Guest “WTF is she talking about?” by David Middleton
This post is the first sequel to: Democrat Senators Demand That Oil Companies Increase Production.
As I write this post (the morning of March 7, 2022), West Texas Intermediate (WTI) is right around $120/bbl. It actually topped $130/bbl over the weekend. This morning, I paid $3.999/gal for regular unleaded gasoline in Houston, Texas. While I make my living finding oil & gas and high oil prices are good for the bottom line right now. These prices are likely to be unsustainable and could trigger a recession and subsequent oil price crash.
The Brandon maladministration is increasingly facing questions about why they aren’t taking measures to increase domestic oil production. This is a typically moronic Democrat political hack response to the questions:
Q We also know, you know, the President, as recently as yesterday, talked about increasing domestic manufacturing to bring down prices on inflated items like goods. So why not apply the same logic to energy and increase domestic production here?
MS. PSAKI: Well, there are 9,000 approved oil leases that the oil companies are not tapping into currently. So I would ask them that question.
Q Is there nothing that the administration can do to get those providers back to pre-pandemic levels?
MS. PSAKI: Do you think the oil companies don’t have enough money to drill on the places that have been pre-approved?
Q Just asking.
MS. PSAKI: I would — I would point that question to them. And we can talk about it more tomorrow when you learn more.Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, March 3rd, 2022
First off, WTF IS Ms. Psaki referring to here?
MS. PSAKI: Well, there are 9,000 approved oil leases that the oil companies are not tapping into currently. So I would ask them that question.
As an employee of “them,” I would try to answer that question. However, the “9,000 approved oil leases that the oil companies are not tapping into” bit is a non sequitur, if not totally wrong. Ms. Psaki was asked, “Is there nothing that the administration can do to get those providers back to pre-pandemic levels?” Well, Permian Basin oil production has already exceeded pre-shamdemic levels. Her response was idiotic. The number of “approved oil leases” (presumably Federal mineral leases) is not an answer to that question. The only thing that “the administration” could do to increase oil production, would be to get the hell out of the way. From cancelling the Keystone XL pipeline, to refusing to hold Federal leases sales, to threatening to refuse to approve drilling permits, they have been getting in the way as often as they can.
I will focus on Federal oil & gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico, because that’s the area I have worked since 1988, I have easy access to detailed lease & production data and the GOM accounts for about two thirds of the oil production from Federal acreage.
If Ms. Psaki is referring to tracts that are open for leasing, there are 10,638 open tracts in the Central Gulf of Mexico planning area.
According to Lexco OWL, approximately:
- 38% of those Central GOM tracts have never been leased in the history of Gulf of Mexico US lease sales… A pretty good indication that those tracts are not prospective.
- 28% of the tracts are deepwater leases that were drilled. These wells were either dry holes or failed to find economically recoverable hydrocarbons and were subsequently relinquished.
- 15% of the tracts are shelf leases that used to be productive… Old fields that have been plugged, abandoned and the infrastructure has been removed due to BSEE’s Idle Iron rule.
81% of the currently open leases in the Central GOM have never been leased, leased and unsuccessfully drilled or are abandoned oil & gas fields. This doesn’t mean that none of them are prospective. A lot of oil & gas gets discovered in old fields. There’s an old adage, “The best place to look for oil, is where it’s already been found.” That said, most of these leases have been recycled many times through annual leases sales over the past 50+ years. The prospects of large discoveries on currently open Central GOM acreage are fairly slim. And, until they resume holding lease sales, as they are legally required to do, the open acreage is about as useful as mammary glands on a bull.
If Ms. Psaki was referring to leases currently held by oil companies, there are 1,771 active leases in the Central Gulf of Mexico planning area.
About 40% of the currently active leases are either held by production or held by a production unit. About 2% of the leases have been extended beyond primary term by active operations, suspension of operations (SOO) or suspension of production (SOP). It takes a long time to finalize the work to the point the prospect is drillable, file all of the necessary plans and permits and sanction development.
About 45% are primary term leases (generally 5 years on the shelf and 10 years in deepwater). The vast majority of these leases had been previously leased and then relinquished. Just because we bid on a block, doesn’t mean there’ll be an economically drillable prospect on it during the primary lease term. Some of these leases will probably get drilled, some will expire and get recycled through future lease sales (if there are any).
Over 300 “pre-approved” leases are currently being unlawfully blocked by a corrupt Obama judge. These tracts received bids in the November 2020 lease sale. None of these leases have been awarded.
Regarding onshore production…
About 26 million Federal acres were under lease to oil and gas developers at the end of FY 2018. Of that, about 12.8 million acres are producing oil and gas in economic quantities. This activity came from over 96,000 wells on about 24,000 producing oil and gas leases.Bureau of Land Management
About half of the leased acreage is “producing oil and gas in economic quantities.” The other half would consist of leases no longer producing economic quantities of oil & gas, prospects that haven’t been drilled yet and “trend”, “play” or “protection” acreage. Oil companies will often bid on whatever is open in hot plays and trends, with the notion of possibly working up drillable prospects. They will also lease acreage around good prospects and new discoveries to prevent other companies from “corner shooting.” Most of these sorts of leases will usually expire undrilled.
Rare is the occasion that an oil company bids on a “ready to drill” prospect. After leases are awarded, companies will start spending money on additional geophysical data, reprocessing existing data and performing the detailed geological and engineering work required to bring the prospect to a drillable stage. Even then, it will only get drilled if it is still economically attractive and can be budgeted by the oil company, provided the Federal government approves all of the required permits. So far, the only thing the Brandon maladministration hasn’t been doing to hamstring US oil production is in drilling permit approvals. So far, they haven’t been blocking or slow-walking drilling permits on existing Federal oil and gas leases. I just pulled up the BSEE APD (application for permit to drill) data for the Gulf of Mexico. In 2017, BSEE approved 820 APD’s. In 2021, they approved 794 APD’s. This isn’t surprising because they haven’t been blocking permits. It would be blatantly illegal if they did. Under President Trump, BOEM held at least 2 GOM lease sales every year, as required by law. Under Brandon, we’ve only had 1 GOM lease sale. We only had that sale because a Federal judge ordered them to hold it. That sale is currently in limbo because another Federal judge blocked it… Because climate change… 🤬
So Jen, exactly which leases are “oil companies are not tapping into”?
- Are you so ignorant that you think an “oil lease” has oil & gas just because it’s an “oil lease”?
- Are you so dumb that you think we can just “tap into it” because it’s an “oil lease”?
Yes, those were rhetorical questions…
“Oil leases” are the mineral rights to geographical tracts of land/seafloor. They don’t have oil because the government designates them as “oil leases.” In the Central GOM, on the shelf, a standard “oil lease” is a 3 mile by 3 mile square tract, covering 5,000 acres. Standard deepwater leases are a bit larger, covering 5,760 acres… However, they’re all just square tracts of acreage. Well, not all… Some leases along the edges of the protraction areas are smaller polygons. The geology of the Gulf of Mexico and the oil that migrated into its geological traps didn’t pay attention to the future leasing plans of the US government.
The Digital Wildcatter summed it up nicely here…
A funny thing happened on the way to saving the climate…
COAL | NATURAL GAS | OIL 18 Nov 2021 | 22:09 UTC
Carbon capture plays prominent role in latest Gulf lease auction
Author Brandon Mulder
Editor Richard Rubin
Commodity Coal, Natural Gas, Oil
Carbon capture and storage played a large role in Lease Sale 257, which recorded a bumper crop of bids from oil and gas producers Nov. 17 for drilling rights in the US Gulf of Mexico.
