Okay, just a question, if we were to open up all the coast and ANWAR and all the other places that they want to drill here in the US (and our waters), how many barrels of crude would they be able to pull out each year. I've heard a lot about how many total barrels that are at these locations, but at what rate can they pull it out?

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

At peak profit/output, ANWR would only release ~850,000 bpd. That's about after 8 years of setup. Maybe a little more. After that, peak performance won't last long.

A study cited by MSNBC indicated it would only then decrease the price of oil p/b roughly 50 cents.

__________________

Jeez, well, isn't that better than nothing? And, it might buy us some more time to come up with/develop a more sustainable solution or two.

I just don't want us to become so obsessed with a mythical "perfect solution" that we end up doing nothing at all. Fiddling around while a crisis builds is bad enough, let's not continue to waste time now that the crisis is here.

__________________
This is what happens when we have panderers instead of leaders...

And what would happen if we took all of that corporate time, energy and money to mass produce something along the lines of the new Tesla hybrid getting 220 miles per gallon?

That would rock. It's something we should have had years ago,when times were good, and money was a-flowing, and was worth more than paper.

It would take leadership and vision the like we haven't seen for seventy years to get all sides in agreement and moving in a forward direction, rather than squabbling over 47 imperfect suggestions. Exxon, Chevron and Shell would have to be on board with something that would directly impact their bottom lines and profits, subsuming that in the name of the long-term greater good.

Let's calculate the likelihood of that happening, shall we?

__________________
This is what happens when we have panderers instead of leaders...

Wow- MSNBC. Collectively, they have an IQ of at least 100.

The question was, however, what is the sum-total domestic potential, not just ANWR.

That ignores the electricity used to charge it up, correct?

I come up with a figure between none and zilch.

__________________
"When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation... We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness...."
- The Declaration of Independence

The study is not by MSNBC. merely reported by it. I don't see what the collective IQ has to do with it.

The real problem is that people promote ANWR as some massive source of oil that will give great benefit, when it wouldn't. It will take a long time and a lot of investment to become profitable--only for a short period--and even then, it's output sucks. I would only approve of drilling if it does not interfere with, say, nuclear construction and other technologies.

We would be better off investing in other technologies, such as nuclear. Something that will last longer, give bigger benefit. All that money and time and effort so you can get a temporary drop 50 cent per barrel (almost imperceptible at the pump) for a few years of peak production after nearly a decade to get there? It won't do anything. It's really quite pointless. It's not even a good stop-gap measure given there's so little we will get after too long anyway.

Another problem is attempting to extend a failed system with more drilling. It's only going to delay the problem, if anything, a short while. I would predict if it did do anything, it would increase pollution more and fool people into going back to their old behaviours as if the oil crisis is over. Regardless, the US doesn't have nearly the petroleum supplies to fuel it's development and maintenance. That's why we import such much. We don't have cheap oil in abundance. US production peaked in the 70s and has gone down since.

__________________

If that were true then the profit-greedy oil companies wouldn't want to drill up there. Or maybe they just hate caribou?

I'd prefer to listen to some guys willing to put their hard-earned profits on the line then a bunch of university types, politicians, or journalists.

Let the market work.