« Obama's Stadium Speech to Cost Networks a Bundle |
Blog Home Page
| Do Democrats Care about Chavez and his Oppression of the Jews? »
July 09, 2008
How much has the drilling moratorium cost you?
Thomas Lifson
Much of the most promising American oil lands have been declared off limits for oil drilling and production for many years. This has cost us all lots of money at the gasoline pump, but the effects elsewhere may be even bigger. The office of US Rep. John E. Peterson has prepared an estimate of the royalties (which means government revenues that wouldn't come from individuals' taxes) that could be realized, and arrives at the astonishing figure of 2.5 trillion dollars.
This figure may be too high (and few details are on offer about the study), but even if the study doubles what would be realized, it would amount to a staggering sum. Not to mention the spin-off wealth and tax revenues from increased domestic economic activity, when drilling and production is done here instead of overseas. Plus the effects on retail prices of enhanced oil supplies from offshore, ANWR, and federal lands int he West.
Meanwhile, the Democrats in Congress remain committed to impoverishing oridinary Americans through restricting oil supplies. This is a natural issue for the GOP to use, if it has the wit and organizational ability to do so.
Hat tip: Nancy Coppock
|
|
|
Comments
To accomplish this, we must concentrate on removing Liberals from Congress (both Republican and Democrat Liberals) and installing Principalled Leaders in their place.
Posted by: David J | July 9, 2008 10:42 AM
I don't think McCain has the brains to embrace this issue as a club to be used against the Democrats.
However, others in the Republican party may and should use it as it's a loser for the Dems and a winner for the GOP.
Posted by: asdf | July 9, 2008 11:02 AM
Great Point Mr. Lifson! My native state, North Dakota, is "struggling" with this problem right now. Since oil tax revenue has QUINTUPLED in the past 10 years. Here is an article from 2007 with the numbers. http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2007/03/30/news/local/131138.txt
I believe in 2007-2008 the oil tax continued to provide "windfall" revenues for the State http://www.kxmb.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=239611
Posted by: Tommy K | July 9, 2008 11:16 AM
Our family owns lands rich with oil and gas. Presently, even with seismic surveys showing the richness of crude and gas underneath, oil companies have not made new leases. Their reason??? Congress governs oil/gas on land with old laws from the 70's holding them to old prices from the 1970's for current drilling and production. Does this keep oil companies from making new contracts (on older leases that once were drilled?) Most certainly it does. We have plenty of gas/oil here underneath lands in the US. Force Congress to change antiquated laws that will encourage new prospective leasing/drilling in old leases that show regenerated oil/gas. We will have enough to supply the US for many years.
Posted by: Bev Gunn | July 9, 2008 11:34 AM
$2.5 trillion would be enough to pay more than 1/4 of America's public debt.
But to get any benefits, you can't just drill in the OCS. You need to also drill in the ANWR and the shales in the Rockies.
Drill now!
Posted by: Zbigniew Mazurak | July 9, 2008 11:35 AM
I think the Republican party is trying to lose this election. I guess this is some grand strategy to do what?
They should be hammering this home daily... It is pathetic.
Posted by: DaveT | July 9, 2008 11:39 AM
I don't know the specifics as I heard it from someone on the radio, but the gist was that there are hundreds of viable wells capped in the gulf as the leases have run out. And that it's apparently easier to apply for a new lease and build a new well than it is to get by government restrictions to renew a lease. I find this hard to believe from a common sense/business standpoint. But I wouldn't put it past how our government works.
Can anyone confirm or refute this?
Posted by: asdf | July 9, 2008 02:42 PM
Everyone should watch this 'inconvenient' movie 'The Great Global Warming Scandal'.
http://video.google.fr/videoplay?docid=-4123082535546754758
Basically, these scientists are on the same UN list of scientists the UN uses
to convince the world that every scientist agrees that global warming is man-made.
Posted by: Jennifer Parfenovics | July 10, 2008 02:20 AM
Keep in mind, those 2500 scientists the UN likes to refer to actually never endorsed the "findings" of the IPCC report. In fact, many actually DISAGREE with the conclusions made.
Just a little tidbit the Globull Alarmists don't want publicized...
Posted by: Cappmann | July 10, 2008 08:42 AM