An offshore drilling rig is visible in the background as beachgoers attend the US Open of Surfing, July 20, 2008, in Huntington Beach, Calif. (AP Photo/Ric Francis)
What’s in the House offshore-drilling bill?
By Eoin O'Carroll | 09.17.08
The House of Representatives approved a bill Tuesday night that would relax the federal ban on offshore drilling and try to expand renewable energy.
The bill, which was adopted by a vote of 236 to 189, was backed by Democrats, who long fought the lifting of the 26-year ban but have been under intense political pressure to look as though they are taking steps to ease high gas prices. Republicans, whose vociferous calls for expanded offshore drilling have been met with widespread public approval, opposed the bill, claiming that it did not offer enough financial incentives to coastal states. On the final roll call, 221 Democrats and 15 Republicans voted for the bill; 176 Republicans and 13 Democrats voted against it.
The 290-page Comprehensive American Energy Security and Consumer Protection Act, as the bill is known, contains a number of important provisions. Here’s a breakdown:
• Allows drilling between 50 and 100 miles from a state’s coastline, if the state approves it. Areas beyond 100 miles from the coast would be completely open to drilling. This map, taken from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s website shows what it would look like.
According to the Associated Press, Republicans opposing the bill cite data from the Interior Department that estimate that 88 percent of the recoverable oil lies within the closed 50-mile zone. Republicans also argue that there is little incentive for states to permit drilling off their shores. They want a revenue-sharing plan, such as that enjoyed by Louisiana. Democrats counter that such a plan would be too expensive.
House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio, whose competing bill would technically allow drilling as close as three miles from the shore (where state jurisdiction ends and federal waters begin) believes that this bill would not result in any significant offshore drilling. “It’s a hoax on the American people,” he said.
If nothing is done, the offshore-drilling ban will expire Sept. 30.
• Sell 70 million barrels of light crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and replace it with less-valuable heavy crude. The swap, which amounts to 10 percent of the total reserve, seeks to provide immediate relief to gas prices. It would be the first time that heavy crude, which is more difficult to refine into gasoline, would be put in the SPR. This provision is based on HR 6578, the Consumer Energy Supply Act, which failed to pass in the House in July.
• Allow oil shale development in Wyoming, Utah, and Colorado, if they approve. Environmentalists have long opposed development of oil shale, a sedimentary rock from which fossil fuels can be extracted, because it is far more CO2-intensive than conventional oil and gas and mining it can cause air and groundwater pollution. Oil shale development is currently banned, but this ban is also set to expire Sept. 30.
• Require oil companies to “diligently develop” federal lands for which they already hold leases. Oil companies have leased 68 million acres of federal lands, but many of these leases are not being tapped. This bill would require oil companies to use it or lose it.
• Repeal some $18 billion in tax breaks for big oil companies. In 2004, Congress enacted a provision that effectively lowered the corporate tax from 35 percent to 32 percent for manufacturers, engineering and architecture firms, Hollywood studios, and oil and gas companies. This bill would repeal this reduction for the so-called Big Five oil companies: ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, BP, and Royal Dutch Shell. Other oil and gas companies would continue to enjoy the reduced taxes. Additionally, the bill would eliminate a provision that allows US oil companies to claim tax credits for oil extracted abroad.
• Require oil companies to pay royalties avoided because of an Interior Department contracting error. In 1998 and 1999, the Interior Department issued more than 1,000 leases for deep-water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, and, to encourage development of these areas, offered a break from the usual 12 percent royalty. In issuing these leases, the Interior Department accidentally left out the standard escape clause that rescinds this break if prices climb higher than $34 per barrel. The omission was noticed in 2000, but nobody fixed the leases. Oil passed $34 a barrel in 2004, and in January 2007, investigators calculated that the government could have collected an additional $865 million.
• Offer renewable energy and efficiency tax credits. These credits would be covered by that $18 billion taken back from the oil companies, and would apply to solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, biomass, landfill gas, hydropower, and other forms of renewable energy. The bill also includes credits for plug-in electric vehicles.
• Require utilities nationwide to generate 15 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2020. This would be slowly phased in, beginning with a 2.75 percent requirement in 2010 and gradually increasing each year until 2020.
• Offer tax breaks for improved building efficiency and strengthen efficiency standards for building codes. This bill requires new homes and commercial buildings to realize a 30 percent improvement in minimum building standards by 2010, and 50 percent by 2020.
• Offer tax breaks for companies that promote bicycles for commuting.
• Issue grants to reduce public-transportation fares and expand bus and rail service.
• Crack down on Minerals Management Service ethics violations. This is a response to the MMS ethics scandal that came to light last week. This bill would make it a federal crime for oil companies holding federal leases to offer gifts to government workers. The bill would also institute drug testing for MMS employees.
The bill faces a possible veto from President Bush. Also, the Senate is expected to take up an offshore-drilling bill this week – one that would open up less area than the House bill. The differences between these two bills will need to be reconciled before Congress sends a finalized bill to the White House.
The two chambers don’t have much time: Congress is scheduled to adjourn Sept. 26.
<< Controversial path to possible glut of natural gas | MainComments
2. Dave Smith | 09.17.08
What a crock! This bill does not resolve our energy problems! Democrats are just trying to take some of the heat off of themselves. If they really want to do something, they can autorize drilling in ANWR and within 50 miles of the US coastline.
3. Russ | 09.17.08
Please check the facts. I seem to remember President Reagan choosing to put heavy oil from Mexico in the SPR.
4. Campbell | 09.17.08
Poorly written bill. The bill does not offer realistic or reliable power needs for the American people. This bill promotes the continued dependency on foreign oil.
5. dotty | 09.17.08
3 miles from shore is ours.
Past that, international waters….. not under our jurisdiction.
7. Eoin | 09.17.08
Russ, believe it or not, I actually do check my facts. My research has shown that this would be the first time that heavy crude would be introduced to the SPR.
I’m not infallible, though. If you can provide me with the URL to a credible report that I’m wrong, I’ll run a correction.
8. Toeser | 09.17.08
Our country’s financial markets are in the process of melting down. We face a real chance of the first depression in generations. With all this going on, Pelosi is still more interested in partisan politics than solving the nation’s problems. With Bush, Pelosi, and Reid running our country, I’m afraid we are doomed.
We need every form of energy we can get, and we need it NOW. Stop screwing around Pelosi and Reid.
9. Churchill Hornstein | 09.17.08
Desperate housewives everywhere. If you have any, check with your buddies in the oil biz-this is just another repub giveaway to their oilybuds. Nobody drills their own oil when there is oil on the market that they can afford. Why do you think that 88% of the existing leases are idle? The only benefit we will get from this new bill, or any bill authorizing more fossil fuel dependence is degenerated oceans and a faster-warming atmosphere.
We need to wake up and demand solutions not so much from the political ***** in both parties, but from the businesses who actually have the wherewithal to develop solutions. We used to be a nation of innovators. Get off the political party kick and start paying attention to the real issues we face-overpopulation, global warming, less and less food with more and more poison in it, warmongers and lying politicians, lack of affordable healthcare, etc. etc. etc.
You want solutions? Get off yer butt, turn off the TV, and start using your brain out in your garage…THAT’s America!
10. Paul Stewart | 09.17.08
Great step forward. Let’s see what the Republicans do with it and what the President does. This is a test of the will of Republicans to walk the talk. If they really believe in doing what is right for Americans a getting America off oil, they should support and enact this bill.
I am not holding my breath.
11. OG | 09.17.08
Dotty, I don’t know where your 3 miles fact came from but that is completely FALSE. Territorial waters is 12 nautical miles from shore, plus there is a 200 Nautical Mile Exclusive Economic Zone according to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. ONLY AFTER 200 MILES is it International Waters.
