Obama Shifts to Speed Oil and Gas Drilling in U.S.

[n2doc]

By JOHN M. BRODER
Published: May 14, 2011

WASHINGTON — President Obama, facing voter anger over high gasoline prices and complaints from Republicans and business leaders that his policies are restricting the development of domestic energy resources, announced Saturday that he was taking several steps to speed oil and gas drilling on public lands and waters.

It was at least a partial concession to his critics, who say he has shackled domestic energy development at a time when consumers are paying near-record prices at the gas pump. The Republican-led House passed three bills in the last 10 days that would significantly expand and accelerate oil development in the United States, saying the administration was driving up gas prices and preventing job creation with antidrilling policies.

Administration officials said the president’s announcement was intended in part to answer these arguments, signal flexibility and demonstrate Mr. Obama’s commitment to reducing oil imports by increasing domestic production. But in fact the policies announced Saturday would not have an immediate effect on supply or prices, nor would they quickly open any new areas to drilling.

The president’s turn to a domestic pocketbook issue comes after two weeks of intense focus on the killing of Osama bin Laden, terrorism more broadly and the multiple crises in the Middle East.

more
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/15/us/politics/15address.html

[Drale]

1. So when oil keeps going up

can we start arresting speculators for treason please?

[Enrique]

2. how many times does he have to "shift"

before news stories start reporting that this is Obama's policy?

This is his third "shift" toward drilling: 1.after winning the nomination in 2008; 2.March 2010, weeks before the Gulf spill; and now.

[quaker bill]

37. It is not a shift, it was always policy

He was never against drilling, he was always for it being done safely, and he has never thought that this alone will solve the problem. It is only one small component of the answer.

[Amonester]

3. As if this will ever lower the price of oil.

Sun power would.

But Sun power doesn't own the government, yet.

[spin]

4. Wind, solar and other green energy programs are the future ...

but we need an interim plan.

Actually we just need a good plan and then we need to stick to it.

[TheKentuckian]

10. I'm forced to say it again.

What is it not to get that we have 3% of the world reserves (mostly in very environmentally sensitive areas), that oil is sold on the global market, and we use 25% of the oil.

We don't have "a plan". Absolutely no plan can be logically based on oil extraction, it is inherently bullshit.

We cannot meaningfully impact cost or supply with every last drop we can pump and doing so brings great risk like we saw in the Gulf that more than offset anything you can get out of the wells.

I think we can argue that our own extraction is meaningless, at best, in our present context.

[Poll_Blind]

5. And so, instead of rooting out the reason why oil is so expensive...

...the solution appears to be...drill for more oil. Is that really the most effective solution?

Really?

Exxon CEO Admits that Oil Should Be $60-70 Dollars a Barrel Based on Supply and Demand

PB

[bahrbearian]

6. Nationalize the oil companies and the profits, they don't own the oil.

[inna]

7. This is a republican wet dream. Where the FUCK is outrage?

:nuke:

[formernaderite]

35. outrage died...

it's futile to protest.
I rarely complain in the real world, and try to practice equanimity but I'm older and it's all starting to seem like the same bs to me. So... I complained to some friends the other day... I was literally told it doesn't matter, democrats protect a woman's right to choose.
"So that's it?" I said.
Yup...

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

8. Bush's economist says it won't make a difference

TWEETY: If we were taking apart the ANWR and drilling everywhere, would the price of gas be much different? In the world market, since this all fungible, if we were doing all that here in the United States, would the price of gas be much different? I‘m just asking that question.

HOLTZ-EAKIN: No, he can‘t change the price very much. So, I mean, he‘s trying to do things—

TWEETY: But the conservatives are saying all you have to do is pump like—all you got to do is drill like—Pawlenty said, just got at this, dig, dig, and dig, drill, drill, and drill, and somehow the price of the gas is going to down on the world market. You‘re saying that‘s not true?

HOLTZ-EAKIN: Well, I mean, you can‘t change the oil price very much with the U.S. exploration. It certainly can‘t change it quickly. We know that. And I think Republicans have been honest about that.

April 28, 2011

link

[G_j]

9. kissing more Republican ass?

:banghead:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. "Shifting" apparently means shifting from one cheek to both cheeks.

[readmoreoften]

24. +1

[badtoworse]

12. It's about time

There is no substitute for petroleum in the forseeable future. Producing our own may not lower the price significantly, but it would certainly help our trade deficit and that would be a good thing.

