If the US wasn’t so limited in where it could harvest oil, would gas be cheaper?

Greater supply is good when the supply is greater than demand the price goes down. But, we don’t want to contribute to lower gas prices by drilling for oil. We’d rather be over the OPEC barrel for ever.
Why not allow more drilling on US territory?
Brilliant arguement I have to admit!
Because demand has risen, lets just keep the supply the same forever! I get the feeling someone here is working for an oil company, or a gas station somewhere………
Classic arguement made at least twice by people who are for Big Oil. We cannot keep up with demand, therefore, we should not even try.
Nice, that way we can just pay more and more for less because there is no point in trying. Propaganda.

22 Responses to “If the US wasn’t so limited in where it could harvest oil, would gas be cheaper?”

  1. iceman Says:

    Instead of spending $ T’s , to kill the innocents and defenseless, hire a team of scientists, and they’ll give you the alternate fuel or energy source you need in less than 5 years!
    If you couldn’t find any one , give me a call !

    But do you think the criminal Elites and big fat corps. like such idea?


  2. goo_head_83 Says:

    No because the world demand for oil has risen. 1 billion people in China not want oil and that is what drives the prices up.

  3. Why Don't People Like Me? Says:

    Because environmentalists are hand cuffing the oil industry in America.

  4. Darlin Says:

    Yes. Good Question.

    Democrats STOPPED THE DRILLING in:

    1. Anwr.
    2. Off Shore.
    3. On Oil Rich Government Land.

    Why???? Because the Environmentalists give the Democrat Party Millions of Dollars each Election—– to get the price of Oil & Gas HIGHER.

    We have been Sold Out by the Democrats & Environmentalists.

  5. K C Says:

    Simple answer, oil reserves in the US are about used up. Like it or not, oil will be gone in our lifetime. I don’t care how much people whine, it will be gone, and it will only get more expensive.

  6. B.Kevorkian Says:

    Not particularly, no. Refinery capacity is a serious limitting factor on domestic suply, so the price would be similar. Most oil resources in the US are relatively high-cost, meaning they can only economically be used when oil prices or high – or they are subsidised, as they are, still, today.

    Adding a refinery would reduce the cost of gas a bit.

  7. BigRichGuy Says:

    It might go down a little. The problem we have is with refining capacity. The good thing, though, is that we would be less dependant on countries that hate us.

  8. ChestyPuller Says:

    The places are there, Alaska, Now South dakota , and North..Wyoming..all have new reserves of oil..google it and see.
    What stops us are the same liberals that cry about Oil for blood from the middle east, But fight to stop the US from getting our own OIL…They have their pockets lined by the Saudi’s too..you better believe it..
    Can you say hypocrite ?

  9. Pater Patriae Says:


  10. Hillary HUSSEIN Lite BOO HOO HOO Says:

    Not when the Oil company executives are taking home trillions.~!!

  11. Consuming Fire Says:

    Yes, definitely, if we could drill in ANWR, and drill more in the Gulf of Mexico, and off the coast of Florida.

  12. CrazyJ Says:

    If you’re talking about ANWR, it’s about 4.7 billion barrels and even if it only supplied 5% of the US oil demand, would last only 12 years. Frankly the controversy over the supply has gone on longer than the how long the oil would last in the first place. So if Alaska was allowed to be drilled when it was originally proposed, it would definitely be dry by now anyway.

    So yes, I suppose it could temporarily reduce the gas price if the oil companies didn’t just pocket the difference under the greater demand in the world economy, but it a very short term solution to a long term problem honestly.

  13. x x Says:

    We need only to say we are going to drill in ANWR and gas prices would fall 30%. It would take 10 years to get a drop but it would have that effect.
    Liberal/democrat do gooders are the problem.
    A nuclear power plant should be built every 6 mos for 10 years.
    p.s. Oil is not subject to supply and demand of a free market. It’s supply is controled at the source, couple that with the media telling you there is higher demand (most times not true or a cycle that the oil companies should plan for) we are going to get screwed every time.

  14. j dog m Says:

    Anyone that thinks the price of fuel goes up because of ethanol is mistaken.Anyone that thinks food goes up because of corn being converted to ethanol is mistaken.Keep rich people from playing the futures market and creating a nonexistent shortage prices will go down.

