T1B

His first order of business? Cut down on that pesky drilling for oil.

President-elect Barack Obama is poised to move swiftly to reverse actions that President Bush took using executive authority, and his transition team is reviewing limits on stem cell research and the expansion of oil and gas drilling, among other issues, members of the team said Sunday.

The Bureau of Land Management is poised to open about 360,000 acres of public land in Utah to oil and gas drilling, a plan that the Bush administration has argued would not harm the land. Environmentalists have opposed the idea, a sentiment echoed by Mr. Podesta on Sunday.

“I think across the board, on stem cell research, on a number of areas,” Mr. Podesta said on “Fox News Sunday,” “you see the Bush administration even today moving aggressively to do things that I think are probably not in the interest of the country. They want to have oil and gas drilling in some of the most sensitive, fragile lands in Utah that they’re going to try to do right as they are walking out the door. I think that’s a mistake.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/us/po ... ref=slogin


And just in time...

“While market imbalances could temporarily cause prices to fall back, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the era of cheap oil is over,” the report states.

The developed world’s energy watchdog has doubled its long-term price expectation from last year’s $108 a barrel for 2030 and assumes oil prices will rebound from today’s $60-$70 a barrel to trade, in real terms adjusted by inflation, at an average of more than $100 a barrel from 2008 to 2015.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ca2b5254-ab6a ... ck_check=1

Drop your pants and assume the position, America

Relax. Don't sweat it.

It gets worse.

Rasputin wrote:Relax. Don't sweat it.

the only people sweating are oil companies....unless the oil companies start utilizing the 70% to 80% of the undeveloped land they already have under contract for oil and gas exploration they're going to lose the rights....millions of acres of land in oil rich areas like Wyoming and the Dakotas will be up for grabs unless they start exploration....Obama has made that pretty clear his is a "use it or lose it" policy

the politics of fear is dead...the sooner you understand that, the better off you'll be

Felix wrote:the politics of fear is dead...

Not according to the November 4 returns. The politics of grred and envy seem to be alive and kicking as well.

mvscal wrote:
And how much oil and gas is actually in that undeveloped land? Specific numbers, if you don't mind.

have no idea, but given the fact that oil companies guard these leases like a pack of Rotties, there must be something down there.....

mvscal wrote:
Oh yes, and if oil companies are already paying the government to not drill on this land, why should we be concerned that they will pay the government more money to not drill on different land?

uh at an average of about $3-$4/acre isn't exactly what I'd call a source of revenue.....if they have no interest in developing these leased lands, then they obviously should have no problem turning those leases over to companies that are willing to put forth the money for explorative drilling.....yet they won't...why do you suppose that is?

Ojigaboo plans to reinstitute the ban on new offshore drilling once he takes power in January, so look for oil to be over $100 a barrel again by February.

Feeldix wrote:if they have no interest in developing these leased lands, then they obviously should have no problem turning those leases over to companies that are willing to put forth the money for explorative drilling.....yet they won't...why do you suppose that is?

Probably because since there's no fucking oil there, there aren't any other companies willing to put forth the money to take over the leases you dumb cocksucker

Cuda wrote:
Probably because since there's no fucking oil there, there aren't any other companies willing to put forth the money to take over the leases you dumb cocksucker

then they should have no problem giving them up....yet they fight tooth and nail to retain these leases....once again, why are they so afraid of losing leases on land that doesn't produce oil?

maybe the oil companies should take some of the record breaking profits and start utilizing some of the 4,000 leases they already hold along the Gulf of Mexico (known to have a lot of oil) to start producing oil instead of insisting that the US open new lands (Cali coast, ANWR, etc.) that won't produce oil for at the very least 7 years, and probably closer to 10 years.....

I've said it before....it's a crazy world we live in

mvscal wrote: The question you should be asking is why should we give a fuck? They're paying not to drill. Why would any business pay money to not do business.

I don't know numbnuts...maybe because they enjoy bigger profits when there is less oil?

Who gives a fuck? If they want to pay more money to not drill on more land, more power to them. Shouldn't you be giving them kudos for preserving the environment in pristine condition?

then why are the waging a carefully constructed campaign to scare the American public that it's imperative that we open all of this new land (again, Cali coast, ANSR, etc.) to oil production when they won't utilize the lands they already have available to produce oil...

