Tag: Oil Exploration

Drill Baby, Drill

Does not take long for the vultures to swoop in, huh?

The U.S. Interior Department, acting in President Bush’s final days in office, proposed on Friday opening up 130 million acres off of California’s coast to drilling for oil and natural gas, including areas off Humboldt and Mendocino counties and from San Luis Obispo south to San Diego.

After a hands-off policy for a quarter-century, the administration submitted plans to sell oil and gas leases for most of the U.S. coast, from the Gulf of Maine to Chesapeake Bay and the Outer Banks of North Carolina to the Gulf of Mexico and the Pacific Coast.

New drilling also was proposed in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, one of the nation’s most plentiful sources of fish, and the Arctic Ocean.

Washington, Oregon and protected parts of Florida were excluded along with waters off San Francisco Bay that lie within national marine sanctuaries.

On Friday, the American Petroleum Institute, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups greeted the news with praise, saying it is time for domestic energy supplies to be released from the moratorium.

Let the people see how many jobs were created by this…..Let the people see how long it takes to get this stuff to market.  Let the people see how much this will cost them in tax breaks.  Do not cook the numbers, just give the facts without the bullshit spin, ok?

Arctic Energy Sources

Across the globe, reserves of oil and gas that were previously regarded as uneconomical are being actively explored and developed. From the Arctic to East Asia to the South Atlantic, untapped billions of barrels of oil are attracting the interests of energy companies and speculative finance capital, seeking to take advantage of the high price of crude oil.

One of the greatest potential oil and gas bonanzas is to be found beneath the Arctic Ocean. A report issued by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 24 July estimated that the Arctic region holds around 90 billion barrels of oil—equal to the total proven reserves of Russia, the world’s second biggest oil producer.

Up to 30 percent of the world’s unproven natural gas deposits could also lie beneath the ice, as well as a possible one-fifth of untapped reserves of natural gas liquids. To date, most of the Arctic Ocean is international water, covered all year by a thick ice sheet.

Russia, like all countries around the North Pole, claims sovereignty over the seas up to 200-nautical miles (370 km) from its coast. To reinforce its claim over a further swathe of the Arctic, in 2007 a scientific submarine dropped the Russian flag under the North Pole as part of a geological survey of the seabed.

Russia recently confirmed that it regularly sends a fleet of around eight nuclear-powered ice-breakers to patrol in the Arctic Ocean. The vessels are capable of ploughing through eight-foot thick ice and can stay at sea for months on end.

Russia’s increased activity in the Arctic has raised concerns in Washington that it is losing out in the race for control over the region. Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Thad Allen commented on Russia’s ice-breaker activity in the Arctic.

Just another confrontation with Russia in the making.  Between oil and missiles, there whole chest thumping thingy is just the beginning of yet another “Cold War”, only there will be a new name for the same types of stand-offs.

A New Cold War–Part 2

Recently I posted an article about a deal from Russian long bombers to use the island of Cuba as a base or a refuelling stop, at least.  And now the news is that Russia and Venezuela are negotiating.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez visited Russia on Tuesday, cutting business deals, complaining about the United States and extolling the friendship between the two oil-rich nations.

He pressed Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to pay him a visit in Venezuela. He subtly ribbed President Dmitry Medvedev, who has been widely portrayed as Putin’s hand-picked puppet. And Chavez announced that his country would buy Russian weapons “to guarantee the sovereignty of Venezuela, which is being threatened by the United States.”

The visit played out against a backdrop of global tension over high oil prices, inflation and a weakened dollar. But some analysts dismissed the back-slapping and dealing between the rulers as a largely empty display.
Russia and Venezuela are riding high on record-breaking oil prices. And Tuesday, the two presidents pledged to form a strategic energy alliance.

“Our relations have reached a totally new level,” Medvedev said after he and Chavez watched Russia’s oil and gas companies sign a host of deals with their Venezuelan counterparts. The deals clear the way for Russian companies to develop Venezuelan fields, beginning with Russian giant Gazprom drilling in western Venezuela while Lukoil drills in the Orinoco valley.

Wider exploration as well as joint railroad, infrastructure and banking projects will follow, the presidents said.

