US Oil pushes back on Biden claims

[miamited]

They would be able to increase those profits by increasing their output, even if it's for a shorter period of time. If prices then start to recede too much, they could always cut back.
If we go by what you're saying and pointing to as far as what the oil companies are doing and how much they're making, then wouldn't it make sense for them to actually cut back their production? Cut it back until oil is $200 before increasing it again. But they're not doing that, even though it would mean bigger profits.

Hi @Aldebaran

Listen, you can believe what you want to about crude oil production. I'm not involved in that business so I have to rely on people that I believe to know what they are talking about to tell me what's going on. Thus, I have included the articles that I did. Are you working in the board room of a crude oil company? If so, then I would take what you're saying as being the truth. If not, then I'm guessing that you really don't know all the ins and outs that make up the decisions that big crude oil producers use to determine if they're going to drill for more oil or not. The articles that I've linked say that they aren't, at the present time, particularly interested in drilling for new oil. They list the reasons why and you're free to accept those reasons as being valid or not. What I know, is that crude oil is about $110/bbl and that makes refined gasoline just over $3.75 in my neck of the woods.

Now, I'm sure, that a time will come when they will drill for more oil. They may even be doing some new drilling now, but as I posted in my previous explanation, bringing new oil to market is neither as cheap or as fast as turning on a new electrical service at someone's home. The oil producers had shut down a lot of drilling capabilities when the pandemic began to curtail a lot of driving and it would seem that bringing it back up to previous levels is not as easy as just flipping that electrical switch at your home either.

However, none of this has anything to do with Pres. Biden's decision to stop selling new oil leaseholds and he is now beginning to restart some of those sales but with some additional requirements in place. I will repeat, and again you are free to believe it or not, there are already 9,000 approved and ready permits for oil companies to put bits in the ground and start drilling for new oil. But it isn't cheap and it isn't fast, so don't expect there to be any changes in the next couple of months, no matter what big oil does in this situation.

God bless,
Ted

 

[hislegacy]

The people who actually are in the oil business said the following:

The head of the biggest U.S. oil lobby groups said the Biden administration is “misusing facts” when it claims the industry has more than 9,000 federal drilling permits on which it can drill to boost supply and ease soaring energy prices.

The Biden administration has repeatedly pointed to the number of approved but untapped drilling permits on federal land when questioned about how U.S. production can rise, and what the federal government can do to help.

“There’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the administration as to how the process actually works,” Sommers said in an interview on the sidelines of the conference.​

Repeating what the Administration states is repeating misunderstandings as to how the process actually works. It does not matter how many times the media dutifully follows the marching orders and bylines from the Whit House - it still not anything more than a reiteration of a misunderstanding.

The Biden administration has repeatedly pointed to the number of approved but untapped drilling permits on federal land when questioned about how U.S. production can rise, and what the federal government can do to help.

“There’s a fundamental misunderstanding of the administration as to how the process actually works,” Sommers said in an interview on the sidelines of the conference.

“Just because you have a lease doesn’t mean there’s actually oil and gas in that lease, and there has to be a lot of development that occurs between the leasing and then ultimately permitting for that acreage to be productive,” he said. “I think that they’re purposefully misusing the facts here to advantage their position.”
​

 

[miamited]

Hi @hislegacy

The head of the biggest U.S. oil lobby groups said the Biden administration is “misusing facts” when it claims the industry has more than 9,000 federal drilling permits on which it can drill to boost supply and ease soaring energy prices.

The Biden administration has repeatedly pointed to the number of approved but untapped drilling permits on federal land when questioned about how U.S. production can rise, and what the federal government can do to help.

Yes, I don't doubt for a moment that he said all of those things, but I know the difference between a 'lobby' group and the actual CEO's. No matter, what he said doesn't point to any evidence that the 'Biden administration is "misusing facts"' then means that it is his fault that oil companies are not drilling for oil. I can misuse a fact and claim that our oil is made up of colored water, but that doesn't have any bearing on anyone's efforts or ability to drill for oil.

