About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

On Fox News, Bolling repeats offshore drilling falsehoods

July 02, 2008 5:06 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Fox Business Network's Eric Bolling asserted that, according to offshore oil "drillers" with whom he had spoken, "China was probably drilling offshore, very close to our shore through Cuba, and taking some of that oil that -- that honestly could -- could and should be helping our situation." His assertion that China was drilling "very close to our shore" echoed a claim made by Vice President Dick Cheney -- citing columnist George Will -- that both Cheney and Will have since corrected.

10 Comments

During the July 1 edition of Fox News' Your World, Fox Business Network contributor Eric Bolling asserted that, according to offshore oil "drillers" with whom he had spoken, "China was probably drilling offshore, very close to our shore through Cuba, and taking some of that oil that -- that honestly could -- could and should be helping our situation." The assertion that China was drilling "very close to our shore" echoed a claim made by Vice President Dick Cheney -- citing nationally syndicated columnist George Will -- in a June 11 speech to the United States Chamber of Commerce that both Cheney and Will have since corrected.

On June 12, the Associated Press reported that "Vice President Dick Cheney's office acknowledged on Thursday that he was mistaken when he asserted that China, at Cuba's behest, is drilling for oil in waters 60 miles from the Florida coast." The AP further reported: " 'There is no actual drilling yet. ... There is exploration,' said Johanna Mendelson-Forman, a senior fellow on energy and Latin America at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. She said China's oil company, Sinopac, has conducted exploratory drilling on a lease on land in western Cuba, but is not involved in the offshore development." Additionally, in his June 17 syndicated column, Will noted, "In a previous column, I stated that China, in partnership with Cuba, is drilling for oil 60 miles from the Florida coast. While Cuba has partnered with Chinese companies to drill in the Florida Straits, no Chinese company has been involved in Cuba's oil exploration that close to the United States."

Bolling also falsely suggested that only unnamed "[w]ebsites" are claiming that it would take more than 10 years to retrieve oil from offshore sites currently covered by executive and congressional moratoriums on offshore drilling. Bolling stated: "I'm getting emails, bombarded. Websites are saying, you know, we are perpetuating a lot -- we're not. I talked to oil companies. I talked to drilling companies because I did not want to be accused of saying, 'Hey, you're talking to the oil industry, and what else are they going to say.' I went to the drillers themselves. I went to Trans Ocean. I went to Diamond Offshore. I went to two or three other drillers. And they said, clearly, number 1, we can get that oil in a much shorter time frame than the 10 years -- some said up as close as one year." In fact, in addition to "[w]ebsites," in its Annual Energy Outlook for 2007, the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration considered the likely effects of allowing the existing congressional and executive moratoriums on certain off-shore drilling to expire in 2012 and stated: "The projections in the OCS [Outer Continental Shelf] access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017."

From the July 1 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:

ALEXIS GLICK (guest host): You know something. You and I keep talking about is -- we keep talking about offshore drilling -- looking for more here, and with some controversy. There is a new -- recent Pew poll, Eric, that says 47 percent of Americans say it's more important to look for our own oil then to deal with climate change right now. Now, two different topics here, but Americans are getting frustrated.

BOLLING: You know, I came on here a couple of times with you, Alexis, and since then I'm getting emails, bombarded. Websites are saying, you know, we are perpetuating a lot -- we're not. I talked to oil companies. I talked to drilling companies because I did not want to be accused of saying, "Hey, you're talking to the oil industry, and what else are they going to say."

I went to the drillers themselves. I went to Trans Ocean. I went to Diamond Offshore. I went to two or three other drillers. And they said, clearly, number 1, we can get that oil in a much shorter time frame than the 10 years -- some said up as close as one year. Almost all of them said no later than six years, but unequivocally across the board they all said that China was probably drilling offshore, very close to our shore through Cuba, and taking some of that oil that -- that honestly could -- could and should be helping our situation.

GLICK: All right, Eric Bolling, thank you very much. Let's hope it doesn't get a lot worse. The rhetoric alone is scary.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by snoopy (July 02, 2008 5:33 pm ET)
         

      I talked to oil companies. I talked to drilling companies because I did not want to be accused of saying, "Hey, you're talking to the oil industry, and what else are they going to say."

      What the heck was that supposed to prove? That he approached this objectively?

      Report Abuse
    • Author by BottleBlonde (July 02, 2008 5:35 pm ET)
         

      If Americans are getting frustrated, it's because they aren't well informed by the media.

      If they think that if we only drilled for more oil off our coasts the price of oil would be dramatically different, they aren't being well informed by the media.

      If they think that we could see any decrease in prices at the pump today or in the near future, they're being misled by the media's failure to keep them well informed.