The Oil Mirage

I was sent this post in an email from a friend in New York.

If gasoline were selling for $2 a gallon today, President Bush’s decision to lift the ban on oil drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts most likely would have caused an uproar. But with gasoline at more than $4 a gallon, and seemingly rising every day, the response to Mr. Bush’s directive has been muted at best. At worst, it is drawing support from various circles, including Congress, as lawmakers react to the growing public alarm over energy costs.

But this is a time for responsible leadership, and Congress must rise to the occasion. It’s one thing for Mr. Bush to seize an opportunity to open more acreage to the oil companies. He’s been pro-exploration from the moment he entered the Oval Office. But it’s quite another for responsible members of Congress to start wavering on the issue of offshore drilling out of fear of voter backlash at home. They need to stand firm.

Increasing the supply of domestic oil is, at best, a feeble solution to a global energy crisis. Under Mr. Bush’s plan, oil companies would be able to drill for an estimated 10 billion barrels of oil pinpointed in areas now off limits to drilling. But even if such a rich source materialized and were tapped, there is no guarantee the oil would flow to the U.S. market. Instead, it would become part of the global oil supply and subject to the price fluctuations of global demand. Assuming there is no let-up in demand by China and India, the impact on prices would be minimal at best. Meanwhile, the U.S. coastal landscape would be degraded.

If only some lawmakers would talk bluntly about this issue. If only some of them would dare to say that even though $4-a-gallon gasoline is a burden on most family budgets, it is, in its own way, a blessing as well. The higher cost of fuel has made Americans more conservation conscious. It has all but driven the gas-guzzling SUV into extinction. It has increased ridership on mass transit systems. It has made cities more attractive for workers to live in, and the suburbs, along with their daily commutes, less attractive. If that trend continues, suburban and ex-urban sprawl may at last be curbed.

Then there are the health benefits. If Americans drive less and burn less fuel, the air will be cleaner and there will be fewer respiratory ailments. And there are economic benefits. Fewer cars means less wear and tear on the infrastructure, and thus less cost for maintenance and repair.

Congress can make these points, and more, by refusing to go along with Mr. Bush and lift the drilling moratorium. That is to say, Congress must act responsibly even if Mr. Bush refuses to do so.

Off Shore Drilling: Is It Good For You?

Putting pressure on congressional Democrats to back more exploration for oil, President Bush on Monday lifted an executive ban on offshore drilling that has stood since his father was president.

But the move, by itself, will do nothing unless Congress acts, too, to revoke its prohibition on offshore drilling.

“The only thing standing between the American people and these vast oil resources is action from the U.S. Congress,” Bush said in a statement in the Rose Garden. “Now the ball is squarely in Congress’ court.”

A look at the issue:

Federal opposition

Congressional Democrats, joined by some GOP lawmakers from coastal states, have opposed lifting the prohibition that has barred energy companies from waters along the East and West coasts and in the eastern Gulf of Mexico. Presidents, from Bush’s father — George H.W. Bush — in 1990 to Bill Clinton have sided against drilling in these waters, as has Congress each year for 27 years. Their goal has to been to protect beaches and coastal states’ tourism economies.

History of the issue

On Jan. 28, 1969, a blowout on a Unocal rig six miles off the coast of California spilled 3 million gallons of oil into the waters off Santa Barbara. The blackened beaches and oil-soaked birds and seals became icons for the environmental movement. Two years ago, a congressional compromise opened an additional 8.3 million acres in the Gulf of Mexico.

Where candidates stand

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. , reversed his position last month and endorsed expanded offshore drilling.

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. , wants to maintain the moratorium on offshore drilling.

How Americans feel

In a May Gallup poll, 57 percent of people surveyed were willing to allow drilling in coastal and wilderness areas that are off limits, if it had the potential to reduce high gas prices.

How much oil is out there, will it affect prices?

The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that there is the possibility of 17.8 billion barrels, but that’s unproven. That amount would equal about 60 percent of proven U.S. reserves.

The Energy Department doesn’t see a significant impact on domestic production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017.

As reported in the Detroit News and Pres Bush who is just playing politics.