Yes, the Biden administration has repeatedly pointed to the number of approved but untapped drilling permits on federal land when questioned about how U.S. production can rise, and what the federal government can do to help. All of that still says nothing about it being this change in leasehold sales as having any direct effect on current oil production. Those are both just two claims that the lobby group has made, neither of which speak even one ounce to the issue of 'why' U.S. companies are not drilling new oil fields.

“Just because you have a lease doesn’t mean there’s actually oil and gas in that lease, and there has to be a lot of development that occurs between the leasing and then ultimately permitting for that acreage to be productive,” he said.

Yes, that is absolutely true and applies to federal property already under leasehold just as much as it applies to any new land leases that might be offered in a lease sale. I don't get this argument as to why the land under already approved permits is one iota different than the land that is not under already approved permits. When oil companies look to lease the land available for drilling, they consider what is termed 'PUD' classification. This means that there is some measure by which there is a strong indication that there are 'proven' reserves under the dirt in question. PUD land that already has permits approved is exactly the same as PUD land that isn't under lease. There is no difference and the oil companies have not taken the steps yet to actually prove and verify that there is oil under any of it.

Most of the measurements are seismic in nature, where they can tell by the graph line of a seismic study that there are, what appear to be areas of heavy dense liquid that is likely oil. Or, it is land that sits adjacent to already producing land. Thereby expected to also have oil reserves because the land a few thousand feet away has oil reserves. In either case, there is no difference, to the oil companies, in either these categories of land, either under lease with approved permits or not under lease with no permits. There is no difference to the oil company that wants to find more oil reserves to drill.

What you have here is nothing more than what is called 'spin' or 'double speak' spoken by an oil lobbyist. It's a fairly common method of proving something by lobbyists that really doesn't prove anything, but sounds good to those who have itching ears that want to be tickled.

God bless,
Ted

 

[hislegacy]

Most of the measurements are seismic in nature, where they can tell by the graph line of a seismic study that there are, what appear to be areas of heavy dense liquid that is likely oil. Or, it is land that sits adjacent to already producing land. Thereby expected to also have oil reserves because the land a few thousand feet away has oil reserves. In either case, there is no difference, to the oil companies, in either these categories of land, either under lease with approved permits or not under lease with no permits. There is no difference to the oil company that wants to find more oil reserves to drill.

What you have here is nothing more than what is called 'spin' or 'double speak' spoken by an oil lobbyist. It's a fairly common method of proving something by lobbyists that really doesn't prove anything, but sounds good to those who have itching ears that want to be tickled.

Since you have previously stated that you have no education in this subject (same with me), we both have to depend on what we read and believe.

Therefore, your wealth of words does not equate to a wealth of knowledge and also does not prove anything, but sounds good to those with itching ears.

And that my friend is why I believe you purposely did not finish the quote:

“I think that they’re purposefully misusing the facts here to advantage their position.”
​

Because this flies in the face of the talking points offered.

 

[hislegacy]

Quote: Joe Biden 2019

During a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Sept. 6, 2019, Biden sought to reassure a climate activist of his commitment to ending fossil fuels. After stating unequivocally that he would not ban fracking, Biden told the activist: "But, kiddo, I want you to just take a look, OK? You don’t have to agree, but I want you to look in my eyes. I guarantee you, I guarantee you we are going to end fossil fuel and I am not going to cooperate with them, OK?"

​

For those who are able to read the other side off the issue, I found the most comprehensive list on FOX Business.

Biden keeping his promise to ‘end fossil fuel’ increased gas prices, RSC memo shows

 

[miamited]

Hi @hislegacy

Therefore, your wealth of words does not equate to a wealth of knowledge and also does not prove anything, but sounds good to those with itching ears.

Well, I'm certainly willing to admit that my 'wealth of words does not equate to a wealth of knowledge'. Based on your admitting that you have about as much hands on knowledge of the subject as I do. How about you. Are you willing to publicly admit here and now that your wealth of words doesn't prove anything?

God bless,
Ted

 

[hislegacy]

Hi @hislegacy



Well, I'm certainly willing to admit that my 'wealth of words does not equate to a wealth of knowledge'. Based on your admitting that you have about as much hands on knowledge of the subject as I do. How about you. Are you willing to publicly admit here and now that your wealth of words doesn't prove anything?

