2008-07-08T10:37:00Z opencongress.org tag:opencongress.org,2007:/bill/comments/51159 2008-07-08T10:37:00Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-07-08:/comment/32812 kieroneil I think the real value in this bill is that leases that are currently held but doing nothing with will be relinquished back to the gov't who can then give the lease to someone who will more actively develop the area. 2008-08-13T06:38:15Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-08-13:/comment/37836 Anonymous If there were really oil beneath this land, do you think the oil companies would just be sitting on their hands? You can't develop what is not there. New more accurate surveys may have proved that there is little or no oil to be recovered in that particular area. Remember, they are a company that MUST make a profit like ANY other company. 2008-09-15T15:05:07Z tag:opencongress.org,2008-09-15:/comment/39213 Anonymous If they keep the oil lease on the books, then yes, the oil is more valuable on the books and in the ground. If they sit on the lease, the cost per barrel continues to rise. Why tap the land at $100 a barrel, when they could eventually put it on the market at $200 +? It is still reflected as an asset to the company, one that climbs every day.