Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Do You Own an Oil Company?
Now that I think about the few bucks a quarter I'm making in my retirement account, I'm not so unhappy about paying several hundred dollars more per month for gas, paying more for everything else because of high energy costs, borrowing money from China to send to terrorists, and all of the other trivial complaints I once had about our energy policy.
Thanks, Big Oil! I'm sorry I've been such an ingrateful bastard.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Why is it Big Oil's fault that they can't build new refineries or drill domestically off-shore, increasing supply? This would actually lower the price of oil.
The senior vice-president of ExxonMobil says new refineries are not necessary.
And off-shore drilling will only have minimal impact (3 to 4 cents a gallon) several years down the road.
It's not really Big Oil's fault, so far as I can tell (unless there's illegal market manipulation). They are just making money the way that businesses are supposed to. But I'm also not going to be writing any thank you notes to the CEOs.
That's with the reserves we know about. If we were allowed to explore the area I'm sure we'd find more oil in the areas off limits to exploration and drilling. Brazil just found more oil, why can't we? Also, I should have included shale oil as well.
Also, I don't really like the "years down the road" argument. Critics of more drilling and exploration said that "years down the road" in the other direction.
I don't think there is a short term solution to high oil prices. We're going to have to get used to the prices for awhile. I'm more concerned about the long term solutions. I think that more domestic exploration and drilling is only a piece of the energy solution puzzle. In fact, i think that more drilling should only be used as a bridge to better forms of energy production.
I hear that the senior vice-president of ExxonMobil gets paid by big oil so we can't really trust what he says about energy production.
I'll try to let you have the last word, but I feel the need to respond.
I think those estimates of impact are based on the high end of the range of oil supply in these areas.
Sure, cheaper oil might be nice several years down the road, but if we're thinking several years down the road, shouldn't we concentrate on reducing demand (for environmental, long-term sustainability, and national security reasons)? Doesn't pursuit of more supply conflict with that goal and offer the wrong incentives?
3 to 4 cents a gallon is a drop in the bucket now or later. The impact of drilling in ANWR is similarly small.
When refining capacity is raised as a defense of oil companies, I'll take them at their word that they don't need it.
"Doesn't pursuit of more supply conflict with that goal and offer the wrong incentives?"
Cars still run on gas and that's not going to change any time soon. If we can drill for more oil so we don't have to buy it from foreign sources then I think that it's a net gain.
Lowering the cost by 3 or 4 cents isn't a significant reduction but it would at least stabilize prices until the alternatives can be transitioned in. Our demands for energy are going to rise (you can only be so efficient), so stabilizing the cost of fuel will allow our economy to recover and adjust to higher fuel prices, as well as allowing alternative technologies to improve and become more cost effective.
Modern drilling technology allows to drill where we never thought we could. This would allow us to explore places that were impossible to reach in the past and allow us to find more oil.
Also, drilling domestically would be better for the environment because of our strict requirements. We have no control of the environmental impact of foreign drilling.
Post a Comment