Reply With Quote
So you admit that you only read out of things what you want to read out of them....So, you admit that your "alledged" refutation was bogus. Thanks, that's what I needed to hear.
...gottcha!
Collateral damage, can't get around it.
So you admit that you only read out of things what you want to read out of them....So, you admit that your "alledged" refutation was bogus. Thanks, that's what I needed to hear.
...gottcha!
..and if your aunt had balls she would be your uncle.....there are no trillion barrel reserves ...in fact, Mexico, the North Shore, and parts of the once abundant M.E. are running out of oil...Say the World consumes 100,000,000 barrels of oil per day (I don't know what the figure is), if we end up putting 3 trillion barrels of oil into the Market in the future, it will last x number of years and then we run out.
If through technological advances in locating and retrieving the World's oil reserves we can put 6 trillion barrels in the Market ("more oil in the market"). we don't run out nearly as soon, and that gives us more time to develope alternative fuels.
Based on a thorough investigation of the petroleum geology of each province, the assessment couples geologic analysis with a probabilistic methodology to estimate remaining potential. Including the assessment numbers for the United States from USGS and the Minerals management Service (MMS), the world's endowment of recoverable oil which consists of ulative production, remaining reserves, reserve growth and undiscovered resources is estimated at about 3 trillion barrels of oil. Of this, about 24 percent has been produced and an additional 29 percent has been discovered and booked as reserves. The natural gas endowment is estimated at 15.4 quadrillion cubic feet (2.5 trillion barrels of oil equivalent), of which only about I I percent has been produced and an additional 31 percent has been discovered and booked
as reserves.
http://geology.uprm.edu/Morelock/pdfdoc/usgsoil.pdf
Ever do any research before you post, or do you enjoy looking stupid...
By the end of 2006, 1 trillion barrels had been produced and it would be easy to conclude that one-third of the World’s oil has been produced. However, it is only correct to say that one-third of the USGS-assessed oil has been produced. There is a large volume over and above this amount, including small oil fields, oil in unexplored or under-explored frontier basins (in regions such as the Arctic, the Indian Ocean, and offshore Australasia), oil that may be recovered from reservoirs with the application of new technologies (reserve growth) after the year 2025, and oil that may be extracted from oil sands and oil shales. Most of this additional volume of oil was not assessed by the USGS because it cannot be produced economically using current technologies. History, however, shows that resources regarded as inaccessible or uneconomic can eventually be produced as technological advances reduce costs. The ultimate amount of oil produced could, therefore, far exceed 3 trillion barrels.
http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/do...s/mccabe01.htm
Abundant energy will power future growth
Financial Post ^ | July 12, 2008 | Lawrence Solomon
Posted on Tuesday, July 15, 2008 4:08:25 PM by Delacon
Bottom line for the world: an incredible 36% increase in oil reserves during the two decades that saw the greatest globalization-spurred oil consumption in the history of mankind. And that doesn't include the 152 billion barrels in proven oil reserves obtainable from Canada's tar sands. Is there any reason to doubt that the next two decades won't build on the steady growth of the last two?
These oil reserves aren't the end of it. These figures -- for the year ending December 2006 -- represent oil that's not only known to be available, but also economic at 2006 prices using 2006 technology. Since prices have soared in the last year, and technology has improved too, BP's annual assessment for the 2007 year will show greater proven oil reserves still.
But this is still not the end of it. Unconventional oil reserves are now in play. In 2005, the Rand Corporation estimated that the oil shale in America's Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, contains 1.5 to 1.8 trillion barrels of oil, with as much as 1.1 trillion barrels of oil recoverable, an amount comparable to the reserves of four Saudi Arabias.
Oil shale becomes recoverable at $95 a barrel, it determined. With oil now trading at $140 a barrel, oil shale exploitation is now very much economic.
Then there's Canada's tar sands, with its even greater potential--estimates of the total reserves that may be available top two trillion barrels, or eight Saudi Arabias.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2045929/posts
Buying more time for alternative fuels.
In the mean time, conservation and fuel efficiency are at a premium.
On the surface, that actually looks like it would be the . Like it would actually help americans....gosh wouldn't that be something. But even if those numbers are true, even if the oil is recoverable in an efficient way, rest assured, one way or another, this will not benefit the common resident of the U.S.A.
Because nothing ever does, and no matter what happens, good or bad in this world, we are going to keep getting ed.
There's enough oil in drilled fields in the middle east and South America to power billions of cars for centuries. That's not the point. The whole point is to be able to produce locally to reduce dependency on foreign oil so we don't have to pay through the nose for gas. People are not mad that there's not enough gas, they're mad about how much they have to pay at the pump. The fallacy is that we can produce enough locally to make a difference. The few actual solutions to this problem are:
- Lower oil demand through conservation or Hybrid solutions
- Heavily invest in R&D for alternative energy sources
- Disallow speculative investment on oil futures
Doing the last one would probably slash the oil price at least by half, because the price would solely be based on supply and demand. Unfortunately, it's complicated to implement because it's hard to regulate futures markets ouside the US.
