Oil in America

Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks? [/quote]

Not sure how much, but this seems like a loaded question. Specifically mentioning our national parks. The single worst environmental effect from drilling is actually cutting down trees to make roads available to transport that oil.

A minor issue really. (Otherwise they wouldn’t allow any roads into these parks.)

But I do know that the oil companies have paid billions for the rights to drill. If they do not drill over a specific time, they lose those rights.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

On the general concept of, would it make sense to have a plan to hold back given undeveloped oil fields for scheduled future dates, I agree that could make sense.

If the position of the left was that they felt that, for example, the oil off of California should be saved till 2015, then start tapping the oil off Florida in 2025, then begin drilling in ANWR in 2035 as part of a long-term plan to guarantee America had good domestic oil production into the near and mid-term future, while I wouldn’t agree with it I would hardly consider it treasonous or stupid.


[/quote]

You have given some good information, (which the left will ignore, unfortunately,) but I disagree with doing the above. I think all the land should be made available, and then let the market dictate when to drill where.

If oil prices climb, the oil companies will increase production, and if it falls, they will delay that production. (Or even cap wells as they did in the 90’s, when oil was as low as $10 a barrel.)

Plus with the 1.5 trillion barrels worth of oil in the Green River Basin, (800 billion barrels extractable at current technology, and at an estimate of less then $20 a barrel using in-situ methods,) I cannot see any strategic reason to hold off on drilling.

By the time we actually would have ran out, we most likely will have moved beyond oil anyway.

Oh yeah. I should mention that according to infoplease, ( Sources of U.S. Oil Imports ) we import 58% of the oil we use. (Which should mean we produce 42% of it.)

Then we get 11% from Canada, and 11% from Mexico. (Interestingly I thought we got 50% from Canada.) That means we get 64% from North American sources. And 36% from other, non-North American sources.

That means we only need 7.5 million barrels a day more produced to be able to achieve 100% North American source.

But I don’t think we really need to worry about getting oil only from North American sources. But we should be cognizant of where we do get it from.

[quote]The Mage wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:

On the general concept of, would it make sense to have a plan to hold back given undeveloped oil fields for scheduled future dates, I agree that could make sense.

If the position of the left was that they felt that, for example, the oil off of California should be saved till 2015, then start tapping the oil off Florida in 2025, then begin drilling in ANWR in 2035 as part of a long-term plan to guarantee America had good domestic oil production into the near and mid-term future, while I wouldn’t agree with it I would hardly consider it treasonous or stupid.

You have given some good information, (which the left will ignore, unfortunately,) but I disagree with doing the above. I think all the land should be made available, and then let the market dictate when to drill where.
[/quote]

I would disagree for the same reason.

But if that were the reason and plan of the left as to why not at present drill in those areas, then while I wouldn’t agree with it, it would not be as bad a plan as intending to leave trillions of dollars of oil in the ground forever “to save the planet” as is their actual plan for that oil.

The main reason I brought it up is sometimes Democrat-leaning people argue, in favor of not drilling, Well what about the future? to which my reply is that if it would be one thing if the Democratic leadership were arguing a plan such as the above, but they are not: what they want is for it never to be drilled, period.

The left has seen too many post-apocalyptic films.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks? [/quote]

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections. This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price. If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.). They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Anyone who cannot see that this debate is about crippling the US and not saving the environment should not be allowed to reproduce.

Really, this one is nit wittery to the nth degree. The one heartening fact is that most Americans don’t really buy this crap when the chips are down.

When polled generally, they’ll show enlightened concern that there’s probably something to this whole environmental disaster thing.

Poll them when gas is 4 bucks a gallon and ask if they’d be willing to pay more to stop climate change and save the planet? NO WAY!!! High 70’s say drill anywhere you have to, just get these prices down.

Nobody (well, almost nobody) who thought the world was going to literally end would say that their budget was more important. They may say the politically correct thing sometimes, but they don’t really buy it when asked to put their money where their mouth is.

Now here’s the part where the elitists step in and cry about how this is why they have to be put in charge to save us from ourselves. [/quote]

?

[quote]rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections. This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price. If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.). They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park. [/quote]

I would doubt that we have many politicians that would have the savvy to negotiate that good of contract on America�??s behalf

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections. This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price. If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.). They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park.

I would doubt that we have many politicians that would have the savvy to negotiate that good of contract on America’s behalf

[/quote]

You have evidently never attempted to read the tax code.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections.

This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price.

If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.).

They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park.

I would doubt that we have many politicians that would have the savvy to negotiate that good of contract on America’s behalf

You have evidently never attempted to read the tax code.

[/quote]

I am guessing tax code was written by Bean counters Lawyers and Lobbyist

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections.

This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price.

If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.).

They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park.

I would doubt that we have many politicians that would have the savvy to negotiate that good of contract on America’s behalf

You have evidently never attempted to read the tax code.

I am guessing tax code was written by Bean counters Lawyers and Lobbyist

[/quote]

Lawyers and lawmakers.

If you want to have a discussion, try doing so without the cynicism. You don’t know enough about the subject at hand to pull it off without sounding dumb.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections.

This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price.

If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.).

They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park.

I would doubt that we have many politicians that would have the savvy to negotiate that good of contract on America’s behalf

You have evidently never attempted to read the tax code.

I am guessing tax code was written by Bean counters Lawyers and Lobbyist

Lawyers and lawmakers.

If you want to have a discussion, try doing so without the cynicism. You don’t know enough about the subject at hand to pull it off without sounding dumb. [/quote]

I see this forum as an opportunity, to communicate with like minded people and to derive a little amusement. Not to argue or belittle any one. I am beginning to think it a waste of time.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
rainjack wrote:
pittbulll wrote:
Well how much do big oil companies pay America to drill for oil in our National parks?

I’m pretty sure they do the same deal with the National Parks as they do with any property owner.

  1. They pay the land owner a lease up front for the right to drill on a particular parcel of land. Out here, they will lease one section (one square mile - 640 acres), and the adjoining sections.

This lease is usually a 5 year lease with a 2 year option, meaning that no one but the leasing company has the right to enter the property to drill for 5 years. They can automatically re lease the land for an additional 2 years at the agreed upon price.

If, after that time period, no drilling has taken place - the leasing company loses all rights negotiated under the lease.

This lease amount can vary quite widely. I have seen some oil leases go for $5/acre all the way up to $3,000/acre. The higher the price, the more certain they are of finding oil,or gas.

  1. Part of the lease includes a royalty amount. This is the amount of money the oil company will pay the landowner for each barrel of oil produced and each MCF of nat gas produced. The royalty amounts can vary wildly, and are usually expressed in fractions (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 etc.).

They are based on the cash price for oil and gas at the time, less pumping costs.

So let’s say oil is $100/barrel. If I have a 1/4 royalty interest in a well that is producing 100 barrels a day, I would be making damn near $2500/day.

That would be exactly what the US would be making on a well drilled in a National Park.

I would doubt that we have many politicians that would have the savvy to negotiate that good of contract on America’s behalf

You have evidently never attempted to read the tax code.

I am guessing tax code was written by Bean counters Lawyers and Lobbyist

Lawyers and lawmakers.

If you want to have a discussion, try doing so without the cynicism. You don’t know enough about the subject at hand to pull it off without sounding dumb.

I see this forum as an opportunity, to communicate with like minded people and to derive a little amusement. Not to argue or belittle any one. I am beginning to think it a waste of time.

[/quote]

I hate that you’re just now figuring this out…seriously. Its only a forum…nothing more…say what you want.