Bush to lift executive ban on offshore drilling...story from a week ago...did it

[tdawnaz]

story from a week ago...did it happen??

Bush to lift executive ban on offshore drilling

WASHINGTON - In another push to deal with soaring gas prices, President Bush on Monday will lift an executive ban on offshore drilling that his stood since his father was president. But the move, by itself, will do nothing unless Congress acts as well.

The president plans to officially lift the ban and then explain his actions in a Rose Garden statement, White House press secretary Dana Perino said.

There are two prohibitions on offshore drilling, one imposed by Congress and another by executive order signed by former President Bush in 1990. The current president, trying to ease market tensions and boost supply, called last month for Congress to lift its prohibition before he did so himself.

But Perino said Bush no longer wants to wait. She pinned blame on the leaders of the Democratic Congress, noting that no action has been taken on this issue.

"They haven't even held a single hearing," Perino said. "So we are going to move forward, and hopefully that will spur action by the Congress."

Asked if Bush's action alone will lead to more oil drilling, Perino said, "In terms of allowing more exploration to go forward? No, it does not."

The president, in his final months of office, has responded to record gas-prices with a series of proposals, including more oil exploration. None would have immediate impact on prices at the pump, according to White House officials, who say there is no quick fix. But starting action now would help, they say.

Bush's proposal echoes a call by Republican presidential candidate, Sen. John McCain, to open the Continental Shelf for exploration.

Congressional Democrats have rejected the push to lift the drilling moratorium, accusing the president of hoping the U.S. can drill its way out a problem.

Bush says offshore drilling could yield up to 18 billion barrels of oil over time, although it would take years for production to start. Bush also says offshore drilling would take pressure off prices over time. In addition, the president has proposed opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling, lifting restrictions on oil shale leasing in the Green River Basin of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming and easing the regulatory process to expand oil refining capacity.

Congressional Democrats, joined by some GOP lawmakers from coastal states, have opposed lifting the prohibition that has barred energy companies from waters along both the East and West coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. A succession of presidents, from Bush's father

[MttFrog13]

yeah it happened already, he lifted the executive ban, but there is still a congressional ban on it so the move was really symbolic. I don't think oil companies should waste time building new offshore oil platforms when as soon as obama gets into office there is gonna be more focus on alternative energy. Even bush said in his speech on the issue that one day cars wont run on gas. bush does get credit for tryin to do something at least.

[dlewis23]

yeah it happened already, he lifted the executive ban, but there is still a congressional ban on it so the move was really symbolic. I don't think oil companies should waste time building new offshore oil platforms when as soon as obama gets into office there is gonna be more focus on alternative energy. Even bush said in his speech on the issue that one day cars wont run on gas. bush does get credit for tryin to do something at least.

Yea that is great, you do that and you can have $8 a gallon gas. 

Lifting his part was good. But it doesn't get anyone drilling with out congress lifting theirs. And Nancy the witch from hell pelosi already said that she is not going to have congress lift there bad on it. Which is beyond stupid, and is not listening too the american people. Dems. and the entire left keep saying that drilling off shore will not make a difference, but when bush lifted the presidential ban on it, oil dropped, it went from around $144 a barrel to $129 a barrel. So they were proved wrong. If congress would get off there ass and do something good for once we could have $60 a barrel oil. But democrats don't want to piss off the environmentalists  because they will then loose in november. Its all not right, they need to stop the crap they are pulling and start listening too the american people, and people want you to drill, everywhere.

[ghostmaster]

The funny thing about that is the fact that Bush lifting the ban didn't change the amount of oil we have one bit, so in my eyes this just proves they're gauging us for every penny we have, knowing their days are numbered....

The amount of time it would take to find oil offshore, and then build the infrastructure to get it, would not help us any time soon, and the fact is, we really should be pumping more money into alternative fuels.  It doesn't matter whether you believe in global warming, or oil shortages, or whatever.  We are still going to fit the bill for future energy sources, not the energy companies, who I might add, are still making huge profits despite the "shortage".

[dlewis23]

The amount of time it would take to find oil offshore, and then build the infrastructure to get it, would not help us any time soon,

Thats not true. If they started tomorrow, off the coast of florida we could have oil from it in less then 2 years. Anyone that says 7 years to get the first drop of oil is a liar. Right now it takes longer for application process to be able drill then it does to setup the rig and start drilling.

