Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby Snik » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 12:51:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'I')s anyone else tired of the "but it's only 5% of our supply! It won't make a difference" nonsense?

Each little piece of the puzzle is important. You can't just shoot down every single individual as having no impact on the whole.

Why bother to drill any individual well? It's only a couple hundred barrels a day, who cares?

Why bother to go to work every week? It's only a couple hundred dollars, it's not going to make a difference. Why not just stay home and watch CourtTV all day?

The argument that off-shore drilling shouldn't be attempted because it's "too small to make a difference" is defeatist and frankly, pathetic.

Moreover, the argument that it will take too long is equally pathetic. If we'd started oil exploration in the late 1990s, we would be getting our first barrels of Florida Crude by now!

It took six years to build the first transcontinental railroad, does that mean we shouldn't have bothered?

I'm glad people like that rarely rise to positions of importance in the private sector. :)


Nicely done Tyler. My hat's off to you.

Wow, another optimist on the board! We're multiplying! Ooops, sorry Monte...ummm....we were here all along, don't worry, not another mouth to feed. :)
User avatar
Snik
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby AlexdeLarge » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 13:52:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Homesteader', '
')Unfortunately the current paradigm is people have the right to spend their money since they earned it.


Those silly peasants. Why don't they understand that the Politburo, I mean the Washington Burocrata, know how to spend their money much better than they do!!

Change We Can Believe In!!

Change????? You better believe it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited by AlexdeLarge on Fri 20 Jun 2008, 14:18:30, edited 1 time in total.
Viddy well, little brother. Viddy well.
User avatar
AlexdeLarge
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1806
Joined: Tue 20 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: I have a whole ward

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 14:03:37

I'll repeat an earlier post of mine for you benefit. a statement was made that ANWR would only provide 57 minutes of our consumption. Let's forget for a moment that no one...AND I MEAN NO ONE....can guess how much an undiscovered field can make. I hoped my respoinse would lighten the mood somewhat but many take too much too serious. But here's my reply:

I’m always amazed at statements like “well….that amount of added production is only X amount of consumption time. Let’s take ANWR as an example. OK……57 minutes a day…..that’s 360 hours each year…..and that’s 15 days a year. Let’s just call it two weeks to be conservative.

You make it sound like adding 57 minutes a day of production as insignificant. I’ll ask you to denote which of the following sacrifices are insignificant to you:

•Two weeks less paycheck
•Sitting at home two weeks with no TV, air conditioning/heat, no lights, no phone, no hot meals (OK…we should all eat more salads)
•No driving for two weeks regardless of how good your mpg is with that hybrid
•Two weeks less vacation
•Two weeks of no shopping
•Two weeks of no sports (It’s only fair…we cut out shopping for the gals)
•Two weeks NO INTERNET
•Two weeks of no coffee (my own personal nightmare)
•Two weeks of no sex (after all she’s still mad about the no shopping thing)

I’m sure you get my point. But we’re not just talking about you giving up these “insignificant things”. We need to multiply these by 300 million people here in the US.

Let’s look at the financial side of ANWR:

Based on you 57 minutes that would equate to 500,000 bopd. That is $24 billion a year that’s stays in the economy instead of sending overseas to people who, at times, find us mildly annoying.

It’s also about $4 billion a year into the Federal treasure from the royalty payments.

I’m not sure how much ANWR would cost to drill up and set the production facilities but it’s a safe bet it would exceed $15 billion. And probably most of that would go to US companies (i.e. US blue color workers)

Not a bad investment…spend $15 billion and make back around $20 billion the first year. Makes for happy share holders. And remember: about 40% of the stock of ExxonMobil, Chevron, and all the other big oils belong to average American Joes and Josephines. Many of them don’t even know it because the ownership is typically through their pension funds. Some of the biggest investors in Big Oil are the auto union pension funds. Somewhat ironic given the hit their workers are taking by reduced demand for those gas guzzling US autos.

One more perspective: the US produces 7 million bopd of the 20 million bopd we use. That’s only 8 hours of consumption. Hell….let’s shut in all our production and save it for the grandkids. What y’all say? It would only mean $500/bbl oil and $20/gallon of gas.

Just trying to put matters into perspective. No…we are not going to drill ourselves out of the peak oil dilemma. But that was also true in the 1950’s when we produced almost all the oil we used. Regardless of the big fields discovered 50 years ago here and in the Middle East, PO was going to be an inevitable fact of life. We should be adjusting to a different consumption model. The only really big fix to drop energy costs quickly is a massive conservation effort. Developing alternatives can’t happen quick enough to accomplish that. Only reducing consumption can be done quickly enough to effect prices in the short term. In time, alternatives would offer the chance to pull back from a hydrocarbon dominated economy. But time is the enemy. Drilling won’t change PO arrivals…just delay a little. But we desperately need that time to develop viable alternatives as well as serious conservation efforts.

