# Off shore drilling



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

OK, who has been listening to the news about the oil within the Gulf of Mexico and relating that to the policies of McCain and Obama? I had to rub my eyes and make sure I was watching NBC and not FOX.

They showed one platform in the Gulf which was producing 8000 barrels a day. The oil was processed on the platform and piped to shore. Those barrels of oil could be in you tank within a couple of days. They also said Exxon was spending 63 million dollars a day in oil exploration.

Right after that they presented taped presentations from McCain and Obama. McCain has been against off shore drilling in the past, but has evidently changed his policy on that. Obama's presentation left me wondering if he works for OPEC. I seriously think the liberal strategy is to drive America within inches of disaster, then blame it on the republicans. Or, blame it on big oil. I see my gal pal Nancy even suggested nationalizing the oil refineries. Can you say socialism?


----------



## cwoparson (Aug 23, 2007)

Two things to add. It is true that McCain was against off shore drilling in the past but that was when oil was $15 a barrel and there really was no need for it. Today it is a different story as conditions have changed. Now we not only should but we must drill for our own oil even if it is only for security. I have no doubt the flip flop crowd will start wagging their tongues and try to slander McCain for changing his position. I've always disliked that term (flip flop) anyway whether it was a Republican or Democrat, they all should be wise and honest enough to change their position when conditions or education dictates so. About the only thing I can see that would validate the flip flop tag would be When a politician changes due to political gain. That would have to be something each would have to decide if it is the case or not.

Second thing is, there was a guy on the news talking about drilling off the coast for oil. He said to avoid being accused to giving a biased opinion by going to the oil companies for information, he instead went to the drillers. The people that make their living drilling for oil. What they told him was with modern equipment and new technology, in places like the Gulf of Mexico off Florida where the infrastructure is already in place, they could be pumping oil in as little as one year and certainly no longer than 18 months. The farther out they move from the coast or in places like off the coast of California, it may take as long as 3 years to start pumping oil. When asked about these reports of 10-15 years it would take to get the oil to market, the drillers said there is no place in the world that would take longer than 6 years to actually start pumping oil from the first day they started. Somebody is lying. Which is it, the politicians or the drillers?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> About the only thing I can see that would validate the flip flop tag would be When a politician changes due to political gain.


Yes, I have always agreed with that. I still like the term flip flop when applied to guys like Kerry who vote for something before they voted against it, or change with every little shift in public opinion.

If people are going to vote in response to every poll out there anyone can be president, it will take no brains or personal values.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

i agree with cwoparson. once you declare a national emergency or a security issue, you can marshall all your forces and begin a 24/7 operation to drill/supply oil from the most readily available sources.
putting up the space shuttle was a lot harder, don't believe NO-bama or his flunky liberals when they scream it will take 10 years.....as usual, it's just liberal, political bull****!


----------



## Skip OK (Jul 16, 2006)

hunter,

Due to the capitol costs involved, offshore drilling has ALWAYS been a 24/7 operation. So has offshore production, which is automated to a great extent.

The time lag will be in the pre-drilling exploration. Geophysical work doesn't end up naturally with "X marks the spot".

It will take a year or so just to figure out where that "x" will be.

Then you have to design a production platform (for shallow water; deep water requires more sophisticated design work). Count on another year or two to design and build it

While you are doing that, you also have to complete the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which will take at least one year, AND negotiate a contract with a drilling company whose rig can drill your wells through your platform template when you need them to be there.

Getting wells down is just one part of the puzzle.

For the record, I know a little about this. While I was in college, I worked on two offshore drilling rigs, including the tender rig that drilled the first well out of sight of land in history. Not long after I left, the tender got hit by a work boat, capsized and sank.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

No matter what the time span is from when they start to when they are pumping oil, you still have to add the years of sitting around arguing about it that congress will do.

Congress is comprised of the biggest bunch of FFing idiots on earth :******:


----------



## 3200 ganger (Apr 21, 2006)

In my opinion, the oil companies already have those X's on their maps and should already have rigs engineered and designed for those X's. The amount of money that they are supposedly throwing at exploration has to include the plan to get it out of the ground doesn't it?
With the amount of money that stands to be made by them and all that I have read, I can only believe that the only thing they are waiting for is permission to go.
The pin heads in Washington that are supposed to "represent" us don't seem to have our best interests in mind. There is no reason why they couldn't fast track the permitting process. If they have a hard time swallowing that idea, maybe they could pretend they were voting THEMSELVES another raise or taking care of THEIR retirement and health care costs! They don't seem to have any problem fast tracking those issues!!!!


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

Exploration money is tax deductible, it is a very ingenious way of investing in themselves.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

if it is deemed important, in the national interest, it can be done very quickly. if................


----------



## Skip OK (Jul 16, 2006)

3200 gauger,

Some of that work may have been done but certainly not enough.

Offshore drilling is fantastically expensive, and until you may SOME indication that you MAY, sometime far in the future, be able to recoup your expenses there is very little impetus to spend major dollars.

I am an oil and gas regulator for the Feds, covering Indian lands in OK. Where I work they have been producing oil for parts of three centuries (1st oil was in 1897) and the 1.5 million acres of land we cover has had over 43,000 wells drilled on it. This is real shallow hole country, where the cost of drilling as just about as low as anywhere else in the US and is substantially lower than the average cost for OK. Even so, many production companies have spent millions of dollars acquiring seismic data in the last 10 years.

If they are still doing that HERE in a low cost and high knowledge environment, just imagine how much more important it would be in an area where little or no exploration has been done


----------