God bless,
Ted

I said exactly that in the paragraph right before the one you quoted. Did you miss it?

Did you read my last link?

 

[miamited]

Hi @hislegacy

Good! Then we're agreed that we neither one know what we're talking about. Tell me again, what is the purpose of the discussion if that's the case? Why do you even post this thread if you don't know what you're talking about?

God bless,
Ted

 

[hislegacy]

Hi @hislegacy

Good! Then we're agreed that we neither one know what we're talking about. Tell me again, what is the purpose of the discussion if that's the case? Why do you even post this thread if you don't know what you're talking about?

God bless,
Ted

The very same reason you responded to it and every other one that you choose to respond in depth, even thought you don’t know what you are talking about.

Ever read that link?

 

[Ray Glenn]

There is a lot of misunderstanding concerning oil leases and production. The public is being lied to concerning what Biden and his Administration have done to the oil industry. When Trump started, the goal was to abolish five regulations for every one passed. That eliminated over one trillion dollars per year in manufacturing costs to US Industry alone. The Biden Administration has done exactly what Obama was doing, Regulate US Manufacturing into oblivion. Oil regulations have increased astronomically since Biden became President and it's growing worse. At the same time, the major banks have implemented CSG scores making it harder for Oil Companies to finance the drilling for il. All a part of the Climate Change myth.

The Electric Utility industry and what's in store for consumers. There are over 900 Electric Utilities in the US. IOU's (Investor Owned Utilites), Government (Municipals and County) and Co-Ops. The first myth ...When we began the first Cyber Security IEEE Committee, one Engineer suggested that all the Utilities become connected using a universal program. I declared that making that move gives one hacker the ability to get in the system and shut it down. That universal idea was crushed immediately. Every Utility has it's own programmed system, working outside of the internet. Face it, they are competitors. They share only what they want to share, nothing more. There so many gates to break through, hacking is virtually impossible, especially when it comes to taking down the grid. Protection Relays would open breakers if a neighbor Utility was receiving shut down orders from a foreign entity.

Right now, The system must, at all times, have spinning reserve present to prevent shut downs when clouds roll in, solar farms stop producing and when the wind stops blowing. The spinning reserve takes over for two entities that were never created to be primary power producers. Wind and Solar are Co-Gens nothing more. The next problem is that system owners lie about their production capability. 145 Wind Towers do not produce 24/7 365 days a year. The location is sold as nameplate at 24/7 365 instead of reality. Reality is along the lines of 25-30% of nameplate.

The public has been conned. Both Wind and Solar must have a transmission line with a power plant at the source running down line. Why? Because both Wind and Solar consume energy before they produce. Let's use wind. This is not the pinwheel Dad bought you at KMart. You are moving tons of material before catching enough wind to produce. The computers on a tower read wind velocity and when everything seems to be right ...The Motors start. The turbine is turned into the wind. The blades are pitched to catch enough wind to shut off the motors. Why do I know this? 150 Wind Farms and 50 Solar Farms. I've been 200 feet off the ground in the turbines. Why do I detest them? We came up with the only purpose making sense for a wind farm over the Oregon Gorge. That is ranch land. Each farm has 150 plus turbines....Each tower casts a 300 shadow .... The Black Angus searching for shade, lined up each morning in a line and followed that shade all day long. Nothing more than a shade tree for cows. You lose all that production plus manufacturing trash burners at night .....Now you want to strain the system with every home demanding power to charge their car batteries. Toyota has a better idea. Hydrogen.

 

[Ray Glenn]

Sorry ...

 

[Aldebaran]

Hi @Aldebaran

Listen, you can believe what you want to about crude oil production. I'm not involved in that business so I have to rely on people that I believe to know what they are talking about to tell me what's going on. Thus, I have included the articles that I did. Are you working in the board room of a crude oil company? If so, then I would take what you're saying as being the truth. If not, then I'm guessing that you really don't know all the ins and outs that make up the decisions that big crude oil producers use to determine if they're going to drill for more oil or not. The articles that I've linked say that they aren't, at the present time, particularly interested in drilling for new oil. They list the reasons why and you're free to accept those reasons as being valid or not. What I know, is that crude oil is about $110/bbl and that makes refined gasoline just over $3.75 in my neck of the woods.

