so 'splain me this....

bravo said:
Don't have to guess...the answer is liberals, lefties, dingbats....in other words...the Democrats,
Click to expand...

and here they are....

The original lawsuit was brought by the Native Village of Point Hope, Alaska Wilderness League, Pacific Environment, and Center for Biological Diversity against the United States Department of the Interior.

The court granted the American Petroleum Institute leave to intervene, and granted leave to participate as amici curiae to Oceana, Ocean Conservancy, The National Audubon Society, The Wilderness Society, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Click to expand...

the result?...

In its ruling, the court vacated the entire 2007-2012 Outer Continental Shelf oil and natural gas leasing program two years after lease sales began.
Click to expand...

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/may2009/2009-05-12-093.asp

so don't let him tell you it's the conservative states that blocked it.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
false premise.....the way oil leases are distributed you may get assigned a parcel lease known to be unproductive, it's simply a lottery.....when oil was selling for $120 a barrel, if there was land with oil on it that could have been drilled, it would have been drilled.....
Click to expand...

I'd like to know what oil company you worked for, and what exactly your professional expertise is in the oil industry.

Because you sound like you're full of shit.

I worked for a major multinational oil company, and your assertion sounds bogus. Now, I didn't work in Alaska, so maybe Froggie would know better than me. But, I know how oil leases are sold in the gulf of mexico, in south america, and in west africa. And the way you describe it, I never heard of anything like that.

In the GOM in Trinidad, and west africa, we made bids on leases that we knew we wanted it. We knew exactly which leases we wanted, and there was no guess work, or randomness about it. Its was a lease sale. Highest bidder wins. It wasn't a "lottery", where the government, or whoever, "assigns" you a random lease parcel at their whim. I'd be amazed if the Alaskan leases are anything like what you describe, but I could be wrong. I bet froggie would know.

And UScitizen just owned you, with his link with the Alaska state oil commissioner saying exxon is camping out on its lease.

Seriously, which oil company did you work for?
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
according to this, it was held up by the same law suit that blocked Alaska drilling, though a decision last month frees it up to continue, and it sounds like Obama is going to let it go through.....do you have something that mentions Bush?.....

http://mobile.reuters.com/mobile/m/...ironmentNews_uUSTRE56S5TY20090729?src=RSS-ECO
Click to expand...

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/news-story.asp?date=053002&ID=s1156519

WASHINGTON -- With his brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, looking on, President Bush sealed a deal Wednesday to prevent further oil and gas drilling off the white sand beaches of the Florida Gulf Coast and in the cypress swamps near the Everglades.

[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeb_Bush[/ame]

[Jeb] Bush signed legislation to protect the Everglades and opposed federal plans to drill for oil off the coast of Florida.
 
Cypress said:
And UScitizen just owned you, with his link with the Alaska state oil commissioner saying exxon is camping out on its lease.
Click to expand...
I've been "owned" with one anecdotal case of an oil company sitting on an oil lease, with extraneous circumstances and a Republican governor filing the law suit to put a stop to it?.....

you say you've worked for a multinational oil company.....is is common for oil companies to plunk down billions of dollars to obtain an oil lease and then do nothing with it?......
 
Cypress said:
I'd like to know what oil company you worked for, and what exactly your professional expertise is in the oil industry.

Because you sound like you're full of shit.

I worked for a major multinational oil company, and your assertion sounds bogus. Now, I didn't work in Alaska, so maybe Froggie would know better than me. But, I know how oil leases are sold in the gulf of mexico, in south america, and in west africa. And the way you describe it, I never heard of anything like that.
Click to expand...

all my life I've heard of oil lease lotteries as a method of speculative investment

LONG-SHOT OIL LEASE LOTTERY A BONUS IN WYOMING
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/09/30/us/long-shot-oil-lease-lottery-a-bonus-in-wyoming.html
 
ib1yysguy said:
http://www.spokesmanreview.com/news-story.asp?date=053002&ID=s1156519

WASHINGTON -- With his brother, Gov. Jeb Bush, looking on, President Bush sealed a deal Wednesday to prevent further oil and gas drilling off the white sand beaches of the Florida Gulf Coast and in the cypress swamps near the Everglades.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeb_Bush

[Jeb] Bush signed legislation to protect the Everglades and opposed federal plans to drill for oil off the coast of Florida.
Click to expand...

lol.....one lease canceled....but
"there are 99 other leases in the Eastern Gulf that remain a threat"
Click to expand...

this, a quote from one of the guys really moving to block offshore drilling....

Graham and Nelson had introduced a bill that would allocate $90 million to repurchase all outstanding leases in the Eastern Gulf.
Click to expand...

Democrats.....

and what was the key element to this lease?

