November Elections and Oil

In an informal poll running on Oakland Tribune's Web site, 60 percent of the 523 votes supported expansion. Though 52 percent of state voters opposed new offshore drilling in a Public Policy Institute of California poll last July, that poll was taken before gas prices shot above $4 a gallon.

"It's time for Congress to open up Alaska and offshore for drilling. I believe that would slow down or even decrease the world price of oil," said Lou Morgan, a Castro Valley resident.
Offshore oil drilling comes back to the surface - Inside Bay Area

A push by U.S. President George W. Bush and Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain to lift a ban on U.S. offshore oil drilling could find plenty of support from Americans weary of rising energy costs, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll.

Some 59.6 percent of Americans surveyed in the poll released on Wednesday said they would favour government efforts to boost domestic drilling and refinery construction to cool record prices.
Most Americans support more U.S. oil drilling | Markets | Reuters

I've said it before, the price of oil and stance by the candidates will have great infuence on our next president. Let the price of gas crowd around $5.00/gal. and household oil in the Northern states rise to a price of $175/barrel and the "green vote" will turn from enviroment to the green in their pocket.

This will go down in history as the issue that crushed a candidate!:D

Have a good one!:s4:

Most voters favor the resumption of offshore drilling in the United States and expect it to lower prices at the pump, even as John McCain has announced his support for states that want to explore for oil and gas off their coasts.

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone surveyâ??conducted before McCain announced his intentions on the issue--finds that 67% of voters believe that drilling should be allowed off the coasts of California, Florida and other states. Only 18% disagree and 15% are undecided. Conservative and moderate voters strongly support this approach, while liberals are more evenly divided (46% of liberals favor drilling, 37% oppose).
Rasmussen Reportsâ?¢: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

Like I stated....let the price of gas hit $5.00/gal and household oil climb to $175/barrel.

Have a good one!:s4:

Offshore drilling is the stupidest solution to gas prices ever. you know the Alaska Oil Reserve? enough oil for like 4 months, and it takes over 5 years to get access to it all.

Lets work for solutions that don't involve the rape of our planet. Alternate fuels? Green energy? Better fuel effeciency? Yes please.

Psycho4bud, I find your enthusiasm for this subject disturbing. I would hope that you would find the issue as unpallatable as everyone else. Using gas prices to justify somthing so damaging to our planet is disgusting. Preying off desperation is nothing to be proud of, it is the reason scum oil companies are able to get their claws into ecological preserves, and the reason our economy, ecosystem, and entire way of life are being exploited, all to make oil companies more wealthy.

Any candidate that suggests drilling our coasts should be immediatly beaten with a sack of hammers. It is not a solution, and is one hell of a messy band aid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LegalizeTheGreen

Lets work for solutions that don't involve the rape of our planet. Alternate fuels? Green energy? Better fuel effeciency?

---

You mentioned 5 years. I'm sure that the majority of Americans would be interested in knowing how long these programs will take to relieve their stress in the wallet.

I've also seen reports that stated that in one year we could be getting oil off the coastal regions. If nothing else, if this would be enough to scare off some speculators the price of oil would drop by $60/barrel.

Do what we need to do now and aggressively work on the programs you mentioned. :thumbsup:

Have a good one!:s4:

While I agree that drilling might relieve some of the pressure, it is a band-aid, one that destroys the enviroment.

Looking for the quick and easy answer is what got America into this mess, and more of the same won't fix anything. By looking to drilling as a way out, the more valid answers get pushed to the back.

You don't fix a bullet hole with a band-aid, you have to do a very in depth surgery, immediatly, or the problem only gets worse.

A candidate campaigning as a drilling enthusiast doesn't strike me as the best person to put in charge of the country.

PS, "For the average case, drilling in ANWR would reduce crude oil by 75 cents, in 2025. The total production from ANWR would be between 0.4 and 1.2 percent of total world oil consumption in 2030"
-quote from wikipedia on the ANWR

You talk like offshore drilling will definately harm the enviroment. How many rigs leaked during Katrina? None of them did.

The band-aid theory:
If I get big enough of a cut that I have to go into the hospital I just don't let it bleed at will on the way there....I put something on it, such as a band-aid, until I can get it repaired for good.