Well, we were talking about ANWR. The problem with offshore drilling is that it lowers the property value of coastal houses. One thing is to have a view of the ocean, and another to have a view of an oil platform. Furthermore, the governent does not compensate home owners for this. The second problem is that if there's a spill, oil can ruin beaches on cities that depend on their coasts for tourist revenue (like Florida). And I'm not gonna cover the emviromental issues (I don't particularly care about those, but they do exist)Offshore drilling or drilling in general does not ignore those that live along the coastline, deregulation would not/does not give the oilco's carte blanche to run roughshod over those living off the land. The entire coastline is not heavily populated.
I agree there's no short term solution. The question is what do we invest our time and money in for the long run. You example of Supply and demand does not really apply in the current oil market. If the price would be solely based on supply and demand, the price of the barrel shouldn't be over $70. The reality is that whenever there's some going on in Zambia, price goes up. Whenever Iran lights up a firecracker, price goes up. All that has nothing to do with supply or demand. Injecting 750,000 barrels a day is not going to change that. It's all speculation.Agreed, and I understand that, but again, we're not talking dollars and cents, we're talking about getting more oil into the Market.
Less supply, higher demand = yet higher prices.
More supply, higher demand = higher prices, but not as high.
We aren't going to get away from higher prices at the pump.
Actually there are three short term solutions that would go much further than offshore or domestic drilling and even conservation.....I agree there's no short term solution
1. Slow down the pace of money growth, raise interest rates and end the war in Iraq to slash immediate and future spending obligations...
2. Regulate the oil speculation market nationally, there is tons of oil sitting in the Middle East, more oil than they can store in onshore storage facilities, but its not sweet crude its the harder more heavy oil that comes from shale only it came from the ground...but the speculators have no interest in seeing that oil make it to American consumers at any price, and it's cheap....
3. Quit the saber rattling before oil prices destroy our economy and negotiate a peace agreement with the Iranians where we help them build a low-level nuclear reactor and work with the IAEA to oversee the control of nuclear material...
That Trillions of Barrels number is Barrels of Oil in place not Barrels of Oil recoverable...
"so we don't have to pay through the nose for gas"
You have to be pretty stupid (aka ideological) to expect the US oilcos to lower their gas prices because the oil is coming, very expensively, from the bottom of the sea rather than from M/E (Canada is US's biggest oil supplier).
Even in 10 years, when offshore or ANWR oil could be available, the impact on gas prices will be under 1%.
Here's some news you must have missed: "The Era of Cheap Oil is Over"
Wanna save gas money? Buy less gas.
In a couple of months, world oil supply will exceed world oil demand by 3%, increasing from the 1-2% now.
Demand is not rising so fast as the price, and supply is keeping ahead of it (until head bombs Iran). aka, the oil market fundamentals (demand/supply) are OK.
Capitalist speculators have created, and will exploit, the speculative oil bubble, now that their Internet and housing bubbles have popped.
"drill, drill, drll" is Repug bull to give the oilcos more resource control and profits.
You are aware that Federal leases are generally written in terms of decades. They lapse at the end of the specified lease unless the company leasing them is actively drilling on them or the lease is producing. Additionally, there are many other extending clauses written into the leases.
(Warning! Opinion!)
It's possible somebody in the house of representatives was aware of this and shot down the legislation.
There's enough erroneous info floating around concerning oil production. Let's not add to it.
boutons and Nbadan are the biggest re s on this forum.
The US imports most of its oil from non-OPEC countries. The two countries we get the most oil from are Canada and Mexico.
Anyway, the US will need oil for many decades to come. The problem is not about some quick fix at the pump.
It's not an either-or proposition. We need to do more drilling and refining AND we need to invest in alternative energy.
right-wingers can't even pronounce the word "conservation".
It's more oil and more oil alternatives, all the time, for ever. Is why USA 2% of the world's population consumes 25% of the oil.
I thought I had read somewhere that the US only gets about 12% of its oil from OPEC.
Just friggin drill till all the oil is gone, by then there should be something thats been discovered that will replace oil.
Shouldn't that have gotten started back in the late 70's when the U.S. had the last gas crisis and we had the "odd or even" rationing?
we're not in a gas crisis now. not like the 70's. i'm not seeing any lines at the pump. there's plenty of gas and a lot of asses in washington.
I'm glad you included yourself in that statement, since that's exactly what you're doing.