Of the 317 bids the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management received – the highest since 2014 – about 140 of them were for tracts located in shallow waters of the Texas and Louisiana coast, inexpensive areas with depleted oil and gas reserves.
“The oil and gas reserves in those areas are pretty much tapped out at this point, so it’s hard for me to imagine a company going in there with the idea of producing more oil and gas,” said Hugh Daigle, a petroleum researcher and professor at the University of Texas. “This is probably a CCS push.
The largest bidder for shallow-water tracts was ExxonMobil, which placed bids on 94 tracts worth $158,000 apiece, according to BOEM data. The company’s tracts are clustered in the Brazos Area, the Galveston Area and the High Island Area – locations in close proximity to the company’s announced $100 billion CCS hub that will be located in southeast Texas.
ExxonMobil didn’t confirm whether the 94 tracts it placed bids on will be used for CCS. In a Nov. 18 statement to S&P Global Platts, the company said it “will work with the Department of the Interior on plans for the blocks once they are awarded.”
“This is the first big lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico that has come after a lot of these companies have made various carbon commitments,” Daigle said. “And in light of that, it’s probably not surprising that you’re starting to see some of these leasing decisions being driven not just by oil and gas production, but by other economic interests of the company.”
[…]S&P Global Platts
So… A corrupt Obama judge unlawfully blocked the November lease sale, the first sale in which CCS appears to have played a significant role, because it didn’t adequately address climate change.
We all know Psaki is a filthy liar cut Joseph Goebbels cloth. Enough said.
So, David Elstrom, I just listened to President Brandon announce that Russian oil imports will be banned from the USA, so that we don’t fund the war. Brandon also said “there are 9,000 oil drilling permits in the hands of oil companies and they are not using them”, a slight modification of Circle Back Psaki’s comment. Then Brandon went on to say that that Black Gold guy in Texas David M. something, the owner of the Exxon Ferrari disguised to look like a jeep, doesn’t know what he is talking about. DISCLAIMER: Due to my advanced age and a glass of wine with lunch I may have mis-remembered some parts of the Brandon comments, but I got the gist of it correct.
No kidding, yesterday and today both her and the chief geriatric of the United States claimed that oil production was higher in his first year than in Trump’s first year.
So apparently 14.8 million is now less than 11.2 million? It’s a little disturbing that the lies have reached 2+2=5 level, considering that these Malthusians are seemingly starting WW3.
I don’t think they are liars. They are just dumb as all git out and don’t care to learn the actual facts. They are the typical Washington elites.
Here s a little story doing the rounds.
Pinocchio ,Superman and Snow White were walking down the street together .
They saw a sign that there was a competition for the most beautiful women in the world.
Snow White saw this and said will enter this as I should win .
She went into the building and half an hour later she came out.
“How did you get on” they asked .I was voted the most beautiful women in the world “she replied.
They walked further and they saw a sign advertising a competition for the strongest man in the World .”I should win that “said Superman and he was back in half an hour with the title for the strongest man in the world .
They walked a while longer and there was a competition for the greatest liar in the world so off went Pinocchio to claim his title .He was back in 10 minutes in tears .
What is wrong they asked Pinocchio “Who the hell is Jen Psaki ” he managed to say before bursting into tears.
Ms. Psaki wasn’t trying to answer a question or enlighten anyone, but rather employing a three step process to deflect. First, she was trying to find a short term explanation, any explanation, that doesn’t illuminate the stupidity of the Biden Administration. Second, beyond that she was trying to intimidate a reporter who asked an inconvenient question. You Mr. Reporter are stupid. Please get educated. Maybe that reporter will not ask the question again. Finally, she stalled for time, tomorrow in other words, when she and the team will be able to construct a better explanation. Perhaps even an explanation that conflicts with those put forward today.
Ms. Psaki is a liar. Most press secretaries are liars. That is their job. One wishes reporters were able to dig for real answers and then write a scorching column highlighting the incompetence and perfidy.
She combines smugness with stupidity in a manner only rivaled by the likes of John Kerry.
My question is, who the hell is going to want to listen to that snarking, arrogant woman when she gets her own show at one of the leftist networks?
In second though, Never mind. It’ll be the same crowd that watches the likes of Joy Reid or that other babbling Joy
I don’t understand the popularity of Stephen Colbert. I find his attitude and behavior repulsive.
He insults people that rich liberals want to see insulted. That’s why they pay his salary.
Colbert maligns, demeans, slanders, etc.
Typical elitist pretend comedian whose alleged humor is dependent upon maligning good people. I don’t don’t tolerate his advertisements anymore, muting him as soon as I hear his voice.
Didn’t Joy Reid just proclaim that the only reason anyone cares about what’s going on in the Ukraine is because it’s populated by white Christians.
Can anyone think of a major conflict over the last 100 years or so that didn’t get a lot of coverage?
Are you kidding?
MOST conflicts don’t get any coverage in the MSM.
How often do you hear about what is going on in Yemen?
Or the unresolved civil war in Libya that has been running hot and cold for over a decade ever since NATO decided to play regime change games with Gaddafi?
Or the terrorist insurgencies / civil wars in Algeria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Chad, Congo, Mali, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Tanzania, Tunisia
Heck, forget about all of those. How about the bloody drug war going on along our southern border between narcotics cartels and the Mexican government? A war whose casualties sometimes spill over into America? The MSM remains mum on that because it would reflect poorly on the Biden administration’s disastrous border policies.
Joy Reid is wrong 99% of the time, but she’s not wrong about the media being EXTREMELY selective in what wars it decides to cover and what wars is to does not cover.
So a few dozen people shooting at each other is the equivalent to 10’s of thousands of soldiers and thousands of vehicles and planes invading a neighboring country?
Are you as big a nut job as Reid?
BTW, Reid is a major member of this allegedly racist media. What has she done to cover these stories that she believes aren’t being adequately covered?
A few dozen?
Tens of thousands of bodies are being dropped in Yemen. Thousands in Mexico. The Libya situation has been going on for a decade and has resulted in open air slave markets in the 21st century. Have any of those ongoing humanitarian disasters generated even 1% as much attention or public outcry as Ukraine?
The Tigray war in Ethiopia is estimated to have five times the number of deaths as the Russia-Ukraine war. Have you even heard it mentioned ONCE on cable news?
Second Congo War
5.4 million deaths. Biggest world conflict since WW2
Ever heard of it?
The same people who listen to Rachel Maddow now?
People who watch Rachel Madcow.
I don’t think she’s stupid, except in that she thinks we are. No, she’s cold and calculating.
Psaki may be smart and allegedly educated, but she is totally stupid as so many elitists are. They believe they are smarter than everyone else, especially those commoners. It’s all narcissistic egomania, not actual intelligence.
Truly intelligent people realize that many people are smarter than they are, and that people who specialize or who have strong common sense or logical skills easily spot ignorant liars.
Well, after further review from the booth, there may be one other contender for that title….
Anyone who criticizes (or posts insulting pictures of) the pure fool known as AOC, obviously just wants to have sex with her!
I won’t touch that statement with a 10 foot Pole……or two 5 foot Hungarians.
But But But they’ve said it so it has to be true even if my eyes show me different.
They are so like little children who want it and want it now and if they don’t get it it’s your fault.
I’m loving the idea that just because the Former Vice President or our UK Prime Minister says it we’re going to be able to undo years of Tom Foolery in a mater of weeks and have cheap gas and oil on tap?
