ANWR less than 1%

[bobcolenso]

I didn't want to hijack this guy's thread on One Billion, so I brought my tangent over here.

Here I got another one.

OPEC makes a billion dollars in revenue roughly every 6 hours--every day.

how you like that one


Now, we all know how the Dems won't let us drill in ANWR "because it won't affect gas prices at all" or "It will only provide less than 1% of our needs". Remember that Nancy Pelosi is "trying to save the planet!"

ANWR will provide about 876,000 per day when in full capacity. Friday closed at $104.55 per barrel. That's $91,585,000 per day, or $33,428,817,000 per year that is being spent here and not going over seas.

And that's less than 1%.

[Spanky]

Thats if america buys the oil!;) Just how much Alaskan oil are we using now? How much of the oil from Alaska is going towards OUR oil consumption?

Why should we risk drillinging in ANWR to export our oil to Japan?:yikes:

[wally-eye]

Thats if america buys the oil!;) Just how much Alaskan oil are we using now? How much of the oil from Alaska is going towards OUR oil consumption?

Why should we risk drillinging in ANWR to export our oil to Japan?:yikes:



YES if it puts 30 billion dollars into our coffers..

Oil has always been and will always be a "Global Commodity".....


Drilling on Anwar will take up 2000 acres out of the 2 million acre area.......

[RumRunner]

Wow, you know how to use a calculator. Unfortunately, you do not understand the global energy market. IF that oil comes to market it will be bought and sold on a global market, so shared worldwide. If oil prices start dropping OPEC and Venezuala and Russia cut reduction fractionally and we are right where we were before. OH!! except we have raped the Arctic shield

[farmlegend]

Wow, you know how to use a calculator. Unfortunately, you do not understand the global energy market. IF that oil comes to market it will be bought and sold on a global market, so shared worldwide. If oil prices start dropping OPEC and Venezuala and Russia cut reduction fractionally and we are right where we were before. OH!! except we have raped the Arctic shield

You're half right. Exploitation of ANWR (which I heartily support) may result in that oil being shipped anywhere. However, the chief benefit of doing so will be to reduce the world price of crude oil. I regard that outcome as a good thing. Exploitation of the outer continental shelf and shale oil in the rockies would likewise tend to do the same.

The other half - while it's easy to say that oil exporters will adjust their production in order to maintain pricing, the history of human behavior says otherwise. Oil exporters readily become addicted to their massive cashflows, and some of them will be UNABLE to afford to reduce production. This is what caused OPEC to be crushed in the 80's and 90's. Russia and Venezuela, which are ironically the nations you mentioned, are among the most likely to be unable to withstand production cuts. Particularly Venezuela, which has already made huge commitments based on its assumption of continued bonanza.

[bobcolenso]

Drilling on Anwar will take up 2000 acres out of the 2 million acre area.......

'Cept you left out a "zero". ANWR is actually closer to 20 million acres.

ANWR is about 20 million acres. The area they want to develope is about 2 thousand acres.

A football field (including the end zones) is about 1.321 acres (120 yards by 53.3 yards). So if we make ANWR equal to a football field, the area to be developed would be about 5.75 square feet, or about 2.4' x 2.4'.

[wally-eye]

'Cept you left out a "zero". ANWR is actually closer to 20 million acres.

ANWR is about 20 million acres. The area they want to develope is about 2 thousand acres.

A football field (including the end zones) is about 1.321 acres (120 yards by 53.3 yards). So if we make ANWR equal to a football field, the area to be developed would be about 5.75 square feet, or about 2.4' x 2.4'.


You are correct.......I did leave the zero off........it is 20 million acres.......sorry.

[MuskyDan]

why would America not drill ANWR and keep all the oil domestic? I don't understand the logic behind selling it to Japan. Who actually owns the oil, the people drilling or the nation? The oild shouldn't be sold it should be stored and used by Americans and certainly should not factor into any global price. Add up the the price foreign purchased barrels and subtract from that the number of domestic barrels and figure a daily price per gallon. Seems easy to me.

[hunter62]

How are we going to keep the oil 'domestic'? When the multi-national oil companies come in and drill they own the oil they find, not the people or the nation.
How do you propose that we tell the multi-nationals that they must keep the oil in the US and not put it out on the free market?

As you all know, OPEC will just reduce their output if oil from ANWR causes a drop in the global price of oil so how do we benefit if oil is taken from ANWR?

I also would like to know how more oil is going to help us when we don't have the refining capacity to process the new oil finds? Is there an agreement to build new refineries if we allow the multi-nationals to drill in ANWR?

[pescadero]

why would America not drill ANWR and keep all the oil domestic?

Because (unlike countries with nationalized oil industries) America doesn't (and wouldn't) drill anything. Exxon, BP, etc. would drill ANWR, and sell the oil wherever they choose.

I don't understand the logic behind selling it to Japan. Who actually owns the oil, the people drilling or the nation?

The people drilling own the oil, at least after they pay their royalty fees to the Feds/State.

For 2007 (approximations):

67.5% to residents (75% of 90% of total royalties)
22.5% to Alaska oil trust fund
10% to Federal government

For 2007 the payout was about $1,650 per resident, and ~600,000 residents.

~$990,000,000 to residents of Alaska.
~$330,000,000 to Alaska oil trust fund.
~$146,666,666 to Feds

Total: $1.47 billion

~263,500,000 barrels of oil pumped in 2007.

That means about $5.60 of each barrel of oil ends up in public hands. In 2007 the average oil cost was ~$80/barrel. ConocoPhillips also reported in 2004 that the Alaska average production costs were $6.30 per barrel.

