WASHINGTON — Oklahoma lawmakers praised the move by President Bush to lift the executive ban on offshore oil and gas drilling Monday, but the political stalemate over expanding domestic production showed no sign of ending.
Advertisement
The president's action to allow drilling off the nation's East and West coasts if individual states agree won't by itself open up areas that have long been closed to exploration; Congress also must act to lift the ban.
But Bush used a brief statement issued at the White House to increase pressure on the Democrats who control Congress to do something about rising oil prices.
"Now the ball is squarely in Congress' court,” Bush said. "Democratic leaders can show that they have finally heard the frustrations of the American people by matching the action I've taken today, repealing the congressional ban, and passing legislation to facilitate responsible offshore exploration.”
Oklahoma lawmakers in Washington quickly embraced the president's action.
"It is obvious that one immediate solution to rising energy prices is to find and develop more domestic oil and gas reserves,” said Rep. Mary Fallin, R-Oklahoma City, who has been one of the House GOP's leading advocates for more exploration.
"Modern technologies have made offshore drilling safer and cleaner than ever before.”
Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Tulsa, said, "Currently, 85 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf — an estimated 19 billion barrels of recoverable oil — is off limits. "At today's import levels, this is the equivalent of 35 years of imports from Saudi Arabia.”
The executive order lifted by Bush has been in place since 1990, when the president's father, President George H.W. Bush, was in the White House. The congressional ban stretches back further. Both were imposed to protect environmentally fragile — and economically vital — areas in states such as California and Texas.
Though the issue of opening areas for drilling is mostly a partisan one, with Republicans supporting it, there are some fissures. There are Democrats, including Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, who back Bush's move. But Sen. Mel Martinez, a Florida Republican, said Monday that Congress should respect the wishes of states that want to keep drilling "at a distance.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who opposes lifting the ban and has called on the president to release oil from the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve to ease gas prices, called Bush's plan "a hoax.”
"It will neither reduce gas prices nor increase energy independence,” the speaker said. "It just gives millions more acres to the same companies that are sitting on nearly 68 million acres of public lands and coastal areas.”
Environmental groups also criticized the move.
Jim Presswood, energy advocate for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, "The disastrous pro-big oil policies of President Bush and his allies in Congress have left us more addicted to oil than ever. Americans deserve policies that free us from fossil fuels and give us better choices that will bring down our energy costs, make our air cleaner, and help solve global warming.”
Leave a comment.
Log in below or sign up (it's free).
Lifting the moratorium in the outer continental shelf should not be rejected on the grounds that it will not provide an immediate, "silver bullet" solution. Ultimately, we must develop a comprehensive energy strategy that encompasses a portfolio of options including drilling, conservation, energy efficiency and alternative energy.
Another point often raised in objections to more drilling offshore is the concern that it will only further our nation's "addiction to oil," New oil supplies should be considered as an interim solution that is part of a portfolio of options designed to move us toward an economy that is not so dependent on oil and gas.
One option would be to earmark royalties from all new developments in the OCS into a fund that is explicitly for research and development in alternative energy. Then, these domestic resources would indeed serve only as a bridge to a new energy future.
The most vehement objection to opening the areas currently off limits in the outer continental shelf is made on environmental grounds. But, according to the MMS, the offshore drilling industry is one of the safest in the United States.
"A recent study by the National Academy of Sciences reports that in the last 15 years there were zero platform spills greater than 1,000 barrels. Compared to worldwide tanker spill rates, outer continental shelf operations are more than five times safer. Imports present an environmental risk of spills about 13 times greater than domestic production. In fact, annual natural seeps account for 150-175 times more oil in the ocean than OCS oil and gas operations." (http://www.mms.gov/5-year/WhatIs5YearProgram.htm)
Interestingly, given the fact that tanker spill rates are higher than platform spill rates, by not allowing more domestic production and thus encour-aging more imports, we are, in fact, utilizing a more environ-mentally damaging option.
The most vehement objection to opening the areas currently off limits in the outer continental shelf is made on environmental grounds. But, according to the MMS, the offshore drilling industry is one of the safest in the United States.