The most important question, IMHO, is whether the politicians/public recognize the immediate need to change business as usually and take advantage of any additional breathing room that increased drilling might afford us.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby Tyler_JC » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 14:36:10

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', '
')
Nicely done Tyler. My hat's off to you.

Wow, another optimist on the board! We're multiplying! Ooops, sorry Monte...ummm....we were here all along, don't worry, not another mouth to feed. :)


I do what I can. :)

I just can't understand the argument that just because something might be difficult, we shouldn't bother attempting it.

We're not even asking anyone on this board to head out to the Gulf and start drilling.

All we want is for the government to stop blocking the efforts of energy companies to find more energy.

It's one thing to say that you don't believe offshore drilling is a good investment (it could turn out to be a lousy investment). But it's quite another to say that because you think it's a bad investment, others should be prevented from attempting it.

The only legitimate argument against offshore drilling, in my opinion, is the risk of environmental damage.

The time and oil supply % arguments are deeply flawed.
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 14:41:32

Tyler,

I'm curious about you staement: "We're not even asking anyone on this board to head out to the Gulf and start drilling."

Please elaborate a little. Are you talking about the Gulf of Mexico?
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11397
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 15:31:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', 'M')onte Monte Monte, oh, if the world just worked the way you seem to think it does.


The sequel to overshoot is always a die-off. That is the way it works.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 15:40:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', ' ')If the scenario you are talking about is true, shouldn't any means to reduce population be considered?


The least obtrusive and coercive measures that will accomplish the goal should be considered.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') would think that a threat to the planet of the severity you believe it to be would warrant drastic actions. If our leadership actually believed the way you do, wouldn't you think their reaction would be of a severity equal to the problem? We've gone to war for a lot less. That being the case, your attempt at convincing people that the world as we know it is going to end, and billions are going to die if we don't do something is, by inference, advocating very drastic measures.


The world's leading academies actually do believe the way I do.

http://www.interacademies.net/?id=3547

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')f you succeed in your quest to convince the world of this, drastic measures will be taken.


Less drastic than nature.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 15:43:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Homesteader', ' ')Why would having one biological child per couple not cause a decline in population?


It would. But not for 25 years due to demographics. For 25 years you would still have a net increase.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 15:48:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', ' ')1) Monte says the world as we know it is going to end, billions are going to die if we don't do something about population growth;


No, biology says the sequel to overshoot is a die-off.

That fact isn't debatable.

And man is not immune to the laws of nature.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') am not advocating anything other than drilling for more oil in this country. Given his scenario, I would think we would want to have every domestic reserve possible at hand when the excrement hits the fan.


To attempt what? To avoid a die-off? You wish to engage in efforts that try to avoid nature's correction and make the die-off that much worse?

You have the hubris to think you can beat Mother Nature at her own game?

Isn't that rather short-sighted and selfish thinking?

What about future generations?
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 15:55:19

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', ' ')I'm glad people like that rarely rise to positions of importance in the private sector. :)


That they don't is why we have this problem.

Addressing the symptoms does nothing to address the cause.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MrBean » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 15:59:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')The least obtrusive and coercive measures that will accomplish the goal should be considered.


What is the goal?
User avatar
MrBean
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun 26 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 16:10:17

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ROCKMAN', 'I')'ll repeat an earlier post of mine for you benefit. a statement was made that ANWR would only provide 57 minutes of our consumption. Let's forget for a moment that no one...AND I MEAN NO ONE....can guess how much an undiscovered field can make.


You can when the maximum export capability of Alaska is 2 mbpd via the pipeline which is currently pumping 700,000 bpd of North slope oil.

Maximum out of ANWR is 1 hour 18 minutes.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 16:13:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBean', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')The least obtrusive and coercive measures that will accomplish the goal should be considered.


What is the goal?


For the death rate to exceed the birthrate and the population to decline to avoid a massive population correction at the hands of nature that could threaten our very existance and decimate the carrying capacity of earth to below pre-industrial levels of less than 1 billion.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 16:15:57

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', ' ')The only legitimate argument against offshore drilling, in my opinion, is the risk of environmental damage.


The last thing a species in overshoot needs is more of the same thing that caused them to overshoot in the first place.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 16:17:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', ' ') The time and oil supply % arguments are deeply flawed.


Please show us the errors in the EIA assessment of OCS.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby Snik » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 17:01:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MrBean', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MonteQuest', '
')The least obtrusive and coercive measures that will accomplish the goal should be considered.


What is the goal?


For the death rate to exceed the birthrate and the population to decline to avoid a massive population correction at the hands of nature that could threaten our very existance and decimate the carrying capacity of earth to below pre-industrial levels of less than 1 billion.


