<p>^^^ There are more staff needed than just the folks on the platforms pulling the oil out of the water. There are management level folks, engineers,etc needed to support the production. I would expect that most of the staff would be taxpaying citizens.</p>
<p>It is pretty hysterical that environmentalists decry the environmental damage that would be visited on the North Slope when the presence of oil had been known for ages by the natives because oil had been seeping up to the surface. As Bullet pointed out, Alaskans are fiercely protective of the environment. And, yes, we do resent those who have never been here, much less to the slope, dictating the use or nonuse of our natural resources. </p>
<p>When you examine Alaska’s economy, it is very much a colonial type economy. Our resources are our major source of income, especially when fuel and the weak dollar make it expensive for those from the lower 48 to visit here. Thankfully, though, the weak dollar should also mean more overseas tourism. Regardless, I wish people would realize that the area involved in the ANWR dispute is the size of a postage stamp on a football field. And the football field is not Alaska, the football field is ANWR itself.</p>
<p>Oh well. We will apparently just have to agree to disagree. And you are right, if it is one or the other, drill here in Alaska! :)</p>
<p>Well said, momof1. Nice to hear a perspective of someone from AK. Thanks.</p>
<p>“conservation” is just an excuse for no growth and a way for the enviro’s to control everyone else. Need more electricity-conservation. More sewer capacity–conservation. This country has grown markedly the last 25 years and will continue to grow. Conservation is not the only answer.</p>
<p>Not positive, but I believe Brazil is a totally oil free country.</p>
<p>They also have the largest, untapped oil supply in the world beneath a lake.</p>
<p>Lots of other choices to ruining the environment and increasing global warming.</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“http://www.conocophillips.com/index.htm]ConocoPhillips[/url”>ConocoPhillips]ConocoPhillips[/url</a>]</p>
<p>Don’t miss in big red letters Now Accepting CCC</p>
<p>7000 jobs projected in area.</p>
<p>Lots of undeveloped oil in Colorado and Wyoming.</p>
<p>Why not drill? Cuba is letting China drill 45 miles off the Fla. coast. Why not let the US have that oil, and all the good paying jobs that go with it.</p>
<p>What we are doing right now is exploiting the natural resources like oil in third world countries. These countries do not have the laws that we have to protect the environment nor the refinery and exploration workers.</p>
<p>We are perfectly happy to protect our environment in our own country as well as our own workers while we fill our cars with gasoline products that come from exploitation of resources elsewhere in the world.</p>
<p>How hypocritical is that?</p>
<p>
Not in this lifetime.</p>
<p>Without the oil exports those countries would be far worse off than they are. Our “exploitation” is their development of jobs and a future.</p>
<p>Oil exports don’t seem to have solved many issues for the economy of Mexico or the nations of Africa. The average citizen receives little benefit from the gas we put in our tanks.</p>
<p>We need to drill. According to this morning’s news, the increase in Saudi production is going to get sucked up by China.</p>
<p>SA is known for heavy sour so this may not help the market out that much.</p>
<p>Imagine Mexico without the oil money. The government uses the oil money to run the country such as it is. Some countries in Africa are using the money wisely, others are not. That’s Africa.</p>
<p>“Mexico’s federal budget is closely linked to world oil prices. Pemex revenues contribute 40 percent to the budget, which is set based on what officials expect worldwide oil prices to be: about $50 a barrel for Mexican crude this year. Instead, the price of Mexican crude has reached $113 a barrel, leading some analysts to predict Pemex could take in at least $20 billion more than projected by budget-setters.”</p>
<p>Now do they use it all wisely–probably not but they would be far worse off without it.</p>
<p>My understanding is a significant majority of US refineries have the ability to process medium to heavy sours, they just don’t have the excess capacity to devote to it. They are too busy with those special summer and winter blends for the West Coast. ;)</p>
<p>Btw…when the Saudis say they have excess production capacity and crude stock available to ‘anyone who wants to buy it’, they are talking about their heavy sour stock, not the WTI light sweet stuff. They very well know most global refiners have not invested in refinery conversion to handle medium/heavy sours, so they are being just a wee bit disingenuous imho.</p>
<p>Valero bought out some other refinery with a lot of capability to handle sour several years ago and they made out very well due to the lower cost of sour over sweet. But they certainly are hurting now because of the overall price of crude.</p>
<p>Definitely agree on the Saudis adding heavy sour capacity. It’s not the stuff in high demand.</p>
<p>Agree BC. Honestly, I’m not sure what the current spread between sour and sweet is right now. (The oilman of the family is down in Colombia at the moment…so I have no one to ask.)</p>
<p>Isn’t Valero is one of the top three or four US companies with investment in heavy sour refining. (If I’m not mistaken?)</p>
<p>ConocoPhillips, Total SA, ExxonMobil, and Sinopec recently signed deals with Saudi Aramco to increase Saudi Arabia’s refining capacity–mostly of heavy crude–by 80%. Unfortunately, it’s expected to take 5 years for the new refineries to be operational:</p>
<p>[Saudi</a> Arabia plans royal treatment for heavy crude - MarketWatch](<a href=“http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/saudi-arabia-plans-royal-treatment/story.aspx?guid={5608C8C0-4CCF-467C-AEE1-4D15A93E5F03}]Saudi”>Saudi Arabia plans royal treatment for heavy crude - MarketWatch)</p>
<p>
That’s because you aren’t looking at the correct figures.</p>
<p>Exporting 1MM-2.5MMbbl/day is virtually meaningless to the average citizen if the country has a population of 100 million. Nigeria, Mexico, etc. It’s not like Indonesia ever got a large benefit from oil production.</p>
<p>The countries that benefit substantially are those with high oil production per capita ratios. Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman.</p>
<p>There’s an interesting article at ABC News on reverse globalization. It appears that companies are looking to manufacture goods in the US again as transportation costs are making China/Mexico more expensive than building it in the US.</p>