For compe ive leases, the primary term is 5 years. (1/2 decade)
For non-compe ive leases, the primary term is 10 years. (1 decade)
Here are all the clauses: LINK
So, all the Goat Pastures can be returned in 5 years... but they're not. Requests for drilling permits have actually been going down for the last few years. Somehow there's interest in retaining the land, but no interest in actually exploring it.
Imagine a chaise lounge, a couple of Coronas', picturesque, if I must say so myself.
On a more serious note, most oil platforms off U.S. coastlines are miles offshore and few and far between, so interrupting ocean views isn't a concern.
As far as drilling of the coasts of Fla., I believe I've read that they're talking 50-150 miles offshore.
Additionally, deregulation doesn't guarantee drilling, the first step calls for exploration to see what's out there.
I don't know how much can be put on the speculators:
If speculators aren’t at fault, why have oil prices ed so high? Fundamental reasons aren’t hard to find. Between 2000 and 2007, world demand for petroleum rose by nearly nine million barrels a day, but OPEC has been consistently unable, or unwilling, to significantly increase supply, and production by non-OPEC members has risen by just four million barrels a day. The prospect of military action against Iran, which would disrupt global supply, seems greater than it did a few years ago. And the plunging value of the dollar has meant that the cost of oil has jumped more in the U.S. in the past year than it has in countries with healthier currencies. ...
http://fakejohnmccain.blogspot.com/2...sing-high.html
And fwiw, I believe Bernanke recently stated that speculators have played an insignificant part in the present price of oil.
Hey, I would gladly buy you a beer in one of those.
Imagine a chaise lounge, a couple of Coronas', picturesque, if I must say so myself.
Well, I believe that was part of the proposal, but it isn't written in stone yet, which is what makes me nervous. Still doesn't address the problems of a potential spill, or economic impact in areas where there's heavy fishing.On a more serious note, most oil platforms off U.S. coastlines are miles offshore and few and far between, so interrupting ocean views isn't a concern.
As far as drilling of the coasts of Fla., I believe I've read that they're talking 50-150 miles offshore.
A lot needs to be studied about these leases before you hand them out (that is, to do it on a responsible manner)
You can actually do quite a bit of research without actually handing out the land. Geological surveys and what not. That's in part what was done on ANWR to get some idea of what's down there.Additionally, deregulation doesn't guarantee drilling, the first step calls for exploration to see what's out there.
Wow, where to start... Ok, basic economics 101 here. If prices are solely based on supply and demand, then obviously there's no speculation: the price is directly dictated by the produced amount of crude vs the demand of that crude.
When you start basing prices on what might happen in the future, that's exactly what speculation is. Amazing how the article mention speculation having nothing to do with the prices and immediately bringing up that prices can vary by what might happen in Iran (textbook use of speculation). Further, later on in the same article he mentions that crude pricing is based on future pricing (and we can't predict the future yet, so we speculate).
The Saudis have been increasing their production at our request, but have been reluctant because they basically are saying there's no supply problems. They have an interest to keep prices high, but not THIS high, since it make alternative energy sources economically viable. To the point that they've repeatidly gone out in recent months telling speculators that there's no current supply problems and that they are on pace to increase their output capacity to match the global consuption increase for the next few yeas.
Now, I'm gonna be honest with you. There's basically zero we can do about this. If we close the Enron hole and regulate the resources futures market, then speculators will go to an unregulated market overseas and keep doing what they're doing. So, the only thing I would be happy about is if we could do an investigation into who are the companies tradng these futures contracts, and wether any of them are subsidiaries/controlled by Oil Cos. If none are, then Ill just be satisfied and move on. I just have this feeling that Oil Cos can be colluding and using the futures market to control the prices artificially. It's the perfect instrument if you wanted to do that. Then again, it's just a feeling, and it might not be what's going on ( see, I'm the one speculating now)
Last edited by ElNono; 07-16-2008 at 10:19 PM.
I was originally under the impression that the rise in the price of oil was on the speculators, because that's where everyone was pointing the finger, but lately the edge has been taken off of that angle. It's like everyone that stands to make a profit is playing a big game with the (helpless) consumer.
Here's yesterdays quote from Bernanke:
Bernanke Defends Oil Speculators
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke in testimony, yesterday, in his Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to the Congress before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the U.S. Senate, defended oil speculators by saying:
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com...eculators.html
What's your take on that El?
I am not saying leave the oil there, but instead of just pumping oil to pump it out to market IMO is a not what is needed. It may by us some time but at the moment it won't because there is no plan in place to lessen our dependency enough on oil. We need to develop other power sources in the meantime and I see little of that happening. Sure there are hybrids and such but we need to develop cars and other transportation means that rely on other fuel sources as well. Hydrogen fuel cells come to mind.
I saw on tv a couple of weeks ago someone had developed a car that ran on compressed air. Not saying that is a good answer but we need to do something besides just pumping more oil without a solid long term plan.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