I agree with your analysis, Kevin, but would you please exempt Tony Snow and Dana Perino from the Liars comment. Thank you.
It’s why I said “most”, Ron. Thanks for reminding me of Tony Snow — that seems long ago.
three step process:
But as a once famous character said. “It’s not a lie if you believe it.”
One wishes reporters were
ablewilling to dig
Looks like Jen’s getting a lot of free rent in the heads of the residents of subterranea. I like Pat Frank’s suggestion best. Get Mr. M in there to teach her what for. Go get ’em…
That Scarymommy sure is scary. She’s dumber than AOC.
I can’t imagine progressive, socialist democrat politicians surviving super high gas and food prices. Even if these huge price increases were not their fault, you can imagine the fury that voters will bring into the voting booth come November.
you can imagine the fury that voters will bring into the voting booth come November.
You can imagine all of the improvements the Democrats have made to the methods they used to install “President” Biden in the 2020 election.
2 million new democrat voters every year Courtesy of giggling Kamalla and the border voter pipeline
Everything you say about the played outedness of current leases applies even more to the new ones. They are, by definition, even more goat pastury. Which is why I agree with you that they should be offered. Development should be only allowed with best practices, a pledge for none of the normal royalty reduction begs, and there should be cash in fist on the fly, but in advance, of every development op, for asset retirement. If we did that, and imposed a carbon tax on them at he same rate as those in the 45q CCS/CCUS corporate welfare, unpaid for, winner picking, trickle ups, then I would say gofer it.
Lease boni have historically been guv revenue generators. Bidders, armed with OPM, get head up and overbid, to the benefit of the US residents who would have to pay those taxes otherwise. Unfortunately, the begging and give aways start, with drilling obligation extensions, begs for royalty reduction, and in the GOM, structures that hardly cast a shadow being skeleton crewed to delay asset retirements.
“Studies have shown that an auction without a reserve price as long Studies have shown that an auction without a reserve price, as long as it attracts at least one more bidder than a negotiation, raises more expected revenue than any negotiation procedure. Generally, the seller the seller s’ revenue goes up with increases in the number of bidders revenue goes up with increases in the number of bidders — the more competition the better.”
I knew David’s article would attract a blob-rant, and I was right.
Were you able to translate *any* of that into anything even remotely understandable??
You were certainly right about the blob-rants, they really are something else.
I’m glad you are asking that question Tony because I can make neither heads nor tails out of what BigOilBob is saying either. I thought it might just be me because I have no background in the O&G industry or geology.
What is the old saying about somebody being a few beers short of a six pack?
You should regard Big Oily Blob’s posts as a kind of Absurdist Poetry. It’s pointless looking for meaning in them.
“ I thought it might just be me because I have no background in the O&G industry or geology.“
I think it’s not just you. Since the post was about federal oil and gas leases, I made the poor assumption that more readers/posters here, were caught up with the subject. Aks me about anything specific that you don’t understand.
B O B
You should see your doctor and get evaluated for Alzheimer’s. You do have an apparent short term memory problem
Apparently you are forgetting that you wrote something and are rewriting it in the same sentence
Does a c/p overwrite actually get you overwrought? I think I’ve seen you on our Nextdoor site.
“What wass that noise outside? Must be kids. Why, when I was a kid…..”
The less relevant his claims, the more he has to disguise them.
“guv revenue generators“
You can’t say that for subsidised unreliables. All take and no give
Word salad Bob with his carbon tax nonsense. We don’t want your stupid windmills driving up energy costs.
Here’s a piece of advice. Make one or two points succinctly (that is, if you have a point). Read what you wrote: remove excess words, run-on sentences, and made-up initialisms or initialisms that aren’t widely known. Remove repetitions of the same sentence (like in your last paragraph). Refrain from giving your opinion unless you can illustrate how you came to that opinion with facts or logic. Resist the urge to spew nonsensical Demorrhea.
“and made-up initialisms”
All words are made up.
Lots of word salad of your own there. And yet no factual refutation of anything I wrote.
Your word salad was self refuting.
Refute random words that have been put through BigOilyBoob’s mental blender? WTF? There’s nothing in your comment that resembles a coherent thought.
That is the exact word, Meab! Coherent!
Boilybob’s writings and apparently reading comprehension lack coherency.
The only point the bigoldboob has is at the top of his head.
In this context, “Demorrhea” seems… autological.
Talk a deep breath and then your meds and then try speaking English.
Bob is of the “baffle them with bullshit” school.
California already has a carbon tax and gas is over $6.00 a gallon in Dan Diego.
We should be seeing a steep drop in CO2 emissions any day now, as that was the promise and the justification for the tax.
“California already has a carbon tax and gas is over $6.00 a gallon in Dan Diego.”
No, it does not. California has a cap in trade program since 2013.
“We should be seeing a steep drop in CO2 emissions any day now, as that was the promise and the justification for the tax.”
California’s per capita GHG emissions have dropped by almost a third over the last 15+ years. Yes, it started pre cap in trade. If you have a “no cap in trade” base case, we can compare.
Yawn…who cares about a drop. We need more CO2 not less, but you already know that.
Tell it to Mr. M. He is pimping unpaid for CCS/CCUS corporate welfare to benefit his current/former employer.
Fact is, even if we are 180 out on your claim, any $ given to CCS/CCUS providers should come from an equitable carbon tax, with proceeds divvied up evenly to every US resident, after the CCS/CCUS payments. If AGW is harmless, the tax and the payments should be nada. If AGW is good for us, then the projects should be taxed and the $ redistributed to the rest of us.
Love the fact that the biggest advocates for this have been the loudest deficit hawks, historically.
Please define “equitable carbon tax”, and also describe the governing body that defines “equitable”.
“Equitable” in the sense that it is equitably distributed. As in, no tobacco tax honey potting.
Now, if you’re aksing, “how high”, then that needs to come from stochastic, incremental economic analysis of the costs of AGW. But, ITMT, the ethical, common sense starting point are the trickle up payments becoming due to CCS/CCUS project owner/operators.
As for the “governing body”, COTUS/POTUS.
No problem. That would be $0.00/ton.
I thought that once the Social Benefits of Carbon were factored in…
Increased plant growth
Mildly decreased Winter Cold
Increased Food Crop production
Gradual Oasification of desert regions
Etc., etc., etc.
The cost actuals would be negative
On that provides Bob with everything that he feels he’s entitled to.
You need to write more clearly dude. Seriously, is english your 2nd language?
Sorry for the big words. We use them in the biz, but from your other posts I can see the problem. Got anything substantive? (oops, another big word).
The problem isn’t big words it’s your poor sentences. Dude seriously is english your 2nd language?
It isn’t big words that’s the problem. Your words are not in fact larger than average. It’s your inability to take those average sized words and string them into a sentence that makes sense to anyone not named Bob.
Trying to decipher the usual word salad, you seem to be claiming that anyone who doesn’t support a carbon tax wants to subsidize the oil industry.
AGW is not just harmless, it’s beneficial, as is CO2 itself.
BTW, I love the way you use any excuse to have government take money away from those who have earned it in order to give it to you. Typical self centered leftist.
Why on earth would you tax something the benefits society. You are sick.
“And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
A pretty compelling quote on Reagan’s post mortem view of your CCS pimping.
CCS was a political shill program to BENEFIT the O&G industry, you MOROON.
Who has the place to put the C?
