How aggressive should the United States be in developing its oil reserves?
Posted at 5:00 AM on April 1, 2010
by Eric Ringham
(25 Comments)
Filed under: Environment/Energy
President Obama announced plans Wednesday to open vast areas to offshore oil drilling. Today's Question: How aggressive should the United States be in developing its oil reserves?
Comments (25)
Your answer was just what I nedeed. It's made my day!
Oil is a strategic resource, not just an economic one. If we agree that the amount of oil in the world is finite (and perhaps already declining). And if we agree that a country without an oil source could never win a war against a country with an oil source, then we should make sure we have the last of the world’s oil.
Meaning we should leave our fields untapped, and encourage the development (and depletion) of any source outside the US. Once the rest of the world’s oil is gone, our reserves will be more of a deterrent to outside forces than even our nuclear weapons.
Tell me this is an early April Fool's joke! The danger to the environment outweighs the oil addiction this country has. I thought Obama had said he would be doing more investment in green energy. Another campaign soundbite or a real commitment? We should be doing lots more to promote alternative energy uses and public transportation. More oil will not solve our addiction, it merely enables it.
"We need to use our own oil. We have plenty of it"
It comes down to this. If we do, we are doomed to climate catastrophe as our atmosphere simply cannot withstand all those greenhouse gases without giving us a new earth-one we are not adept to live in.
So the only real answer is none-we should be putting 100% of our efforts into non-polluting renewable energy sources. Anything else is uninformed and detrimental to our continued existence!
I have to disagree with the majority of you.
If there is a reason not to allow exploration, it's not because we have some self righteous duty to deprive oil companies of the opportunity to bring more supply to market and lower the prices for consumers, if imperceptibly.
And it's not because we should be principially for green energy always and fossil energy never.
It's absurd to think that not drilling domestically will affect consumption one iota.
No, the only reason for the government to protect oil reserves is so that we have oil reserves later when Iran implodes, China buys everything, etc.
The new offshore oil is probably uneconomical except in a $300 barrel scenario anyway.
Although I do believe we should explore potential oil reserves here in the United States, we as a country have missed the point if we somehow think this will save us. We need to move away from oil dependency towards other future energy sources. Unfortunately I am unsure if that will even happen as long as oil companies are allowed to make campaign contributions.
There IS a simple way to wean ourselves from foreign oil that really would work: Tax all petroleum (maybe use the revenue to pay for our unfunded wars) and let market forces sort out what to use instead. If we also want to discourage the use of coal, tax that, too. Unfortunately, though this would work, it will never happen, because too many corporations with a vested interest in fossil fuel use make big campaign contributions.
What we need to be doing is investing money in getting us off the grid, and developing new forms of transportation and new transportation systems. In the meantime, our best strategy is conservation and efficiencies.
The drive to drill is politically driven. I think it is very obvious that those in power will fight tooth and nail to keep their power. An example is the health care debate.
I find it hard to believe that our general population is willing to degrade the environment to the extent that is happening--including mountain top mining, mining of the tar sands, and destruction of rainforests--with no thought of the sustainability of this planet for future generations.
Jobs and the economy need to move in new directions. Our goal should be a sustainable economy--not an economy based upon an increasing GNP that is dependent on decreasing resources.
There needs to be a moral responsibility that considers the common good, not an economy based upon corporations that are given the rights of individuals, but responsibility soley to corporate profit.
Energy from petroleum (and even more so from natural gas) is less bad than energy from coal, since more of the emissions are in the form of water vapor and less carbon dioxide. So I guess I'm less upset about offshore drilling than mountain-top removal for coal.