Still no answer though on how long it will take to help Joe Voters' pocket book by going completely green. The middle class and poor aren't the type to wait for the whims of the rich. It's hard to fill a tank at $5/gal. when you only make $10-$20/hour.

Have a good one!:s4:

P4B is right drilling for oil is the only solution we have right now,how many cars on the road right now use other types of energy.Also our lives depend totally on oil based products from fetilizers to plastics.I know its not sustainable but oil is all weve got right now

Then why does the government say plenty leaked?

MMS Press Release

Notice it is a .gov website.

NEW ORLEANS â?? Minerals Management Service (MMS) today released an update of the assessment of damage to offshore oil and gas infrastructure caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

MMS Gulf of Mexico Regional Director Chris Oynes noted that â??Todayâ??s assessment of damage updates the assessment MMS released on January 19, 2006. Based on additional industry assessments, investigations, and reports, the number of pipelines damaged has risen to 457 from 183. The number of larger diameter pipelines (10 inches or greater) that were damaged has risen to 101 from 64. Thirty-two have returned to service versus the previous number of 22.â?� Table 1 and Table 2 list the major pipelines that were damaged.

MMS has also revised the number of platforms destroyed from 115 down to 113 (one well was mistaken for a platform and one platform was damaged not destroyed). Table 3 and Table 4 list the destroyed platforms. Of these 113, four replacement platforms have been proposed by the operators and approved by MMS to date. These replacement platforms will take the place of eight destroyed platforms with a pre-hurricane daily production of 16,700 barrels per day.

MMS has canvassed the operators of the facilities with largest amount of production still shut-in to provide an estimate of when they might return to production. These are:
Operator Company Facility Name Area Projected Date
Shell Mars Mississippi Canyon Block 208 Mid year 2006
TOTAL Matterhorn Mississippi Canyon Block 243 Imminent
Shell Cognac Mississippi Canyon Block 194 4th Quarter 2006
Kerr-McGee Red Hawk Garden Banks Block 876 Imminent

MMS also is releasing the following tally of hurricane-related oil/condensate/chemical spills in Federal offshore OCS waters as reported to MMS and the National Response Center. Six spills of 1,000 barrels or greater were reported; the largest of these was 3,625 barrels of condensate reported by the Gulf South Pipeline Company in the Eugene Island Block 51 area. A total of 146 spills of 1 barrel or greater have been reported in the Federal OCS waters; 37 of these were 50 barrels or greater. No shoreline or wildlife impacts were noted from these spills.

Oynes explained that, â??Assessments of pipeline and facility damages are still ongoing, and any updates will be reflected in future announcements. It is likely that additional damage will be reported as underwater damage assessments are completed. These have been delayed because of overwhelmed support resources, such as diving equipment, support vessels, and remotely operated vehicles, but we are moving ahead as expeditiously as possible under the circumstances.â?�


Thanks for playing!

Also, how about we put an end to the SPECULATION which is what is causing these high gas prices, instead of raping our land/coastal areas? Another thing, why don't the oil companies drill some of the land/coastal areas that they already purchased and licensed before buying more?

Thats exactly why more drilling is the worst kind of band aid we have access to. If you are so willing to drill for the oil, perhaps you should be the ones living in the polution and wreckage it creates, but since it is somewhere else, and not hurting you, then fine, drill, pollute, whatever it takes for a cheap tank of gas, right?

what noone has mentioned and i think is a prevalent point here is that no matter how much more oil we get or what the price of that oil is is that now that the oil companys who produce the ever more precious gas for your car know that americans are willing to pay out the ass for that gas you will never see a significant reduction in the price at the pump.
it common sense in buisness you sell at the absolute highest price possible to the consummer at take in maximum profits.and if that number is $4.50 - $5.00 a galon for gas before the average person starts to signifacantly curb their usage then expect it to stay at that price.
and speaking of usage my boss told me couple weeks a go that average americans only spend 2% of their salary on gas. after i got up off the floor laughing i asked him what decade he was livin in. on my salary that would be me buyin 3 maybe 4 galons a week