Regarding this bill. It’s a giant SHAM. I’m all for renewable and new sources of energy (except BIOFUELS which is stupid and is the cause of rising food prices thus increasing inflation too) but what is the use of drilling if you can’t drill where the oil is.
Sounds like a plan doomed to failure from the start. The democrats will allow drilling past 50 miles and when it fails they’ll shout “SEE SEE WE TOLD YOU THERE’S NO OIL”
Drill Now Drill here. Promote the Pickens plan. Fund new Nuclear, Wind, Geothermal, Hydro, and Hydrogen Energy. Put money into Energy R&D. A new Comprehensive Energy industry will boost the economy, take us away from foreign oil, improve our Foreign Policy and Relations, spur development of new technologies, and send our country into the forefront of a new and important industry.
12. Libba | 09.17.08
Hunh? In 1998-99 the Clinton administration “accidentally” left a standard clause out of an oil company contract, thereby allowing oil companies to avoid paying substantial royalties–to the tune of $865 million thus far?
Tell me again, dear Dems, that oil companies are in cahoots with Republicans and Democrats are the protectors of the public interest!
13. Mike | 09.17.08
Dotty the UN Convention of the law of sea 3 which was passed in Nov of 1994 leaves 200 miles from shore as a countries exclusive Economic zone or EEZ this means other countries are allowed to travel on or fly above these waters but only the coastal nation may use it for economic reasons, thes law actually started to end fishing disputes but is now used more for offshore oil.
14. Phil Seymour | 09.17.08
Most people don’t bother checking the facts, but some of us do. Here are a few important facts that have been conveniently overlooked;
The U.S. uses 20 million barrels of oil each day. We produce 5 million barrels a day. New offshore oil could, maybe in 10 years, add an extra 750,000 barrels to our supply each day. It costs 2 Billion dollars for each new oil rig.
The proposed 70 million barrels of oil will be gone in a week.
We will not reduce the price at the pumps with this new bill.
The most effective way to save money at the pump is to use less.
15. Oregon4Obama | 09.17.08
Everyone has seen those awesome comercials from the oil companies that say they have awesome geo-whatchamacalit technology to find oil in the ground….well now they get to test it 50 miles off the coast….Oil companies had no say in this bill and it shows…..
by the way….we only have 3% of the oil in this world so dont expect the prices to magically dissapear in a couple of months or years
16. Shale | 09.17.08
This bill is a sham. There is less drilling opportunity in the bill than what we currently have and all of this is due to that empty suit Pelosi. She is lacking in every sense and we are going to pay for her ignorance and obstinance. Pelosi, Reed, and that moron Linsay Graham are ruining our country into the ground. As a old time oil man who has gone bust a few times and boom several we are hurting ourselves. But the leftwingers like on IRAQ love it when there is bad news or when our industries are hurt. Their base is the Hate America crowd.
17. grouchyoldman | 09.17.08
Typically cynical liberal Democrat proposal. This is the kind of change that Obama is promising to deliver: more and larger bloated inefficient social engineering program that NEVER solve the problems they purport to address.
Disgusting and insulting Democrat malarkey…
18. T961585 | 09.17.08
There are some populist aspects of the bill that are worth keeping. But overall, it’s a complete waste of everyone’s time to ONLY allow drilling in areas with low to no yield. It sounds like something boneheaded that Mao Tse Dong would have proposed in the cultural revolution of the 60’s.
If you’re opposed to drilling, that’s a fine and principled position to have. But you need to have the backbone to say so rather than cave to perceived popular sentiments and come out with half-baked bills. Are high fuel costs and dependence on foreign supplies worth keeping our shores and wildlife refuges pristine?
Our governmental system creates career politicians that become better at running campaigns for re-election than doing things that are best for the people. Additionally, we’re required to vote for the leader of the free world as if that has become part of the Constitution’s job description and we’ve put too much emphasis on “experience” as a result of this modern notion.
19. John | 09.17.08
it will either be the usa or china drilling off our shores i feel more comfortable with the usa drilling than i do with a country who cant supply toys of even baby formula without poison in them. we need to drill drill drill
20. BobW | 09.17.08
Repeat after me: The USA generates less than 2% of its electricity by burning oil. Solar and wind power are not substitutes for oil.
21. azureblue | 09.17.08
Here is the only reason big oil wants to drill off shore:
To be able to sell more fuel & gas to Japan and China. Last year, fuel sales exports rose 33%. If the oil companies were permitted to drill ONLY of they oil & gas they find were to be sold in the US then I would consider it. But this push to drill is so the oil companies can have more oil & gas to sell overseas, not to America. Stop exporting Us oil and gas and the price of gasoline
Big oil knows that it will take years for the oil from ANWAR and offshore drilling to actually hit the market- anywhere from 3 to 10 with 10 being the most likely figure.
22. Paul Stewart | 09.17.08
It is clear that the Republicans want drilling to stay something they can harp about. And it is clear they do not want anything but drilling rights.
They talk the talk about renewables and the whole spectrum, but come time to vote on a bill, they just want to “drill here, drill now” just drill the American people. And, they don’t want to claw back foregone taxes from the oil companies that are gouging Americans at the pumps and in their heating bills and everywhere else (it filters though everything you buy because it takes energy to make things). No, no. They want to reduce the taxes. I mean, come on, they are not going to drill more. They are going to get the drilling rights, buy up the leases and sit on that too. They can make a killing by just watching the prices go to $200 and more per barrel. It will come quick.
No, America must get off oil. Now. And it must focus almost exclusively on doing that. The extra drilling rights will benefit only the oil companies. Its presence will not be felt much in the markets. It certainly will not be felt in the typical American pocket book. It will be felt by those who own these stocks - the already wealthy. And don’t give me the **** about its in everyone’s pension fund. It is not going to make anyone’s retirement materially better when companies that fund the pension and the pension itself go bankrupt.
Republicans and oil companies have been waiting for this crisis day to get the drilling rights passed. Democratic lawmakers are wise to see this does not happen in an open unregulated way. The oil companies, left unfettered are more rapacious than any financial companies. And look what is happening there as we speak.
23. dragonfly777 | 09.17.08
You missed a historical event on CSPAN yesterday as the Dems pushed a pork drilling bill. They wrote and proposed at 9:45am a bill no one had seen. They want to invest 10 billion in 10 yrs. to alternative fuel and we haven’t drilled a drop. The aggressive time for the alternative fuel investment will do nothing but burden the general population! They made damn sure the people will still pay. Instead of spreading the investment out over a longer time, to ease the prices at the pump, they will keep gas prices extremely high. Get ready to go to European prices if Obama takes office. The Europeans love him, don’t you?
24. Brady | 09.17.08
Pelosi is a Pemoron and this bill is definitely a sham. It’ll sound good in the headlines though, at least on CNN and the NY Post.
25. Fledgling Yute | 09.17.08
We are in the mess we are in due to the efforts of republicans, who are owned by large corporations, have completely dismantled regulatory structures around commodities exchanges. It really has nothing to do with where the oil gets extracted from. The only good thing the republicans have said about domestic drilling is that it cannot be traded on the global market.
We have been steadily groomed to believe in the fantasy of justified higher prices through deception by the republicans for too long now. The only reason this is as bad as it is: too many Republicans in congress and a colluding thief sitting in the White House.
27. nobama_nobiden | 09.17.08
Drill ! Baby Drill! - Also invest in renewable energy. In knowing where the oil is listen to the oil companies. But Remove their subsidies
28. wtobias | 09.17.08
a tax on the oil is a tax on anyone that buys fuel the oil companys will pass any expenses to there prices and the dems know that they never wanted to drill and they just hope that this gets veto so they can play there card nancy and harry need to be put where they belong on unemployment. like the thousands that are already there because of high cost of fuel maybe it will take a long time to drill but it may take longer to find a replacement for oil delaying is not helping i guess this is why the dems run the do nothing but put us workers on the unemployment line congress
29. Brady | 09.17.08
Just had a thought; What and who are the libs going to vilify when and if we do get off of oil? Big Battery? Big Sun? Big Wind? They need the oil companies so they have something to whine about. I guess the acedemic lifestyle makes it hard to afford a few more bucks for gas. I’ve heard Berkenstocks (sp?) aren’t that cheap either.