      If it's supply that drives prices, and in many ways it is, then it doesn't matter if it's China, Cuba, or the USA that's drilling in the Florida straits. A greater supply will lower the price no matter who's doing the drilling.

      China is a boogeyman to some on the right.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by MiddleLeft (July 02, 2008 6:20 pm ET)
           

        But  is it supply that is driving prices, or is it demand?  Oil supporters claim fear of decreased supply has driven up prices. The Saudis have agreed to  increase their production (just this year) an amount equal to what we could  get from offshore or ANWAR..... and the price did not come down!

        Drilling may help a little, eventually, but I am persuaded that production cannot be increased faster than demand.  Reduced consumption through efficiency and alternate renewable energy is the solution.  How much fuel would we save by dropping the interstate speed limit by 5mph (As we did in the 70's?)

        I don't know.  Probably an ANWAR, every year, forever.

         

        Report Abuse
        • Author by oscar the grouch (July 02, 2008 7:59 pm ET)
             
          Actually, I think the speed limit was dropped by 10 mph in the 70s. And those who are not driving for a living (manufacturer's reps, long haul truckers, etc) could probably for the most part live with a lower speed limit.  For the occasional long distance driver, I don't know.  It would add an overnight stay to some trips we make to see family and the cost of that is more that the cost of the little we save in fuel (car gets about 33 mph at posted speed limits). We would probably save more if road expansions were stopped in larger metropolitian areas, tie-ups in traffic would probably do more to promote mass transit use than lower speed limits.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by jawill11 (July 03, 2008 11:51 am ET)
               

            I would like to see some real data on the issues you bring up (not a challenge, just a true curiosity).  I know that the reduction in the '70's did help out, so I would guess that the overall savings overshadowed any losses to the shipping industry in the macro picture. 

            As for road expansions, that might cut both ways as well, since much more gas is used up in stop and go than highway cruising.  However, I agree that mass transit needs to be utilized more, but the big problem is a lack of practical mass transit in many cities.  Maybe if those road expansion projects were diverted to mass transit projects.  

            Report Abuse
          • Author by MiddleLeft (July 03, 2008 1:54 pm ET)
               
            I heard a news report on the radio that several major nationwide trucking lines have reduced the speed of their trucks in their fleet in order to save on cost of fuel and thus be more competitive.
            Report Abuse
    • Author by sandss981580 (July 02, 2008 7:57 pm ET)
         

      i heard some obama surrogate over the weekend refer to drilling for more oil as a gimmick.  some gimmick, it's what we've been doing since oil was discovered.  what an idiot.

      also, last friday i listed to a conference call with don coxe of bank of montreal.  he said the democrats are trying to keep canada from exploiting their oil sands in west canada.  there is a bill to forbid the military from purchasing any oil that come from those sands.  they say it's because exploiting the sands will create greenhouse gasses, but i think the demsand obama just want to keep supplies tight, and prices high so they can blame the republicans.

      how stupd and hypocritical.  they will not let a vote come forward on theinterior bill because the republicans will include a measure for offshore drilling.  sothat is held up.

      anyway, the canadians say screw you, we will just sell to china.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by big2xrube6146 (July 02, 2008 8:07 pm ET)
         
      Who is this Eric Bolling? This guy has no idea what he is talking about. China is not drilling off the coast of Cuba or the US. There is more oil in the US on dry land than off the coast. I live in East Texas and drilling is going wide open here. Mostly natural gas though. Some oil. If you want to know the drilling activity in the US go to bakerhughes.com. There you can find out the active rig count in the US and the World. Look for drilling activity to skyrocket soon. There is a shortage of rigs right now but new ones are being built. North Dakata is where the next oil boom will be at. Don't expect oil prices to fall to much even with domestic wells.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by eweston8542983 (July 02, 2008 9:08 pm ET)
         

      The Energy Depts Energy Information Administration input, if the drilling moritoriums are allowed to expire, drilling starts when rigs become availible, the prices of crude oil and natural gas will not be significantly impacted before 2030, but what do they know.

      So Sandss AKA _______ has found a new rumor to beat on democrats with. How lovely for him.Think the brewup was over the tech's source for oil extraction, ie not an american owned or controlled process. Sounds more like republican efforts to help the people who bought them fair and square.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by sandss981580 (July 02, 2008 11:40 pm ET)
           
        it was mentioned by don coxe, a canadian.  he has no dog in the fight here, and doesn't care who wins.  he thinks it will be okay no matter who wins, and canada will just sell its oil to china.  you can google him, and mention bank of montreal, or bmo nesbitt, when you do.  you canlisten to his conference call from last friday, but if you wait you may have to listen to his next one, which may be tomorrow.  i don't know if they archive them.
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.