Christos Dimoulis

Eveready
Off-shoredrillingNegCD
4/26/2010 page 1 of 4
Off-shore drilling; Neg
1. Oil amount stats
2. Might be more…or less
3. Issues with offshore drilling
4. Off shoring less economic incentive
5. No significant impact on oil prices
6. Off shoring wouldn’t decrease US dependence
7. No correlation between drilling and lower costs
8. Not enough oil
9. Oil companies have not utilized the leases they have now.
10. Drilling could lock us in to a future of expensive gasoline.
11. Production expensive wouldn’t start soon, no short-term effect on prices.
12. There isn’t enough drilling equipment.
13. We can’t refine the oil we would extract.
14. Drilling more oil now not path to alternative energy
15. We need to move forward with new alternatives

1. Oil amount stats

Emily Gertz, Scientific America, “Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?”
September 12, 2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-offshore-drilling-
make-us-independent

The MMS has estimated that there are around 18 billion barrels in the underwater areas now off-
limits to drilling. That's significantly less than in oil fields open for business in the Gulf of
Mexico, coastal Alaska and off the coast of southern California, where there are 10.1 billion
barrels of known oil reserves as well as an estimated 85.9 billion more. To put these numbers in
perspective: one U.S. barrel of oil equals 42 gallons (159 liters) and, according to the Energy
Information Administration (an arm of the U.S. Department of Energy that provides energy data
and analysis), the U.S. consumes some 20.8 million barrels of oil a day—almost one quarter of
the 87 million used worldwide. That adds up to 7.59 billion barrels a year.

2. Might be more…or less

Emily Gertz, Scientific America, “Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?”
September 12, 2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-offshore-drilling-
make-us-independent

But here's the catch: There is a chance that the MMS has miscalculated the amount of offshore
oil, because its estimates are based on 30- to 40-year-old data. For example, MMS spokesperson
Nicholas Pardi says a 1987 survey of the Gulf of Mexico indicated there was potentially nine
billion barrels of oil there, but when the area was resurveyed nine years later (using newer
technologies), the number jumped to potential 45 billion barrels. In other words, says Ian Nathan,
a senior research analyst with New York City–based Energy Intelligence Group (a publisher of
data and information on the global energy industry), it is possible that areas currently off-limits to
drilling might actually contain a lot more—or less, for that matter—petroleum than previously
believed.

3. Issues with offshore drilling

 Christos Dimoulis
Eveready
Off-shoredrillingNegCD
4/26/2010 page 2 of 4
Emily Gertz, Scientific America, “Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?”
September 12, 2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-offshore-drilling-
make-us-independent

What's more, industry experts say no matter how much oil there may be offshore, only some of it
will be "recoverable," that is, able to be removed at a cost that's cheap enough to guarantee oil
companies enough profit on their investment. Current shortages of both oil rigs and skilled
manpower to operate them could also bottleneck such efforts.

4. Off shoring less economic incentive

Emily Gertz, Scientific America, “Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?”
September 12, 2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-offshore-drilling-
make-us-independent

According to Phyllis Martin, a senior EIA energy analyst, Atlantic and Pacific oil fields tend to
be smaller on average than those in the Gulf of Mexico, but it is just as costly to drill them,
making the economics of drilling these areas especially tough to justify. In fact, oil companies
have yet to take advantage of the nearly 86 billion barrels of offshore oil in areas already
available for leasing and development. So why are they chomping at the drill bit to open up the
moratorium waters and survey them anew?

5. No significant impact on oil prices

Emily Gertz, Scientific America, “Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?”
September 12, 2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-offshore-drilling-
make-us-independent

Even by 2030, offshore drilling would not have a significant impact on oil prices, according to
Martin, because oil prices are determined on the global market. "The amount of total production
anticipated—around 200,000 barrels a day—would be less than 1 percent of the total projected
international consumption."