30. JoE | 09.17.08
OG is right; the Dems are about to do a whole lot of nothing instead of what needs to be done. The Reps will tear them on it, but it beats the heck out of VISION, that silly pipe dream of Roskam’s.
If Obama is so obsessed with change, why doesn’t he actually author a bill that mandates spending money on energy R+D and not talk about over the next four years, when congress gets around to it. And if McCain is such a maverick, he’ll endorse it. Or do it vice versa, i don’t care.
We need geo, nuclear, wind and solar mirror farms. And we should be looking to those who have good, PROVEN, tech to get the world on a good track. Build a solar convection (updraft) tower. Its solid, it’s reliable, and it could even be a tourist trap for who ever puts it in their state.
The only way to pay less right now is to use less, sad but true. Buy a used bike or use public trans to commute anywhere within 10 miles.
Oil shale, off shore, and the reserve are all jokes. And Alaska is flat out off limits to anyone with half a brain.
31. j | 09.17.08
Good job Congress!! Once again you demonstrate how you think the average American is stupid. In my job, I follow where the data leads me. Congress draws a map and then proclaims, we know more than the Geologists. I guess when your head is full of rocks one would tend to think this.
32. alan | 09.17.08
“The U.S. uses 20 million barrels of oil each day. We produce 5 million barrels a day. New offshore oil could, maybe in 10 years, add an extra 750,000 barrels to our supply each day” Interesting “fact” 10 years, 750,000 barrels?
Phil,where did you get This fact? Dem talking points? The actual span is 3-4 years and the quantity is not yet known(yes I talked to Actual oil rig project managers). Agreed we need to relinquish our use of foreign oil and CNG is a reasonable answer. Because it does not require a huge addition to our debt to implement(most vehicles on the road now could easily be converted to run on CNG) and it would be less traumatic to all the industries that require transportation(that would be ALL) leaving us capable of restoring our markets and remain competitive in a global economy. Pooh Poohing the plan to drill offshore(earnestly, not what the dems passed) based on some erroneous “facts” is sophistry and that is fatal to your argument since it is espoused ubiquitously by the Liberal media and left leaning pundits even though it is fallacious.
33. Ahoog69 | 09.17.08
ANY exploration or new drilling for oil (off-shore or ANWR) will only prolong our “addiction” to oil. We need to get away from fossil fuels.
Of course, this will not be an easy task, but we must start sometime. And it must start with the consumer. Reduce your demand for gasoline, and increase your demand for solar, wind, and hydroelectric. For example, a 1,000 square mile solar facility in the desert (or spread out across the country) could power the whole of the United States!
Heck, the batteries of electric cars could be recharged via thin solar panels on the roof of the car. Technically difficult? Probably, but certainly not impossible…we need to start rebuilding American innovation!
34. ED LIVINGSTON | 09.17.08
HELP! This congress shows its total contempt for this country and its people with this fraud of a bill. Congress is the cause of the current dependency on foreign oil. The bans on drilling and production which now exist are the cause of our high prices, and our living at the mercy of OPEC. Cannot everyone see that this bill is the most clumsy carnival trick - shameless demagoguery. This bill pretends to do, and claims to do, exactly what it does not do - permit the production of our own crude oil sources, which are estimated at more than that available from outside sources. The congress is a completely corrupt institution, unable to effect either the good or the will of the people. The arrogance of those in power is breathtaking!
35. tom | 09.17.08
Besides just magically appearing in this article….where is the proof that oil can only be found within 50 miles off the coast? After reading the interior department’s webpage, it appears that this number comes from the fact that only ocean bottom that lies on the continental shelf has been explored and deep ocean exploration has not been economically viable. Of course, that doesn’t take into account the fact that a barrel of crude is over $100 dollars. I think it’s time everyone got their heads out of the sand *no pun intended* and actually researched the facts before disgorging erroneous information.
36. Rocko | 09.17.08
This bill is a great step toward what this country needs. Force these companies to use what we have given them, open up new areas, and push the country toward energy independence. Those of you who think this is a bad idea have no clue of the economics behind this. Watch as in 10 years the country is energy independent and the nation become the only oil producing nation.
37. Nate R | 09.17.08
This is a sad smoke screen for doing NOTING! Let them dril anywhere they damn want! If they cause a environmental problem let the oil companies pay to repair the damage.
Are the Dems that stupid that they think the public id not paying attention???!!!
More OIL, More NUCLEAR, More WIND, More HYDO, More CONVERSATION. Drill here NOW.
STRAIGHT Republican ticket for me. I have HAD it with the Dems and I AM a union member!
38. colonial girl | 09.17.08
This bill is clearly a typical democrat smoke and mirrors and no action bill. Most of the land already under lease has NO OIL under it and is not worth drilling; the richest deposits are in the 50 mile and closer zone, plus this bill doesn’t mention Anwar another oil rich site.
The states also deserve a cut of the royalties, what’s this “too expensive” nonsense the democrates are talking about.
And for you “big oil” nonsense people, have you ever considered who OWNS big oil? That’s right, they are publically traded companies and union retirement funds, teacher retirement funds and local government retirement funds own hug blocks of “big oil” stock as well as joe average with his little 401K. If you weren’t so drunk on the liberal koolaid, you’d discver that a LOT of the big name democrates also own “big oil” stock and get big political donations from them.
We could be getting oil from these leases in less than 5 years and if Clinton hadn’t banned it, we could have been getting that oil TODAY. But, you’d rather see our money go to foreign OPEC members and us little people pay increasing costs for food, travel and other necesities of life while waitng for some pie in the sky “alternative energy source” in 10 or 20years if ever.
39. Nate R | 09.17.08
Why not pass a law that we only drill for oil on the moon while they are at it. Since when does congress know anything about where oil can be found? They’d have to have a 6 month committee of experts before they made the wrong decision. Won’t any reporter have the nerve to ask Pelosi where the oil is if she is so smart?
40. alex | 09.17.08
Anybody paying attention?
OIL IS NOT THE PROBLEM!
Have you noticed your house is worth 3/4 of what it was 2 years ago? Or how about the fact that your 401k and investments are worth half? Unemployment rate above 6.1% and obviously rising! A 3 month treasury bond yields .02% interest!
This bill gives lots of money and incentives, which was going to oil companies, to the production of renewable energy sources! THE FUTURE!
Oil has fallen more than $50 off its high, OIL IS GETTING CHEAPER ALREADY, YOU KNOW IT!
We dont need to drill for more oil you dimwits! We need to create the future in renewable energy, and make tons of money from it! Why is this so hard to understand?
Let me put this in terms you might understand. If we don’t invent and mass produce the first sufficient and efficient alternative energy, THE CHINESE WILL! And then we are screwed, ok. You know how much money oil makes??? Well how much money do you think the thing that replaces oil will make??? Wouldnt you like to see that money??? Don’t you want to work for that company??? Can you work for that company if the plants are in Beijing???
GET OUT OF THE PAST, YOU ARE GOING TO LEAVE US ALL BEHIND.
41. Phil | 09.17.08
There are some good points in there, at least it’s a start. Too bad it will never get out of the senate. The one thing I never realized was that the big oil companies actually pay a lesser tax rate on income than some American people. They should at least pay the same rates as the people.
42. RoBoTech | 09.17.08
I get sick of hearing that we only have 3% of the worlds oil
First off, so what? Just what we KNOW is there will last the US 60 years! 60 years of oil independence!Of we aren’t off oil in the next 60 years.