Who has the means to pit the C there?
BUT, you are all for it because it is divvied up “every to every US resident”, lest the cost of the CCS.
You moroon, there is always your leftist DC buddies taking their share for the bureaucracy, so NO it will never be EQUITABLE.
But as all leftist, you believe MORE taxes will always be better.
This comment from you BOOB, clearly defines you for what you are, a statist leftist, and not a very bright one at that.
Look back, please. Your first sentence nicely encapsulates my view. But not Mr. M’s. You are out to lunch on what I have actually posted.
Sounds a lot like a Socialistic Wealth Redistribution scheme where the guberment takes from everyone and gives less back pocketing the remainder.
If your intent is truly to Give it back, why take it in the first place??
Cap and Trade == Tax
“Fuels Under the Cap fee, which is part of the state’s cap and trade program that requires suppliers of polluting fuels to purchase allowances to offset the emissions that result from burning those fuels. The fee varies depending on the price of the cap and trade allowances and currently comes to 14.3 cents per gallon.”
“Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which requires suppliers of fuels with high carbon intensity to purchase credits from makers of fuels with lower carbon, such as ethanol and biodiesel. This fee also varies but using recent prices, Stillwater estimated it at 22.6 cents a gallon.”
Call it what you like, but consumers can smell a tax even when it hides behind terminology like “cap and trade”.
It is qualitatively different. No $ to the guv, the “allowances” are bought and sold. Of course, whenever the amount of a commodity is “capped” the cost of it rises. But not a tax.
AGAIN, a true carbon tax, per my description in these fora, dozens of times, would be preferable.
Just more deflection from the gist of my original post. If you trickle up CCS/CCUS credits, per 45q, then:
Anything else is 180 out from (now forsaken) traditional, Republican values.
If no revenue goes to California state government, then please account for this statement:
“Revenues that California receives from the program are deposited into the state’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and then appropriated to state agencies to implement programs that further reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 35 percent of the revenues are required by law to be directed to environmentally disadvantaged and low-income communities. Since it commenced, the program has generated 5 billion dollars of total revenue.”
Which is correct? You’re trying to say “No $ to the guv”, but the “Center for Climate and Energy Solutions” group claims “the program has generated 5 billion dollars of total revenue”.
Still smells like a tax to me.
New info to me. But still, not a tax.
Is it your point that $ end up funneled away? Unfortunately, there is always this pressure. If you don’t like that, line forms behind me.
Please read, for comprehension this time, my views on a carbon tax. But here’s a summary:
Dude you should take a writing course if english is your 2nd language. If not, how do you live writing gibberish?
But BOOB , there are NO COSTS of AGW. None.
Just the cost of lunatic unreliable electrical production methods highly subsidized by governments that, in general, are a blight to the eye and the landscape, and there is no in place mechanism to ensure that the blight will be removed from the landscape.
And yes, Cali’s “cap in trade” as you call it IS a tax.
What a MAROON.
“But BOOB , there are NO COSTS of AGW. None.”
Thx for agreeing with me that Mr. M is FOS on his pimping of unpaid for, winner picking CCS/CCUS projects. Which, if you look back, was my original point…
I think you will find quite a bit of agreement on this point – government should not be in the business of picking winners and losers, especially through the use of tax dollars.
But – from the perspective of the oil companies, if the government is going to throw around free money, wouldn’t it be irresponsible of any company to turn it down? Especially if it ultimately provided a profit or community goodwill?
“If the government is going to throw around free money, wouldn’t it be irresponsible of any company to turn it down?”
Yes, it would. Even ok to legally rent seek for it – which they did – in the absence of meaningful lobbying/dark money reform. And to make matters worse, it’s bipartisan. That’s why I decried the practice only.
Yes – it’s a tax.
Forcing consumers to pay more money for a product or service, where that money is then redirected to the government for spending on something else, is a tax.
Please read, for comprehension this time, the definition of TAX from the OED:
“a compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers’ income and business profits, or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions.”
So – increasing the price of fuel (“”a compulsory contribution … levied by the government on … the cost of some goods”) whereby a portion of that money goes to the State of California (“to state revenue”) is LITERALLY a tax.
It doesn’t matter what trendy, equitable, diverse, inclusive, (insert all manner of cute phrases here) program the money is intended (at least at first) to fund – the state is adding a surcharge to the price of fuel, forcing consumers to pay it, then taking that money and moving to somewhere or someone else. Again, LITERALLY A TAX.
That is YOUR opinion. If you believe this to be FACT, please provide citations to research and data that shows this to be the case.
I thought we ALL we supposedly burdened by AGW. At least that’s what the “science” keeps telling us. If that’s the case, then the most equitable thing to do would be to give the tax money back to the person paying it, or better yet, not charge the tax. That would be equitable.
I’ve not seen a tax and spend plan yet that, at any level of government, was anywhere near your definition of equitable. Perhaps you could provide real-world examples of where a tax and spend plan was implemented that was actually equitable (per your definition)? Until I see evidence of this, I shall remain skeptical of any so-called “equitable” taxation program.
And by the way, I also thought that AGW was not limited to the United States. Why should the money come back to US citizens only? The US is not the largest emitter of CO2 anyway – perhaps China should be sending US citizens a check every year?
On this we can agree. But how about we not limit the discussion to corporate welfare for CCS? Let’s throw in corporate welfare/pork barrel spending to electric car subsidies? Windmills? Solar power projects? How about we be truly equitable about this and let consumers decide?
“On this we can agree. But how about we not limit the discussion to corporate welfare for CCS? Let’s throw in corporate welfare/pork barrel spending to electric car subsidies? Windmills? Solar power projects? How about we be truly equitable about this and let consumers decide?”
No argument on any of these. To which I will add, Ben Dover environmental, safety responsible care fossil fuel regulatory enforcement, and 11-12 figures USD of oil and gas asset retirement obligations on schedule to be shirked, just in the CONUS. Not to mention unfunded coal pensions, uncleaned up ash pits, abandoned mines.
Wanna make those historically responsible pay up, and then lose them all? Line forms behind me….
“method of reducing AGW costs”
The only “AGW costs” come from the implementation of green taxes, mandates, and subsidies.
Best way to reduce those costs is to get rid of them completely
Come on Bob
California is no different than Germany and other virtue signalers and have simply move all those emissions past their borders, importing electricity instead of doing the ugly work of actually eliminating any emissions
The per capita emissions, and the ~15 year long reduction thereof, are based on use. I have no problem with folks buying energy across state lines. Do you?
California does have a carbon tax program. The climate hippies are the ones that don’t think they have a carbon tax, so they continue to increase carbon tax and go after the non existent Cap in Trade program, (just a renamed carbon tax), then claiming they are successful at lowering carbon, which is always increasing.
Each year, fewer allowances are created and the annual cap declines. An increasing annual auction reserve (or floor) price for allowances and the reduction in annual allowances creates a steady and sustained carbon price signal to prompt action to reduce GHG emissions.
Sounds good to me.
And love the Cal love to hate. Apparently the state with among the highest fraction of STEMmers, the state with twice the fraction of new residents with STEM degrees, versus those leaving, is replete with “climate hippies”. I urge you to breathe a SCUBA tank of 35 year old LA air and then go there and breathe it now. After which we will welcome you to climate hippiedom!
I summer there, and aks the whiners living near me the same ?. Why are you here?
” then claiming they are successful at lowering carbon, which is always increasing.”
Per capita emissions have dropped for ~15 years. By nearly a third.