6. Off shoring wouldn’t decrease US dependence

Emily Gertz, Scientific America, “Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?”
September 12, 2008, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-offshore-drilling-
make-us-independent

Kaufman dismisses as "nonsense" any promises that offshore drilling could make the U.S. "oil
independent." Even if it could somehow insulate itself from the ups and downs of the global oil
market, he notes, the U.S. would have to make a huge leap in domestic oil production to replace
what it buys from overseas. "At its peak in production, which occurred in 1970s, the U.S.
produced about 10 million [barrels of oil] a day," Kaufman says. "Now, after 30 years of fairly
steady decline, we produce about five million barrels a day," whereas we consume 20 million
barrels daily. "Whoever talks about oil independence has to tell a story about how we close a 15-
million-barrel gap."

7. No correlation between drilling and lower costs

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html
 Christos Dimoulis
Eveready
Off-shoredrillingNegCD
4/26/2010 page 3 of 4
According to a report by the House Committee on Natural Resources Majority Staff: “Between
1999 and 2007, the number of drilling permits issued for development of public lands increased
by more than 361 percent, yet gasoline prices have also risen dramatically, contradicting the
argument that more drilling means lower gasoline prices. There is simply no correlation between
the two.”

8. Not enough oil

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

The U.S. oil supply-demand balance is insurmountable. We have less than 2 percent of the
world’s known reserves, yet use 25 percent of its oil. Even if we drilled off of every beach, and
inside every national park, refuge, and forest, we could not produce enough oil to offset our
growing demand.

9. Oil companies have not utilized the leases they have now.
Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

Why open up new areas to drilling when oil companies hold over 4,000 undeveloped leases in the
western Gulf of Mexico? What’s more, the government already leases 44 million acres offshore,
of which only 10.5 million—or one quarter—are producing oil or gas.

10. Drilling could lock us in to a future of expensive gasoline.

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

By committing to costly recovery, oil companies are betting that oil prices (and gas prices) will
stay high enough to justify their investments. Opening the Outer Continental Shelf could never
bring us back to $2-a-gallon gas, but would ensure that companies that develop the newly
available oil have an interest in keeping gas prices high enough to justify their investments.

11. Production expensive wouldn’t start soon, no short-term effect on prices.

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

The average oil field size in the OCS is smaller than the average in the Gulf of Mexico, which is
already being developed. As a result, much of the oil in the OCS would be expensive to extract,
and is only becoming attractive now as a result of high oil prices. According the Energy
Information Administration, it would take at least five years for oil production to begin. EIA
predicted that there would be no significant effect on oil production or price until nearly 20 years
after leasing begins.

12. There isn’t enough drilling equipment.

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html
 Christos Dimoulis
Eveready
Off-shoredrillingNegCD
4/26/2010 page 4 of 4
Due to the high price of oil, existing drilling ships are “booked solid for the next five years,” and
demand for deepwater rigs has driven up the price of such ships. Oil companies just don’t have
the resources to explore oil fields in the OCS.

13. We can’t refine the oil we would extract.

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

In a June speech, President George W. Bush noted that, “Refineries are the critical link between
crude oil and the gasoline and diesel fuel that drivers put in their tanks.” Yet refineries are already
so stretched that last year, the United States had to import almost 150 million barrels of gasoline.
The Wall Street Journal reported oil companies are not building new refineries because it would
be bad for their bottom line: “Building a new refinery from scratch, Exxon believes, would be
bad for long-term business.”

14. Drilling more oil now not path to alternative energy

Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

President Bush said in his speech that “in the short run, the American economy will continue to
rely largely on oil,” but “in the long run, the solution is to reduce demand for oil by promoting
alternative energy technologies.” Unfortunately, President Bush opposed efforts to shift tax
incentives from big oil companies to efficiency and clean energy technologies, such as plug-in
hybrid electric vehicles. If alternatives are the future, why propose an oil-based solution to the
energy crisis that will not show any results for years?
15. We need to move forward with new alternatives
Center for American Progress, “Ten Reasons Not to Expand Offshore Drilling”, September 15,
2008, http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/10_reasons.html

The real solution to the energy crisis—and to the climate crisis—is to innovate, become more
efficient, and move forward. That’s why offshore drilling in sensitive areas is a bad idea. For a
long-term plan, it is remarkably short-sighted.