Redstate

and the sites will be producing in half the time.

Just passing the enabling legislation and signing it into law will have an immediate effect on crude oil prices.

Dittos the effect from enabling legislation for the construction of new nuclear power plants. Provided said legislation contains the same limitations regarding legal challenges to the permit and construction process.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

If you look at American Solutions, they have a ton of facts about the amount of oil we have in this country. Between ANWR, off shore and the oil shale we have more oil than the Middle East. I think that should account for a decent percentage of demand. Now, if we could do that and build refineries we would be in great shape!

But American oil will be used for Americans. The ability to drill in these areas will give the states more revenue and Americans cheaper gas.

"Between ANWR, off shore and the oil shale we have more oil than the Middle East"

And between Bill Gates and I we have more money than anyone in the world.

-exits

Obviously should have been a reply to wiggins.

-exits

One or two or three fields will never be the solution to our problems.

We need a concerted effort to maximize our supply on all fronts.

Here's a link to a recent diary of mine that kind of answers your question, to the extent it can be answered.

You have fallen into the trap of comparing an individual field's projected rate and then saying "Oh, well, compared to world demand it's insignificant, so why bother?" Worldwide production is 85 million barrels of oil per day. There is a small handful of fields in the world that ever made more than a million barrels per day; the last one of them was discovered in 1976.

The other point is that while global production is 85 million barrels per day, domestic crude oil production is only 5 million barrels per day (7 million with natural gas liquids). Two thirds of our domestic needs are satisfied out of North America. An incremental million barrels a day of domestic crude would be very significant.

Most analysts think that there is a large risk premium built into the world crude oil price because so much of it comes from less stable parts of the world. Another reason that controlling domestic supply is important.

"PsychObama, qu'est-ce que c'est?"

...the Bakken is a perfect example of my point. When and if it's (over) touted reserve potential becomes a reality, it will be incremental. It will be from hundreds of wells drilled by dozens of small companies.

Note that in the case of ANWR and offshore, all we have are educated guesses right now as to the reserves. You can be certain of one thing only, that the true reserves to be recovered from both areas will be higher or lower than the current estimates. Until we actually begin to drill, it's all just SWAG.

"PsychObama, qu'est-ce que c'est?"

That was an interesting link, thanks. I'm surprised that I had missed it; I usually try to read at least the energy related diaries as it's a topic of interest of mine.

Bakken was one of the things that really started me looking at this. Weren't the USGS Arpil estimates of 3 to 4 billion barrels recoverable, higher by almost a factor of two then what people had previously estimated. And no one is opposed to drilling in Bakken, at least no one that matters, but look at what's happened to the price of oil since April? It just seems like there's this idea amongst the pro-drilling crowd that if only we start drilling in ANWR and off-shore, we'll be back at $1.50 gasoline and it all seems so absolutely at variance with the real supply and demand picture.

-exits

Even in the opinion of one of the trend's largest operators.

And as one of the pro-drilling crowd, I wouldn't try to sell it on the promise of $1.50 gasoline, probably not within our lifetimes. But if we sit around with our thumbs up our collective posterior and do nothing, not even as far as evaluating the potential of our sacrosanct ANWR and OCS, then shame on us.

Since 10 years is the time frame that seems to justify doing nothing, what gasoline price are you comfortable with 10 years from now? $10? $15? $20? That's the direction "don't drill" takes us, vs a fighting chance of somewhere in the range it is now.

"PsychObama, qu'est-ce que c'est?"

We're probably not going to get anywhere so I'll just post my last thought (which will look a lot like my first one) and leave it there. I'm no environmentalist and I have zero objection to drilling anywhere, I'm just trying to really understand the affect it's going to have.

I understand that the law of supply and demand isn't the ideal gas law; you can't plug the independent variables into a calculator and get the exact price. But economist can estimate and I've seen two or three such estimates and they all put the affects of even the top end of the estimates of our untapped domestic at something on the order of a few dollars a barrel. This is just wildly different than what you suggest above which is that domestic drilling might be the difference between $10, $15, or $20 gas and $4 gas. In any event, thanks for your thoughts.

-exits

assumes there will be no new discoveries, nor no increase in world wide production during the same period.

It also discounts conservation efforts and an increase in the use of alternative fuels during the same period.

Then factor in the national security interests of the United States.....

We've gone way past the desire to produce more of our own oil.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan