This topic has been all over the news this summer, and I’m sick of it.
Here’s the gist of it:
Gas prices are up roughly $3 since Bush entered office in 2000.
People want lower prices. What else is new. (Though Americans forget that Europeans and others have been paying prices this high for a while)
Republicans offer more offshore drilling as a solution to high prices — supply & demand, yada yada yada.
Some democrats point to lands already owned by oil companies that aren’t being drilled. “Why not?” they ask. Oil companies probably aren’t stupid (profit driven and careless, but not stupid), they drill where prospects are good — so maybe already owned land is just not as productive as offshore, or just not worth the start up costs. Who knows.
My conclustion: More drilling offshore will NOT lower prices in the immediate future — it’s a global market. Our oil is just a drop in the global bucket.
Republicans want to “give people credit” (that’s their way of pandering to public outcry) and say most Americans understand the issues — they don’t, sadly.
Let me repeat that part above for emphasis–More drilling offshore will not lower prices in the immediate future — it’s a global market.
Thankfully the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, is blocking a vote to lift the ban on offshore drilling.
Popular opinion is leaning towards lifting the ban, but really people just want to see some action because their wallets are hurting. Poor us. We consume more than everyone else on the planet, and now we have to pay more to do it and we want to cry about it. I say we need to suck it up until we come up with a real solution to energy needs. (Yes, I have a car too)
Now Obama is wavering on the offshore drilling issue. He was opposed to it, but now he’s open to it for the sake of politics? He’s said he’d be open to limited drilling as part of a compromised bill that would include other emissions regulations and whatnots. And since he’s such a “celebrity” now, the pundits are saying that Speaker Pelosi is on the unpopular end of this debate, and is making a mistake by not at least letting it go to a vote. Why do pundits say the democrats are fumbling on this issue? Because polls say over half the country wants to open up offshore drilling? For crying out loud, what’s wrong with the best answer being the unpopular one? The ban is only unpopular because no one’s come out and shut everyone up with some convincing reasons why the offshore drilling idea is nonsense. Why don’t people get it? Am I missing something?
I support Nancy Pelosi and her decision to block a vote on offshore drilling. The scientists and engineers all agree that it would be years before any new rigs would start contributing oil to the market, and even when they did it would be such a small percentage of the market as to render little effect on the price.
Yes, prices are high. Yes, people want lower prices. But give me a break, people — why do we have to pander to the illogical? And why can’t the media help clear the air on this issue, rather than capitalizing on the confusion? I’ve seen some news reports getting it right, but many still merely copy cat public outcry and then sit on the sidelines as the politics takes over.
Sure, opening up offshore drilling wouldn’t be catastrophic or anything, but it’s a matter of principle. It wont help, and it’s a step in the opposite direction from where we need to be going. We should be lowering our need for oil, not investing in more ways of getting it.
As for Obama — I hope he doesn’t continue to water down his messages.
You are right on. Most people simply lack the ability to really think the issue through and just tow the line that they are being fed by the media and the republicans that if this ban is lifted we will see the price of gas go down very soon.
If they thought it through they would see that the oil to be gotten from offshore drilling is owned by the oil companies, not the US, and they can sell it to whomever they want. We will only get a small percentage of the oil that is produced from offshore drilling in at least 10 years, not more. This percentage of oil will not even come close to what we need to significantly reduce the price of oil.
You are also right that the solution is to start practicing better conservation of oil and gas so that the demand is reduced (basically what Obama said and is being criticized for) and to also find alternate forms of energy to also reduce the demand.
Also…
I agree that Obama has watered down his message, but at the same time, people should be smart enough to realize what his point was instead of turning what he said into some idiotic and ignorant solution to our oil problems. Like I said before, people just don’t seem to have the capacity to really think things through for themselves.
Anya says, “I agree that Obama has watered down his message, but at the same time, people should be smart enough to realize what his point was…”
What do you believe his point was?
My understanding of the compromise position is that we’ll still need oil for a while until new energy sources develop, so some drilling will be needed, so let’s do limited drilling in places that seem safe. I think this is hogwash because we’re not running out of oil in the next 10 years or anything… but perhaps there’s another point the compromise makes that I’m not understanding.