Right now we have nothing to replace oil with, we have more oil in this country then anyone else. we need to go get it. We don't need more oil, we use the same amount now in a day as we used in the 70's, we just need to get our own. We also need to stop using food for fuel to, that is the dumbest idea ever, it costs $1.25 to make a $1.00 worth of energy with food, that doesn't add up.

China is going to pass us in oil usage, and then we are really screwed if we are not using our own oil. We need to drill everywhere we can.

[ghostmaster]

I highly doubt it would only take 2 years to get oil from the Florida coast, not to mention the fact that all it would take is one hurricane to wipe it out.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9f/EIA_petroleum_consumption_of_selected_nations_1960-2005.png

Considering the fact that petroleum is used in much more than just fuel, you are dead wrong about our oil consumption since the 70s.  The clothes you have on right now have petrolum in them.  Plastics are made from petroleum.  Almost everything we use has petroleum in it.  It isn't just fuel.  That what people don't freakin understand!

Food fuel is dumb, and it sure as hell isn't clean.  Hydrogen is the way to go in cars, and solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear are the way to go everywhere else.

[dlewis23]

If you put a line on that graph with the 2 biggest spikes in the 70's on there, its only off by about 2 million barrels a day for today usage from the 70's. No one can seem to come up with an accurate number of how much is used per day anyway, ive seen people say 15 million barrels a day, 30 million barrels a day, and everything in between.   And we make a lot more products today out of petroleum then we did in the 70's, almost anything you touch has oil in it somewhere. So the usage for gasoline is about the same.

What we really know is that US oil usage had just dipped to almost null.

And it would take only 2 years to get oil off the coats of florida, It would have only taken 2 years 10 years ago. They started saying this 7 year crap because they don't want it. It could even take less time if they really wanted to. Oil rigs are totally pre-fab you just gotta find the place to put it.

I'm all for hydrogen, but it doesn't produce the power for it right now. they need to figure out how to get more power out of it, in a every day car.

[ghostmaster]

How has US oil usage dipped to almost null?  If that was the case, then demand would be lower, and our price would be lower.  Show me a link about how long it would take to build the oil platform for drilling, and then refining said oil.  It will be more than 2 years.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2008/db20080718_965702.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily

The "fact" is, nobody knows how much oil we actually have offshore.  It could be enough to make us energy independant, or it could be just enough to make our prices go up from all the infrastructure they wasted money on.

[MttFrog13]

hydrogen is a gimmic, they can't possibly produce it synthetically for all the cars in the world. It is already something like 8x the price of gas. Hydrogen is just an escape plan for oil companies. think about it, if we switch to electriciy, the gas companies will go out of business will lose most of their business and all their money, if we switch to hydrogen, at least the oil companies can switch to that and charge us for that. I'm all for plug in hybrids and electric cars. They are already here, the technology doesn't even need changing except for the cars to be a little cheaper. If we switch to electric cars and solar power plants, cars will be 100% clean.

[ghostmaster]

We don't have the battery technology to create and affordable electric car.  Nor do we have the electrical capacity for plug-in cars.  And the transtion straight to solar power wouldn't work, because we don't have the battery power to store it.  One way or another, we will need a transitional fuel. 

Hydrogen is not a gimmic, and you don't synthesize it.  They can pull it right out of the ocean water.  There are 3 main concerns with hydrogen. 

1.  It produces a lot more power than gasoline, but it is consumed a lot faster than gasoline.  So we need to work on fuel efficiency.

2.  Storage:  Hydrogen is NOT highly flammable like gasoline, but it IS highly explosive.  So safety is the issue there.

3.  Infrastructure:  Hydrogen needs to be stored cold.  We would need to build fueling infrastructure at the same time we transitioned.  It would cost a lot of money, and take a long time.  The same can be said of any new fuel though.

