|
|
Post by glennkoks on Feb 26, 2012 4:44:47 GMT
phydeaux, oil does not drive our economy. Cheap oil does. We will never run out of oil, it will just become to expensive to burn in our cars. Not only will there be new discoveries, and increases in technology that are hard to predict but as gas goes up there undoubtably will be advances in effeciency that will prolong the decline.
|
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 26, 2012 15:21:53 GMT
phydeaux, oil does not drive our economy. Cheap oil does. We will never run out of oil, it will just become to expensive to burn in our cars. Not only will there be new discoveries, and increases in technology that are hard to predict but as gas goes up there undoubtably will be advances in effeciency that will prolong the decline. drives the economy. The current approach from 'environmentalists' and that at the moment includes the courtiers to the President and the EPA is to make ALL energy prohibitively expensive. This was the stated aim of this Administration. In Europe they have already been doing this to 'bad' effect see www.thegwpf.org/international-news/5035-green-germany-half-a-million-families-sitting-in-the-dark.html and www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/22/older-people-cold-energy-bills. For those people in the cold and some dying of the cold - " waiting for an advance in technology" is not an option. In the mean time there ARE advances in technology that could be used right away except the SAME administration courtiers and the EPA and associated extra-congressional law makers are all against them - so to no cheap oil or drilling will be added huge difficulties in building gas fired power stations or nuclear power of any sort even the safer Thorium reactors. Perhaps you have elderly friends who would like a free winter holiday to a nice cold dark house in UK or Germany? I am sure that they are low on QALYs so it won't matter to you. Fuel poverty is NOT something to wish on anyone especially the old in the cold. |
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Feb 26, 2012 16:36:42 GMT
nautonnier, If it is as you say the goal of this President and the EPA to make ALL energy prohibitively expensive they are doing a terrible job. Natural Gas is trading at 2.60 an mcf which is as cheap as it has been in years. Oil production is also at an 8 year high.
Nothing will get a President bounced quicker than a weak economy and high fuel prices.
|
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 26, 2012 17:12:09 GMT
nautonnier, If it is as you say the goal of this President and the EPA to make ALL energy prohibitively expensive they are doing a terrible job. Natural Gas is trading at 2.60 an mcf which is as cheap as it has been in years. Oil production is also at an 8 year high. Nothing will get a President bounced quicker than a weak economy and high fuel prices. I agree with you as most would - they are doing a terrible job. But that was the stated aim and in many ways they are achieving the aim of making energy prohibitively expensive. They were caught totally unaware by the technological advances of 'fracking'. In the same way that in your posts you consider the limits of available energy based on the current technology. I fully expect there to be an EPA led 'environmental concern' on fracking and water pollution or earthquakes - both have recently been peddled to see the response. And of course to use the gas you have to have the generating capacity - and try to build a new power plant to replace the coal fired plants being shut down by EPA standards on mercury emissions (you know that extremely dangerous vapor that the EPA now require us to keep in heated capsules in all our homes). The number of oil drilling permits issued last year was ONE. The companies are of course allowed to drill in all the areas where there is no oil - 'look we've given them a permit and they aren't drilling'. Clever stuff. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 26, 2012 17:42:21 GMT
nautonnier:
Actually, and this is not in defense of President Obama, just in ND there were over 700 wells drilled last year, each requireing a permit.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Feb 26, 2012 17:47:41 GMT
Not to mention thousands of permits issued in TX, NM, Alaska, LA, Arkansas, OK, Wyoming, Colorado, New York, California etc...
|
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Feb 26, 2012 19:59:35 GMT
nautonnier: Actually, and this is not in defense of President Obama, just in ND there were over 700 wells drilled last year, each requireing a permit. On permits issued the previous year? |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 26, 2012 20:46:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 26, 2012 20:47:36 GMT
Glenn is probably more familiar with the overall numbers than I am. I am somewhat familiar with ND as the number of permits affects the state's budget as the Bakken is so plentiful that virtually every well becomes a producing well. Some a bit more than others, but the failure rate is very low.
|
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Feb 26, 2012 21:39:07 GMT
Not to mention thousands of permits issued in TX, NM, Alaska, LA, Arkansas, OK, Wyoming, Colorado, New York, California etc... I'm coming in late on this, so ignore me if this has already been said. On land, permits for oil and gas wells are generally issued by STATE agencies (such as the Texas Railroad Commission). Most states with oil and gas reserves are eager for permit revenue and, where drilling is done on state lands, royalties. Thus, the permitting of land based wells has continued at a good pace. There is now some pressure in Appalachian States (especially New York) to limit or eliminate permits for Marcellus shale wells because of water quality and earthquake concerns. These concerns are driven by so called environmentalists who are trying to shut down the shale gas plays because gas is a fossil fuel. There is no basis for claiming that fracking of shales causes these problems. By contrast to the states, the federal government has been actively restricting the issuance of permits for drilling on federal lands. Moreover the Administration has been removing vast tracts of federal land with oil and gas potential from the leasing pool. This is especially true in the west, and offshore New England and Florida. (yes, there is oil and gas offshore New England. I worked on a rig in the early 80s that drilled several exploratory wells in the Garden Banks. The shows were impressive.) And, of course, the feds have shut down ANWAR, and made permitting in the GOM much more difficult after Macondo. (take a look sometime at the new permitting regs for the deepwater GOM. They are precautionary principle based) The current administration despises the oil and gas industry, except when it can use it as an example of "greed" in order to push its anti fossil fuel agenda. As one poster noted, Mr. Obama stated in 2008 that he has a policy goal of pricing fossil fuels out of the energy picture. Woe be to all of us if he succeeds. |
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Feb 26, 2012 23:36:11 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Feb 26, 2012 23:44:42 GMT
This from factcheck.org
Obama 'Against Any Kind' of Offshore Drilling?
Santorum was wrong when he said the Obama administration is "against any kind of exploration offshore or in Alaska." In fact, the administration has approved 296 new permits for new offshore oil wells since taking office, and it is considering granting the first permits in Alaska since 2004.
|
|
|
|
Post by phydeaux2363 on Feb 27, 2012 0:05:10 GMT
Ah, Mr. Glenn, you and your website fall for more government propoganda. There are dozens of permits required to drill an offshore. Check the records and see how many of these record number of permits actually authorize a lessee to spud the well. The truth is very few do, and this administration is slowly strangling deepwater exploration. When i get to the office tomorrow, i'll post a credible, documented rebuttal to the administration's snow job on GOM permitting. |
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Feb 27, 2012 0:25:07 GMT
phydeaux2363:
I am sure Glenn looks forward to this.......as I know for certain that I do.
We have a very tight race in ND coming this fall between a dumb Republican and a smart Democrat......US Senate Race.
I am not against the Democrat, but before she would earn my vote I need to know how/why/when she would take a stand against President Obamma and his policies.
|
|
|
|
Post by glennkoks on Feb 27, 2012 1:51:14 GMT
phydeaux, I am in the oil and gas business so don't take my links as support for Mr. Obama. But you and I both know spudding happens long after permitting.
|
|