[Curmudgeoness]

17. I think you are in the wrong message board.

Here you go, let me help you....

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/*/index

[spin]

21. Six dollar a gallon gasoline is a possibility ...

$6 Gas? Could Happen if Dollar Keeps Getting Weaker
Published: Wednesday, 20 Apr 2011 | 1:46 PM ET

A dollar plumbing three-year lows is hitting Americans squarely in the gas tank, and one economist thinks it could drive prices as high as $6 a gallon or more by summertime under the right conditions.

***snip***

"All we have to have is a couple badly placed hurricanes which could constrain some of the refinery output capacity in some key locations," says Richard Hastings, strategist at Global Hunter Securities in Charlotte, N.C. "If you get weakness in the dollar concurrent with the strong driving season concurrent with the impact of one or two hurricanes in the wrong place, prices could go up in a quasi-exponential manner."

***snip***

Gas prices also have been boosted from turmoil in the Middle East which in turn has triggered a wave of speculation that traders estimate has added about $15 or so to the cost of a barrel of crude , which is now teetering above the $110 mark.

***snip***

Should events follow their current course, sharply higher gas prices will burden consumers further as they also cope with the rise in food costs this year.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/42683030/6_Gas_Could_Happen_if_Dollar_Keeps_Getting_Weaker

I fully support green energy and a transition from our dependence on fossil fuel. Obviously $6 a gallon gas will cause us to move more rapidly toward the development of solar, wind power and electric powered vehicles. The problem is that Obama and other Democrats will have a hard time getting elected to office in 2012 with high gasoline prices which will allow the "drill baby drill" Republicans to replace them. These Republicans will ignore the development of green energy and favor of the continued use of fossil fuels.

As a country we need leadership that recognizes the necessity to develop an energy policy that will transition us away from fossil fuels. Unfortunately, this will involve time. Democrats need to develop a realistic energy plan for the future that will accomplish this goal without causing the economy to collapse. This will also require some support of Republicans who are currently praying for $7 a gallon gasoline at election time.

With foresight we would have devolved a comprehensive energy policy years and years ago and it would be paying off today. It may well be too late, but maybe we can still find an approach which keeps gasoline prices reasonable while we transition. In 1969 we landed men on the moon. Surely we can find a way to address our energy usage today and solve the problems we face.

I personally fear that neither the Democrats or the Republicans seem to have the interest of our country at heart today. They squabble like children in a play yard or like the Steelers and the Browns in a football game and all that matters is who wins. Both parties seem to represent the big corporations, Wall Street and the banks rather than the citizens that elected them. This has to change if we don't wish to be just another chapter in a future history book rather than a driving force that helps the world become a better place.

[Curmudgeoness]

23. Exactly. We have to move quicker towards alternative energy

sources. And that move will have more motivation with high gasoline prices. The higher the price, the more motivation. There would be economic desire to do something. I have a feeling that the technology is there already to do much more, but it is not available to most people yet. It could be.

But I am not buying the premises from the article. I do not believe that domestic drilling will relieve the prices we pay, since the oil drilled here is not ours, it belongs to the oil company who drills it, and it is sold in the global market. We are not Venezuela with a state owned oil company. The profits that the oil companies have been making indicate to me that the hurricane damage is not an issue today. The Middle East has been in turmoil all of my life, so I don't know why I should think that is the reason for the high prices today. Experts say that oil prices should be $60-70 per barrel, Saudi Arabia said that increasing their production would do no good because the price has nothing to do with supply problems.

So I cannot figure out why domestic drilling increases will do any good. Maybe I am missing something.

[spin]

26. It's a very complicated problem ...

and I definitely do not have the background to suggest a solution, but I believe that there are people who could work together to solve this problem.

Maybe we need to launch a project like we did to land a man on the moon or to develop the first nuclear weapon. By enlisting the best minds in our country and allowing them to consider all approaches without the interference of politicians or corporations we might create new technologies and improve existing ones to not only gain energy independence for our nation but to provide inexpensive green power to many other nations.

Congress and the presidents at the time could have never landed men on the moon, but NASA did. The spin off technologies from the lunar program led to many of the improvements which enhance our lives today.

Obviously we need to change our approach because over the last several decades we have accomplished little except to insure the profits of Big Oil.