Oh by the way, how long will it take to produce oil from the land that they aren't using right now? Wouldn't that also take 7-10 years assuming that number is accurate?

the leases are already in place, thus the federal hearings, environmental studies, etc. have already been conducted.... they could bring the oil to production much quicker, yet they continue to fight to open up more lands for oil exploration....

So to recap: Certain vague, unspecified oil companies

they're not "vague" oil compaines....Chevron, Mobil, Exxon, etc.

government to not drill on land that contains vague, unspecified amounts of oil

I have no idea how much oil there is, but then again nobody is certain until wells are drilled....but to date, they're unwilling to utilize the leases they already own....

and in doing so are fighting tooth and nail in a vague, unspecified manner to prevent other vague, unspecified companies from extracting this vague, unspecified amount of oil. And this is a bad thing.

there are lots and lots of foreign oil companies that are begging for the opportunity to utilize the leases held by companies like Mobil, Exxon, Chevron, BP, etc.....what are you a fucking shill for these douchebags? there is simply no reason not to utilize EXISTING contracts instead of begging for new lands to be opened for exploration....

you must like getting fucked by oil companies

Felix,

Not to get in between you two, but a couple of points need to be made here.

First, even if all the US oil companies got together they would not be able to significantly move oil prices. What we produce pales next to what OPEC can throw on the market.

Second, yes there are leases that are not being produced at the current time. Yes, the oil companies are looking to open up other areas for production. However, it isn't as simple as you make it. The pay in these currently closed areas is much easier to produce than in some of these other areas already under lease. There is a huge field in the Gulf of Mexico but the depth makes it much more difficult to produce, vs shallower or land based fields.

Now y'all can get back to whacking each other about the knees.

mvscal wrote: Obviously you are an entry level wage earner with little concept of how a business actually runs

fuck off douchebag...you have no idea what the fuck I do for a living.....your patronizing attitude is getting pretty fucking old....

but when your company lives and dies on drilling and refining crude oil, you drill and refine crude oil or you go out of business.

no shit...then why don't they drill instead of simply pleading to open up more lands....

The idea that they are sitting on economically viable deposits of oil and not extracting them so they can drive up the price (how is that working out for them these days?) is an idiotic, ignorant and adolescent pile of horseshit.

you are a shill for these fucknuts.....apparently you don't understand the basic concept of supply and demand...funny, I thought you were smarter than that.

Exxon is, at best, a bit player in the crude business. They don't have enough reserves to infleuence the price of crude one way or another. They don't even have enough crude to meet the demands of their own refineries. Exxon buys almost half of the crude they refine on the spot market, so the idea that they are trying to jack up the price of crude is patently moronic.

and the fact that you think Exxon/Mobil is some kind of "bit player" is as moronic as it comes....

The only "carefully constructed campaign" here is the steaming pile you're trying to shovel.

OK. Now we're getting somewhere. You don't know shit from a hole in the ground, but the people who actually do aren't at all confident that there are any commerically viable opportunities there. Now that is what I like to call a 'clue'. For instance, if your head wasn't stuck up your ass, you might be able to reach the obvious conclusion that if companies which extract and process crude oil are not extracting and processing crude oil on leased property, it is because it is not economically viable to do so.

stop with the personal insults for a second and put your thinking cap on....why do they spend all of the time and money they do to fight "use it or lose it" type legislation if they are as worthless as you contend? Obviously they keep these leases out of the goodness of their hearts, knowing they're worthless, yet continuing to pay for them....fuck, they're like the Florence Nightengale's of the economic world....

Name a couple. Shouldn't be too tough. There are "lots and lots" of them.

sure thing....PetroChina, Petronas, Petroleos Mexicanos are a few, there are others

That is yet another area where you are simply wrong as two left shoes.

of course, that's why the Oil Companies spend enormous amounts of money on lobbyists trying to protect these worthless oil leases....

a new day is dawning and you best get used to it bud.....

How is it the libs are pretty much begging the oil companies to drill on the already leased lands, but, they blow a gasket at the thought of raping the frozen wasteland pristine arctic reserve? Are the wildlife in these areas less deserving of protection than the poor caribous and polar bears in ANWR?

