Old Media's coverage of the recently-lifted executive and congressional bans on offshore exploration and drilling for oil and natural gas largely overlooked an important element that should have been very relevant to the discussion.
Supporters of lifting the bans surely share much of the blame for only rarely citing it. Though they have frequently noted the hundreds of billions of dollars a years annually sent overseas to pay for oil that could have been extracted here, they have mostly missed a golden opportunity to tell the American people what over a quarter-century of drilling bans has cost the government and taxpayers. They also generally failed to tell us about the windfall that awaits if the end of the offshore and other bans finally leads to appropriately aggressive use of this country's God-given resources.
But if we had inquisitive financial reporters in the business press who were interested in information relevant to the "Drill Baby Drill" debate instead of merely repackaging the press releases they received from those on both sides (the sole exception I found was this Wall Street Journal editorial), many more Americans would have long ago learned about what follows.
Congressman John Peterson (R-PA) has assembled information about this. The numbers are stunning.
In a PDF available at the congressman’s home page (at “Charts and Other Useful Information”), he tells us that “the United States is the only industrialized nation in the world which prohibits offshore exploration and production of domestic energy.” In other words, everyone else is talking the talk, while we're the only ones walking the walk. Translation: We've been suckered by environmentalists and the "not in my back yard" crowd into doing something no one else in the rest of the world will do.
The government collects royalties on oil and natural gas when it is extracted. Peterson’s office obtained information from the Minerals Management Service and the Energy Information Agency showing that the average offshore royalty rate, which is based on market prices of the resources when extracted, is 15.17%.
Earlier this summer, the Congressman's office prepared this summary (available in HTML format here) of how much royalty money is just sitting there offshore:

Even if you adjust Peterson’s calculations to reflect current prices of roughly $100 a barrel for oil and $8/mcf for natural gas, the royalties locked up still amount to over $1.8 trillion (about $500 billion from natural gas, and $1.3 trillion from oil).
But that’s only the beginning.
Estimates of known reserves have almost always been low. There is no reason to believe that things are any different now. For example, over twice as much oil has come out of Prudhoe Bay than was initially predicted. A repeat of that result with offshore reserves would not be at all surprising, especially because Congress has prohibited even exploring the areas involved for years. Using $100 a barrel as the current price of oil, that's at least another $1.3 trillion in royalties.
Then there’s shale oil. This Wikipedia entry shows over two trillion barrels in estimated U.S. reserves. Assuming that only 10% is recoverable, that’s another $3 trillion in potential royalties.
If you’re keeping score, we’re at about $6.1 trillion. That’s more than 60% of the current national debt of $9.8 trillion, which is set to shoot up to a frightening degree in the coming years thanks to Uncle Sam's bailout binge.
The real number for potential royalties is much higher. I ignored additional royalties from offshore natural gas. I also didn't look at royalites that might come from oil obtained from sands, oil and gas in North Dakota’s Bakken Formation, oil and gas in the Great Lakes, or future oil and gas discoveries.
On top of all that, according to a spokesman for Congressman Peterson, the federal royalty rate for land-based extraction is typically much higher than the 15%-plus off shore rate. States also collect substantial land-based extraction royalties on top of Uncle Sam's take. The total can be as high as 50% of the market price at time of extraction, with 25% going to the Feds and 25% to the states involved.
Even beyond the royalties involved, Uncle Sam, state governments, and local governments would collect additional billions in corporate and individual income and payroll taxes because of increased business activity.
For decades, both the executive and legislative branches of our supposedly “by the people, for the people” government have mostly done all they can to keep us from using and benefiting from our own resources. By doing so, even at the much lower prices in previous years, they have caused the government to lose out on tens of billions of dollars a year. At today's prices, if we capitalize on the recently-lifted offshore bans, annual amounts coming into the Treasury could easily run into the hundreds of billions.
Our representatives should be embarrassed by their past quarter-century of energy negligence. The American people should be infuriated, and would be demanding a full-speed-ahead on domestic exploration and drilling -- if they only knew.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.
—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
The only problem is, Dims
October 5, 2008 - 09:09 ET by ThisnThatThe only problem is, Dims aren't really interested in the money. They are only interested in keeping you from having any money -- or oil, or gas. Therefore, this analysis isn't attractive to them at all.
___________________________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If it is in English, thank a Soldier. - My barber
This is great material, but "inquisitive reporters?"
October 5, 2008 - 09:13 ET by ThalpyThis is great material, but "inquisitive reporters?" You know that is not what they do. If the results fail to fit their Progressive world-view--forget it! They don't want us to find oil, and they don't want us to drill for it if we do. They want us to down-size and become better stewards of the earth-- uneducated, undereducated Luddites all.
We've been suckered by
October 5, 2008 - 09:24 ET by SeashellWe've been suckered by environmentalists and the "not in my back yard" crowd into doing something no one else in the rest of the world will do.
This is so true. We are probably the laughing stock of the world when it comes to this.
Fine Mother Nature?