"A recent study by the National Academy of Sciences reports that in the last 15 years there were zero platform spills greater than 1,000 barrels. Compared to worldwide tanker spill rates, outer continental shelf operations are more than five times safer. Imports present an environmental risk of spills about 13 times greater than domestic production. In fact, annual natural seeps account for 150-175 times more oil in the ocean than OCS oil and gas operations." (http://www.mms.gov/5-year/WhatIs5YearProgram.htm)
Walter of Edmond said, Oil companies currently hold undeveloped leases. It has been argued, therefore, that it is not worth offering new areas for exploration. This is not a well-reasoned thesis. Commercial quantities of oil do not exist everywhere a well is drilled. If a company's assessment of the acreage under lease indicates it will not bear commercial quantities of oil and gas, then it will not be developed. Moreover, some leases are under study but drilling, which may happen eventually, has not yet begun. Oil companies with leases cannot simply hoard acreage without ramifications. In fact, they would be penalized by investors and shareholders with lower company share values for doing so.
I don't know where Inhofasaurus gets his numbers. But the Dept. of Interior says only 21 percent of the Outer Continental Shelf leases are in production - 1,655 out of 7,740 active leases. Over 41 million acres of the OCS have been leased for oil production, but only 8,123,000 acres are in production. 45.5 million acres of federal lands have been leased to oil and gas companies, but 31 million acres are not in production. The Minerals Management Service says 79% of recoverable offshore oil reserves are open to drilling, not the 15% Inhofe would have you believe. 82% of the recoverable offshore natural gas reserves are open for leasing. What a joke. They just want to lock up more reserves for the future so they can control them, instead of investing in non-fossil fuels that won't run out or be held hostage.
Cindy, read all of PickensPlan, don't just listen to the commercial and think you can comment on his plan. T Boone says drill offshore , along with everything else. We need more of everything, solar, wind, oil, nat gas, biofuels, .... everything.
Why does everyone address this issue as if we have a crisis? Why do you think that drilling would be a short term solution? I do not understand the logic of those who say that we need alternative energy. I can name 4 sites off the top of my head that have over 50 years (each) worth of oil just waiting for us to get it. There is plenty of resources available. We do not have a crisis. What we have is a political establishment that has brainwashed it's population into believing that oil is bad. They present it as a resource problem, but really, what they mean is, no matter what the cost, we are going to find alternative energy. Of course the cost will be out of our pockets, not theirs. Bush is right. Drill off shore, on shore, downtown - anywhere there is a resource, we should be taking advantage of it, instead of standing by and watching our economy slowly die.
Wow! Talk about morons. They are coming out in full force on both sides. If ever there was an issue that calls for bipartisan action this is it. I disagree with pretty much everything George Bush stands for up to and including his very existence. But, he is right on this issue. We must find and produce more oil and gas to ease supply issues while at the same time conserving more energy and developing reliable and affordable alternative energy sources. Any of these efforts by themselves fall far short of what is needed but a concerted effort by all for all the various fronts can and will make a big difference.
Stephen, if you are going to quote Boone Pickens, don't forget, "We can't drill our way out of this problem." This is just another one of Bush's ignorant ideas and as usual, the Republicans are jumping off the bridge with him.
No kidding, Barbara. Most people, including a lot of democrats, think Pelosi is an idiot. Now that Dubya finally revoked the executive ban at least it's on Congress to do something so there will be a lot of pressure on both parties to move this. However, just remember even if we drill off of all of our coasts and anwar this isn't a long term solution.
While it may not have impact immediately at the pump, it will impact the US at some point. Also the proposal for a windfall tax on oil co's must be stopped. I'm sure the Saudi's have a tax right? The Russians? A tax on our oil co's will put us at an even bigger disadvantage. Lets open up our coasts and figure out a way off oil in the meantime. This plan is by far the best option to start with today. To quote Pickens, "This is the largest transfer of American wealth in History (to the Saudis)." We must stop the bleeding, then we can look for a cure.
Chris, Oklahoma City. The President's action is futile unless Congress also acts. You have it from mspelosi's on mouth the congress has no intention of doing so.
r.rocky: T. Boone Pickens makes more sense by building windmills he may or may not profit from that purchasing carbon offsets from algore does.
I just don't understand why George W. Bush has waited so long to do this. Instead he's been going to his family's good buddies Saudi Arabia and begging them to increase production like a little girl.
mister from bogota, Oklahomans are out AHEAD of this issue, we have people here who have a far greater understanding of world oil production. You drag the rest of us down, I wish you would go back to bogota.