Yet Mauna Loa CO2 measurements continue to increase linearly showing that all of California’s CO2 climate mitigation efforts are meaningless.
Money for nothing. Such a good investment.
Are we really going to pay any attention to someone gassing about this subject who writes “cap in trade”?
How about eliminating the oil futures market? When you buy oil, you *buy oil*. Real, actual, out of the ground oil, not oil that might be pumped out sometime later. You’ll need somewhere to put it or rent storage for it. That would be incentive to get it refined ASAP. Somewhere online there’s a chart showing the price of a barrel of oil from the mid 1800’s to almost current. Aside from a brief spike during the US Civil War, the inflation adjusted price per barrel held around $4 – until the oil futures market started. Inflation of prices of just about everything else went up along with it.
I think that futures markets, hedges, collars, provide needed price information. I have nothing against them. Shale investment has remained dormant in large part because no one is willing to buy enough production at once to provide some protection from price drops, mid production schedule. Smart move….
So does the federal government require set aside funds for the decommissioning of wind and solar on federal lands BOOB.
No?? Then WHO is going to PAY BOOB?
Still can’t answer, but you are sure to mention “there should be cash in fist on the fly, but in advance, of every development op, for asset retirement.”
What a Maroon!
“So does the federal government require set aside funds for the decommissioning of wind and solar on federal lands BOOB.”
Aksed, and answered, over and over. Post after post, for months. Folks, Dan Kahan System 2 hysterical blindness redux….
In short, no.
BOB can’t get out of his own way when it comes to being wrong.
From the Final Rule
Bond determined based on reclamation cost estimate for grants. May consider salvage/recycling of project materials. If BLM approves, the bond may be less than min. amount
Bond based on rule’s standard bond amount. No reclamation cost estimate required. Lesser bond amount possible with BLM approval.
More info here:
Solar and Wind Energy Rule | Bureau of Land Management (blm.gov)
It sounds like ya’ got a skip in yur record, big guy.
a skip? his record cracked a long time ago.
People have conspiracy theories about the Deep State (which are looking more and more likely). The Brandon Maladministration has conspiracy theories about O&G producers. But they are too stupid to understand the science, or the business.
What do you expect her to say? Admit the Brandon administration fugged up everything? Truthfully say that everything FJB touches turns to Schiff?
Bear Schiff is sure hitting the fan!
I believe that the correct technical term for what the Biden regime did is “screwed the pooch.” Of course, being from the UK, I may have got the Americanism wrong.
Name abreviatons that have gone down in history
Don’t forget MJB
In art and science of argumentation, answering a question with a question is considered a sign of one or more of the following: (1) predetermined conclusion, (2) lack of preparation, (3) avoidance, (4) arrogance, or (5) lying. I would have failed a debate class in high school for answering a question with a question. But Psaki is at the top of the bureaucratic structure so there is no one who can fail her out of her position.
Deceitful … Psaki, “here is my non-response so shut up!”
And don’t even think to try to say that Biden environmental / energy policy is trading off energy and national security.
what the hell are you talking about?
(6) Just being a douchebag; intimidation; 1-5 combined. (eg. Biden).
DonM, I’m talking about the basic ability to have reasonable conversations with other human beings. Psaki can’t or doesn’t have reasonable conversations with other people. The person from the press asked Psaki a question and Psaki answered that question with a question. That is poor form. Period. And that is what I am talking about.
I get it. Sorry my comment(s) weren’t read as intended.
My first comment was an example of an added item (6) to your list.
Psaki is reflective of all of your items 1-5. Biden is reflective of item 6.
There can be legitimate reasons for answering a question with a question. Two examples are when the original questions are poorly formed or asked with malicious intent. (Have you stopped beating your wife?)
Neither of those conditions apply in this case.
Good work putting this together and presenting it, David. As a Mineral Exploration Geologist I can assure that us on the “Yellow Oil” side of the business experience the same wild swings in the project advancing/permitting process as do you “Black Gold” explorers. The intent of the Democrat Administrations, especially Carter, Clinton, Obama, and now Brandon, is to delay or stop extractive industries. Now the climate change game kicks in on the oil side. I can attest that permitting a project under these Democrat Administrations commonly meets with delay, denial, outright lying, and legal threats. The difference in the two industries is that an oil well can produce from a discovery hole, 6 to 12 months, whereas a discovery hole leads to a 10 year process to start commercial production in a mine, and this virtually guarantees changes in federal Administration.
In some areas it is getting close to 3 years to build a house.
It is just who they are.
CCS == Throwing good money & energy down a dry hole.
Paying attention, Mr, M?
“Mr. Carlo, apparently, you failed to actually read my “rant” But in any case, thanks for agreeing with it….
Maybe you should rethink the Scarlet Pimpernel language. And of course I didn’t read it.
“you failed to actually read my “rant””
That pile of incomprehensible gibberish you posted .. was that your rant ?
I think it was in his pants.
In the back.
“That pile of incomprehensible gibberish you posted .. was that your rant ?”
You have to be more specific than that, as that description pretty much fits all of the posts the bigoldboob makes.
Sounds like a place for the eternal question: “Who is John Galt?”
Ah, the silly skirt who claims increased supply does not lower prices
Must be post- modern economics
Mickey Mouse economics.
That’s a insult. You owe Mickey Mouse an apology for the insulting comparison.
When Trump left office the US was “energy independent”.
Brandon issued an Executive Order blocking what Trump had done to make us “energy independent”.
Psicki implies there’s nothing Brandon can or needs to do.
That might make sense to somebody but not me!
So the USA imports somewhere in the region of 550Mbbl from Russia and exports a little over 800Mbbl of oil, is that about right? So tell me again why does Biden need to go begging to Iran and Venezuela? Does the USA export the wrong kind of oil?
The composition of the lies by staff is in full operation with every issue. This government gone bad MO is also quite prevalent in state and local government bureaucracies of all kinds.
Agendas and the continuous maneuvers to avoid consequences drives the deceit. Much of it justified by the entitled sense of noble cause.
Why tell the truth when it would harm the good people doing good work?
There ya go that’s the recipe in a nutshell.
Easier to demonize the oil companies than to do something productive to fix things.
Big Oil assclown shills for Big Oil. Clownshow at 11.
GO Brandon! Something rotten in the state of Denmark. Don’t Sniffit for God’s sake.
Let us “Big Oil assclown shills for Big Oil” stand together
Too damned funny. Sometimes comments on this site are the best comedy to be found.
LOL, a really nice way to say something I first heard in jr high in the 50’s
Love it !
david, you were way to polite with your comment. here, let me give it a try.
hey sniffit, take your comment and the horse you rode in here on and jam-em both up your ass.
Is your first name “Adam”?
I’m no expert, but as I recall the US was energy independent in 2020. It took the current occupant 1 day to issue EOs that have made us dependent on Russian, OPEC and other oil producers in a little over a year. Now their planning deals with Maduro and Iran to try and bring down gas prices before November- Insanity! And all because they bought into the climate change scam thinking they could leverage it into creation of their ideal socialist utopia. We need a massive regime change come November. Big enough majorities in both houses to over ride vetoes (I can dream, can’t I?).
As I recall just 18 months ago Texas was producing more oil than Russia.
The news is that we will now be banning Russian oil imports, which last year amounted to 245 Mbbls. Is there some reason we couldn’t tap further into the oil reserves (amounting to 621Mbbls at last count) to say, 100 Mbbls? They aren’t called the “Strategic Petroleum Reserves” for nothing. Asking for a friend.