The only ones these gas prices are really hurting are the lower income. Everyone else is merely inconvenienced .
If the â??averageâ?� American were really hurting by the gas prices they would slow down that SUV a little bit. Driving 80 mph isn't conducive to saving gas.
They gripe about how much it costs to fill up that gas hog they own, and then peel out of the parking lot. Hellâ?¦. Theres a gallon wasted right there.
The â??averageâ?� American has sooooo much! Computers, iPods, cell phones, multiple vehicles, etc,etc,etc.
When the gas prices started rising the first thing I gave up was my daily Starbucks, next I downsized my cell phone. I slowed down when Iâ??m driving. (Saves a tremendous amount of gas.), stopped going out to restaurants 3-4 times a week. And what do you know, those little changes saved me over $ 400.00 a month. More than enough for the increased gas bill.
So they want to destroy our coastland forever, f*ck up our delicate eco-system so we donâ??t have to be inconvenienced or cut back on our lifestyle?
Its really a bad idea to put a band aid on a 30+ year old wound. When our children, and grandchildren, pull it off its gonna be oozing and infected!
Americans got greedy with cheap gas and now we think we deserve it.
Next time when you buy a vehicle maybe you should get it for the gas mileage, not how many cup holders it has.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud

I've said it before, the price of oil and stance by the candidates will have great infuence on our next president. Let the price of gas crowd around $5.00/gal. and household oil in the Northern states rise to a price of $175/barrel and the "green vote" will turn from enviroment to the green in their pocket.

This will go down in history as the issue that crushed a candidate!:D

---

You almost sound happy that things might get so bad that we'll consider endangering our coastal environment with offshore drilling when otherwise we would never consider it. I don't see how you think the high price of gas possibly forcing the offshore drilling issue is a good thing. It's not a good thing when desperation forces you to do something you don't want to do. Hell, maybe it will get bad enough we'll have to burn all our furniture just to stay warm! That would be even better!

To me the high price of gas proves the petroleum industry is about done with --- we need to move away from it. I'd rather see the investment that would go toward developing these offshore wells go instead to finding an alternative. Either way we are a few years from seeing any benefit from the investment we make now. It makes more sense to me to spend that time and money finding a solution that might last awhile, rather than just blow it on unsustainable fossil fuel that will be burned and gone in a few years. The wakeup call we are getting is not to tell us to drill for more oil, it is to tell us to move on from oil.

Also, regarding the safety of offshore oil rigs, there is nothing you can do to guarantee their safety, and even when they function exactly as designed, there are still huge amounts of pollution. The Santa Barbara spill that triggered the ban on offshore drilling was not a failure of the rig --- it was a failure of the rock the rig was drilling through. Once they tapped the high-pressure pocket of oil, the oil forced it's way through flaws in the rock and spilled that way --- not through a ruptured pipe or damaged rig. You can't guarantee that won't happen again. And even when rigs do not spill, there is still a lot of ecological damage due to the shore facilities, pipelines, runoff, erosion, and other pollutants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LegalizeTheGreen

you know the Alaska Oil Reserve? enough oil for like 4 months, and it takes over 5 years to get access to it all.

---

actually there is 4.3 to 11.8 billion barrels of oil assumed to be there according to Drilling for Oil in ANWR ~ Tell Me Again What it Solves « The World According to Opa
even though it is statistically low balled at lasting for only one year and 4 months, at least that could possibly by us some time to develop affordable energy alternatives, and by golly it seems like enough to convince me to make a decision to go for it, hell anything that saves me money asap i'm all for!!!!!!!!!:stoned:

I do recall watching a program on either the history channel or national geographic that had geologists stating that they think there may be more crude oil and/or natural gas in ANWR than the entire Middle Eastern oil fields combined. The point is we wont have a definitive answer to the quantity of fossil fuels in this area until we attempt to use the readily available modern technology to help drill in areas most likely to contain fossil fuels with little to no impact on the surrounding environment. We must all remember that drilling for oil is no longer a guessing game, we have access to great technologies that allow us to actually see whats in the ground before any drilling actually occurs. that fact alone should in my mind ease the environmentalists concerns that they have concerning oil drilling....:stoned:

I would like to make it absolutely clear that I do in fact support the expansion of fossil fuel production on a domestic level, however, I only support these ideas in order for us as Americans to lead the world in the search for alternative renewable energy with zero emissions. I just think that we as a country were "caught with our pants down" when it comes to the energy crisis. We simply need to buy some time for our manufacturers to utilize their Rand D departments and come out with affordable options.........:stoned:

wow! talk about a stoned rant!!!:stoned: