MKF: They hold at least 116 billion barrels of oil, maybe more. That’s enough to fuel 65 million cars and provide fuel oil for 3.2 million homes for 60 years.

Except that we currently use 20 million barrels per day, which using quick math comes out to less than 16 years’ supply.

I agree. The MSM does a lousy job of keeping us actually informed on this (and many other) issues. Their “reports” are usually not much more than recycled soundbites from politicians and “experts” who usually have their own axes to grind. I suspect that the average reporter doesn’t understand the issue, anyway, so how can he be expected to explain it to the rest of us?

Morgan K Freeberg (August 4, 2008 • 6:17 pm) - “… what’s the dirty rotten creepy business scheme to make more of a profit by not doing your job? How’s that work, exactly? Because the last time I checked, they were ‘oil’ companies…not ’sit on land and not do anything with it’ companies.”

Good point. I’ve heard the oil companies complain that they DON’T do much drilling on the land they have leased because (1) there is no oil there and (2) getting permission from myriad federal, state and local agencies to actually start sinking a well is time-consuming, expensive, and often impossible.

MKF - “… is it even the democrat party position that gas prices SHOULD come down? I have to ask that as well because, since Pelosi’s comments about a ‘common sense plan’ more than two years ago, I haven’t even heard a democrat say they want to bring the gas prices down.”

Another good question. Based on the evidence, I’d have to say that the answer is “no”. There is actually a certain hard logic to this: if we aren’t allowed to use oil, we are forced to come up with an alternative. O’ course, those alternatives may not be quite as wonderful as people think. CFL’s use less electricity… but you risk contaminating your house with mercury if one breaks. And I’d love to see the effects on the already stretched California power grid if a significant fraction of Californians start driving electric cars. And how will we make that electricity, anyway? Maybe The Annointed One can make another national goal: end the age of electricity within our time.

Sign me up for that.

“Oil companies are sitting on 68 million acres of oil leases and refuse to drill.”

This is yet another slander of “Big Oil” by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — one that has become a major talking point for Democrats in Congress. It’s completely dishonest.

Oil companies have spent billions of dollars for those leases. Drilling has increased by more than 66% since 2000. They are searching for oil even as you read this. Some parts of those 68 million acres will have oil, some won’t. But at $145 a barrel, you can bet oil companies have plenty of incentive to find it.

That said, 68 million acres is in fact a minuscule amount. Some 94% of federal lands — 658 million acres — remains off-limits to exploration. Another 97% — or 1.7 billion acres — of federal offshore properties likewise remains off-limits. These lands contain tens of billions of barrels of recoverable oil. It’s there for the taking, now.

How much energy is there? Federal lands, according to the American Petroleum Institute, hold 651 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, enough to fuel 60 million households for 160 years. They hold at least 116 billion barrels of oil, maybe more. That’s enough to fuel 65 million cars and provide fuel oil for 3.2 million homes for 60 years.

As such, it’s the height of irresponsibility for Congress to leave these lands off the table. It ensures we remain vulnerable to pariah petrostates like Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iran and others who wish us ill.

My question is this:

Let us pretend, as a hypothetical, that what is summarized above is not true. Let’s take the Pelosi propaganda at face value. Oil companies are sitting on 68 million acres of perfectly good land, and have decided, for whatever reason, not to drill there. They want more land. Just like the people Chris Crocker is yelling about they always want more more more more more! LEAVE THE CARIBOU ALONE!

++cough++ Sorry, I digressed. Anyway.

So they have all these millions of acres they don’t want to drill.

What’s wrong with giving them another plate when they haven’t chowed down on the first one yet? How does that hurt? Let’s open up two hundred million acres. Three hundred million. Why not?

In fact, what’s the dirty rotten creepy business scheme to make more of a profit by not doing your job? How’s that work, exactly? Because the last time I checked, they were “oil” companies…not “sit on land and not do anything with it” companies.

In fact, is it even the democrat party position that gas prices should come down? I have to ask that as well because, since Pelosi’s comments about a “common sense plan” more than two years ago, I haven’t even heard a democrat say they want to bring the gas prices down.

I love people saying, “Well, the oil companies aren’t drilling in the leases they already have!”, when they would be the same ones STOPPING them from doing so.

As for profitability, I don’t know the details about how big a challenge the current leases are, but if it’s the difference between 6% ROI and 9% ROI, I’d say someone is a little spoiled. If oil today is $120/bbl, at what price point does it become worth their while?

My frustration is that no one is covering this angle, so we don’t know if it really is that difficult or if the oil industry is just pushing for lower hanging fruit. I think someone ought to be doing this kind of investigative journalism. I guess there’s too much money to be made as a fight promoter in the battle royale Right vs. Left. Don King, eat yer heart out.

The electricity crisis in CA a few years back was indeed almost entirely engineered by the energy companies, I am not so sure about the oil crunch we are going to face soon.

As for drilling where there is oil, but it is harder to get at, imagine if someone said to you “This job that you do, you have to do it in a worse environment under harder condtions. With a chance for less payoff.”

You would probably balk too. I know I would.

You’re absolutely right. No argument there. But when I say 80% of our offshore reserves, I’m talking about 80% of our *proven* reserves. The oil is there. It may not be in the most profitable locations, but they would still make money, and it would be a small price to pay for using less foreign oil, creating jobs for Americans, and keeping more of our fuel money in the US economy rather than exporting it.

Still, supply hasn’t changed much, global demand has gone up only slightly with China’s new thirst, so what’s changed that causes $150/bbl oil? I suspect it’s the speculative trading, of the same type that gave us $200/kwh electricity in California a few years back. If you stop that, you’ll see oil prices drop like a rock. But no one in Congress or the White House has the stones to stand up to the oil lobby like that. Sigh.

There is no such thing as peak oil or fossil fuels, when that is realized and proven to John Q. Public, oil speculation will virtually end and market forces will take care of the price of oil, as it has in the past.

Someone needs to make the oil companies eat what’s on their plate before going back for seconds.

But they cannot always tell where the oil is and in what quantity, it would be great if everywhere they had a lease, there was oil. But there isn’t. If you’re in business you are going to go for the surest option that guarantees the most profit. To do anything else is…well kind of stupid. Yes, it is all about about money. Nobody goes into business to be poor. Not my mom (who makes homemade soap) nor nor a CEO of a big oil company.