The problem is that this is not a short term problem and once the reserve is gone we become even more vulnerable.
The real question is how did we get from self sufficient to foreign oil dependent junky in 12 short months??? We have an administration that wants to destroy the US, that is how!!!
It is both short term and long. The SPR deals with the short term.
If they were to rescind all of Bidens anti oil EOs I would agree that the SPR could be used. But without increased production using the SPR is like using your credit card to meet monthly expenses.
More than a few people do that.
Not for long.
Only for as long as it takes them to max out their credit.
Thanks David, excellent!
The other day I mentioned that China is building huge Arctic destined ice breakers.
No surprise there, Russia’s Arcic Yamal peninsula has an awful lot of oil and gas around there.
Two Yamal pipelines go to West Europe (Nord stream & Nord stream 2); however, unlikely in the near future they might fall out of use.
But there is also proposed gas route from Western Siberia to China.
In meantime China needs to have a year round tanker access to the area.
A month ago, among all invasion talk Russia has agreed a 30-year contract to supply gas to China via a new pipeline and will settle the new gas sales in euros,
The above map is from 2019, credit S&P Global Commodity Insights
Gazprom already completed a gas pipeline to China.
I believe that the completed pipeline is the short link from the Far East Siberia that supplies Vladivostok energy terminals (see map above)
Vuk “But there is also proposed gas route from Western Siberia to China.”
Mar 1, 2022, 11:30 AM:
Just over a week ago businessinsider.com wrote:
Russia said it’s pushing ahead with building a massive natural-gas pipeline to China as Western sanctions rock its economy
New pipeline will go via Mongolia
“…The natural gas pipeline called the Power of Siberia began transporting natural gas in December 2019, providing an initial capacity of about 177 Bcf per year. The pipeline is the first natural gas pipeline to deliver Russia’s natural gas exports to China; the 1,400-mile long pipeline is connected to the Chayandinskoye field and crosses China’s border at the Heilongjiang province. The pipeline is expected to reach full capacity of about 1.3 Tcf per year by 2025, providing a substantial amount of natural gas supply and an attractive alternative fuel source for power generation to a region in China that uses high levels of coal…”
as I suspected spur of the Vladivostok pipeline
A few years ago China announced that it had a vested interest in the Arctic and demanded a share in its development. It’s not just about Arctic resources but access to Northern trade routes and increasing international recognition of China as a world leader. Access to more gas and oil won’t stop them.
Indeed, as I said in my original comment, comparing Northern sea and Suez routes, see the first link at top of this conversation stream.
3 reasons Vuk, not 2. Count them – 3! Point taken though.
West civilisation is doomed, I would think soon to be more like 1.5×10^9 reasons.
Agreed. Time to buy some food seeds for the back garden and learn Chinese.
The author discredits himself from the get-go by referring to the “shamdemic”. Really? Denying that the COVID pandemic exists.
Why is this guy Middleton allowed to post anything on this website? He’s posted some doozies here over the years, but this one literally takes the cake.
Secondly, he mentions things that the Feds can do to speed up US oil production, such as approving the Keystone XL pipeline. What, is Middleton convinced all his readers are abject idiots, and do not understand that the Keystone pipeline carries – today – Canadian oil, not US produced oil, and has been doing so for many years. The XL extension is just an alternate parallel route, the rest of the pipeline works fine, and the developers should have just stuck with their current route that does not traverse Federal lands, instead of stupidly insisting on a Federal lands route that requires Federal permits to build. Plus, even if the permit was granted, it would take years to build it. In the meantime the same oil is already being imported to the US via the existing Keystone pipeline, and by rail and by truck. The oil isn’t sitting in a big tank in Canada waiting for the new pipeline section to open up.
For someone who supposedly believes in private enterprise and free markets to complain that the Federal government isn’t doing enough to force American oil producers to produce more oil is, well, gobsmackingly stupid. It ain’t up to the government to force oil producers to produce oil.
The problem with oil prices today is an extremely simple one to diagnose – even Middleton oughta be able to get it: it’s called “supply vs. demand”. Supply dropped dramatically in 2020 do to the real world COVID pandemic which caused a world wide (not just in the US) very deep but short lived recession. Prices for oil plummeted to negative prices in April 2020, and stayed very low for the next six months. Oil producers stopped producing oil at prices below their cost, most intelligently. By the end of 2020 the v-shaped recession was already over, demand skyrocketed as people returned to work and normal routines of driving, but oil producers cannot turn on a spigot and produce a lot more oil suddenly. Demand was way up, and production has been trying to catch up ever since the end of 2020.
Then Russia happened to further disrupt oil and gas markets world wide. Prices naturally, like always, skyrocket until either production catches up to demand, or demand is suddenly curtailed (such as in another recession).
Presidents don’t cause this stuff to happen, and Presidents don’t cause this stuff to stop happening.
Markets make all this stuff happen, and markets make all this stuff stop happening. Over and over and over again. In case Middleton has been asleep like Rip Van Winkle for the last 50 years, these great cycles of swings in supply and demand have been repeated at least twice a decade for those last five decades. It’s the nature of the beast, and politicians have no control.
Still having trouble with those “supply” and “demand” concepts, aren’t you?
Duane starts with the assumption that nothing Trump did worked.
He then builds a narrative based on that.
Toss in some Russia for good measure.
“It’s the nature of the beast, and politicians have no control.” That’s true, but they think they do and sure know how to mess things up. Half century ago we had a similar problem, knew the truth about renewables and how those in cities didn’t understand the massive mass, requiring energy, transfer in and out necessary for civilization. A crude analogy but cities are parasites, better not kill the host. Some learned, but much failure in current understanding. Had a engineer friend who taught a stint in Tokyo, came back amazed.
You don’t need to have control in order to completely destroy something. Ask any drunk driver.
Covid although real was used as a tool by the Left. That is why innocuous drugs like hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were banned despite promising results.
The latest study on Ivermectin is it 70% more effective than Remdesivir in prevention deaths from/with COVID. Remdesivir cost thousands and Ivermectin cost pennies, guess which on got approved and pushed to be used against COVID. Follow the money is the code here in the good old USA now.
Links are always useful.
You can’t be this ignorant.
Your smart enough fool others with your cut & paste on other subjects.
Ignorance can’t be your excuse.
What is your true goal?
(If I am wrong, and you are just an opinionated guy with irrational ignorant leanings … see Oily Bob comments above to understand your future mental state(s).)
Hanlon’s razor strikes again; “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”
“You can’t be this ignorant.
Your smart enough fool others with your cut & paste on other subjects.”
Grammar nazis, on the other hand, are that ignorant, as they can’t see the forest for the trees.
what is your true goal?
Transporting Canadian oil by train turned out to be a horrendous mistake which incinerated large numbers of Canadians in horrific accidents. In this blog, IMHO, Middleton sticks to writing sensible pieces on matters upon which he is knowledgeable. Not sure about you Duane. Haven’t seen you express much of a sound opinion on anything.
Ah yes – the author can’t express an opinion about a subject he clearly understands very well because he made a snide remark about something completely unrelated.
By providing snide remarks, I enable mentally feeble people to participate in the conversation… 😉
… and we are thankful.
Duane must have shaved his head and greased it up.
I honestly never thought it was possible for a person to have their head wedged that far up inside their own rectum.
A1 as usual, David M.!