Now, I'm sure, that a time will come when they will drill for more oil. They may even be doing some new drilling now, but as I posted in my previous explanation, bringing new oil to market is neither as cheap or as fast as turning on a new electrical service at someone's home. The oil producers had shut down a lot of drilling capabilities when the pandemic began to curtail a lot of driving and it would seem that bringing it back up to previous levels is not as easy as just flipping that electrical switch at your home either.

However, none of this has anything to do with Pres. Biden's decision to stop selling new oil leaseholds and he is now beginning to restart some of those sales but with some additional requirements in place. I will repeat, and again you are free to believe it or not, there are already 9,000 approved and ready permits for oil companies to put bits in the ground and start drilling for new oil. But it isn't cheap and it isn't fast, so don't expect there to be any changes in the next couple of months, no matter what big oil does in this situation.

God bless,
Ted

If biden wasn't getting in the way of drilling, then explain this: Biden administration to resume leasing for oil and gas drilling on federal lands

Why would he need to "resume" something that was always there?

 

[miamited]

Hi @Aldebaran

If biden wasn't getting in the way of drilling, then explain this: Biden administration to resume leasing for oil and gas drilling on federal lands

Why would he need to "resume" something that was always there?

Because he had it looked into and raised the lease rates to be more competitive and profitable for government coffers. I imagine that it was also studied and decided what properties should actually be made available for leaseholds.

So, while the lease sales were halted, which didn't really have any effect on new drilling, the BLM was able to come back with what they believed to be better properties offered and also increase the federal revenue. As I think I said very early on in this debate, I don't think it was ever a matter of never leasing federal lands again. It was a matter of looking over the process and improving it for the federal government's (and therefore the people's) benefit. Here's a blurb from the Dept. of the Interior:

The fiscal components of the onshore Federal oil and gas program are particularly outdated, with royalty rates that have not been raised for 100 years.

Big oil has long taken advantage of the government's largess in leasing and holding these properties for 10 year terms. Meanwhile the property can't be used for other worthwhile programs while under lease. Now the leases cost more and so, hopefully, Big Oil won't be so anxious to just pay for some cheap lease to hold onto federal lands for no good reason. As was also pointed out in an earlier linked article, there is an argument made that a lot of these Big Oil companies just wanted the land on their books to make the company 'look' more profitable for its investors.

Personally, I'm not deeply enough involved with the issue to make any absolute claims. But that would be my answer to your question.

God bless,
Ted

 

[Ray Glenn]

"Big oil has long taken advantage of the government's largess in leasing and holding these properties for 10 year terms."

The government negotiated those terms in good faith. If the government wants to change them, sit down and make the change.

This is one of the most absurd statements made. What is stopped? The Government doesn't own private land. They can't stop leasing in the places they can't control. So what exactly are we debating here?

Leases on unused federal lands. Maybe the Government wanted to open a park in the desert or artic circle?

This is all a part of the insane effort to destroy the US economy to force New Green Deal issues that are not what the "Experts" say they are. When you have a science that sold their souls for the myth of Global Warming and positioned themselves as prostitutes at the alter .....This is not science.

This means there is vast misunderstanding of what is being positioned in the background. Start researching ESG scores by big banks. All a part of the New Green Deal. That's why "Red States" are initiating legislation to stop the practice of this insanity.

 

[miamited]

Hi @Ray Glenn

The government negotiated those terms in good faith. If the government wants to change them, sit down and make the change.

That's exactly what the government BLM has done.

This is one of the most absurd statements made. What is stopped? The Government doesn't own private land. They can't stop leasing in the places they can't control. So what exactly are we debating here?

It would seem that you don't have any understanding of the government's role and activities in federal land leases.

Leases on unused federal lands. Maybe the Government wanted to open a park in the desert or artic circle?