And second, we don’t know if there’s more than that because it does no good looking for it, if anymore is found, nobody can get it because of ignorant Libtards.
And it darned sure won’t tale 10-15 years to get any of it to market. We can get oil from anywhere in the world in less than three.
Don’t believe it? Hey, guess what, we ARE going to explore and harvest. With, or without a Democratic Congress or President. Count on it.
Norway spent less than a year exploring off their coast and found the biggest off shore oil well EVER. They are now oil independent.
How do we know what we will find? We may have 1000 years worth and we can’t touch it. And the same with Natural Gas.
Oil and gas are OUR resources, the Democrats and the environment freaks think it’s a liability.
Brain damage is all I can say.
43. Douglas | 09.17.08
It’s an election year. You people cannot possibly be naive enough to believe that either party would actually accomplish something that would benefit anyone other than one or both political parties, can you? Wake up and smell the coffee. Throw out the Dems who have done their level best to put this country into a financial stinkhole in order to take back the White House. Then do it to the Reps if they don’t clean things up by 2010. Keep tossing out the party in power until they realize we’ve had it with politics as usual.
January of 2007, the Dems take power in Congress and oil is at $50 a bbl. The housing industry is doing fine, the banks are doing fine. Two years later and the bottom has fallen out. How hard is this to figure out?
44. Syd | 09.17.08
So let me get this straight, you guys actually think that more drilling will decrease the gas prices we pay at the pumps. Are you serious? Let me try not to laugh out loud as people actually delude themselves into thinking that the oil companies have any interest in consumers paying less for their gasoline. If oil companies actually cared about decreasing prices at the pumps they might start drilling on the leases they already hold.
Go Republicans - they’ll oust those yellow bellied dems! Go Democrats they’ll vilify those big money companies and save us all from evil! Yeah, great way to argue for change people.
Does anyone in America actually know how to think for themselves any more or has intellectual thought regressed to lining up behind party lines cheering on the team as if sitting in a sports bar chewing on chicken wings while watching Monday night Football?
45. Californian | 09.17.08
The photo of Huntington Beach is altered with a zoom lens or photoshop to falsely show the rig and ship closer than they actually are. I love Huntington Beach and this photo is a fake.
46. sean | 09.17.08
Unbeleivable.
Dems pretend to do something, and plan to blame everyone else when nothing happens. So we get a bill that says no drilling where the oil is known to be, and if there is oil, the Feds get all the money; the state gets NO money for it. How does that help the folks in those states? Are the people in those states so stupid that they will not understand that they are being robbed?
Gas prices are high, and Dems want to TAX big oil. Do they think that these companies will just say “gee wiz, it costs more to do business, but we are too kind to pass on the cost to our customers?” Get real. Taxing any big business just makes everyone else pay more when they pass the tax to us.
Dems, if you were ever sincere about helping the regular, common, working class and poor, you’d quit taxing and making everything they need more expensive: like gasoline and food.
Someday, modern American liberals will finally help, by having conservative children.
47. dante | 09.17.08
u know i just wondreing all this talk people let drilling begins if it will benifit needy american. i will say teccnicall ynot impossible whatever men i dont even care at all i mean i got an option when thigs get bad i just go back to my country u know what saying we made oil pal
48. Tom Colton | 09.17.08
This Bill is a con job designed to fool Middle America into thinking the
House Leadership has done something to bring down oil prices and avert an
energy crisis. I’ve been a liberal since I came back from the War in South
East Asia and supported McGovern for President. But this kind of deceit by
Nancy Pelosi and others in my party-The Democratic Party-makes me ashamed
to be a Democrat. I’m switching to The Independent Party. I want solutions
not whitewash, smoke and mirrors.
49. Keith B | 09.17.08
This bill is fantastic. The Democrats know that US drilling will only affect the price of oil if we drill EVERYWHERE, and then only maybe in 2-10 years. Therefore, by passing a ‘pro-drilling’ bill that really helps a lot of other energy and accounting problems that have been piling up the last several years, they are 1) correcting those problems, 2) able to gain political points with ignorant people by pretending to be for more drilling, and 3) not significantly increasing drilling. Great job!
50. Joe | 09.17.08
Wow, look at how many people hate the bill just because it isn’t a huge gift to oil companies like the Republicans want. Seems like some people don’t know what oil spills do to coastal communities…
52. Democrats a joke | 09.17.08
What a joke, the Democrats would have us all riding bicycles. Nancy Pelosi is an idiot!
53. econ 101 | 09.17.08
Basic economic principles say that off shore drilling WILL NOT reduce this “dependence” on foreign oil. What it will do is increase global supply which will have a minimal effect on price. The only way off shore drilling would reduce our “dependence” on foreign oil is if the government forces the oil companies to sell the newly extracted oil to American’s only and sets the price as well. Is this what the off shore proponents really want?
55. McCain4BigOil | 09.17.08
Bush, McCain, and all the Republican cronies have PROVEN what they are all about…Big business, Big Oil, and stepping on the little guy.
IT’s not even about OBAMA or the dems, it’s about NOT having more crackhead addiction to the middle east!!!
The same goes for outsourcing our workforce, it’s time for this rich-get-richer, in-bed with oil, smoking stogies with oil-dipped $100 bills that must (and will) stop when the repugs get booted out of office, and change for the better is allowed to begin.
=enough is enough
57. econ 101 | 09.17.08
Ahoog69 has it correct. We need to change the debate from “addiction to foreign oil” to our true problem of “addiciton to ANY oil”. Everyone must remove the veil from their eyes that causes them to think drilling off shore will lead to dramatic decreases in gas prices because the oil will come from off shore and straight to the tank. Any increase in oil production ANYWHERE in the world, will contribute to global supply ONLY. Unless respective governments use their power to take the oil and use price controls. (which nobody wants)
58. Frank | 09.17.08
Well the house has lived up to it’s 9% Approval rating what more can I say. This plus Obama’s idea of putting more air in my tires should just about solve everything for me. Pelosi, you need to go back to California they can’t get thier budget passed maybe you can screw with them some more.
59. adam | 09.17.08
“Require oil companies to diligently develop federal lands for which they already hold leases. Use it or lose it.”
This is a poorly thought-out plan, allow me to explain:
There are 2000 drilling rigs in the United States. Rigs cost $25,000 a day to lease. Therefore it would cost $18.25 billion to lease all drilling rigs in the United States, or about $3.6 billion per major oil company.
By consuming all available rigs on their leases, major oil blocks small companies from getting rigs. Then the small companies have their leases terminated by the government for lack of use. They leases are then resold, guess who will be buying them?
60. Mark | 09.17.08
Offshore drilling is fine and dandy if you drill where the oil is at. This bill does not do that. This yet another Democrat scam. Just a hint to everyone out there. If you ever wonder what the Democrats are doing that’s shady just listen to what they are accusing the Republicans of. Many Dems including Obama get money from the oil companies, banking industry, and insurance industry. It’s in their intrests to keep oil prices high.
61. Matthew | 09.17.08
First, I think it is great Democrats are willing to do something they don’t support 100%. It is called a compromise. Something republicans do NOT know how to do. When I go to the beach I do not want to see off shore drilling, so keeping it further out is better! It also does allow them to find new sources of oil.
Second, I would like to point out that republicans controlled the house, senate, and white house for 6 years. They did NOTHING, nothing at all. If they had all the answers, why didn’t they take action? It is democrats who took action on this. Republicans let the oil companies and other businesses run without any control. And look at the mess we are in now.
Third, it is great to see that they put a focus on other sources of energy. The thing that makes this even better is it creates new fields to work in, which increases jobs. It also can help to lower how much oil we would need and would use. It would also help that little problem of global warming.