The moron is Pelosi and her idea of using the SPR, that has to be the dumbest thing I've heard yet. It shows a complete failure to understand the problem we're facing. And to the guy down below quoting Pickens, if you read ALL of his plan, you will see it includes offshore drilling. And yes, it will not lower the price but it will keep the price from rising further. We going to reach a point that we will welcome any additional oil production, no matter the cost. Not only for the economy but for national security. Its imperative we drill now.
As usual Oklahoma leads the charge of the dinosaurs straight into the tarpit of stupid outmoded ideas...except for that one cagey old dinosaur , the Booneasaurus who will wait on the edges and who's genes will eventually evolve into something a bit smarter...like a MONKEY !!!
b, compared to your morons in congress, Bush is doing a great job. But only in comparison. the contention that much new oil won't lower the price is disingenuous.
boone pickens, expert? how about boone pickens, major investor in the worlds largest wind farm. who is in favor of the government mandating we all turn to his project for our electricity.
"every other expert?". plenty of energy experts disagree with pickens view of energy resources. we were told a few years back that "all scientists of any consiquence" supported the global warming "fact".
now many sceptics have emerged in the scientific field.
the term moron? i probably agree with you but for different reasons. i think it applies to the 500+ individuals up there spending way more money than they should on their various "vote" getting projects.
but, certain morons had to vote for them in the first place, didnt they?
Boone Pickens and every other major expert in the energy industry has said, without equivocation, that this will make no difference at the pump. And yet, the morons who represent us in Washington start clapping like seals. Oklahoma must be one of the only states in the union where more than 25 percent of the public still thinks Bush is a decent president. Of course, what do you expect when we send morons like this to Washington?
Here's a look at what some state representatives are saying:
"Congress' outdated ban was put in place at a time when our economy was looking up and gas prices were low. But today we have different circumstances and an uncertain energy outlook. We need to act now by lifting the legislative ban, a move that will unlock oil and natural gas reserves, create good-paying American-energy jobs and put us on a path towards a more secure energy future.”
Rep. Tom Cole,
R-Norman
"The American people — including an overwhelming number of First District residents — support a comprehensive solution to our current energy crisis that includes lifting the ban on offshore energy exploration. The longer House Democrats delay in allowing a vote on the drilling ban, and putting America on a path to energy security, the longer Oklahoma families will continue to pay more than they should for a gallon of gasoline.”
Rep. John Sullivan,
R-Tulsa
Related to this story
Articles
Drilling ban's end brings hope 07/15/2008 The president's decision to end an executive order banning offshore exploration of oil and gas puts pressure on Congress to end its ban as well, said the...
Bush calls on Congress to pass housing, energy 07/15/2008 WASHINGTON - President Bush is calling on Congress to move quickly to put into force legislation designed to help prop up mortgage giants Fannie Mae and...
21
One option would be to earmark royalties from all new developments in the OCS into a fund that is explicitly for research and development in alternative energy. Then, these domestic resources would indeed serve only as a bridge to a new energy future.
"A recent study by the National Academy of Sciences reports that in the last 15 years there were zero platform spills greater than 1,000 barrels. Compared to worldwide tanker spill rates, outer continental shelf operations are more than five times safer. Imports present an environmental risk of spills about 13 times greater than domestic production. In fact, annual natural seeps account for 150-175 times more oil in the ocean than OCS oil and gas operations." (http://www.mms.gov/5-year/WhatIs5YearProgram.htm)
Interestingly, given the fact that tanker spill rates are higher than platform spill rates, by not allowing more domestic production and thus encour-aging more imports, we are, in fact, utilizing a more environ-mentally damaging option.
"A recent study by the National Academy of Sciences reports that in the last 15 years there were zero platform spills greater than 1,000 barrels. Compared to worldwide tanker spill rates, outer continental shelf operations are more than five times safer. Imports present an environmental risk of spills about 13 times greater than domestic production. In fact, annual natural seeps account for 150-175 times more oil in the ocean than OCS oil and gas operations." (http://www.mms.gov/5-year/WhatIs5YearProgram.htm)
r.rocky: T. Boone Pickens makes more sense by building windmills he may or may not profit from that purchasing carbon offsets from algore does.
puleeze!
"every other expert?". plenty of energy experts disagree with pickens view of energy resources. we were told a few years back that "all scientists of any consiquence" supported the global warming "fact".
now many sceptics have emerged in the scientific field.
the term moron? i probably agree with you but for different reasons. i think it applies to the 500+ individuals up there spending way more money than they should on their various "vote" getting projects.
but, certain morons had to vote for them in the first place, didnt they?