Ok, nice to know your goal. Now, how do you get rid of billions of people if lowering the birthrate is too slow?
User avatar
Snik
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby Snik » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 17:09:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'I')s anyone else tired of the "but it's only 5% of our supply! It won't make a difference" nonsense?

Each little piece of the puzzle is important. You can't just shoot down every single individual as having no impact on the whole.

Why bother to drill any individual well? It's only a couple hundred barrels a day, who cares?

Why bother to go to work every week? It's only a couple hundred dollars, it's not going to make a difference. Why not just stay home and watch CourtTV all day?

The argument that off-shore drilling shouldn't be attempted because it's "too small to make a difference" is defeatist and frankly, pathetic.

Moreover, the argument that it will take too long is equally pathetic. If we'd started oil exploration in the late 1990s, we would be getting our first barrels of Florida Crude by now!

It took six years to build the first transcontinental railroad, does that mean we shouldn't have bothered?

I'm glad people like that rarely rise to positions of importance in the private sector. :)


Once again, I applaud your post. Indeed, what effect does any action taken by itself have in the overall scheme of things? If we all thought that way, nothing would ever be done. Come to think of it, why am I recycling? I'm sure that whatever I am going to the trouble of seperating out is not going to make a fraction of a difference to anything. Good point Monte....I think I'll quit...waste of time.
User avatar
Snik
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 17:16:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', ' ')Ok, nice to know your goal. Now, how do you get rid of billions of people if lowering the birthrate is too slow?


Get out of the way of infectious disease and stop trying to save everyone with extraneous measures. Choose from the right hand list first or acqueisce to nature.

Not acceptable?

Well, that is our dilemma, isn't it?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dr. Bartlett', 'I')n the left hand column, I’ve listed some of those things that we should encourage if we want to raise the rate of growth of population and in so doing, make the problem worse. Just look at the list. Everything in the list is as sacred as motherhood. There's immigration, medicine, public health, sanitation. These are all devoted to the humane goals of lowering the death rate and that’s very important to me, if it’s my death they’re lowering. But then I’ve got to realise that anything that just lowers the death rate makes the population problem worse.

There’s peace, law and order; scientific agriculture has lowered the death rate due to famine—that just makes the population problem worse. It’s widely reported that the 55 mph speed limit saved thousands of lives—that just makes the population problem worse. Clean air makes it worse.

Now, in this column are some of the things we should encourage if we want to lower the rate of growth of population and in so doing, help solve the population problem. Well, there’s abstention, contraception, abortion, small families, stop immigration, disease, war, murder, famine, accidents. Now, smoking clearly raises the death rate; well, that helps solve the problem.

Remember our conclusion from the cartoon of one person per square meter; we concluded that zero population growth is going to happen. Let’s state that conclusion in other terms and say it’s obvious nature is going to choose from the right hand list and we don't have to do anything—except be prepared to live with whatever nature chooses from that right hand list. Or we can exercise the one option that’s open to us, and that option is to choose first from the right hand list. We gotta find something here we can go out and campaign for. Anyone here for promoting disease? (audience laughter)

We now have the capability of incredible war; would you like more murder, more famine, more accidents? Well, here we can see the human dilemma—everything we regard as good makes the population problem worse, everything we regard as bad helps solve the problem. There is a dilemma if ever there was one.
Last edited by MonteQuest on Fri 20 Jun 2008, 17:21:15, edited 1 time in total.
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby MonteQuest » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 17:20:36

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Snik', ' ') Good point Monte....I think I'll quit...waste of time.


Don't quit. Focus on the cause rather than the symptoms.

Read this and realize you are in the minority on this site at least.

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic15043.html+iceberg
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Lifting the Ban on Off-shore Drilling:The Facts

Unread postby Homesteader » Fri 20 Jun 2008, 17:36:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AlexdeLarge', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Homesteader', '
')Unfortunately the current paradigm is people have the right to spend their money since they earned it.


Those silly peasants. Why don't they understand that the Politburo, I mean the Washington Burocrata, know how to spend their money much better than they do!!

Change We Can Believe In!!

Change????? You better believe it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You are taking me out of context, not surprisingly. My point was not that tptb know how to spend our money better than we do and to give control over to a centralized government. Actually, I'm mostly a constitutional republic kind of person. You know, the kind the founding fathers had in mind, then put it in writing, then succeeding generations frittered away.

My point is that we spend all we make buying stuff. Heck, when we run out of our money we borrow more in order to keep buying stuff. That is why 4% of the population uses 25% of the resources.

We spend all we make thereby causing our consumption to go off the charts which has led to an inverse relationship with resource exhaustion and species extinction.

Which is why I'm a doomer. Everyone of us spends or invests all we make in energy intensive endeavors or pursuits. It isn't going to stop until there is nothing left.
"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…"
Sir Winston Churchill

Beliefs are what people fall back on when the facts make them uncomfortable.
User avatar
Homesteader
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Economic Nomad
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 231 guests