Lift the Offshore Drilling Ban

National Review: It Would Signal That The U.S. Is Serious About Increasing Domestic Production

(National Review Online)  This column was written by The Editors.

---

John McCain is finally starting to exploit Barack Obama's weakness on the energy issue. With gasoline topping $4 per gallon, McCain reversed his stance on offshore drilling and called for Congress to lift a 27-year-old moratorium on coastal energy exploration. With this shift, McCain has put himself on the same side as two-thirds of the American people, according to a recent poll. Obama, meanwhile, has said that he "would have preferred a gradual adjustment" toward $4 per gallon gasoline, but otherwise he seems amenable to it - as we would be, if that $4 price reflected market conditions instead of government restriction of the energy supply.

Lifting the ban on offshore drilling won’t increase supply right away, but would signal to oil speculators that the U.S. is serious about increasing domestic production, long smothered under regulatory and tax practices that discourage exploration and the expansion of our refining capacity. That could immediately put downward pressure on the price of oil and alone would do more to reduce the price at the pump than anything Barack Obama has proposed. But McCain should go even further.

He remains opposed to drilling in a miniscule section of the Alaskan National Wildlife Reserve (ANWR), and so far he hasn’t said anything about oil shale, a type of oil-producing rock found in abundance on federal lands in the Western U.S. Although the price of traditional crude will have to rise even more before shale becomes a viable alternative, it is worth considering given the trajectory of the market. On this, McCain should look to President Bush, who gave a speech Wednesday calling on Congress to lift the offshore drilling ban, reiterated his longstanding support for drilling in ANWR, and asked Congress to repeal a ban on oil-shale leasing on federal lands.

The U.S. Minerals Management Service estimates that drilling offshore could produce as much as 86 billion barrels of oil. Drilling in ANWR - which would only affect approximately 2,000 of its 19 million acres - could supply 5 percent of America’s oil each year for 12 years before it starts to decline, according to Energy Department estimates. And though there are barriers to their exploitation, oil-shale deposits in the Western U.S. could yield up to 800 billion barrels - three times the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia.

To his credit, McCain has been touting nuclear power, and wants to streamline the permitting process for new plants. But he continues to plug for “energy independence” as if it’s a revolutionary policy, when it has been a standard Washington promise since the Nixon administration and remains a chimera. He foolishly talks of wind, solar, and tide as if they are viable near-term substitutes for fossil fuels. And he feels compelled to condemn the “obscene” profits of the oil and gas industry, as if it were responsible for the increased prices - set by a global market - for its products.

McCain should realize that anti-business demagoguery is a Democrat’s game. Indeed, the most ambitious energy proposal we’ve seen from Obama so far is a punitive new tax on oil companies, intended to produce pain rather than revenue. In reality, a “windfall” profits tax would function as a tax on investors in oil companies, including many pension plans and retirement funds. The Congressional Research Service found that the last time Congress imposed such a tax, it reduced domestic production by discouraging investment in oil companies. It also puts the government in the business of deciding what profits are acceptable, which is itself unacceptable.

Americans favor increasing - not reducing, or making more expensive - energy production. We’re glad McCain has taken a step in that direction.

[taxguydave]

Mexico and Canada were mentioned. Together, they produce less than the US. America consumes more oil per day than the entire daily output of North and South America put together.

Maybe we should make the oil companies drill the 2/3 of oil leases that they have that they aren''t currently drilling before giving them the entire Western US.

[jon2012-2009]

We have billions of barrels of oil that can''''t be drilled for because of the Democrats in Congress.

Posted by dmw1167 at 12:23 PM : Jun 20, 2008

This doesn''t answer the key numerical disparity between U.S. oil consumption of 25% of the world''s output and possessing only 3% of proven reserves, including oil fields already online. In a way, a higher price for gas is probably the best way to reduce consumption and make renewable energy competitive with fossil fuel. But this is too much for the likes of you to grasp who can only see short-term spoils for Bush and Cheney''s buddies that will not benefit American motorists.

[juliemd]

Baloney!!! Any ole excuse to f with nature and rape the land...these NRO guys are soooo 19th century...there will be blood...hopefully, theirs all over the floor...put that in your tank and drive it...!

[notblue]

superdum, you make it sound like republicans are the only ones who drive vehicles, cook on a stove or heat their homes, get a life and a perspective dummmasss.

[superdem]

Yes - McCain has moved away from what we need to do, to support what he have always done, no progress there at all. He has knuckled under to the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries in true Republican style. We can expect nothing but further resource exploitation, environmental degradation, pollution, and nuclear waste under a McCain Administration. We need a Manhattan Project away from fossil fuels, as McCain advocated before he caved, and we won''t get it from the Republicans who care only about money and entrenched power. DUMP THE REPUBLICANS !!!

[notblue]

jimfinster, try all websites, including oil company, the USGS isn''t in the business of searching for oil reserves destined for oil companies. Other countries understand the TRUTH that''s why they are drilling 60 miles of our shores, that''s why Russia put a flag on the floor of the ocean at the north pole. you people like to have it both ways and play both sides of the fence. If you want to deal with REALITY oil is going to be our only viable choice for many decades, we have it we are not using it, it''s that simple. While it will take ten years to bring it to the public the sooner we move on this the sooner it will happen. Why do you think there have been no refineries built since the 70''s? because the oil companies were not aloud in the 70''s to access these resources and they still aren''t allowed. Do you want to be less dependent on foriegn oil? If so then stop the incorrect propoghanda people like you spew and use the oil we have. It''s that simple.