October 5, 2008 - 09:52 ET by MazziRush Limbaugh recently reported that Mother Nature is the biggest ocean oil polluter. In the article he states that the average offshore U.S. oil company spillage is 6,555 barrels per year. The natural oil ooze from ocean floors surrounding the U.S. is 620,500 barrels per year. In fact, where oil rigs are pumping, the natural leaks are far less than areas with no rigs. The common-sense answer to that is because the rigs actually release the pressure so that the ocean floor does not need to do it on it's own.
Despite what the libs would let you believe, hurricanes Katrina and Rita resulted in no major spills in offshore rigs, That's right - none.
Additionally it is reported that since 1980, a bit over 100,000 barrels have spilled in total, from the 11.8 billions of gallons of offshore extracted oil. That would be 0.001%.
I am sorry I can't link the the report - it was in the September 2008 issue of the Limbaugh Letter - BUT, all of the reported facts come from the US Minerals Management Service (MMS) and the Coast Guard.
I did not personally go check it out. I live by the tenet of "consider the source", and no matter what you think of Mr. Limbaugh, he is rarely (if ever) factually incorrect.
"We just want truth, we want fairness. We want that balance." ~ Sarah Palin (re: hypocricy of the press)
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" ~ Martin Luther King Jr.
Mazzi, Remember that big Cali oil spill... the last one, c.1969
October 5, 2008 - 13:02 ET by upcountrywaterOil is ozzing out all over..the planet.
I white water rafted through here, for a few miles it smelled like an oil refinery... oil oozing out dripping off, the canyon walls. Some of the old pipes still there, someone years ago collected the oil, now it's a CRIME.
The 1970's Alaska pipline... 1,300 permits , for approval!
CLIMATE CRISIS
IranianUranium
What makes this issue even
October 5, 2008 - 09:55 ET by dscottWhat makes this issue even more rediculous is the failure of Gov. Schwarzenneggar to negotiate with the oil and gas companies for a share of royalties just as Gov. Sarah Palin did for Alaska. Just because there is no law mandating the federal government share royalty money with the states, there is no law preventing the states from negotiating to get it directly in exchange for allowing drilling. California has HALF of the recoverable offshore oil in the US, yet he is coming to the federal government for a bail out. Talk about a lack of leadership and incompetence!
Drilling could commence immediately IF the governors get off their lazy butts. DRILL BABY DRILL
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Good Point
October 5, 2008 - 10:22 ET by JoelCTExcellent point. What if California asked for just 20% of the royalties, and the Feds got to keep the other 80%? I think that would be a fair deal, and California would be swimming in money in a very short time.
It is sad that a tiny fraction of the population (tree-huggers) is keeping this country from moving forward on energy policy. The billions being spent to build stupid windmills, which don't work - as in provide NO power, below 4MPH winds, could have already built a bunch of nuclear power plants, which provide power 24/7/365.
»→ Great angle Joel
October 5, 2008 - 10:30 ET by Cool ArrowImagine a State exploiting its natural resources in an attempt to dig its way out of financial hardship? Brilliant!
The flip side would be "If you don't want to sell off your resources, don't get into financial difficulty". California isjust a rich State begging for bailout because everybody else is doing it.
Screw them and their suicidal NIMBY values and "bring on the Mexican Slaves" attitude.
"John McCain has not talked about my Muslim Faith" - Barack Hussein Obama
The lack of compromise by
October 5, 2008 - 10:42 ET by dscottThe lack of compromise by the AGW cultists points to their out of step fanatical ideas. A livable compromise by the AGW cultists would be to allow drilling AS A REPLACEMENT of DOMESTIC OIL for FOREIGN OIL without increasing the overall use of carbon if that was truly their issue. The winner take all attitude by the AGW cultists speaks to the failure of their ideas to reflect reality and that the environment is NOT what they are demanding we sacrifice for but a hidden agenda of socialism.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.
Untapped mineral resources
October 5, 2008 - 14:07 ET by wotsiznameFollow the money - Into what banks/pockets do the foreign oil producers put their grand profits? Can the lack of domestic production be traced to those here who profit from the present arrangements? There is no reason not to vigorously pursue domestic production. Prudhoe Bay sent us over two million barrels a day at its peak. Now it's about seven hundred thousand and falling. Cape Thompson and the coastal sliver of ANWR, (barren land and tidal swamps) just to the east, are waiting. Many others await. Yes, how about "of the people, by the people and FOR the people."
Tom.. would make a great ad.
October 5, 2008 - 20:48 ET by Gary HallTom... What an important find. Thanks. This would make for a good ad for the McCain camp - might actually make a few millions folks use their noggin. gary
That's only if the McCain
October 6, 2008 - 08:41 ET by dscottThat's only if the McCain camp had the wit to use the issue. They are too busy with the Ayers peripheral issue. If McCain should win this election, it will be despite himself.
Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, starving the poor one gallon of ethanol at a time. Fill your tank with E85 and cull a village.