The United States has an estimated 112 billion barrels of potentially recoverable oil. Sounds like a lot, doesn't it? Well, actually, it's not all that much.
In an earlier post, we showed that if we could access all of our recoverable oil, it would provide enough fuel to power all our cars for maybe 15 years -- a far cry from sustainable energy independence.
Still, that's something, so, some argue, let's get started drilling now and get it out of the ground and into our cars ASAP. Some of the nation's untapped oil resources are believed to be located offshore on the outer continental shelf (OCS). So, many want restrictions on offshore drilling lifted so that we can access this oil. Others oppose drilling because of environmental and economic concerns. Perhaps because this is an election year, the debate on offshore drilling has become heated and even, at times, emotional.
All politics aside, I would like to share with you the information I have been able to gather with regard to the amount of oil we might be able to get from offshore drilling.
The impact on oil supplies from additional offshore drilling on the U.S. OCS looks to be very small indeed. The graphic below -- adopted from Architecture 2030 -- provides a great illustration of the veritable drop in the bucket that offshore drilling will bring to our gas pumps. (The yellow sliver indicates how much bang we'd get out of our drilling bucks.)
According to an analysis and data from the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the earliest this oil would start dribbling in would be around 2017, and the initial rate of production would be about 10,000 barrels of oil per day. At their peak in the mid-2020s, the wells would yield about 20,000 barrels per day.
To put these numbers in context, consider that we bring in about 15 million barrels of crude a day. If we keep on our present course, U.S. consumption of oil will increase moderately in the next couple of decades reaching about 17 million barrels of oil per day by 2030. In that case, OCS drilling will supply:
Clearly, offshore drilling is not going to get us to energy independence, not even close.
What about the price at the pump? Analyses, including the government's own, predict that any price reduction will be in the neighborhood of pennies and not dimes and certainly not dollars. But keep in mind that price impact is difficult to predict because oil prices are influenced by speculation -- and hence investor's assessment of future trends -- as well as supply and demand.
By comparison most studies show that a very significant reduction in our dependence on foreign oil and in gas prices would arise from decreasing our demand for oil -- for example, by investing in technologies to increase the fuel economy of our cars and in mass transport. (See here [pdf].) That's why so many of us see a great benefit from these types of investments.
Nevertheless, some folks still favor OCS drilling. They argue that we need to do everything we can to advance energy independence, insisting that every drop counts and we should therefore drill regardless of how much it will yield. Such an argument is not in my view entirely without merit. But others, usually environmentalists, argue cogently against OCS drilling because of its environmental costs.
So, what's the bottom line? Should we allow new offshore drilling or not? I suspect that your answer largely depends on your politics. But the facts are the facts, and if someone tells you that offshore drilling is going to make more than a dent in our dependence on foreign oil or the price at the pump, he or she is trying to sell you shares to a bridge to nowhere.
EIA - Forecasts and Analyses - www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/forecasting.html
EIA - Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf - www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/otheranalysis/ongr.html
Dr. Bill Chameides is a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the dean of Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment. He blogs regularly at www.thegreengrok.com.
Follow Bill Chameides on Twitter: www.twitter.com/theGreenGrok
Loading comments… 
Heres one every expert including the Dems say we have enough oil reserves in the US to provide energy for the next 60 not 15 years.
They always fall back to it will take a minimum of 10 years to get it out of the ground, process it and get it to market...T
It sound like 5 times what we have.
It looks like you used the North America Oil reserves numbers instead of the United States.
http://www
The Undiscover
Well that's COULD BE infinite?
Pure fantasy.
And this is where politician
In reality the market will take care of this problem for us. The next winter will be hard on those who are heating with oil and they will reduce their consumptio
http://ost
http://fed
Even allowing the omission of oil shales, to say that 112 Billion bbls recoverabl
So if 112 B bbls of oil is not a lot, then most ceratinly 115 B bbls of oil is also not a lot. This cuts right to the quick of one of the left's most popular anti-Iraq-
If so, I have half a dozen bridges to sell to you. They are all available for three easy payments of $199.99. Plus shipping that is. One of them is in Alaska. Or will be if Sarah becomes Queen.
If, on the other hand you want a serious discussion
I agree that oil even at $200/barre
The offshore deposits are our public assets, and belong to the American taxpayers. If companies want the right to exploit our oil holdings, we should be absolutely certain we're getting the better end of the deal.
The recently passed House bill, which approves limited offshore drilling, also demands payment in exchange - provisions that oil companies will lose leases they don't drill in a reasonable period of time; extension of the soon to expire renewable energy tax credits for consumers; ending billions in tax subsidies to oil companies awash in profits; and more.
If the oil companies don't like the deal - and their Republican apologists are already shrieking - tough. Take it or leave it. If it's not worth paying Americans what we think the oil is worth, go find it somewhere else.
Meanwhile, we'll be watching our asset increase in value, in the ground, where we can keep an eye on it.
I think you make some good points. Leases should definitely be structured to maximize the government
Keeping resources in the ground for posterity is one of only two arguments I accept against the merits of additional offshore drilling (the other being legitimate concern over environmen
The fact of the matter is that politics are played the way that they are played, and right now Pelosi played the republican
We can make large improvemen
You can expect oil companies to build niches for themselves in alternativ
Oil companies do what they do do well, why is it their "obligatio
Having said that, I don't see the problem with a compromise bill (such as the one already passed by the House of Representa
What I find most disturbing about this issue is the fact that many republican
Crude oil produced off the East, West, or Floridian coast could be sold on the world market, but this is not likely. Oil costs money to transport and it would likely be sent to the closest US refineries
Refined products from this crude oil may end up being exported since not every carbon molecule within a barrel of oil can be efficientl
Therefor the notion that somehow domestic oil should be or would be cheaper to US citizens than oil from other producer countries is basically invalid on all counts.