[joyous88]

caliguy55;

right on!, bush is lying ,as usual, and McSame is right ion there lying with him, also as usual,

the problem with using oil will remain even if we drill, we need to use alternate forms of energy, when
will americans wake up and understand that the republicons are a greed driven fascist party, they do not care about America

[caliguy55]

With gasoline topping $4 per gallon, McCain reversed his stance on offshore drilling and called for Congress to lift a 27-year-old moratorium on coastal energy exploration. With this shift, McCain has put himself on the same side as two-thirds of the American people, according to a recent poll. This is enlightening in that highlights one of the many issues McSame has flip-flopped o n in the past few months.

[caliguy55]

It would be nice if the posters in this section knew the facts about what they were attempting to discuss. It would take 5 to 10 years to fully develop any oil fields found today. It would take that long to get one drop of oil from them. Also, we consume so much oil that production of every barrel of oil available to the U.S. under any circumstance today would, at the most, lower gasoline prices somewhere between $0.03 and $0.05. As usual, Bush is lying, when he states anything contradictory to these facts.

[jimfinster]

first of all there is not a small amount of untapped oil of Americas coasts and Alaska, there is enough varified reserves to power Americas needs for the next two hundres years, if they drill now the impact will be seen in 10 years.

Posted by notblue

Genius, you need to go visit the USGS and the Energy Dept and set them straight! Poor dumb guys, they say there is only a few years of oil in both places. Even say so on their web sites!

[clestes-2009]

Not going to happen. The timing is all wrong. Rep had the opportunity to do this in 2005 and they could not even get ANWR open. If they had, this ban would have followed BUT IT DIDN''T HAPPEN.

Obama does not favor offshore drilling and neither do the democrats. Even if Obama lost, something that has less and less possibility every week, the dems in Congress would not support it.

No, the windfall tax is going to pass next year and that money is going to be spent on alternative energies, along with other monies from the budget and our coastlines will be oil rig free and our cities smog zone free and our national security not held hostage by dependance on oil.

What a wonderful future! We have f*cked things up enough for our grandchildren now. Maybe we can start working on leaving them a better world.

[taxguydave]

A few facts, easily googled.

The US is already the world''s #3 oil producer (7-7.5 million bbl/day). Saudi Arabia and Russia are #2 and #3, 9 and 8 million bbl/day.

The US is the #1 oil consumer (21-23 million bbl/day).

Over 2/3 of existing oil and gas leases in the US are unexploited because the oil companies can''t make any money drilling them, even at $150/bbl.

Do the math. There ain''t no way to drill ourselves out of this.

[notblue]

aintaken, some estimates state enough for 60 million homes and cars for the next 200 years, these stats are not made up, do a little research. On the one hand everyone *** about middle east dependence and on the other refuse to use these known resources out of politics not common sense. These resources were discovered in the 70''s and multiple administrations could have accessed them over the decades. Drilling technonlogy is safe and environmenally friendly, there is no reason not to harvest these needed resources.

[joyous88]

another ridiculous article that means absolutely nothing,

so what, we drill, find a little more oil ,use it up,

quess what? we wind up rigth back where we are now!

Another empty headed republicon plan to make a quick buck,

the greed driven republicon corporatists, nothing but war mongers

[afmca]

This was the plan of Cheney''s illegal energy meeting at the beginning of King George''s first term. They took out Iraqi oil with a stupid war. They saber rattle to get speculators to fear war with Iran. They threaten Chavez to make Venezualian oil more difficult to get. Once this is all done, then they go after the American reserves. Want to bet that the leases will be so structured that the American taxpayer gets nothing but more expensive oil and gas. We are being played by fools by the oil industry and the Republican ******.

If we want to get out from under both middle eastern oil AND Big Oil we must learn to conserve and develop alternates to oil .. not just exploit the reserves we have. Oil is trying to enslave the American people to their will for another decade or two. We cannot be so stupid as McCain and the Repubs to fall for this.

[notblue]

first of all there is not a small amount of untapped oil of Americas coasts and Alaska, there is enough varified reserves to power Americas needs for the next two hundres years, if they drill now the impact will be seen in 10 years. It would provide independence from middle east oil. Oil and auto are the same company and cars, trucks, heavy equipment and ships will be using it for the longterm. There is no other refueling infrastructure for any other options. It''s interesting how the uato makers in ten year cycles dangle some new technology in front of the American people and as long as they change focus every ten years or so they can continue to do business as usual.

[omnibus66]

McCain, along with the Bush Crime Syndicate, are responsible for the current high oil prices. Applauding McCain for a lame proposal that will produce NOTHING for at least 10 years is beyond stupidity.

Even if new drilling would produce results tomorrow, it is, as we have come to expect from the Republicans, the wrong path. Like taking morphine for the pain of cancer, it covers but does not cure the real problem.

A small increase in oil supply for a short time would only serve to delay action to actually solve the real problem. We must, repeat must, turn to energy sources other than oil.

True, the Arabs have oil enough for the next hundred years, but they, along with the oil industry, are determined to bleed us dry as long as we are dependent on them.

Waste the next 10 years chasing a false promise, or use the time wisely to find a real answer, that''s the choice.

[jimfinster]

This is the weakest argument in the history of weak arguments. Drill so that we "send a signal to oil speculators"? At the same time admitting there is only 2-3 years worth of oil there? This is what we would risk ruining our coast for???

This is beyond stupid.

[alancontact]

I don''t want offshore drilling. I don''t want access to cheaper oil that will give a complacency to avoid alternative energy. The best way to motivate development is to have shortages. If we continue to believe that we can get by on fossil fuels, we are heading for a major crisis... or at least our children are.

[feelfree4u]

Re: "Lift the Offshore Drilling Ban"

I propose a compromise:

Why don''t we start with drilling into the rotten, disease-ridden heads of the editors of the National Review Online, and the Weakly Standard.

Surely there has to be something inside one of them that has fossilized by now.

If we have any luck, we can then start talking about other drilling targets, once these sources are tapped out.