Florida lawmakers and environmentalists quickly hailed the agreements -- particularly the one affecting Destin Dome, where the state and a consortium of oil companies have been locked in a lengthy dispute over offshore drilling.
Click to expand...

and who were the ones that instigated the "lengthy dispute"?....

environmentalists.....not conservatives.....your initial claim is bogus.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I've been "owned" with one anecdotal case of an oil company sitting on an oil lease, with extraneous circumstances and a Republican governor filing the law suit to put a stop to it?.....

you say you've worked for a multinational oil company.....is is common for oil companies to plunk down billions of dollars to obtain an oil lease and then do nothing with it?......
Click to expand...


Uh, yeah. Oil companies are willing to camp out on leases, for years or decades depending on economic conditions, the terms of the lease, or other factors. Hording oil leases, and focusing on drilling the most profitable ones is a fact of business. It doesn't neccessarily mean the oil company is evil, its just a fact of business. They are going to do what they feel is their best interest. Not what is in the best interest of the State of Alaska, or of the United States.


You really need to do a little more research on the oil industry. Because when you make blanket statements like oil leases are randomly "assigned" in "lotteries", you make yourself sound like the typical message board armchair expert who really doesn't know what they're talking about. Personally, I try to keep my mouth shut on topics I know nothing about.

You may have "heard" of some oil lottery somewhere. But that's not the way leases are acquired, as a general rule. We spent enormous staff time, money, and effort, to assess what leases we wanted, what their potential was, and how much we were willing to bid on them. And when the lease sale is held, the highest bidder wins. Period. There typically is no "lottery" where the governments "assigns" you a lease on a whim. Oil companies are not in the habit of exposing themselves to that kind of risk, that kind of randomness, and they sure as hell aren't going to spend money on a lease that is "proven" to be unproductive, which I think you asserted. The drill bit is the only real way to prove an oil play in a sedimentary basin to be unproductive. I believe that's why the State of Alaska is accusing exxon of camping out on its lease.
 
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet said:
lol.....one lease canceled....but


this, a quote from one of the guys really moving to block offshore drilling....



Democrats.....

and what was the key element to this lease?



and who were the ones that instigated the "lengthy dispute"?....

environmentalists.....not conservatives.....your initial claim is bogus.....
Click to expand...

Pretty funny. Your desperate attempts to spin this.
 
ib1yysguy said:
You know who blocked it in Florida? His name rhymes with Reb Tush.
Click to expand...
They dont' want to hear that. They are on planet wingnut and dont' want to hear about reality. They'll cherry pick places where there was democratic opposition and completely ignore where there was republican opposition. So try not to pee in their kool-aid.
 
Cypress said:
Uh, yeah. Oil companies are willing to camp out on leases, for years or decades depending on economic conditions, the terms of the lease, or other factors. Hording oil leases, and focusing on drilling the most profitable ones is a fact of business. It doesn't neccessarily mean the oil company is evil, its just a fact of business. They are going to do what they feel is their best interest. Not what is in the best interest of the State of Alaska, or of the United States.


You really need to do a little more research on the oil industry. Because when you make blanket statements like oil leases are randomly "assigned" in "lotteries", you make yourself sound like the typical message board armchair expert who really doesn't know what they're talking about. Personally, I try to keep my mouth shut on topics I know nothing about.

You may have "heard" of some oil lottery somewhere. But that's not the way leases are acquired, as a general rule. We spent enormous staff time, money, and effort, to assess what leases we wanted, what their potential was, and how much we were willing to bid on them. And when the lease sale is held, the highest bidder wins. Period. There typically is no "lottery" where the governments "assigns" you a lease on a whim. Oil companies are not in the habit of exposing themselves to that kind of risk, that kind of randomness, and they sure as hell aren't going to spend money on a lease that is "proven" to be unproductive, which I think you asserted. The drill bit is the only real way to prove an oil play in a sedimentary basin to be unproductive. I believe that's why the State of Alaska is accusing exxon of camping out on its lease.
Click to expand...
This is where PiMP ussually resorts to some lame circular argument. Nice rebuttal Cypress. You're obviously quite informed on this topic. It would be interesting to hear what Topper would have to say about your comments.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
This is where PiMP ussually resorts to some lame circular argument. Nice rebuttal Cypress. You're obviously quite informed on this topic. It would be interesting to hear what Topper would have to say about your comments.
Click to expand...

What Pimp, and other righting armchair experts, don’t understand, is that oil companies are in the business of hording leases, and exploiting them if and when the profit motive can be maximized.

This is something USC obviously understands.

The profit motive of the oil company, and the government’s ostensible policy of energy security and self-sufficiency, are not always compatible. Profit, and national interest are not necessarily always in sync. This is self evident to intelligent people. There may be some tangible relationship, or common interest. But to assume giving away leases to well-meaning oil companies who’s only interest is contributing to america’s energy security, is a weak premise
 
PostmodernProphet said:
spin it?.....you claimed off shore drilling was stopped by conservatives...even your link shows it was Democrats and liberal environmentalists.....
Click to expand...

Cherry picker.

Sopme offshore drilling was stopped by dems. Most by cons in the background.
Or the foreground in Jeb and George's case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top