Drill Bits: How Much Oil Would Drilling in the OCS Yield?

At 9000 gallons a tanker truck and 40 gal per bbl the 860000 daily reduction is about 3800 tanker trucks a day in reduced volume* note though that one bbl of crude produces about 20 gal of gas so this is apples to oranges in one respect

However the scale of just the reduction is almost unimaginable

All I know is that gas went up from $3.67 to $3.77 in my town this morning. This on the heels of a 20% drop in the price of crude. Any math and petro marketing people out there that can help me understand beyond the fact that prices run up and walk down.

Every single barrel of oil is foreign oil. If anyone thinks that oil companies are loyal to our nation, they need their head examined. These are multinational companies and they dont give a damn what happens to the US, except insofar as it affects their ability to use our military as their personal police force.

Oil demand is not going up worldwide unless you perceive the emerging China and India as the world or everyone else. In reference to 2025 - 2030, the projected years of peak oil production from new offshore drilling, one could reasonably hope that by then green technologies could significantly supplant fossil fuels. By focusing on a finite and disappearing resource, we're ignoring the potential for renewable resources and falling behind the rest of the developed world in green technology.

Whether you use a high estimate or a low estimate, the bottom line is that offshore drilling will not make the United States independent of foreign oil.

The question is why reporters feel that they have to allow either political candidate to make statements which are manifestly false without challenging the candidates on this, and why reporters are unwilling to clearly make the best information available to their readers.

In the 1970s, the claim was made that the proposed Alaska oil pipeline would help end our dependence on foreign oil. Not only did this not happen, but the major partner in the consortium of oil companies was not any American oil company, but British Petroleum.

The highest estimate of oil that might come from offshore drilling does not even equal the amount of oil that the US presently imports from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela.

And isn't it odd that the phony debate about whether or not drilling should be allowed bypasses the question of raising the mileage standards on US market automobiles, trucks and SUVs.

The folks from OPEC enjoy the stupidity of mericans. Its like baseball. In the USA its world series, but once they get whacked by China it becomes who cares. Please carry on the blinded discussions.

"That's recession for you."

No ... I think that's $4.00 a gallon gas.

""Preliminary data shows US consumption is down a hefty 860,000 barrels per day in the first seven months of the year compared with the same period of last year."

That's recession for you.

Oil companies, like any other business must have incentive for sinking billions and billions of dollars into new wells and new drilling platforms. Platforms themselves can cost billions alone.

With the possibilty of a democrat as President who wants a "windfall tax" on oil companies, what incentive is there to invest capital in a venture where you'll have to give the government what you make?

The government has it's fingers in too many pieces of the pie. With democrats, they'll take the whole pie ... as Maxine Waters let slip that the democrats want to nationalize the oil industry. Oh, won't That be efficient. Maybe they can hire Hugo for consulting work.

One more thing to think about - I worry that Exxon and Chevron will decide to become non-US companies. Think of the consequences - there are many fewer US employees and lots less taxes paid by Shell and BP. Obama or McCain administrations would be in a bad situation if US majors decide to incorporate somewhere more tax friendly, like Dubai. Would not change the oil price, but would take focus off US production.

Rodney:
How is biodiesel "suppressed"?
There are hundreds of old mercedes running around LA on biodiesel, and anyone with an interest can find out where to buy one and the equipment to make the fuel, as well as a list of restaurants glad to give you their waste grease. It's a pain in the neck, and you smell like french fries all the time, and only popular among a few oddballs. But it is in no way "suppressed".

you children can squabble all you want.

before i go i will say my next new vehicle will be a diesel-probably 2 or 3 cylinder being developed in germany--or here if available from domestic car company---and i will produce my own fuel--i will pay the road taxes--and they can shove the foreign oil where the sun dont shine..at least i will do a little part

Notafool - right on! I totally agree with you. We have to find something to take out our frustrations on and Oil Cos. are an easy target! Politicians sure make demons of them because of this - yet they accept their money for their campaigns, and Gov't. gets billions of dollars in taxes! How would they fund all their pet projects without Big-Oil Taxes! Such hypocrisy!

Bio diesel - the major oil company I contract for has projects with Willie and other bio diesel concerns. The market will grow. Logistics are tough. The distribution system is not all that flexible and bio diesel is a very small piece of a major's business. Gets attention but can never be the primary focus.

THAT IS WHY I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE BIODIESEL----it certainly is not all the answer---but it sure would be a start---we need to grow the highest oil producing plants---we could make this supply full circle--plant to fuel and animal food----- animal waste to fertilizer and thus the circle is complete----my greatest question is why not.

Yes, I know about Willie and bio diesel, which is entirely different from ethanol gasoline blends. Have you noticed that you can't store gas for your lawn mower, etc. anymore? Or that you can't start that mower if you leave gas in it over the winter? Because ethanol attracts water and gunks up motors. NOT a good thing.

energy marketeer
did you know that a funny looking pot smoking man has been in the biodiesel business for over 20 years---and it is not corossive to tanks or any thing for that matter---and that what is left is one of the highest grade animal feed especially cattle--anf that what is removed (the oil)is of no use to cattle--and that there is no greenhouse gas.money will stay in our country jobs will be created---and i cannot find any downside---ask that old geser WILLY NELSON

New domestic supply is needed just to keep up with the decline curve of current production. Still need alternative energy research and development. I don't think the government or the oil companies need to fund that. Oil companies need to focus on what they do best - the risky business of finding and producing oil and gas. Government mandates have given us MTBE (pollutes water) and ethanol(less mpg and damaging to engines) and many gasoline blends (expensive to refine and segregate for distribution given that new tanks are hard to permit and cutover to new blends is hard to manage seasonally.) There is market incentive for new fuel developments and they will come with or without oil company or govt funding. New taxes will not lower prices.

darwin the figures just dont jive--i will tell you what i think must be done--and you all can argue it
for electric----newest tec on nuclear--wind generators---solar power-all very viable.
fuel---natural gass---biodiesel--newer tec for ethenol---cars getting nothing less than 50mpg----but biodiesel can be produced by anyone---seems to be the reason it is supressed---that taxing thing such as road tax how could the government prove and or collect it----however tax is necessary to keep roads and bridges up to standards for safety.if all these were persued with vigor we may be able to export more than we import----would that not be a change for the better--just need the right leadership.