The people we elect to office are no more competent than or I you at solving the energy problem but they are great at playing political games and getting reelected. That may be the basic problem. This problem is far too important to trust to politicians.

[Curmudgeoness]

28. That really is what has to happen. The New Manhattan Project.

To get Manhattan off the grid. The greatest minds, funded by the government and given free range to move toward the goal. Sorry to say that this government today is not willing to do it. Oil owns them.

[badtoworse]

30. Do you know what a trade deficit is?

If you had a choice between paying an American, a Venezuelan or a Saudi to produce oil, who would you pick?

[Curmudgeoness]

32. Yes, I do know what a trade deficit is.

American oil production, though, will not solve much of that problem. We use so much oil that we could not supply our needs if we drilled every ounce of oil that we have immediately. Talk about trade deficit, and talk about the outsourcing of jobs. We have screwed the pooch on the trade deficit with all the manufacturing gone. We are at the point where we have to import everything. This is the problem. I remember when we were told by the Republicans how we would be able to move to a higher plane by letting all the poor countries do the production---and why are we not at that higher plane? Because they were just wrong.

Don't preach about the trade deficit in oil, when there are too many other holes in our trade.

[badtoworse]

33. Any reduction in what we need to import would help.

You are apparently unwilling to address the fact that we need petroleum for the forseeable future and don't want to do anything to produce it. If that's true, you are both foolish and shortsighted. I'm glad you're not driving the energy bus.

[katnapped]

38. You're still obviously clueless

Others have already said that it's not "our" oil but all you seem to hear is the magic "DRILL DRILL DRILL" and voila, no more problems.

[badtoworse]

29. Do you actually know anything about alternative energy?

I worked almost my entire career in the electric power business developing, building and operating conventional as well as renewable generation. Most recently, I've been developing a 150 MW wind farm on the Texas Gulf Coast. I know a little bit about renewable energy and the electric power business in general. We currently get about 8% of our energy from renewables, but we aren't even close to having the battery technology or the infrastructure to transition away from petroleum as our primary transportation fuel. We might get there in time, but it will take at least a decade, maybe longer. In the meantime, people still need to get to work, goods still be to get to market, we'd still like for the lights to go on when we flip the switch and no one can live without American Idol. That means that unless your willing to live a radically different, far less convenient lifestyle (which I'm not), we are going to need to produce more oil. Obama is doing the right thing, but it's unfortunate that he wasted two years of his presidency that could have been used to expand domestic production sooner.

Lots of posters on DU cavalierly say we don't need to find and exploit new sources of petroleum; we could just shift to renewable sources. Funny thing is none of them ever identify a viable technology or a plan for building the infrastructure needed to do it. Absent those things, the talk about renewables supplying all our energy needs is just ignorant blather. By the way, what's your plan?

[DemocracyInaction]

13. As long as the MorAns believe it.......

hell, the oil companies aren't even interested in using the permits they have; but the key here is to make the MorAns believe everything will be better now. It's a great mind game to get the ignorant public back into "spend, baby, spend" 'cause prosperity is just around the oil slick on the corner.........

[beck47]

14. Alternative energy

Put the money there..Start now.

[Curmudgeoness]

15. How many times does it need to be said...the US does not own the oil.

We allow drillers to take the oil, and then they sell it on the OPEN GLOBAL MARKET. I cannot believe that someone who is as smart as Obama cannot grasp this, or that he does not know that this is just a knee jerk reaction to a fear of losing the election if prices do not come down. So all I can figure is, the real powers-that-be have made a deal with Obama that if he allows them to drill, they will bring down the price at the pump. They drive the price with speculation, and can do something about it if they are motivated to do so.

[BlueIris]

16. Bad call(s), wrong direction, wrong reasons.

Ask me again why I don't believe he'll be the next nominee.

[Dj13Francis]

18. Wow.

Like that's gonna magically make righties jump on board with the Obama train? Come on! You can't appease the opposition. THEY OPPOSE YOU NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO!!! THEY HATE YOU!!! Obama could cure cancer and they'd complain that it's going to cause more problems with our Social Security system. Obama could do exactly what they've said should be done (like pass a health care bill based on a REPUBLICAN IDEA) and be completely contrary. It absolutely doesn't matter what he does, they WILL STILL HATE HIM BECAUSE HE IS NOT ON THEIR TEAM!!! Any of this appeasement will be completely lost and won't change one single rightie mind.