  15. airlines charge for the seat. Says:

    I don’t think so. Even if the demand was great, American products cost more than products from abroad. The greater the supply the more they will make money.
    I agree that our US should drill more on US territory.
    Maybe the US like being slaves of OPEC. Usually insecure people depend on others huh?

  16. Shylock Says:

    I’ll tell you what – let’s compromise.

    We mandate minimum fuel effciency standards of at least 40 MPG for all personal transport (say bye to the 14 MPG Hummers and other gluttonous ego-machines), and we can drill wherever we damn well please.

    What do you say – deal?

  17. Kevin g Says:

    I kind of like the Idea that when the rest of the world runs out of oil, we will still have reserves so we can produce plastic for IV bags. The rising prices will drive innovation so that hopefully we will have found a means of producing enough energy without oil before we run out.

  18. mbush40 Says:

    In one of the Dakotas, they have just found one of the richest deposits in the world. It would provide many, many jobs, and reduce the price of fuel in half. If we the people stood up to this government, and the environmentalists like we did not long ago on the immagration bill, they would have no choice but to drill the be-jeebus out of it. You would see a mass reduction on gas prices, and terrorists would stop getting our money. Drilling Dakota boosts jobs, boosts the dollar, stop paying for the terrorism we are fighting against. Put that in your tree hugging hippy pipe and smoke it Mr. Environmentalist.

  19. smash mouth Says:

    no it won’t,the world demand for oil has risen. if we were drilling in alaska the big oil execs just be selling it to china and others

    even if we were drilling in alska the oil company woudn’t give up their 100 a barrel profits.yesterday congress public hearing with big oil about the gas prices.one congressmen ask the oils executives "since you’re making record profits,have you ever thought about lower gas prices to take some of the strain off people?"

    the executives were silent didn’t even answer the question

  20. Janet Says:

    One of the big problems in USA is no new refineries. If we built refinereies it would go a long way toward bring down the price of gas and diesel. You can’t force a bananna through a key hole.

  21. Mark T Says:

    This is a long answer but hopefully gives a good answer to a question that deserves one


    Well, put frankly we can and have largely opened the spigot in the lower 48 states, since 1972, the US government has allowed unrestricted drilling in the lower 48 subject only to states particular restrictions. Save Yellowstone, and some parts of upstate New York (where there probably isn’t much oil to be had anyway in either location), the lower 48 are fully explored and were mostly in productive decline by the mid 1970’s.

    The Alaskan oil/gas reserves could certainly be utilized in about 10 years, (that’s about how long it would take to build the pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to the best spots of the Alaskan Reserve), and they would last about 10-15 years depending on how hard we tried to extract.

    This misses the point, however, ANWAR, or mandated offshore drilling or whatever.

    A very little known fact is that prior to about 1990 for every dollar invested in exploration or drilling, you got a return on investment, over 50 years, with all the recent advances (since the 1990’s with computers), most all of the oil available for drilling on the planet has been discovered.

    Since 2000 however, the while the rate of and expenditures for exploration has skyrocketed, rate of discovery for every dollar invested in exploration has PLUMETTED. The problem is that will billions of dollars invested, it’s not that they are coming up totally empty, but that the finds they discover are very small.

    There are three major areas of the planet which are not well explored as of yet.

    The Arctic & Antarctic archipelago – there are probably quite alot of reserves however, the infrastructures needed and environmental conditions are so harsh that it would be decades until we could reliably even survey let alone access any available oil.

    Suffice it to say, unless they found a Ghawar* type geological reserve (there’s no reason to suggest they would), it might only then be worth it.

    Sub-Saharan Africa – Largely due to post-colonial corruption and bad infrastructures, large portions of sub-Saharan africa have never been properly surveyed, (that will change in the next decade however).

    The deep oceans – It’s quite possible that there are reserves available in the southern pacific or elsewhere in very remote areas, which would make the North Sea seem positively close at hand.

    At the end of the day, given the massive investment in exploration,planetary oil production more or less "peaked" at about 81-82 million barrels of oil about 4 years ago.