Texts sent to MPR:
You don't lose weight by loosening your belt. We should reduce & conserve, growing the green economy and protecting our climate. -Kathryn, Minneapolis
I think there's plenty of savings to be had in conservation, which would make more production obsolete, but asking the American populous to change their extravagant behavior to benefit humankind seems futile. -Pete, Minneapolis
I believe in energy sustainability, but what is the environmental cost? There has to be a happy medium somewhere. That's the area we need to be aggressive with, the middle of the road. The world itself relies on it. -Julie, Howard Lake
I think we have to be very aggressive when it comes to drilling. The US is far to dependent on others for this product. We have enough resources to supply the bulk of our own needs. However I also believe that if the US is supplying its self with this product it will show those in power how truly important it is for us to move away from oil consumption. -Casey, Minneapolis
Drill, baby drill will not matter. Depletion rates elsewhere are too high. U.S. oil production peaked 40 yrs ago! Economic growth needs oil. No growth in oil supply means economic collapse and food shortages. -Norm Erickson, Rochester
It takes nearly 9 units of fossil fuel energy to extract 10 units of oil energy. Without government subsidies the oil industry is dead because it's totally not market competitive. If Renewables had same government subsidies, over time they would dominate energy markets and spur economic growth. It's pure economics if one does the math. -Chris, Minneapolis
I think the only progressive response would be "Not as aggressive as our search for new energy should be." -anonymous
This is a terrific question. Oil and natural gas are our two primary sources of energy. While developing our own energy sources is beneficial, oil and natural gas harms the environment; therefore, drilling reduces foreign dependency but not oil dependency. Fragile Artic ice caps are now at greater risk. Oil dependency is key in our lubricant and transportation sectors because we demand speed and individuality. Electricity, which also harms some environment areas, comes closest to supplying that. We must weigh two evils oil dependency vs. foreign dependency and hope that we can rid ourselves of both.
Big mistake to drill offshore! President Obama said we need to "break with the past ways of thinking." Yet, he appears to be only supporting the past ways of thinking. He also said we need to keep our economy growing. Why must we keep it growing at the expense of our climate? If we believe that increased oil use will bring catastrophic consequences, then what is good for our economy MUST agree with what is good for the future our planet. Let's invest the billions of dollars, that will pour into wrecking our planet through the expansion of oil drilling, into energy sources that will save our planet. How about offshore wind energy? Don't say it can't be done. At one point, offshore oil drilling could not be done. We must invest money into what we must accomplish for our own survival, not continue with failed energy strategies.
It is the height of hypocrisy that those who reap the benefits of our lifestyle that include the use of oil and its product derivatives are the ones who falsely believe that, without serious consequences to our life (health, technology, information, communication, etc.), renewable or wind-power can sustain our lifestyle and that somehow life prior to oil was pristine (think black plague, limited availability of food). It may sound frightening, but oil is a natural resource as it comes from the earth. We have the knowledge to utilize oil along with other resources (wood, nuclear, bio, wind, etc.). For those who "preach" renewable, review the current National Geographic issue focused on water and the impact growing crops has on the use and availability of water. There are hazards we must be aware of when being stewards of our environment. Individuals and organizations who are anti-oil are not realistic in their perspectives on what it takes to make this world work today and in the future.
If the chosen one thinks it is a good idea - I am for it 100%. He's gonna help me.
Not aggressive. We need to kick our oil habit, period. Every investment in new oil infrastructure delays and makes more expensive the eventual transition to cleaner energy. More domestic oil drilling means more profits for oil companies, which means their political influence will continue to be immense. If we want energy that serves average Americans, our government needs to stop finding more ways for oil companies to get richer and instead focus on clean renewable energy and conservation (cheap!). We can get around without getting sick from oil-related pollution or having to pay a mint for a dwindling resource. More efficient vehicles, better public transportation and electric vehicles powered by wind and solar power are all prime time ready and if they got the same support from the government that oil, coal and nuclear energy get, they'd already be widespread and we wouldn't be so worried about drilling for more oil. It's time to aggressively implement clean, efficient transportation solutions.
If it means putting at risk the environment that surrounds the oil, I'm against it. The amount of oil that can be found is insignificant when measured against the amount the US uses. Whatever oil may be found will be sold on the world market, with no guarantee that the United States will receive any benefit from it. It will however, add to the coffers of the big oil companies, who are already making obscene profits at the cost of the American people.
If we are ever to reduce our oil consumption, we should be investing in renewable energy and conservation methods now, not later
Much more aggressive. They have been predicting the end of oil for years yet they continue to find more.
Nobody is preventing you from developing alternative forms of energy(and please don't tell me to fund my competitors) but you sure like to control my drilling(and spend the taxes it generates).
You develop your technology and let me develop mine.
http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2010/03/31/obama-energy-announcement-more-imported-oil-less-domestic-production-fewer-jobs/
I good article on the subject
I think the President's mistake here was framing this as an energy security issue.
Oil industry folks on the left and the right know that Atlantic drilling will not "reduce our dependence on foreign oil", but that's what we want to be told.