The only way to change a rightie mind is direct confrontation. You have to go to war with them. (With words I mean...) You need to show them, prove to them beyond a shadow of a doubt that their world view is flawed and erroneous. All this nonsense, appeasing their basest Sarah Palin 'Drill Baby Drill' ass-clownery, is simply giving legitimacy to their unfounded, and asinine arguments.

www.davidjamesfrancis.com

[Alexander]

19. Anyone familiar with Petro-Canada? Obama could try something similar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petro_canada

Petro-Canada was a crown corporation of Canada in the field of oil and natural gas. It was headquartered in the Petro-Canada Centre in Calgary, Alberta. In August, 2009, Petro-Canada was merged with Suncor Energy, which took approximately 60 per cent ownership of Petro-Canada. However, the Petro-Canada brand for fuels, petrochemical products and service stations, and the loyalty program are retained by Suncor Energy along with Suncor's Sunoco brand.

A public oil campany?

[bluetex]

20. Way to go, Mr. President

He's tricked 'em ...again.

Notice he agreed to additional "exploration". Not...production. IE: Drilling.


98% here, Mr. President.

[TheKentuckian]

22. Exploration is more drilling too.

[TransitJohn]

27. Exploration IS drilling.

:hi:

[bluetex]

36. I must be reading this wrong...

From the Article:
But in fact the policies announced Saturday would not have an immediate effect on supply or prices, nor would they quickly open any new areas to drilling.



I stand by the President. He's giving them what they THINK they want, while not giving in to the yahoo's who think more oil is the answer.

[TransitJohn]

41. Stand wherever you want, but in the extraction industry, exploration is drilling.

I'm just telling you what the term means.

[Enrique]

42. he's doing what he mocked McCain for doing

the fact that the drilling wouldn't happen right away was a cause for Obama to mock McCain's position as bogus. Within days of this very strong statement (which everyone at DU loved), Obama flip-flopped and embraced McCain's bogus position:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3416165

(CNN) — Sen. Barack Obama stood his ground Wednesday in opposing what he calls the "scheme" of offshore drilling, during a campaign event in Springfield, Missouri. "The oil companies are shoving this thing down the throats of Congress, because they know everybody wants to try to pretend they're doing something about the energy crisis,” Obama said. “This is not real. I know it's tempting. The polls say its one of the ways that a majority of Americans think we're going to solve this problem, but it's not real."

"I understand how desperate folks are. If I thought that I could provide you some immediate relief on gas by drilling off the shores of California and New Jersey… I'd do it.” But the Democratic presidential candidate added, "The soonest you would see any drop of oil from drilling off our shores would be 10 years from now….The most you would end up saving 10 years or 20 years from now would be a few cents on the gallon, although at that point, I figure oil might be $12 a gallon."

Citing the oil companies' record profits, Obama charged that they are, "making money hand-over fist, they're making out like bandits."

Obama then proposed his own answers: "First of all, let's make the oil companies drill where they're already got leases, let's increase supply by making them do what they're supposed to do." Obama also said he wants to make sure speculators aren't manipulating the oil markets. To a standing ovation, he said, "And let's get serious about alternative energy sources like solar and wind and bio-diesel. Let's raise fuel efficiency standards on cars. Let's get plug-in hybrids all across America. Let's finally free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil. That's the direction we need to go."

[TransitJohn]

25. Drilling has only accelerated throughout Obama's administration.

I've been busier than I was under Bush's* admin.

[mmonk]

31. It doesn't matter. The oil will not stay in the US in a tank to bring prices down.

It will be sold on the international market and the price will still be controlled by oil companies and speculators. But Obama always jumps when the right complains no matter how much their ideology misses the target.

[Better Believe It]

34. "Drill baby, drill!" Who said that?

[quaker bill]

39. This is not a shift.

He was never against drilling, he was always for it being done safely. When the gulf spill proved that safety was being compromised or ignored, he changed the agency approach to require greater safety measures, better response plans, and more compliance inspections.

As best as I can tell, he still thinks drilling is only a small and short term component of the solution to this problem.

[blindpig]

40. As though the Gulf Spill never happened...

Ain't Capitalism grand?

[G_j]

43. what Gulf "Spill"? nt