    This is the REAL focus for the recent increases in costs to consumers. Forget taxes or environmental add-ons or whatever, if you live in the US or Australia, the taxes for fuel are fractionally trivial compared to other nations and constitute (typically) around 5-10% of the cost at the pump.

    Japan, Germany, China and England (our traditional / future competition) all have taxes on gasoline that would make most Americans faint, (typically 100-200% of the raw-cost, so a gallon of gasoline can cost, in inflation adjusted dollars about 7-10 bucks a gallon.

    The problem here is overall planetary demand, currently all nations combined use about 105-115 million barrels a day, the US uses about 14 million barrels a day.

    This demand is increasing at about 2-3 percent per year.

    This accounts for the largest amount of the increase in price.

    We are quickly running through any overages and gaps , such that our demand vs. available reserves is razor thin, (about a 1-2 million barrel – per day gap), since there is no slack or lee-way in the market, any Jihadi with a microphone and a bad attitude, or workers strike or accident or bad weather somewhere can and does cause a major market price change.

    This is historically unprecedented and is the major cause for volatility in the marketplace.

    At this rate – in about 30 years, as we will run through the existing reserves and older supplies which we are drawing upon to make up the "gap" between 82 million and 110million+. The demand will become in fact be constrained by the available supply (it practically is now).

    Since a LARGE portion of the ruling/business class of the US
    feels that this is not possible, they are in for a very large shock. The first time this happened was in 1971-3 and again in 1979-80.

    If you’re old enough, you’ll remember just how much fun that was, if not, let’s just say it sucked pretty bad.

    While I personally think that technology will allow us to produce – perhaps – several million gallons of gasoline via other methods (algae bioreactors, or by refining the VAST Canadian tar-sands), the costs for both of these methods will be higher – costing about 7-8 dollars a gallon.

    Unscrewing ourselves
    The bigger question is , how much of the US population can really afford to pay 80 bucks to fill up. How can truckers continue to do business or public services (like school buses or public transit), to say nothing of farmers.

    A few years ago worrying about oil was cast as a liberal "chicken little" problem, that, however , is a MISTAKE.

    Japan and Germany are not generally regarded as being great bastions of liberal thinking, and they have long ago made MAJOR national priorities of oil and gas use.

    In so far as the federal government has operated on the basic principle that the "market will provide" , with respect to oil prices , it definitely will, because of global and increased demand outside of the trade interaction of the US, we are increasingly subject to world demand.

    The problem is that our government in the last 10-15 years has done a particularly abysmally bad job of educating our citizens.

    While it’s maybe satisfying for a little while to get pissed of at this politician or that oil company, or the Arabs, or terrorists or whomever, it’s more important for us to get SMART about our resource usage.

    1. There is a WAR on, this is – after all the BS is put aside – it’s about maintaining stability regarding the supply, our nation shouldn’t – to my mind – concern itself with anything more than making the middle east stable, or as stable as possible for as long as necessary.

    2. Conservation – Australia and pretty much every other industrial nation (China included) is hugely more cued in on conservation than the US is, in this area we are badly out of tune with our national and personal interests.

    3. Change the way we’re living – whether we want to admit it or not, we’re in a (hopefully temporary) period of transition.

    So until we all drive cars that get 100-200MPG, (The Toyota Prius, mark 2, will allegedly get 90-100MPG), we are going to have to pay up at the gas-pump.

    4. Frankly our corporations were until VERY recently to my mind a national embarrassment, Toyota and Honda, will stop selling conventional engines entirely in less than 10 years, GM was – until 2005, still pumping the tagline that they were hoping to have some hybrid car models available – someday soon, eventually.

    5. Food production – skyrocketing gas and oil prices have already driven most fertilizer producers out of the US marketplace altogether. But basic fuel needs for loaders, augers and other automated farm equipment are a national priority on par with military needs. Retooling commercial and food distribution onto electrified rail distribution could be considered a national priority.

  22. Dan H majicman medican Says:

    WE are outsourcing everything and depending on other countries way to much!!!!!!!!!!! We are being controlled by the big corporations and elitist , Watch and see the new world order it is on we have become slaves!!!!!!!!!!!!!We have given up our resources and security handed it on a plate we are being sold out by our countrymen!!!!!!