is it smarter to keep it in case of an emergency? Or would it be better to drill it and use it for a few years while doing some major research on other alternatives to power our cars, etc (not that it would happen even if it was smarter because of greed)?
2006-09-10 13:15:03 · 6 answers · asked by mountain_laurel1183 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Its really not that easy. MOST of our oil reserves are not economical to "drill" or mine (such as oil shale).
Look at it this way. Right now, it costs much less than $10 barrell to drill, produce and send (for refining) oil in the OPEC and other producing countries (as well as existing US wells).
Deep sea oil (the most controversial, due to the increased environmental hazzard) costs far more.
Oil shale costs the most ($36 BBl)
Now, it might make economic sense to drill and obtain the more expensive oil -- but why do it when we still have the less expensive oil available, and the refineries do not have capacity to handle additional supplies?
Answer: because we NEED the additional supplies to bring down the price. BUT, for the oil companies, why take "only" $30 (less refinery and end-transportation costs) when they can take $50 (less refinery and end-transportation costs) in profit?
2006-09-10 13:27:53 · answer #1 · answered by robert_dod 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Regarding the oil recently discovered out in the deep Gulf of Mexico, it would take 5-10 years to develop it and get it into distribution. That rules out "saving" it for emergencies.
It should be developed now, and deal with the "emergency" contingency considerations when it actually is available.
It also only amounts to about the same as would come from ANWAR in Alaska, as far as they know now.
Also, people won't conserve energy if the price goes down, and the producers won't bring it on line for the same reason.
During WWII, people were rationed 5 gal/week. Just imagine that.
2006-09-10 13:30:09 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh, would that alternative energy would become a priority for the government! Unfortunately, I don't see that happening as long as the energy companies hold so much power (heh).
Everyone's wearing blinders--the oil is going to eventually run out. Maybe not in our lifetimes, but what about our kids, or their kids? In the meantime, our kids are being killed to get the oil.
2006-09-10 13:22:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
well if we use our reserves and we can't get oil from foreign source,for some reason,Alaska is having some line shut down for repair,they could have more hurricane to hit the gulf and shut down oil production,so if we us up our reserves now,what about when we really need them and we already used it,its better to keep our reserves,reserved
2006-09-10 13:22:45 · answer #4 · answered by purpleaura1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, that would be up to who owned the land. The government has almost no nationalized oil reserves.
2006-09-10 13:21:15 · answer #5 · answered by Black Sabbath 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say use it as we move towards a hydrogen economy.
2006-09-10 13:18:14 · answer #6 · answered by mrjwm 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