Fourth, one of the best parts of the bill is use it or lose it. Oil companies have land that they can use, instead of developing that land the oil companies have bought back more of their stock.
We have had 6 years of republicans doing anything they wanted. It is about time we tried something new! What republicans did in the past has been a complete failure for our country. Ask yourself are you better off now than you were 8 years ago? I bet most of us would say we are not better off. So let’s try something new and let democrats lead us in the correct direction.
62. davo77 | 09.17.08
I agree Mr. Seymore’s earlier logic….here’s is what I figured… using his 70 million barrels to be got figure. You end up with 1,365,000,000 gallons or as I count 1.37 billon gallons. Now if it cost 2.5 bil to do one rig they will not be making any money until gas is 10, 20 , 30…..100 dollars a gallon depending on how many rigs they build to get it and what OilCo considers as a decent profit margin.
Summary: At the current cost of extraction, offshore drilling seems to be a loosing endeavor. Until all the technology required is something comparable to a shotgun and an Uncle Jed delivering a bubbling spigot to a convenient storage spot next to the refinery…. it really isn’t worth it… And come on if it was that easy, I guarantee you that OilCo would have already had it sucked up and sold yesterday.
63. Daniel | 09.17.08
You conservatives really confuse me…. I mean they give you an inch and ya want a foot.
Nothing will ever please ya guys….. can’t wait for 2009…
64. Bob | 09.17.08
If they really want to do something, they can autorize drilling in ANWR and within 50 miles of the US coastline
——————–
USGS studies show that ‘if’ all the oil in ANWR were recoverable it would drop the price of oil by about 50 cents per barrel. It’s a waste of time and money. Spend that money developing renewable resources and we’ll be further ahead.
65. buckwheatmacdonald | 09.17.08
this is one of those threads that give you weird ideas about people…there is a lot of oil in the areas they opened, it’s just expensive as **** to get out. you have to get to the bottom of the ocean before you start drilling. dead animals make oil. ocean is filled with them. i personally would rather fund cazy deepwater drilling with my gas than another caca de toro war. mostly, the bill is another pile of refuse generated by obscured agendas. i say that everyone goes to work but doesn’t pay for anything. it’s a strike of those that work their lives away so a few can have all the money.
66. james | 09.17.08
I read each comment posted and was disturbed by the majority of statements made along party lines. Everyone complains about partisan politics but seem to practice the same rhetoric. Forget blaming one party or the other, but research the issue from reliable sources and get involved to make a difference.
I am a registered republican and most of the time vote republican, but I am also against continued dependence on oil, all oil not just foreign oil. Yes, oil companies are getting filthy rich, while the earth is getting warmer from burning fossil fuels (I am a biologist, sorry all those who don’t believe in global warming, but not believing does not make it go away). The best thing for this country is to invest in alternative energy. Let this new industry compete and eventually replace big oil, or if big oil was smart they would start diversifying and wean themselves off of oil. After all they are in the energy supplying business. What does it matter to them where the energy comes from? And yes, I think clean air, clean beaches and unspoiled natural areas to be enjoyed for myself and my children are more important than $4 gallon gas!
Like it or not the free market system does work. It does not always work as fast as we like but it does work. Example… barrel of oil sells for $140, therefore gas sells for $4 a gallon. This high price forces the public to rethink our normal routines and use less fuel. Less fuel used means less demand for oil, therefore price of oil drops which leads to a decrease in the price for a gallon of gas. Simple supply and demand. If you check various sources, Americans used less gas this past year which actually reduced air pollution and shifted public demand for alternative transportation and energy saving devices. What came out of high fuel prices was a new (not really, it is been here all along but ignored), earth friendly and financially viable industry. This new industry will require workers which will mean jobs!
So through all my rambling, the American public needs to quit relying on congress or the president to do everything for us. We have the power through our innovative spirit and our buying power to change the world for the better! I prefer to see the glass half full and not half empty. Necessity is the mother of invention, lets start inventing ways off our dependence on oil!
67. Ken | 09.17.08
What seems to escape the notice of all the “drill now” cheerleaders is the fact that (for one best example) — in Alaska, the second biggest proven deposit after Prudhoe Bay is the Point Thompson field. Alaska, home State of Poopsy Palin, is currently suing a variety of oil companies, including Exxon. Why, I hear you ask (yea, right)? Because, these oil companies have had the right to drill there since 1977, and to date have not poked one single hole. But, of course you will continue to insist that the oil companies are dying to drill, but just “held back” by the evil Democratic Party.
68. Working Man | 09.17.08
We all have an overwhelming contempt for our politicians.Why do we elect every smooth talking laywer,and wealthy bussinessman that comes along?
Why cant we elect some everyday people that are in touch with everyday peoples needs?
Another thing we should REQUIRE from anyone wanting our vote is a POLITICAL CONTRACT with the people.A contrat which holds someone civil,or criminaly liable if they violate the provisions of the agreement that they made with the people.That would virtualy eliminate a lobbyists influence,and immediatley throw them out of office instead of leaving them,like a fox in a hen house,to pilfer the remainder of their term.Replace them with an approved alternant and hold them to the same terms.This is the only way to hold someone to any accountability that I can see.When you buy a car,or house,Does anyone take you’re word for it? Why should we trust people in office with a past track record of not doing what they said with our,and our childrens futures just upon what their speach writer tells us.
We need to wake up,and realize they get smarter every year.We tend to give them another chance just because they tell us something different!Lets get a signed contract,then we can sit back and watch them!
69. OldnDeCrepit | 09.17.08
Why take the tax break away from big oil and leave it for small oil and Hollywood studios?
70. Solar White House? | 09.17.08
Democratic President Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the White House. His successor Republican President Ronald Reagan had them removed in symbolic solidarity with Big Oil. The Republican Party has opposed clean energy alternatives to oil long as there has been an Earth Day.
71. Art Sullivan | 09.17.08
This bill seems to be a reasonable step to open up some off-shore area for drilling, even though we all know this will have little impact in the foreseeable future, and that other solutions will have more impact. Once the administration is changed we can hopefully readdress the real SHAM law that was passed to increase vehicle MPG standards so gradually that it will have no impact on either the manufacturers or on America’s driving habits. I tough MPG standard could do many times what the opening of off-shore areas could possibly do.
The thing I like best about the bill is its attempt to address the sweetheart deals given to the oil companies by the government. “Use it or lose it” could allow the government to reclaim and re-lease lands at much higher fees that reflect the true value of the oil and the fact that it is an irreplaceable national asset. Correcting the 1998 Gulf of Mexico Giveaway that waived 12% royalty fees would help as well. A new bill might raise that 12% to something that reflects the true value of the oil…The federal government should take a cut equal to that taken by OPEC countries. (That might begin to pay for the war in IRAQ.) If the oil companies balk at this, they can leave it in the ground and lease from OPEC! While we’re at it, we might see if the federal government could use the trick made famous by Alaska and Sarah Palin, who reportedly pushed through bills that reportedly take 3/4 of the value of a barrel of oil in taxes. She’s my kind of republican! (at least on that issue)
72. BamaBoy | 09.17.08
Regardless of whether this bill is good or bad, we have to get off oil. There’s a lot that’s going wrong in America and we better wisen up to that fact. Fighting amongst ourselves will only make the problems worse. We’re going to have to have a lot of give-an-take to make it through this together.
73. dotty | 09.17.08
Download Digital Maritime Limits
The following links contain zipped shapefiles of the Three Nautical Mile Line, Territorial Sea (12 naut. mi.), and Contiguous Zone (24 naut. mi.) as represented on NOAA’s nautical charts. For more information about each dataset, metadata is also provided. This site will be updated frequently with new digital boundary information. http://www.esri.com/software/arcexplorer/download.html
74. Chris | 09.17.08
This Democrat-sponsored bill is pretty useless as far as it is an effort to expand offshore drilling, but more importantly: the endless Republican harping on drilling that lead to the political need of Democrats to propose something like this is even more useless. Drilling won’t make a dent in gas prices and it won’t lead to energy independence in this country. The sad fact is that Republicans have convinced the majority of Americans otherwise with their empty “drill now” slogans and political posturing, and the Democrats could no longer ignore the growing call to drill.