[MttFrog13]

i don't think hydrogen is literally a gimmick, but i don't think it will ever become a standard in cars of even have a substantial part of the car market. The hydrogen concept cars cost in the millions, electric cars. Check the link below. The Telsa Roadster is in production and is $100k. Or hell, a toyota prius starts at $21 although it sells on car lots for about $30k because of the demand for them. I don't see why we should go through the trouble of refining the hydrogen car when electric car is such a good choice. The only people i see the hydrogen car helping is the oil companies.

[dlewis23]

How has US oil usage dipped to almost null? 

Not usage, the oil we import. In I think 1990 we imported only about 45% of oil we now import over 70% of oil. That is just wrong. We have it here, there is more oil in in shale in colorado/utah then there is regular oil in all of saudi arabia.

Most of our oil comes from canada, but if you go down the list there are some not so great countries that are really high up on that list http://physics.ius.edu/~kyle/P310/crudebycountry.htm

[disturbed]

Recent estimates:

Oil production: 8.322 million bbl/day

Oil consumption: 20.8 million bbl/day

Oil exports: 1.048 million bbl/day

Oil imports: 13.15 million bbl/day

Oil proved reserves: 21.76 billion bbl

This entry is the stock of proved reserves of crude oil in barrels (bbl). Proved reserves are those quantities of petroleum which, by analysis of geological and engineering data, can be estimated with a high degree of confidence to be commercially recoverable from a given date forward, from known reservoirs and under current economic conditions.

Proved reserves of oil:

1 World 1,331,000,000,000 1 January 2006 est.

2 Saudi Arabia 264,300,000,000 2007 est.

3 Canada 178,800,000,000 1 January 2006 est.

4 Iran 138,400,000,000 2007 est.

5 Iraq 115,000,000,000 1 January 2007 est.

6 Kuwait 101,500,000,000 2007 est.

7 United Arab Emirates 97,800,000,000 2007 est.

8 Venezuela 79,140,000,000 2007 est.

9 Russia 60,000,000,000 1 January 2006 est.

10 Libya 45,000,000,000 2007 est.

11 Nigeria 37,250,000,000 2007 est.

12 Angola 25,000,000,000 2007 est.

13 United States 21,760,000,000 1 January 2006 est.

Oil consumption (bbl/day)

1 World 80,290,000 2005 est.

2 United States 20,800,000 2005 est.

3 European Union 14,550,000 2004

4 China 6,930,000 2007 est.

5 Japan 5,353,000 2005

6 Russia 2,916,000 2006

7 Germany 2,618,000 2005 est.

8 India 2,438,000 2005 est.

9 Canada 2,290,000 2005

10 Korea, South 2,130,000 2006

11 Brazil 2,100,000 2006 est.

12 Mexico 2,078,000 2005 est.

13 Saudi Arabia 2,000,000 2005

[dlewis23]

That is just estimated crude oil. And does not include all of the oil shale, or coal to oil.

http://www.dailyreckoning.com/rpt/OilShale.html

America's oil shale reserves are enormous, totaling at least 1.5 trillion barrels of oil. That's five times the reserves of Saudi Arabia!

Factor in coal to oil, since we have more coal then well anyone and you have a supply of energy that will last a very long time, sertantly long enough at a cheap price to get a renewable source.

[tdawnaz]

where's that video of that fella talking about why we won't see the prices that we want to see and why we can't drill our own...it all boiled down to the oil embaro of the 70's and henry kissinger and the deal he made with the opec nations...

can anyone find that it's in here some where

[tommie gorman]

Or about the oil that we are pumping and selling out of Alaska every day now? 

And have ever since the Alaskan pipeline was built day one.

[coknuck]

where's that video of that fella talking about why we won't see the prices that we want to see and why we can't drill our own...it all boiled down to the oil embaro of the 70's and henry kissinger and the deal he made with the opec nations...

can anyone find that it's in here some where

Is this what you were looking for Mamma! "The Energy Non-Crisis"

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147&pr=goog-sl

[tdawnaz]

yes doll that is the one...now how do i save that i wanna send it to everyone i know...well maybe now everyone...just the ones that already know that i'm nutz

thx for finding that...damn ur good

and for those of u that haven't watched it...it's long...like 50 minutes or something...but worth the time...

[tommie gorman]

Well it looks like Obama shifted again. 

