

Please give us your source for this "fact".

Republicans have been advocating using our own natural resources over buying someone else's for just about ever.

Hmmmm...

State GOP Senators Wary of Nearshore Drilling
As much as the Big Oil lobbyists that are circling above Tallahassee would like you to believe, nearshore oil drilling is far from a done deal in the Senate. As reported in the Sunday St. Petersburg Times, many Republican Senators still believe that the public is not ready for the risk an oil deal so close to the shore provides. The Times:

Senate President Jeff Atwater, who’s running statewide for chief financial officer, is not convinced that Floridians increasingly support drilling. Moreover, he says the issue is not on his priority list for 2010.

“The oil drilling matter is not on the Senate agenda for the coming session,” Atwater, R-North Palm Beach, said flatly.

Beyond Atwater’s lack of enthusiasm, several veteran Republican senators — some representing beachfront districts — are on record as saying they would not vote for a drilling bill. They include Sens. Victor Crist, R-Tampa; Dennis Jones, R-Seminole; Paula Dockery, R-Lakeland; and Durell Peaden, R-Crestview.
It’s true. Many influential Senate Republicans are scared of this deal…as they should be. Not only is drilling more unpopular the closer you get to the shore, but one spill, even minor, will cripple that district’s economy for decades.

dontdrillflorida.com...

But even as proponents insist they'll corral the votes they need, Senate skeptics are multiplying — including the chamber's presiding officer and several key Republicans who sound increasingly hostile to the idea.

www.tampabay.com...

reply to post by Eurisko2012


The ugly truth about "Drillgate":
Number of off-shore drilling leases currently held or available:8,237
www.mms.gov...(3).pdf
Number of active off-shore rigs: 37
tonto.eia.doe.gov...
Who is dragging their feet here? The number of off-shore platforms has declined steadily from about 200 in the 1980's to about 40 today. Why do the oil companies need these leases if they clearly have no intention of drilling? Because they can count the value of "proven reserves" as ASSETS in their corporate net worth. In other words, this has nothing to do with making the price of gas go down at the pump. It has everything to do with shilling for Big Oil. Kepp chanting "Drill, Baby, Drill," though. It's much more PC than "Heil Sarah!"

tonto.eia.doe.gov...

www.mms.gov...(3).pdf

reply to post by DJW001


No. We need the oil offshore in case a nuclear bomb goes off
in Saudi Arabia. Stop dreaming up reasons for us to sit on our hands.
We know where the oil is. Lets go get it now.
---------------------------------------------------
Might as well do it now. When President Sarah Palin walks into the
White House January 2013 we plan to cook some moose burgers in the rose garden then we will get down to business and Drill Baby Drill !!!
Go Sarah!

reply to post by Eurisko2012


You can give the oil companies all the permits and legislation they need to tap every single source of oil in the US, doesn't mean they will do it. Doesn't mean they will hire a single new person.

Why?

They are private companies, they are in it for the $$$. Chant "drill baby drill" all you want, doesn't mean big oil is going to go and do squat.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3389abef97de.jpg[/atsimg]

All thanks to this man, John D Rockefeller. Think that doesn't have anything to do with today? Well it shouldn't unless of course John D. Rockefeller IV is a sitting senator. Now do you think that a Rockefeller is going to do anything to hurt the bottom line of his legacy?

Do you honestly believe that giving big oil more permits will make them drill more when they already are getting huge massive profits?

Can anyone tell me the #1 Fortune 500 Company?

Exxon Mobil

In the top 100 companies according to the Fortune 500 9 of those companies are Oil companies.

Oil companies aren't hurting, and they aren't going to change their business model because they are allowed to drill more. It's not like the oil is going anywhere. It's been here for millions of years, they have all the time in the world to go get it when they feel like it. They are only going to go get it when it's the most profitable for them.

reply to post by whatukno


Sarah and i have a problem getting oil from the middle east.
Having a nuclear terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia is a real threat.
Lets have the oil ready to go. I know we have the SPR but
we need even more.

------------------------------------------
Creating oil drilling jobs is secondary.