As for their not drilling in the already leased areas, I am going to go wayyyyy out on a limb and guess that they figure there's not enough oil there to make it financially wise to drill there now.

Notice I said "not enough" and "now".

For you dumbfukks out there, that means, yeah, there's prolly something there. When the price goes to 200 dollars a barrel because some evil neocons sabotaged all the windmills, it will make sense to drill there.

This would explain why they aren't drilling now and why they want to keep the leases for the future.

As for the reparations thing, I say we kill two birds with one stone.

We can give the airlines some much needed bidness and undo past wrong.

Full fare one way ticket to anyplace on earf. All you got do is renounce your citizenship to this racist land.

Fukkk, might as well help out another group, the domestic automakers. We could throw in a free new american made car. The big three sell cars in most 3rd world shitholes, so delivery wouldn't be a problem.

mvscal wrote:

Felix wrote:fuck off douchebag...you have no idea what the fuck I do for a living.....your patronizing attitude is getting pretty fucking old....

Oh, I think we can rule out a fair number of possibilities including anything at all to with upper management or even lower level accounting. In any event, it's clear to me that you are a jizz mopping flunky of some sort..

it ain't easy keeping the stomach-stapled missus supplied with a non-stop stream of pizza rolls

mvscal wrote:
Drill what? You keep assuming that they're sitting on top of all this oil and you don't even know if there is any there, where it is or how difficult it might be to get at. In a word, you don't know jackmotherfuckingshit about it.

I've pointed it out numerous times, yet you can't seem to grasp the idea that there are others that want to obtain many of the oil leases the major oil companies have in their possession.....the oil companies do not want to cede these leases, hence the reason they keep lobbying to retain them...it's so simple even Cuda could understand it...but you can't seem to grasp that simple concept

I suppose it might be useful at this time to point out the fact that Exxon isn't the sole source of supply and that demand will be met by their competitors if they decide to sit on proven reserves instead of exploiting them.

then they should be more than willing to give up the leases....how many fucking times do I have to say this.

How else would you describe a company that controls less than 3% of global crude supplies? Certainly their puny reserves are incapable of moving the price of crude one jot of an iota.

we're talking about drilling and supply as it relates to the United States (after all, it's certainly not the Saudis, nor the Venezulans that are screaming to open ANWR)...or are you implying that Exxon intends to export oil from the US...if not, then why would you analyze Exxon's production capabilities on a global scale

I'm still waiting on some real numbers from you. How much time? How much money?

you'd need to talk to oil experts

Specfic proposals, please. I didn't ask you to pull names out of a hat.

there can't be any specific plans you fucking tard, because the oil companies that own the leases won't release them....this is like the 20th time I've said this...

An enormous amount you say? How much is that? A rough, ball park estimate will do. Maybe you ought to try bolstering your argument with a few facts every now and again or at least a logically consistent argument.

I don't know, but I know lobbyists ain't cheap....again, if the oil leases they control have no potential, give me ONE VALID FUCKING REASON why they refuse cede the leases back the the government....it's a pretty simple question bud...

bottom line....the oil companies are either going to have to start to utilize the leases, or the government will sell them to somebody that will....

Of course first, Comrades Pelosi and Reid (and the other guy) must purge wrong-thinking counter-revolutionary forces from the People's Party.


La révolution dévore ses enfants.

Felix wrote:

Cuda wrote:
Probably because since there's no fucking oil there, there aren't any other companies willing to put forth the money to take over the leases you dumb cocksucker

then they should have no problem giving them up....yet they fight tooth and nail to retain these leases....once again, why are they so afraid of losing leases on land that doesn't produce oil?

maybe the oil companies should take some of the record breaking profits and start utilizing some of the 4,000 leases they already hold along the Gulf of Mexico (known to have a lot of oil) to start producing oil instead of insisting that the US open new lands (Cali coast, ANWR, etc.) that won't produce oil for at the very least 7 years, and probably closer to 10 years.....

I've said it before....it's a crazy world we live in

probabaly because right now with the technology they can't get to the oil but in the future they believe they will....

Hillary Rulez.......