Obama shifts, says he may back offshore drilling By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 20 minutes ago

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday he would be willing to support limited additional offshore oil drilling if that's what it takes to enact a comprehensive policy to foster fuel-efficient autos and develop alternate energy sources.

Shifting from his previous opposition to expanded offshore drilling, the Illinois senator told a Florida newspaper he could get behind a compromise with Republicans and oil companies to prevent gridlock over energy.

Republican rival John McCain, who earlier dropped his opposition to offshore drilling, has been criticizing Obama on the stump and in broadcast ads for clinging to his opposition as gasoline prices topped $4 a gallon. Polls indicate these attacks have helped McCain gain ground on Obama.

"My interest is in making sure we've got the kind of comprehensive energy policy that can bring down gas prices," Obama said in an interview with The Palm Beach Post.

"If, in order to get that passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought-out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage

[coknuck]

Couldn't pass this up!

[philp]

Couldn't pass this up!

I especially like the "appeaser" one. That's basically the whole Democratic platform isn't it? Last week I heard a news story on CNN where Obama was in Germany talking about pulling our troops out of Iraq. Then with his other face he started talking about how we can't allow Iran to have a nuclear program. What's he going to do when Iran tells him to go get fucked? Call them bad names? Why can't Democrats understand that you can't make idle threats and try to coerce actions if you have no intention of backing up what you say?

[mudmanc4]

How has US oil usage dipped to almost null?  If that was the case, then demand would be lower, and our price would be lower.  Show me a link about how long it would take to build the oil platform for drilling, and then refining said oil.  It will be more than 2 years.

http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2008/db20080718_965702.htm?campaign_id=rss_daily

The "fact" is, nobody knows how much oil we actually have offshore.  It could be enough to make us energy independant, or it could be just enough to make our prices go up from all the infrastructure they wasted money on.

I happen to know someone that underwater weld these rigs, ( I went to school with him)  he also has 7 years of onshore experience, I spoke with him a year ago about how long it would take to get oil out of the ground, and refined.

They can have a rig on the spot ( land ) in Anwr, in a month, they could be pumping oil out of there in two weeks , shipping it to Canada, refining it, and filling the pumps in less than two months.

He says it takes quite some time to build an offshore rig, but the secret is, they have them, several of them that are ready to go, plus, they can move them to where it is restricted now, just like when a hurricane comes.  So this bullshit story about how long it would take, that the left is saying, is just that, bullshit.  Besides, do we think for one second, if a oil company has the chance to make billions more, instead of the UAE, then they wont rush to do t immediately ? Cm,on

It's simple, they can't allow all that oil to be put into the market in an election year, it would make Bush look good, and the left just can't have that.   But you cam bet your ass they'll do it if a dem wins in 08, soon after inauguration.

[tommie gorman]

YOu betcha. 

[Roco]

It seems a tough decesion to Drill for oil in a place of scenic beauty , but a nation has to survive , anyway it has happened back through the ages , America from what I have seen is truly a blessed country for scenery ( sad to say for me only in film and pictures )

we have an old saying back in the rural areas , "yeah it's a great view, shame is, you can't eat the scenery , "

the great upside on the high oil prices , truly there is a upside , it has made us all aware

of what we are doing to this planet and it's future , and our grandchildrens future and beyond , it needed to happen , there aint no such thing as a free lunch IMHO,

[mudmanc4]

It seems a tough decesion to Drill for oil in a place of scenic beauty , but a nation has to survive , anyway it has happened back through the ages , America from what I have seen is truly a blessed country for scenery ( sad to say for me only in film and pictures )

we have an old saying back in the rural areas , "yeah it's a great view, shame is, you can't eat the scenery , "

the great upside on the high oil prices , truly there is a upside , it has made us all aware

of what we are doing to this planet and it's future , and our grandchildrens future and beyond , it needed to happen , there aint no such thing as a free lunch IMHO,

I understand where your coming from as far as the scenery, and we here in the US love out great parks, that consist of tens of thousands of miles of forests and beaches , and everything in between.

The fact remains that there are so few people that ever even visit the remote frozen places where we want to rill, and the polar bear species has nearly doubled in just a few years, that they would not be effected. No matter what the left says, your not going to kill the damn bears, nor are you going to kill the planet.