As should be well-known by now, even if the Republicans got everything they wanted here “access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030…[and]…because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.” That’s straight from the Energy Information Administration’s Official Energy Statistics for the U.S. Government. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html)
75. dotty | 09.17.08
Descriptions of Maritime Limits
Three Nautical Mile Line– The Three Nautical Mile Line, previously identified as the outer limit of the territorial sea, is retained on NOAA’s nautical charts as it continues to depict the jurisdictional limit of other laws. The 9-nautical mile Natural Resource Boundary off the Gulf coast of Florida, Texas, and Puerto Rico, and the Three Nautical Mile Line elsewhere remain in most cases the inner limit of Federal fisheries jurisdiction and the outer limit of the jurisdiction of the states. The territorial sea was extended from three to twelve nautical miles by Presidential Proclamation No. 5928 on December 27, 1988.
Territorial Sea– The territorial sea is delimited either from base points on the land mass (normally at the low-water line along the coast) or from baselines connecting such points in accordance with international law. The coastal state enjoys sovereignty and jurisdiction over the territorial sea subject to the right of innocent passage for foreign vessels. The maximum breadth of the territorial sea allowed under international law as reflected in the LOS Convention is twelve nautical miles.
Contiguous Zone– Presidential Proclamation No. 7219 on August 2, 1999 extended the Contiguous Zone from its prior limit of 12 nautical miles from the baseline to 24 nautical miles. Under international law, a contiguous zone is an area contiguous to a nation’s territorial sea and in which the nation may exercise the control necessary to prevent infringement of its customs, fiscal, sanitation, or immigration laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea. It may also exercise the control necessary to punish infringement of the above laws and regulations committed within its territory or territorial sea.
76. dotty | 09.18.08
This is the actual mapping of what is ours and “the hope of what is our” out in open oceans. The term used is potential.
Hope that might include conflict or war is simply hardly worth discussing as practical drill sites.
http://www.dur.ac.uk/resources/ibru/arctic.pdf
if you move to other sectors, this potential changes.
IE:Hawaiian Islands and the Gulf region.
The defendable jurisdictions and laws are limited to the quadrants that are mandated.
In the outter limits known as potential, the military currently cruising is actrually the law. Which is the biggest fish in the area that day or hour , is hardly condusive to private investors.
Another element is Distance out also means depth. The deeper the rigs, the more expense and difficulty there is.
I am reminded of the 1980’s when denatured alcohol was classified and taxed as human consumable, by Congress, instantly shutting down mass production that GPC had implemented inthe midwest.no one can say the Dem ruled Congress is not working. They are working to disempower the USA….. Working really hard at it, I would say.
77. Cesar Balbuena | 09.18.08
Everyone who claims this bill is a sham needs to analyze what off-shore drilling would do for the consumer, and realize the real sham is the proposed idea of off shore drilling. Drill, Drill, Drill is not an energy plan but Republicans seem to think so. First it will do nothing to lower our dependency on foreign oil. Crude oil is sold on the world market, and determines its price on the world market. The worlds consumer will benefit not strictly the American citizen. The Impact on the world market will be insignificant compared to similar alternative investments into a new alternative source of energy, with the same amount of years to develop. For example, lower the demand of oil by converting the combustion engine cars into electric cars. We would directly impact the American citizen, the demand for oil would dramatically decrease but more importantly give the American consumer a real choice in car’s to the inevitable continued increase on the world price of crude oil, as neither solution will solve the worlds addiction to oil. The oil industry does not want to lose the American market any sooner than it must, and would love to add inventory. This solution is neither pursued genuinely by either Republicans or Democrats. But when Republicans stage public discontent with the lack of proposed legislation to fatten the pocket books of the worlds largest criminals, and the American public sympathize with the idea, then Americans are stupid. The idea that we must even negotiate with any continuance of dependency on oil to pass legislation that would provide investment into other alternatives is ridiculous. The Republicans have no shame in displaying who they work for with such actions. However, as Barrack Obama has stated his opposition which would provide change compared to the current president and John McCain. The fact that democrats have not allowed the oil industry to have their way while addressing the stupid Americans who lack any knowledge into energy issues, which explains the poll numbers, then we must breath a sigh of relief. I believe if Barrack Obama is elected president we will never have to negotiate on such terms.
78. dotty | 09.18.08
RoBoTech | 09.17.08 wrote:
I get sick of hearing that we only have 3% of the worlds oil
First off, so what? Just what we KNOW is there will last the US 60 years! 60 years of oil independence!Of we aren’t off oil in the next 60 years……”
*****
If you do a little research, you will find that Countries rarely disclose their actual estimates for strategic reasons.
Therefore it is clear that all of that new undersea exploration revealing oil seeping up from the ocean floors may or may not be included in satellite intel without high clearances.
Maybe Congress knows something we do not, but the fact remains when we say Drill baby Drill, the economy has hope and the Arabs are freaked that we might compete in the world market and shut off their money coming from us.
Today it really looks like we are sleeping with the enemy in our midst. Can we continue through the attacks on our financial backbone from within?
79. FJ | 09.18.08
We do not need anymore oil, we just need to stop using it. In California we have been doing that by demanding increased fuel efficiency in automobiles (despite additional mileage standards being blocked by the Bush Administration), building power plants and acquiring more and more of our energy from alternative sources (by law), and requiring building standards that reduce energy demand. We are doing it. Nancy Pelosi’s state is doing it, we have been doing it, and we will lead this nation to energy independence. I don’t think it, I know it, and if you care about our nation you would do well to learn how and why California is succeeding. There will be no more drilling off of California’s Coast, because we have found better more immediate ways to meet the challenge. Our state has the resources, the science, the technology, and a government that understands oil is not the answer.
“The state (California) uses less energy per capita than any other state in the country, defying the international image of American energy gluttony. Since 1974, California has held its per capita energy consumption essentially constant, while energy use per person for the United States overall has jumped 50 percent.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/16/AR2007021602274.html
“California’s electric utility companies are committed to using renewable energy to produce 20 percent of their power by 2010 (and 33 percent renewables by 2017).”
http://www.energy.ca.gov/siting/solar/index.html
http://www.pge.com/about/environment/pge/cleanenergy/index.shtml
So what if every other state, did the same? What if California doubled or tripled it’s investments in and production of solar power and wind generation over the next five years? The United States is more than capable of reducing and replacing our demand for oil far and beyond the piddly amount of oil offshore drilling is ever going to achieve. Those of you who are so stuck on offshore drilling you are stuck in the past. You are chasing after crumbs, when we need new and better ways to feed our nations energy requirements without oil. I am not surprised you are angry and calling people that disagree with you names, if oil were the answer I would be angry too. Having a national plan that immediately begins large scale development and production of solar, wind, and nuclear power will not only generate electricity, it will generate new jobs, and it will give our nation and our economy a critical advantage over the rest of the world if we choose to do it.
Breakthrough in Solar Energy Storage from MIT:
http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen-0731.html
Science - Learn Something:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/earth_climate/renewable_energy/
Scientific American and Solar Power:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=a-solar-grand-plan
It’s Already Happening in California:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/07/technology/woody_solar.fortune/index.htm
80. JoE | 09.18.08
three things;
A: Thanks Chris for actually CITING YOUR SOURCE!
B: If this is such a democrat giveaway to the reps, why did they almost all vote against it? Because they don’t want the dems to get the credit. Nothing to do with actually policy, just politics.