The natural assumption here is that the Biden administration in an attempt to be green made a mistake. Then there is this statement :
Buttigieg on Keystone Pipeline amid Ukraine Invasion: “We Don’t Want ‘Permanent Solutions’ to Short Term Problems”
This crisis has nothing to do with Russia and started way before the invasion. It was not a “Mistake” it was a calculated plan by LEFT to destroy the fossil industry. This is just part of their long term plan to destroy the US and its economy/currency along with anyone who has a dollar in savings. Don’t worry folks the New World Order will be Utopia. /s BTW the /s was for those of you who think that the NWO is something to look forward to.
I agree that it wasn’t an accidental ‘mistake’ but it was a bad blunder of pretty epic proportions.
Sorry but blunder does not imply that it is purposeful. THIS IS A PLAN! I hate people that type in caps but sometimes it is needed.
But, but, but…. your name is in caps.
“said Hugh Daigle, a petroleum researcher and professor at the University of Texas.”
Sounds like delusions of grandeur to me.
Sounds like delusions of adequacy to me.
Just a dumb question for which there is probably a good explanation: why can’t the existing producing US fields increase production by, say, 5%-10%? That would go some ways in making more oil and gas available. Thanks.
Production rates are determined by reservoir properties. Wells are produced at the rate that maximizes the ultimate recovery. We produce wells at the maximum sustainable rate irrespective of prices.
The moment a well goes on production, the reservoir pressure starts to drop and/or water begins to move up-dip and encroach on the well. If you drawdown the pressure too quickly and/or cone up water, you will ruin a perfectly good well.
The only way to increase production is through additional drilling and well recompletions & workovers… Which takes time and money.
Maybe everyone with a job can just work 5-10% more hours to make up for higher prices, or drive 5-10% less miles to save gas, or drive 5-10% more efficiently to get more miles from the same number of gallons?
I am sure there must be some reason or reasons why…
The BBC went live to Sleepy Joe this afternoon. I think he was saying much the same as Psaki. Can’t be sure though. I don’t pay too much attention when Sleepy comes on.
While VP Cackling Kameltoe Harris was making a fool of herself criticizing heavy trucks for polluting, WH spokesperson Jen “Red Star” Psaki was defending shutting down the XL Pipeline by saying the same amount of oil was still being moved from the source to the refineries ON TRUCKS and DIESEL POWERED TRAINS!!!
When the relative safety of pipelines to avoid crashes of tanker trucks and derailments of tanker trains spilling oil was made, she said that comparison was IRRELEVANT!!!
They are not “tone deaf,” this is INTENTIONAL sabotage of the fossil fuel industry and the energy sector overall to try to please the RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL WACKOS who have them by the throat and dictate energy policy.
I think you have completely misunderstood the relationship between the “environmental wacko’s” and the Biden regime – it’s a sick relationship but both sides may be consenting adults. The Biden regime appear to be willing and eager submissive’s to the demands of their Green abusive partner.
Excerpt from EQT CEO Toby Rice letter to Jennifer Granholm, U.S. Secretary of Energy:
“…The problem is very straight forward: the pipelines heading to New England are full, and as a result, we cannot physically flow that gas needed to meet growing demand without more infrastructure. That’s it.
And the way to solve this problem is equally straight forward: allow the completion of pipeline projects such as those in the table noted above, many of which are substantially complete, and let us provide the natural gas … while also reducing New England’s emissions.
The True Impact of the Infrastructure “Cancelation” Movement
What we are seeing play out in New England is the result of a symbolic attempt to address climate change by canceling pipelines, thereby isolating itself from domestic supply. I say symbolic” for a few reasons. At the time, it was argued that the natural gas that the pipelines would deliver was not necessary, and that lower emissions alternatives were all that was needed. In reality, though, since canceling the first natural gas pipeline that would have accessed New England, the consumption of natural gas by the region has increased, not decreased. The consequence has been that New England has had to look to foreign natural gas to meet its energy needs.
New England is the only region remaining in the United States that is importing LNG from foreign sources. Rather than relying on natural gas sourced from Appalachia with some of the lowest methane emissions and smallest carbon footprints on the planet, New England instead has to source foreign supply shipped from over 2,000 miles away. Not only has the cancellation movement resulted in New England’s natural gas being the least responsibly-sourced with the highest emissions in the United States, it has also caused the region to be subject to international LNG pricing. This is the reason New Englanders are paying five times more for natural gas than their neighbors…”
This is one of your best articles ever. It defines and then explains every aspect of the current fiasco and its causes clearly enough for even the room temperature IQ Leftist St Greta worshipers to understand. I am sharing a link to it on several blogs and websites that deal with politics and the environment….You are becoming legendary in the fight for Truth, Justice, and….you know, “the Thing.”
Full disclosure, my father was one of the early wildcatters. He was born in 1900 and was a combat pilot in the Army Signal Corps after our entry into World War I….I was an Air Force pilot in the Vietnam war.
After “The World War”, he started his own oil company and eventually drilled a well with Will Rogers and Wiley Post. The photo my mother kept in a bureau drawer of my father and Will Rogers and Wiley Post arms around each other with the gusher in the background in the Tulsa and Oklahoma City news papers labeled him “The Wildcatter from Texas.” It was “mostly true” since he was living in Texas at the time, but he was originally from Illinois.
Thank you for staying in the fight in spite of the constant threat of facing ruin at the hands of the “Cancel Culture” and the Deep State destroying everyone who goes against the narrative.
I find it interesting that climate alarmists and their ‘camp followers’ claim that the ‘existential problem’ we are facing is almost exclusively the result of CO2 emissions from deriving energy from the combustion of fossil fuels. Their solution is to suppress production, without a viable alternative, in order to reduce anthropogenic CO2.
So, the brain trust’s solution to high prices, resulting from their actions to reduce the supply of fossil fuels, is to ask Iran and Venezuela to make up for the shortfall. If that is successful, just as much CO2 will be generated (Actually a little more, taking into account transportation.) as would have been, had no action been taken to throttle domestic production. In other words, they will have done nothing to accomplish their actual goal, and perhaps made the situation slightly worse. At the same time, they have brought on inflation we haven’t seen in 40 years, contributed to unprecedented supply line issues, encouraged an aggressive nuclear power to invade a sovereign nation and made almost 2 million people refugees, and brought us to the brink of WWIII.
One has to be exceptionally stupid to not realize that the policies are not only not accomplishing what was supposedly intended, but are reducing the quality of life for all of the world. The alternative explanation is that it is a malicious attempt to destroy the world as we know it. Rhetorically, just who might be behind that since the current president doesn’t appear bright enough to carry it out on his own. None Dare Call It Treason!
For some additional context:
Jen Psaki should not be denied service in any Virginia area restaurants.
Instead, she should be served all her food cold.
Putin probably had a hand in the shutting down (attacks) of the two largest oil fields in Libya this week while groped around for oil with the Saudis and Maduro. Between Putin and Psaki, Americans don’t stand a chance. See the WSJ story on Biden ignoring American and Canadian oil players.
…while Biden groped around for oil
…and sniffed it’s hair
So this is where debate skills lead you–diversionary tactics in a global crisis. Hopeless.
The lease holders need to say something about the low chances of finding oil on those sites. That might win them federal stimulus funds in the cause of not finding anything but looking busy, which is the main game in DC anyway.
