Thanks for talking about it.

I have heard that all of the rigs capable of doing the job are already booked for the next five years and even if one was to build new ships, it would take three to five years before they could be launched. Is this true and if so, with current oil prices so low, can new ships/drilling be profitable?? Wouldn’t it be cheaper to restart idled land-based wells, that I see all the time, than to drill new wells offshore??

If a beach resort’s view is ruined by unsightly offshore rigs, should those businesses be compensated for lost business??

Eventually, we all know there will be oil spills, whether caused by nature or man. We also know that oil spills in open water are particularly problematic. Who should pay for the cleanup when we know what happened with the Exxon Valdez?? Is this another case of Private profits and Public liabilities??

I’m not advocating not doing it, I actually think we’re in agreement on that point – my comments are focused on zero dollars to the drillers since they’ll figure out a way to pay for it if they can make a profit. Meanwhile full concentration, and maximum financial support should be given to those areas in our economy that can develop alternative energy sources as we no longer support and under write the oil companies.

Just because we drill in American waters doesn’t mean that oil comes to us – it will be shipped to the area that allows for the greatest profit – do you think Alaskan oil is used solely in the US? Oil is sold as a global commodity and it will continue to be whether we drill or not. If the oil companies make more money shipping the oil to Europe and off set that by importing cheaper oil from somewhere else they can and will.

Terry, temporary in what sense? Surely not in the “therefore we can simply dismiss it as useful or important” sense.

We’re not going to run out of oil any time soon, not based on known reserves. I am fine with making a transition simply because we know that oil resources are finite. But it strains my credulity to suggest we ought not to ensure adequate resources for current needs when we have not yet come up with a comprehensively viable alternative available at anything resembling a comparable cost.

Our oil dependency is one of the major reasons we are so militaristically involved in the Middle East, as well as a main contributor for the disdain in which we are held all over that region.

Um, wouldn’t that be a strong argument in favor of offshore drilling, since we are talking about augmenting our domestic supply?

Here’s the thing: it makes sense BOTH to devote more resources to alternative fuels _AND_ to pursue extraction of available resources. IF we don’t so that, and other nations do, we voluntarily put our nation at a disadvantage. For example, every time that we pay a few pennies more for a gallon of gas that includes x percent ethanol which costs more per gallon than gasoline _AND_ includes less energy. I know that every time I fill my talk I ask myself whether we are doing any real good, or just making some folks feel better.

Every gallon of fossil fuel we don’t use is just one gallon that can be bought by China or some other less scrupulous nation for a few pennies less.