Slashdot Mirror
Oil Exploration Ramps Up In US Arctic
ananyo writes "A new round of exploratory oil drilling is due to begin in the Arctic this July. The oil giant Shell was granted permission some months ago by the U.S. government to drill two exploratory wells in the Beaufort Sea and three in the Chukchi Sea, both north of Alaska, this year — between 15 July and late September. The project is finally coming to fruition after years spent fighting legal challenges. It will be the first oil-exploration program to run in U.S. Arctic waters since 2000, and could mark the start of the first offshore commercial drilling in the American north, although it would take another decade to establish production wells."
For techy people? Oh well, probably more topical that a fake severed head on a fake TV show.
FWIW, Shell has drilled in the Arctic before - several other exploratory wells. They've done quite a bit of due diligence to mitigate problems including painting their disaster recovery ship a dark blue so as not to scare the whales.
They realize quite perfectly if they have a major spill or blowout then the game is over. Further, there is no assurance that this will go anywhere beyond the exploratory wells - they may not find oil, they may not find much oil, it may cost too much to pull out.
And if they wait long enough, the whole area may turn into a tropical paradise, much like it was when the algae, etc. that created the biomass that subsequently became oil was alive.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
We buy most of our oil from Canada but oil is a global market, so this will only help drive down prices long term.
If you buy any oil, you can't really say you are not buying or contributing anything to "Arab" countries, even if you only buy it from one place due to oil's global nature.
Bad.
I provided 1 trillion times the evidence and supporting reasoning of the parent. My post is better.
You both have it wrong. Here's how US public opinion on the matter actually works:
Average gasoline prices under $3.75/gal? "Bad oil company! No drill! NO DRILL! bad! bad! bad!"
Average gasoline prices over $4.50/gal? "I don't care if you have to line the well with baby seal fur and lubricate the rig with infant dolphin blood! Drill, damn you! DRILL!"
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
The Economist has a funny quote in their article -http://www.economist.com/node/21556800 - on how faster-than-expected warming in the Arctic will open up previously inaccessible resources:
"Oil companies are reluctant to admit that climate change plays a part in their northward shift. They do not want to be seen to be profiting from the environmental damage to which their activities have contributed."
Oil Guy: Do you find it ironic that we denounce global warming, but use higher temps and lower ice mass to get more oil for more Carbon emissions?
Tobacco Guy: no, not at all.
I heard below 20% capacity or about 400,000 barrels a day it can become unsafe to operate in the winter. Its down to about 500,000 now.
I drove along the pipeline road from Valdez to Fairbanks 6 years ago. Its an amazing thing to see,
And how did you figure that out? Wishing to the economist fairy that a non-renewable resource will instead last forever, production will never be less than demand (despite demand rising exponentially), and never go into permanent supply decline?
Futures speculation affects short-term prices. Yes. But actual supply and demand affects long-term prices. Even OPEC learned this back in the 1970s when they artificially flattened supply increases, prices spiked during the oil crisis, the global economy crashed, demand correspondingly crashed, and then so did the prices despite OPEC desperately reducing supply. If OPEC couldn't artificially dictate whatever price they wanted back in the 1970s, what makes you think speculators can artificially set whatever price they like? Speculators can perturb the overall trend for a little while, and that's where they make their money, but the price is not disconnected from availability over the long term. On top of that, if prices rise sufficiently, demand empirically falls. If the economy does poorly, demand falls, and so do prices. This is not the signature of a system entirely controlled by speculation.
Also, if supply wasn't ultimately a constraint, then you wouldn't have companies spending money to try to find oil in remote and/or deep-water and/or harsh Arctic environments where it easily costs 10x as much to drill and produce as it would on land closer to markets. They're drilling here because the conventional/cheap supplies are dwindling away. They're drilling here because they have no other choice if they want to maintain production levels. If that's not a sign of a real issue with regards to availability, I don't know what could convince you. Why spend 10x as much for a barrel of oil there if, supposedly, they could get all the oil they wanted from somewhere else cheaper?
We're genuinely in the bottom half of the barrel.
Electric cars are a stupid idea. And they will be until we get much better batteries, they must be smaller, lighter, charge faster and be cheaper
Those are easy to fix. They have all been fixed on a small scale already, and the solution scales well. The problem is that nobody wants to invest the capital to make it work. Everyone expects the government to pony up a trillion dollars or so for the fix, so any private work done before that is at a loss. After all, we spent multiple trillions to kill two people (neither of which tried for the reason we initiated aggression against them), so what's another trillion to greatly improve the US? If we can find so much money to ship overseas, why can't we spend a fraction of that domestically?
Eletric cars are easy. They pre-dated IC for a reason (they were easy). The *only* issue left is that with everything solved, nobody will do it. Selling a few here or there to the niche makes more money and protects the embedded interests better than raising CAFE to 50 and mandating appropriate standards on electric cars, which would solve the problem in less than a year.
Learn to love Alaska
"the US imports more oil from Canada than any country in the Middle East"
But of course yes. Why the hell would any Middle East country import oil from Canada?
Or we can just not drill and have you pay more at the pump?
Or let Canada get the money instead and really pollute the environment with its tar sands?
Why is it evil to help poor native Americans living in these villages get free education and money for groceries and a better life for their kids? No matter where you spend your money you subsidize people regardless through standard economics. Alaska pays to use its resources because most of the population is native and they own a majority stake in the pipeline. It is their land so why can't they keep it?
So where I used to live has resources and a large part of the economy is more dependent on that than any other source. Natives fish around the oil well in Prudhoe Bay all the time and the water is prestine and clean. They have a stake in making sure it is.
I am not an ulta conservative nutcase or work in the oil industry. I am just giving slashdotters another perspective.
http://saveie6.com/
Higher oil prices are the answer. They are the only external force that will cause Joe 6-Pack to care about better city planning, public transportation and the like.
So, you want poor people to pay more for food, medicine, housing, energy, and clothing, besides not being able to afford to get to work, the doctor's, the kid's school(s)?
That's the effects higher oil prices have. Not just higher gasoline prices. Nobody who advocates for higher oil prices ever mentions that or offers any practical solutions, if they'll even talk about it at all.
It won't only affect those living outside urban areas or the rich. It will take a real toll in human lives. Mostly the working poor and those on Social Security.
You just ooze the milk of human kindness, don't you?
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.