I come from the same stable as David Middleton. Back in the seventies when I was active in North Sea exploration I formed the opinion that whenever a politician got up to speak on anything to do with energy it was as the braying of an ass. They sounded ever so knowledgeable and yet talked complete gobbledygook. As a corollary I started to assume that when a politician spoke on a matter on which did not consider myself very knowledgeable that he/she might also still be talking nonsense. I have yet to see a major falsification of that assumption
I have yet to see many minor falsifications of that assumption, let alone any major ones. It seems to be a requirement for the job that you have no relevant skills or experience, just the ability to talk loudly enough to drown out those who do.
The same is true of journalists.
You have to envy Ukraine one thing. A president worthy of the trust and support of his nation. The decrepit whingeing old creep in the White House is unfit to lick his boots. Let him lick the boots of the crazy ayatollahs and Nicolas Maduro as he whinges and cringes to save his Green New Deal.
The Oligarch loving green coterie in Downing street are not much better.
Worthy? Obama managed to get a $12.5M mansion out of his time as president, Zelenski’s Miami mansion is worth over $34M and not far from the president of Kazakhstan’s Miami mansion. Obama must be kicking himself for getting the right job in the wrong country. You failed to extend the oligarch loving to cover the extensive Ukraine oligarchs.
Would Obama or Biden hop onto the first transport out of town as soon as the first bombs started falling?
Nope – lose too many votes. They’d wait until their position was almost surrounded then allow themselves to be persuaded “in the best interests of the country.” I’m hoping we never find out just how far Zelenski will travel down that road.
So, David, is there a news organization that would bring in a working geologist as a press conference ringer to ask Jen Psaki a pointed question, and then factually destroy her answer?
And why not you? 🙂
Pretty sure, I couldn’t resist saying, “Jen, you ignorant ****!” and dropping a few f-bombs.
Psnarki has a rather large hat size.
In the absence of significant pushback as in banning Russian oil imports, ineptitude will prevail in an administration more concerned with posturing, deflection, and outdated Party/lobbyist agenda lists.
Believe it or not, David, $3.999/gal is “cheap” for gas. Up here in my BC town, the cheapest gas today is $6.507 per US gallon ($1.719/litre).
$1.719/L — how much is that per drop?
They don’t produce energy.
But they want to control energy.
Tyranny on full display.
Don’t produce anything but want to control everything? Government 101.
Thanks for the thorough analysis of her statement.
My next question that I would like to have an answer for when talking to others like her:
Are there places in the US where oil producers already had active rigs that were shut down by the Biden admin, and where they could extract oil from again on reasonably short notice (after gathering manpower, equipment, etc.)? That is, could oil producers “flip a switch” (figuratively) and get more production online in short order if they were allowed to do so?
My research suggests that parts of ANWR are in that situation. Is there a thorough analysis of that location and others that I can point to?
The short answer is no… But your point is valid.
The long answer would be yes, but the question would be somewhat different.
I’ll try to find time to write up a post with the long answer.
You know it’s bad when Biden minions can’t acknowledge Tesla or American and Canadian oil producers in the face of a land war in Europe. Just how much did the unions and enviros buy off this Party anyway?
The sophists, propagandists, and climate crackpots along with the Brandon MalAdministration will now proceed to claim that skyrocketing worldwide hydrocarbon prices justify massive investment in more pinwheels and sunshine (i.e., unreliable, intermittent, expensive, subsidized wind and solar generation)—
IN OTHER WORDS— EXACTLY WHAT GOT EUROPE IN A MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE !!!!
Not to niggle but an Oil and Gas lease is an exclusive option to drill that will continue if production is obtained. Leases generally require a sharing of production obtained. There is no obligation to drill a well or well.
The lease gives the Oil company security to invest the sums needed to evaluate, permit, drill, and develop the lands.
Regarding Federal offshore leases… There absolutely is an obligation to drill a well.
There is no penalty for failure to drill.
Without drilling or production a lease will is ineligible to be extended beyond the primary term.
Extension of the lease is a reward for success.
By definition a Royalty is a share of production.
The penalty is that you lose the lease.
Royalties are “sharing” in the same way that “taxes” and “tariffs” are “sharing.”
Saw the “9,000 unused leases” comment from some knob and thought “Do any of them have oil that can be gotten?” I’d have asked them but I deleted my Twitter account after being locked out over a 9 year old tweet, not that such bellends would answer truthfully, if at all.
Brandon has now shifted to 9,000 permits… Might be the topic of my next post. Between November 2020 and January 2021, operators of Federal onshore oil and gas leases in New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, etc. filed thousands of permit applications, which were quickly approved. Some operators stockpiled up to 10 years worth of permits because Brandon said he would halt all permitting on Federal leases.
API lays it out here also
I was originally going to call it a “red herring”, but I couldn’t find the picture of the referee making a “red herring” call, so I went with non sequitur… 😉
API definitely laid it out very succinctly.
In the API article there is – –
My question is about the term “unproductive”.
I think he means ‘potentially productive’
What say you?
Unproductive just means the lease isn’t currently producing. The primary terms of the leases prevents us from locking up acreage for extended periods of time.
How many wells are there where a good supply of oil was found, but it was capped or plugged and has been left to sit? Such wells should be the first priority. We know where one huge one is, the one the Deepwater Horizon was in the process of doing a quick and bad job of plugging when it blew up. Start by figuring out how to tap that well. Then locate others in the gulf and on land that have been abandoned. How about a lost well bounty? Pay to find plugged and abandoned wells that were drilled ages ago by companies that don’t exist today. Open them up and if they’re good, start pumping. Finding lost underwater wells would help the environment by sealing up the leaking ones as part of the process of putting them into production.
“Pump, baby, pump!” has to come after “Drill, baby, drill!” when the drilling finds oil.
Biden could get around to approving oil exploration in the Arctic desert part of ANWR that Carter set aside for that. There’s nothing out there but rocks, moss, and lichen, possibly some insects. It’s not the forested mountains with rivers and caribou the antis like to claim it is.
None really. You don’t plug a well that is producing any material amount of oil. Oil and gas drilling is high in upfront capital low in ongoing variable cost. Generally when you drill a well you produce it as fast as the formation allows (without harming the formation) to maximize your return on capital. When production declines to the point where you aren’t covering variable cost you plug and abandon it. You’re not going to spend more capital to unplug a well that could barely cover its variable cost.
The only way to materially increase production is more leases, more seismic, more more new drilling, more pipelines to that new drilling, etc. This takes money, people and time. Hard to get all of the above while politicians are talking about banning lease sales, banning fracking and jawboning capital providers not to fund drilling. Harder, anyway.
‘Now those critics are in desperate need of help and the only people that can save them are the ones they have been demonizing for the last 10 years.’ Spoiled brats. Children who were never told ‘no’ and who were never taught self-control or to respect others. Sorry, America, you did this to yourself.
As a career oil and gas veteran it’s refreshing to glimpse some reality in a discussion about this issue. I don’t know what’s more frightening that Psaki/Biden have literally no one who understands these issue at even a basic level anywhere near them, or that they understand reality and are such shameless spewers of misinformation.
It seems all Biden actually cares about is shifting blame for problems, not solving them. This is not likely to work when in fact *you are the problem*. And I don’t mean Biden himself so much as the Democrats war on oil and gas that has been going on for decades. There’s really only one thing that makes it hard to lease, permit, frack, pipe and oil well that would otherwise be economic – Democrat politicians. There are reason why there are 7 rigs running in California and 300+ in Texas right now. Subsurface geology may have something to do with it but surface politics have an enormous impact. You can look at data that show California was once a top oil producing state but it basically sat out the last 20 years of the shale/fracking boom due to Democrats.