C: This is a massive waste of time and money. And I’m not just talking about the bill. You all are regurgitating stumps from the RNC and DNC. be it “Drill Baby, Drill!” or “Eight is Enough”, neither side seems capable of intelligent thought. personally, I’d like to actually die of old age on this planet if it’s at all possible. Learning from history is apparently right out of the picture as no one is taking into account that were about to be hit with so much methane that the Permian Extinction won’t have nothing on us. (also not knowing what that is proves my point so well)
I’m so glad Iowa has a ‘No Party’ option. The rest of you drive me bonkers.
81. Kipper | 09.18.08
I personally don’t trust Pelosi after what she said she would do and actually did in Iraq.
First she said no money without a withdrawl or at least a time-table. Then she caved and gave George the money anyway to keep from looking bad by not supporting the troops.
George isn’t going to comprimise with the Democrats, and Pelosi will cave and allow drilling anywhere George wants to do it, so the Democrats don’t look like they don’t care about the price of gas.
82. Kenna | 09.18.08
SYD…Love ya - whoever you are !
Why don’t we all drop the monikers and maybe some of the
egocentric, fearful, dogmatic, or just downright insulting
under and over tones and communicate. I see a lot of
re-hashed Limbaugh rhetoric, I see a lot of pie in the
sky renewable energy served upon an energy based economic system cold turkey is great…what I don’t see so much is
what YOU want…individually…because when we start there
we can begin to identify with each other. We have so many
things in common as matters of need. Beginning from the
bottom up we can’t afford 4,6,8,10 dollar a gallon gas-
nor the resultant spike in the things we consume and the
cost of powering our homes and we need to work together
towards a solution. I DO mean WE….These folks in Washington are supposed to bend to OUR will and NOT the
other way around. Problem is…we don’t have a common
will for the most part. We are and remain so divided trying to debate our issues from the top down instead of the bottom up that our representatives just do what they want while
we fight amongst ourselves.
Nobody is for filthy air or water
in principle. No one wants to see an America that trades
opec for chinese hydrogen or bio-fuel. No one wants to be
taken advantage of by huge corporations or to see them
villified when it is not warranted. All liberals don’t
hate America and all conservatives don’t own a monopoly
on love for it either. People have good ideas, followed
by not always as sound; ideologies.
We will not be able to shock
our current system into radically new solutions overnight. We certainly CAN begin to clear the road for them in a
meaningful way right now though. While doing that we can
also find ways to reduce the drag on ourselves financially under the current petroleum model. We must steer the ship however. Understand- petroleum companies only sell a handful of products, so leaning on them too hard for guidance is to entertain the negotiating power of a captive audience.
Alternative energy has made great gains and more can be made ( or uncovered ) if we can find the courage to question why in 100 years we go from horse to car, balloon to plane, radio to tv to satellite, rotary dial phone to cell to digital, etc…etc…but we still use the same basic automobile propulsion system that came in a model T.
Go on y o u tube and type in HHO gas, or energy from the vaccum. Type in free energy generator or over unity generator. Before you read this last paragraph and say ‘crackpot’, you might entertain that if 1 percent of what you find there is legitimate, then we are tearing each other to pieces for no good reason. It’s the system baby…not your intelligence….not your political affiliation…none of that matters when both sides of your government are really the SAME side, and it has been lying to you all along !!!!
Peace to you all my beautiful brothers and sisters !!!!
83. paul | 09.18.08
It is a travesty regarding the House version of the energy bill..
———————————-
According to the Associated Press, Republicans opposing the bill cite data from the Interior Department that estimate that 88 percent of the recoverable oil lies within the closed 50-mile zone. Republicans also argue that there is little incentive for states to permit drilling off their shores. They want a revenue-sharing plan, such as that enjoyed by Louisiana. Democrats counter that such a plan would be too expensive.——————
So the Democrats want us to believe its too expensive???
Well limiting the drilling to no less then 50 miles out and further is going to be just as expensive if not more because all the extra pipping that will be needed to be used to go down that much further before they even hit solid ground…had this bill gone to ANY committee this point would have surfaced I would like to think…and this is why it did not go to ANY committee because this and other points that would come to light would have been harder to hide!!
84. jb | 09.18.08
To you idiots slamming Democrats (and Republicans) - go pick a new religion - your silly catchphrases like “libtards” and “P.M.S Pelosi” certainly don’t advance your arguments. Honestly, some of you sound like a bunch of drunk football fans rooting for their team. “Go Redskins!” makes about as convincing argument as “Go Republicans” or “Go Democrats”.
How about the sensible people out there drop the fake political party lines with their made up and ever changing platform planks and join forces to actually change things. Start a new party or vote independent.
In response to people needing an enemy in Big Oil - I say, you don’t need a pretend enemy when Big Oil (whatever that is) is the real enemy. How would “Big Sun” be an enemy? Let’s see, no buying oil from terrorists, no drilling, no pollution, no destroyed watersheds, no need to drill in ANWAR or off the coastline. Sure a few fat-cats would get rich while the rest of us wage-slaves toil on. I’m not complaining about the wealth, I’m tired of breathing smog, worrying about my drinking water, and trying to figure out why all the flag toting country folk are happy to send all our energy dollars to the same crazy hate filled countries they profess as enemies. I’m an ecofreak because I’m tired of funding al qaeda with every gallon of gas I buy.
Here’s my solution. Phase out purchases of all foreign oil over the next ten years down to zero, zip, nada. No foreign oil. None. Guess what everybody? You can drive your car on natural gas - people already do it. Plastics are mostly made from natural gas. your home is heated by it, and electricity is generated by it. And we got lots of it. ****, you can even make gasoline out of it if you really want to. Why on earth are we buying oil from Venezuela, Russia, Saudi Arabia? Why???? Like another commenter pointed out, if our reserves last us 60 years, then lets use them until their gone, and move on to something else.
And let’s see what happens in the world of religious fanatics when the great Satan stops sending them paychecks.
Maybe with the money freed up from having to fight them, we can slowly transition into solar, wind, clean nuclear, whatever. If global warming is a hoax, so what. Why do we have breath exhaust when we could be breathing water vapor? Let’s drop the political jargon and borrowed arguments from talk radio, and uses our American ingenuity to make this country great again. I’ll become a flag waving nut myself just as soon as I get my pride back in my country.
85. Douglas | 09.18.08
Very few of you seem to get it… it’s an election year and you are being played. Bills will be proposed that haven’t a chance just so politicians can say “we tried but the opposition blocked us”. There are very few politicians who are dedicated to the concept that they are there to represent you, the people of United States. Your job, your duty, is to sift through the rhetoric, the lies, and the blarney, and kick out the weasels (even if that weasel is your own) and try again. You have nothing to lose but a few leeches.
86. deralaand | 09.18.08
We are not getting off oil! Not in our lifetime. This is a simple fact. Where that oil comes from, should be the important issue here. Look at what American dollars spent on foreign oil has done for Dubai.
Another aspect of this whole battle with oil vs. renewable energy (ethanol, electric etc…) is this…
The only viable alternative energy solutions will be those that can be controlled, regulated and taxed. (scrap all plans for water locked Hydrogen…water can’t be controlled)
Someone near the top commented on how we should be out in our garages inventing the solution. I agree 100% with this notion. However, where will it get you?
87. deralaand | 09.18.08
…also…
when will someone compile an in depth list of those lawmakers who are voting in favor of such useless bills…with a counter list that includes their replacements currently running for election. This list needs to include 100% FACT and 0 (ZERO) opinion.
It seems to me that this information is hard to pin down easily. Most voters in the polls show up uninformed about every name below the Presidential selection. Choosing simply by name recognition is very counter productive.