Assume oil production costs doubled between 2004 and 2007 and you end up with the following breakdown:

Value of oil pumped: ~$21 billion.
Amount spent on production costs: ~$3.3 billion.
Amount handed out to state/feds/residents: ~$1.47 billion

--
lp

[Due51]

I love the terms "exploitation" and "rape the land." Drilling and mining are no more exploitation of the land than hunting or fishing.

"Raping the land?" I'm convinced leftists/environmentalists would have us live in grass huts while mending our own clothes, growing our own crops, and raising our own cattle.

Oh, WAIT! Can't do that. That would be exploiting the land by disturbing the ecosystem and the natural habitat of the dung beetle. And we CAN'T raise our own cattle because that's cruelty to animals.

Exactly how are we supposed to advance our society without doing some exploration and trial & error?
:dizzy:

[pescadero]

I love the terms "exploitation" and "rape the land." Drilling and mining are no more exploitation of the land than hunting or fishing.

Agree.

"Raping the land?"

Exactly how are we supposed to advance our society without doing some exploration and trial & error?
:dizzy:

We can't do it without SOME trial and error - and that is why stringent regulations are needed, and why that trial and error should (as much as possible) be done in areas that aren't one of a kind pristine wilderness.

The other problem is that the oil companies keeping trashing the environment even when they're doing things they know how to do with their eyes closed.

Take a look at the BP pipeline leaks from a few years ago - they knew they needed to do the pipeline maintenance, they didn't do the pipeline maintenance, there were leaks, they lied to the government and covered up the leaks, they got caught and got a slap on the wrist.

--
lp

[Hoppe's no.10]

Wow, you know how to use a calculator. Unfortunately, you do not understand the global energy market. IF that oil comes to market it will be bought and sold on a global market, so shared worldwide. If oil prices start dropping OPEC and Venezuala and Russia cut reduction fractionally and we are right where we were before. OH!! except we have raped the Arctic shield

You obviously weren't around in the 1970s when there was a real gas crisis - long lines at gas stations, odd/even fillup days, etc. What happened was that as gas prices rose demand declined. All of the OPEC members decided to cut production to keep prices high but as demand steadily declined they soon started cheating and selling their oil on the black market because THEY NEEDED THE REVENUE because it was and still is the major source of revenue for their countries - how many Iranian carpets, how much Venezuelan coffee and cocao, how much Russian vodka and caviar are you going to buy. Do you think these countries can live off the profits from these exports. Read Adam Smith.

Hoppe's no.10

[Bwana]

You're half right. Exploitation of ANWR (which I heartily support) may result in that oil being shipped anywhere. However, the chief benefit of doing so will be to reduce the world price of crude oil. I regard that outcome as a good thing. Exploitation of the outer continental shelf and shale oil in the rockies would likewise tend to do the same.

The other half - while it's easy to say that oil exporters will adjust their production in order to maintain pricing, the history of human behavior says otherwise. Oil exporters readily become addicted to their massive cashflows, and some of them will be UNABLE to afford to reduce production. This is what caused OPEC to be crushed in the 80's and 90's. Russia and Venezuela, which are ironically the nations you mentioned, are among the most likely to be unable to withstand production cuts. Particularly Venezuela, which has already made huge commitments based on its assumption of continued bonanza.

:yeahthat:

Outstanding commentary once again!

[RoadKillCafe]

You're half right. Exploitation of ANWR (which I heartily support) may result in that oil being shipped anywhere. However, the chief benefit of doing so will be to reduce the world price of crude oil. I regard that outcome as a good thing. Exploitation of the outer continental shelf and shale oil in the rockies would likewise tend to do the same.

The other half - while it's easy to say that oil exporters will adjust their production in order to maintain pricing, the history of human behavior says otherwise. Oil exporters readily become addicted to their massive cashflows, and some of them will be UNABLE to afford to reduce production. This is what caused OPEC to be crushed in the 80's and 90's. Russia and Venezuela, which are ironically the nations you mentioned, are among the most likely to be unable to withstand production cuts. Particularly Venezuela, which has already made huge commitments based on its assumption of continued bonanza.

Just in case the rest of the world decides they don't want to sell us any oil, doesn't this give us at least 1% more than we would have had?

[MuskyDan]

Because (unlike countries with nationalized oil industries) America doesn't (and wouldn't) drill anything. Exxon, BP, etc. would drill ANWR, and sell the oil wherever they choose.



The people drilling own the oil, at least after they pay their royalty fees to the Feds/State.

For 2007 (approximations):

67.5% to residents (75% of 90% of total royalties)
22.5% to Alaska oil trust fund
10% to Federal government

For 2007 the payout was about $1,650 per resident, and ~600,000 residents.

~$990,000,000 to residents of Alaska.
~$330,000,000 to Alaska oil trust fund.
~$146,666,666 to Feds

Total: $1.47 billion

~263,500,000 barrels of oil pumped in 2007.

That means about $5.60 of each barrel of oil ends up in public hands. In 2007 the average oil cost was ~$80/barrel. ConocoPhillips also reported in 2004 that the Alaska average production costs were $6.30 per barrel.

Assume oil production costs doubled between 2004 and 2007 and you end up with the following breakdown:

Value of oil pumped: ~$21 billion.
Amount spent on production costs: ~$3.3 billion.
Amount handed out to state/feds/residents: ~$1.47 billion

--
lp

Right, I kind of understand that. What I am asking is why doesn't the govt. say to the drillers we will pay you to drill the oil for us, but we own the oil? Lowest bidder gets the job.

[pescadero]

Right, I kind of understand that. What I am asking is why doesn't the govt. say to the drillers we will pay you to drill the oil for us, but we own the oil? Lowest bidder gets the job.

What are "we" going to do with oil? "We" don't own a pipeline or ships to transport it, "we" don't own any refineries to refine it, "we" don't own any tank farms to store it, "we" don't own any distribution network to distribute it...

--
lp