He's just trying to make a suitably liberal-hawkish excuse to do what is just a good idea anyway: remove a moratorium on exploration that never made sense in the first place.
The courageous thing to do would be to square your shoulders and say "Removing these artificial barriers to exploration in federal waters is the right thing to do. Private oil exploration and my green energy agenda are not at odds."
Might also be nice if he had mentioned the lily-white environmental record that offshore drillers have proved themselves capable of.
Hey, I can dream.
We should not develop oil which is a short term fix for a long term problem. Let's fix the problem. Develop appliances, cars, etc. to be more energy efficient, stop subsidizing corn which uses a lot of fuel to grow, and bring zero population growth back into the news. Will we destroy the environment, and then decide to fix our energy problems in a different way?
Yes, but reporters, report on WHERE will the accompanying refineries go? In FL, (probably not 'cuz of coastal land prices,
no in GA due to Atlantic hurricanes; so more in the 'poor lands' (and less regulated) in TX and LA.
I still want to see more wind-farms; and increased tax credits to instal solar-farms and residential solar.
Lastly, I'm sure commercial land owners can do better in turning off lights at night, and assessing (and correcting) their energy usage. Suppose cities could use more LED lights, and sensors on street lamps.
T Boone Pickens' push to explore ALL energy options, but with emphasis on moving—within reason—as quickly as possible toward domestically produced green energy wherever applicable makes the most sense in terms of national and economic security.
Obama can be trusted more than the Bush camp, since he is less likely to take this action as a reckless, long term solution. Additionally, Obama is far more apt to ensure environmental concerns are kept at the fore of any drilling operations.
Not very much because the money being spent on oil exploration could be used to fund the development and installation of alternative energy. Burning oil is the reason for climate change, so this decision goes in the wrong direction.
Right now folks, a partnership of Cuba and China are drilling right just past international waters near Florida. We won't, but they will.
Yes, diversification is always good. Wind will never be more than 10-15 % of of ELECTRICAL needs, but needs to be developed. We need to keep finding newer and better technologies for solar. Solar is still way to expensive and we are having the cells made in China!
We need to use our own oil. We have plenty of it. I
t would boost our economy with good paying union jobs and tax revenues from oil companies. Yes, oil companies make money and we get tax revenue.
I'd rather pay folks in Alaska, North Dakota, or Louisiana for our oil than "Immanutjob" in Iran or Hugo Chavez. If we went full force into our own oil, we would greatly cut the funding off to the worlds terrorists and dictators.
Of our oil consumption, we currently use about 25% of our own oil, then about 25% from Canada, 25% from Mexico, then we make up the rest from Venezuala, Saudi Arabia and others. We don't buy much from the Middle East, but the world does.
We can fight useless wars over oil, we appease Iran all day, we can sing Kumbaya and think that wind will save us.
The United States using it's own oil is the best thing for American jobs, our trade imbalance, and world security.
Fill me up! With American gas!
We should be not nearly as aggressive developing oil as we are developing wind, solar, and other local, renewable, and non-polluting energy sources. Oil is finite. Sun and wind are not.
| April 2010 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Master Archive
Recent Entries
- Have changes to the airline passenger experience affected your willingness to fly?
- Should marijuana be available for medical use in Minnesota?
- Do the struggles of Minnesota's business icons signal trouble for the state's economy?
- Do you know whether insurance would cover your losses in a major storm?
- What kind of recycling program would you be likely to use the most?
- Would you support paying people for organ or tissue donations?
- Have personal relationships in the workplace ever presented a problem for you?
- Do you think Facebook is a passing fad?
- Will you be less likely to visit the Minnesota Zoo without its dolphins?
- Should authorities in the Twin Cities change the way they warn people about tornadoes?
Public Insight Network
The Public Insight Network draws upon your experiences to help shape our coverage.More
Categories
Services
In The Spotlight
-
Sound Learning
Looking for ways to ensure your students are doing quality research from credible sources? Sound Learning is a launching point to Minnesota Public Radio's content on the Web. -
The Current Music Blog
Your daily note for good music, news and pop culture. With attempted jokes.
- Become a Member
- Member Connect Accounts
- Leadership Circle
- Sustaining Members
- Member Discounts
- Become a Sponsor
- Tax Information
- Planned Giving
- Vehicle Donation
- Donate Stock