Deliver this list to all of your friends inboxes with simple instructions: “If you like the way things currently work and don’t mind the meltdown…simply trash this email. If you would like to take part in the solution…forward this to everyone you know and then use the information in this email to make an informed decision about the candidates below President (on your ballot)
88. Matt | 09.18.08
I am still waiting for somebody — anybody — to explain how increased domestic drilling would in any way impact prices for consumers, and moreover, solve US dependency on foreign oil.
Any oil we produce is traded on a global market. It’s not like we keep it for ourselves. Are the domestic drilling advocates proposing that we nationalize our oil industry? Because that’s the only way that we would keep all of it for ourselves. Let’s say, hypothetically, that we did keep all domestic production for our own needs. Just how much oil do you think we could produce? The US currently consumes 21 million barrels of oil per day — one quarter of the world’s total — and produces about a quarter of what we consume. Suddenly, we magically have the supply and capability to quadruple our production? That’s assuming, of course, static future demand with an ever-growing population. Just how much oil exists here in the US that such production could be sustained for any length of time, if it was even technically possible to extract it at a rate that would satisfy actual consumption? Wow, we must be the next Saudi Arabia. Who knew? Let’s be serious. The US will never be independent of foreign oil in a petroleum-based economy. It’s simply not possible. Period.
Moving beyond the disingenuous argument of oil independence, let’s look at oil prices. Just how much new oil production do you think it would take to lower oil prices on a global market? Let’s take the Republicans’ favorite red herring, ANWR, for instance. Assuming 10.5 billion barrels of recoverable oil, an estimate shared by many geologists, production in ANWR would lower prices by 30 to 50 cents a barrel. Not a gallon, a barrel. A barrel of oil produces between 30 and 50 gallons of gas. You do the math. The potential savings just makes your head spin. “Drill, Baby, Drill!!!” What a joke. Fascinating how this suddenly became a huge political issue — just in time for the 2008 election. Meanwhile, the price of oil has risen exponentially during the Bush administrations, coinciding with the neocon Middle East foreign policy experiment that was supposed to pay for itself from Iraqi oil revenue. How did that work out? Instead, US taxpayers are going to foot that $3 trillion disaster. Interesting how we didn’t hear a word about domestic drilling as oil prices were rising out of control, that is until consumers grew restless and Republicans realized they could make political capital out of it and distract from their massive failure in crafting a sensible energy policy. This is political theater, and history will show this to be true. When a nation elects oil-industry ***** to run the country, this is what happens.
The bottom line is that domestic drilling will do nothing to make us energy independent and will create negligible savings for consumers. Oil is a dead-end street. Switching to alternative sources of energy is inevitable, and the longer we delay in developing and implementing it, the worse off we will be economically — not to mention environmentally. Lost in all of this debate are the vast implications of worsening climate change, which itself will exact huge economic costs for future generations. The Arctic ecosystem is on the verge of collapse, which will accelerate climate change, and all the politicians and their petro-puppet masters are talking about is the opportunity for more drilling and the opening of new shipping lanes. Pathetic.
89. Sidney | 09.19.08
Those on both sides of the energy debate are missing the point that we must focus on current practices to plot a course for the future. America’s Energy Coast, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama, produce 90% of the nation’s offshore oil and gas, and are facing the impacts associated to hosting such activity. The region is vulnerable to natural disasters, such as hurricanes Gustav and Ike, which recently slammed our coast skyrocketing gas prices and leaving our production capacity severely crippled. Environmental sustainability and revenue sharing must be considered first in any discussion of offshore energy production. America’s Energy Coast has released an accord outlining best practices and policy recommendations for this vital region. For more information visit http://www.americasenergycoast.org.
90. John Hunter | 09.21.08
Having been in the energy business internationally for 40 years, and having watched this same debate in various countries, let me offer some information. It’s important to get beyond misinformation and hopelessly flawed logic.
This debate should not be about whether offshore oil will affect gasoline prices immediately. The name of the offshore oil game is (or should be) displacing foreign oil from your “friends” in Venezuela, Iraq, Iran, etc., and replacing it with American product produced by Americans with jobs and royalties for Americans instead of all benefits to foreigners. Some of these royalties can be used to fund alternative energies or health care, for example. In addition, offshore oil helps security of supply; the US is in awful shape here, importing half its oil. Offshore oil also helps the US balance of payments. Just look what Norway has done with their offshore industry in both these respects, Newfoundland (Canada), Brazil, and many others. How many Americans realize that over a quarter of your oil already comes from offshore?
Global warming caused by new American offshore oil? NONSENSE! New American offshore oil has no effect on the environment because you are not changing the amount of oil you use, just the source – you are displacing foreign oil! In fact, I argue it might improve the environment because incremental American production will avoid somewhat risky international tanker runs to the USA, and Americans will produce the oil with less environmental impact (for example, in Venezuela in the 1970s, we flared most of the associated gas; this is still done in parts of the world).
Offshore oil spills? Why do opponents foam about this but not tell the layperson that natural seeps of oil into North American waters exceed one million barrels every year, and that Mother Nature leaks (seeps) 13 times the oil into North American waters as the entire North American offshore industry? The history of offshore oil spills in tightly regulated and tightly operated waters such as the US and Canada has been excellent over the last quarter century plus. Santa Barbara is ancient history. Claims of big spills and dumping of drilling waste and heavy metals and the like are alarmist and false – based on old history. Now zero discharge drilling is possible, like the newest platform in Cook Inlet, Alaska.
And please do not use the “logic” that it might take years to find new oil and bring it on stream, so “forget it”. What if we took that approach to curing cancer, or Wilbur and Orville had accepted such nonsense?
Replace oil with tidal energy and wind farms? Ever tried to make your clothing, computer case, luggage, toilet seat, etc. out of electrons? A world without petro-chemicals is a scary thing. Warm up your caves! Try fuelling an airplane with electrons?
The USA, with only 3% of world reserves, can’t drill its way to success when using a quarter of the world’s oil, said a September 7 New York Times editorial. This comment is totally apples and oranges, displaying a typical misunderstanding of “reserves”. Resources are what a country has as hydrocarbon potential, but its existence has not been proved to be real, let alone economic, by exploration to date. The US offshore has huge offshore resources. Reserves are those proven to exist by accepted means and measures and are economic in certain conditions. Until you unleash further exploration, your oil reserves will by definition remain small.
My bottom line is simple – to the extent you ARE going to use oil, why not use American oil and employ Americans and “pay yourselves”, instead of sending billions of dollars a year to unfriendly foreigners? Why not ensure the oil you do use is produced and transported in the safest and most environmentally friendly fashion possible?
John Hunter P. Eng. J. Hunter & Associates Ltd.
91. Jim Sparrow | 09.27.08
I find it incredible that the Democrats, indeed CONGRESS, can try to pull the wool over people’s eyes with this pathetic bill. Are people actually so naive as to believe that opening up outer continental shelf leases will do anything to resolve America’s dependence on mid-east oil? Anyone with any basic geological knowledge would know that the vast majority of hydrocarbons *and the least expensive to explore / develop* are located in the shallower inner shelf.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
2. NewlyGreens :: Tips and Strategies for Sustainable Living » Blog Archive » Congress Passes Energy Bill - What’s in it? | 09.17.08
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
1. TLewis | 09.17.08
I love the pictures, but what has this to do with where the oil is? Draw pictures all you want, but if the oil is not located in the NEW GREEN Area then what happened? Let the public know where the oil companies believe that there is oil not the politicians decisions on what the Sierra Club is telling them what to do. The House Oil Drilling Bill turns out to be a joke and we the public are suppose to believe the most unpopular American congress ever. Oil Drilling Must Happen. Democrats will lose over the next 10 years because of this ridiculous attempt and trying to fool us. NO MORE. You Pelosi and your fellow made this bill. Your going to eat it, each and every Democrat. Imagine only 10 Democrat’s in Congress! It’s coming!