[edit on 12-2-2010 by Eurisko2012]

reply to post by Eurisko2012


Long term economic strategy isn't y'all's strong suit is it? Suppose for argument sake we drain the middle east of all of its oil. Now where in the world might they get more? Well, the US of course. Now what bargaining chip does the middle east have? anything else they have to trade? Sand? What?

Personally I would think it would be smarter to bleed your competition dry and keep your own for latter when it's use would be the most profitable.

reply to post by whatukno


We will bleed them dry BUT i also hope for the best and plan for the worst.
-Drill Baby Drill -
------------------------------------------------------
BTW, i got some news for you about Exxon.Exxon Story
I got the link from Sarah Palins Facebook Page.


[edit on 12-2-2010 by Eurisko2012]

[edit on 12-2-2010 by Eurisko2012]

It costs about half a billion dollars to buy a sea-going drilling platform. It costs in the neighborhood of half a million dollars per day to operate it... call it $150 million per year. That's roughly three quarter billion dollars out of pocket to sink one (1) off-shore well. Where do you think they're going to get the money for all this? Yep, your pocket at the pump. But wait! There's more! Every refinery on the planet is running at maximum capacity 24/7 (Allowing for periodic maintenance and diminishing efficiency in certain state-run facilities.) Assuming that the oil companies really did decide to "drill, baby, drill," they would need a new refinery to process the new oil coming on-stream. Any idea what a new refinery costs? The Saudis recently spent $7 billion to expand an existing refinery in Texas. Frankly, oil is still too cheap to be making investments like that. When it levels off at $150/barrel for a year or two the oil companies might start to use the leases THEY ALREADY HAVE. Meantime, we should consider our off-shore resources and the ANWR as strategic reserves. If there is a disruption in global supplies and the US armed forces need oil, something tells me they can suck it all out real fast.

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Doesn't matter...

If Obama tried to pass a bill to offshore drilling, republican senators would simply fillibuster it.

might wanna watch the news...we no longer have a functioning government. foot dragging cannot occur when your feet are cemented into the ground by the opposition.

I don't think they would. Republicans have historically been in favor of drilling. The Democrats have been the ones holding onto the oil leases and preventing offshore drilling every chance they get.

I think Obama is dragging his feet because of the blistering reprisal he would get from his own party.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by centurion1211
It's a good start. Now try looking at some sites that show opposing views.

What sites with opposing views? This is the energy information administration.

Why should I do your dirty work? Why dont you put the evidence where you mouth is? What sources told you there was enough oil to double the production here in the US?

Your telling us all these wonderful things about drill baby drill, but you have absolutely nothing to show for it. Why? Are to afraid to admit one of the pundits told you so?

[edit on 12-2-2010 by Southern Guardian]

Why should anyone bother to convince YOU of anything? You aren't worth the time or the effort. No metter what anyone shows or proves, you will always shill for the Democrat in power. Why don't you go write another letter to Barney Frank telling him how wonderful he is and how much you love his voice?

Originally posted by sos37
Why should anyone bother to convince YOU of anything?

Why bother posting a thread insisting to drill baby drill? Why choose to participate in this thread and insist its going to work?

Why is he trying to convince me and others here?

you will always shill for the Democrat in power.

Did you actually see me shill for Clinton? Or Carter? I'll assume you didnt, so you dont have any claim over the matter of who and what I supported.

Now, back to the topic at hand.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


Are you implying that you and Sarah Palin are going to nationalize the petroleum industry? That's sure what it sounds like. If the oil companies don't want to develop their leases because it's too expensive, are you suggesting that Palin will use tax-payer dollars to develop them... the way she used tax-payer funds to build an oil pipeline nobody but the Canadians wanted? To fully exploit the existing leases would take an investment of about eight thousand billion dollars. Let me repeat that: EIGHT TRILLION DOLLARS!!! Now where are you and Sarah going to find that kind of cash? And then once you've sucked our reserves dry, where do we turn if there IS a war in the "Middle East?" Venezuela?

I'm just bumping this up to get a reply to my question. Given that Palin was the Governor of a "petrostate" not unlike Venezuela, and that she has a long history of using public funds at her own whim (sports stadium, gas pipeline) isn't it very likely that Sarah Palin is planning to nationalize the oil industry?