Again, no understanding of the process and how it works. Not all of the leased land is in the desert or the Arctic circle. Over 1 million acres are under federal land lease for oil and gas exploration and development in North Dakota. Over 2 million in Colorado. Over 8 million in Wyoming.

If you'd like to know more, read here:

The Oil Industry's Public Lands Stockpile

God bless,
Ted

 

[Ray Glenn]

Take note on what was addressed "Federal Lands" The only thing that Biden can control. However, he can and has started the Democrat process of overregulating the industry. Overregulation restricts production. I saw in the circus that was Congress grilling the Oil Execs....one Republican bring the stack of new regulations, post Trump, produced by the Government, since tree huggers took over the Departments. All based on oil production.

The US does not control the market and uses OPEC to determine the price of a barrel of oil. Due to Biden's missteps to satisfy the Squad and John Kerry ....the US is importing oil at the OPEC set price.

Another point .... Let's use a make believe number on oil profit. If you know nothing about the overall profit and loss of a corporation ....most of the population doesn't

Hi @Ray Glenn



That's exactly what the government BLM has done.



It would seem that you don't have any understanding of the government's role and activities in federal land leases.



Again, no understanding of the process and how it works. Not all of the leased land is in the desert or the Arctic circle. Over 1 million acres are under federal land lease for oil and gas exploration and development in North Dakota. Over 2 million in Colorado. Over 8 million in Wyoming.

If you'd like to know more, read here:

The Oil Industry's Public Lands Stockpile

God bless,
Ted

 

[Ray Glenn]

To use the old Bear Bryant Tide football analogy, you put 150 guys on scholarship, not because they are needed, but to prevent someone else from getting them and beating you with the players you never intended to field. Today that number is down to 85.

Oil Companies gobble up those leases simply because they are there. So did BLM change the length of lease? BLM terminated the lease, it was meant for another purpose. Everything you read is now driven from the myth of Man caused Climate Change. If I recall in January, the Biden Admin (BLM) terminated the leases. They did not add or subtract years, they terminated with no intent to allow drilling at all.

I read the attachment , thank you. Consider this, especially since I am most familiar with Wyoming and the pockets in most of the west.

When the author uses statements like preventing the taxpayers from using the land ....For What Purpose? Those lands were only productive when thousands of buffalo roamed the plains. Exactly what purpose does the taxpayer desire from the property. Want productive uses? How about selling most of that land and let cattle graze, or leasing the property to ranchers? It's too bad that grazing requires 35 acres per animal.

A National Park? Want another one that no one uses? Most of land is technically a national park. The government owns it and doesn't allow anything to happen there. Go to Yellowstone or Devil's Tower or to Montana at Custer. Wyoming is why the joke now is that if Liz Cheney can get the drive by cattle, Elk, Moose , Deer and Pronghorn vote, she'll win in landslide.

I appreciate the work you are putting into this.

 

[Fantine]

Making matters worse, the process of refining lithium also uses toxic chemicals like hydrochloric acid, which can leach into local ecosystems and habitats.

Researchers in Nevada found that pollution from mining chemicals had effects on fish as far as 150 miles downstream from a lithium mining operation.

Researchers are finding better ways to mine lithium without excessive water use or pollution. One such company has a large operation in El Dorado, Arkansas, home of Murphy Oil.
Given the huge upside to clean energy, I am glad that companies like Standard Lithium are providing jobs in my home state while making electric car batteries safer.
Standard Lithium Ltd. (SLI)

 

[Aldebaran]

Researchers are finding better ways to mine lithium without excessive water use or pollution. One such company has a large operation in El Dorado, Arkansas, home of Murphy Oil.
Given the huge upside to clean energy, I am glad that companies like Standard Lithium are providing jobs in my home state while making electric car batteries safer.
Standard Lithium Ltd. (SLI)

Since you only provide a link to the company making the claim (and the money), we'll just have to take their word for whatever they're claiming.

 

[Fantine]

I said that they were researching. They are conducting a pilot project. At least they are embracing the imperative to make energy cleaner---rather than oil companies whose mantra is deregulation.

Other companies are pursuing the same goals.
New tech will free cheaper, cleaner lithium supply – report - MINING.COM