Author Topic: What's wrong with drilling for our own oil? (Read 887 times)

Boroda · « **Reply #15 on:** November 04, 2000, 01:47:00 PM »

AFAIR from my Economical Geographics school textbook (read it in 1989) - in 1980 US produced 2 times more oil then USSR (not Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenia included). You can call it "communist propaganda" if you wish

Also please note that US consumes more oil and energy resources then the rest of the world. So - that's who our children will blame for oil exaustion.

StSanta, where in Europe did you find a 1200km route, and how many borders did you cross? ;-) Hehe, here we usually go to lake Seliger on weekends. It's quite near: 450km ride from Moscow. I know some guys that don't mind to go kajaking to Karelia on weekends, ~1500km one way

------------------
With respect,
Pavel Pavlov,
Commissar 25th IAP WB VVS

StSanta · « **Reply #16 on:** November 04, 2000, 04:06:00 PM »

Boroda, I used to live in northern Sweden. And had (and have) a brother in southern Sweden, so we travelled 1200 km when we wanted to visit.

Sweden is a relatively long country by European standards

.

------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"

Toad · « **Reply #17 on:** November 05, 2000, 08:21:00 AM »

Remember the gas price thread?

Go back and look at the figures in there. In most countries, the price of the GASOLINE is essentially the same.

The real difference in the "pump price" comes from the taxes the individual governments apply to the product.

All that "FREE education" and "FREE health care" and "FREE" this and "FREE" that always has SOMEBODY paying for it.

I don't think it's possible to change the course of development now. Personal transportation devices are here to stay. People like the freedom. So, alternatives to oil WILL eventually be developed. The only thing that might be altered is the timeline.

AKDejaVu · « **Reply #18 on:** November 05, 2000, 11:02:00 AM »

I read an article about an oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. It was surveyed and found to be pretty big. The pumping started and, as expected, the production began tepering off after a matter of some time. After an even longer time, the production began to climb again until it actually surpassed the original numbers by a factor of 2. The area was re-assed and the oil field size had doubled in size.

I think scientists are having to re-evaluate just what the source of oil is. Some previous assumptions aren't applying every time they should. Basically, I wouldn't hold my breath for the oil to run out in the Middle east.

AKDejaVu

Soda · « **Reply #19 on:** November 05, 2000, 11:23:00 AM »

Oil field size is not the only factor, the most important is how easily the oil in the field can be collected. Some rock is much more porous than other and thus allow the oil in a field to flow more easily to the collection point. If the rock is less porous, you have to drill more wells in order to extract it. More wells = more costs. Doubling production probably involved drilling more production wells.

Anything off-shore is expensive, to have to drill lots of wells offshore is even more expensive. Drilling lots of wells on land is cheap(er). Problem is, the large majority of significant US oil and gas deposits are offshore or in Alaska. Both are fairly expensive areas.

Winter drilling season is upon us soon, I know the rigs in Canada are going to be working full tilt...

Soda

Igloo · « **Reply #20 on:** November 05, 2000, 01:49:00 PM »

Instead of draining the world's oil reserve, why not make it a priority to come up with an alternate source of power to replace it?

Oil takes thousands of years to be created. Once we're out, thats it folks. Nevermind the ecological problems that will come up with oil reserves run dry. Oil has a natural purpose and it is not to power our needs.

Dowding · « **Reply #21 on:** November 05, 2000, 04:16:00 PM »

Toad - some of us don't mind paying more taxes to have education and health care available for all. The problem with high fuel tax in this country is the fact that there is a budget surplus of $16 billion this year, so many people want some of this surplus to be used to cut petrol tax.

qts · « **Reply #22 on:** November 05, 2000, 04:37:00 PM »

Dowding, many of us do object to the extortionate levels of indirect taxation. I don't object to fair and reasonable taxes on profits. I do object to taxes which prevent businesses making profits in the first place.

-lynx- · « **Reply #23 on:** November 06, 2000, 04:52:00 AM »

...IR35 is one of those...

------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF

Animal · « **Reply #24 on:** November 06, 2000, 06:17:00 AM »

my vette gulps fuel at the same rate StSanta and I can drink a bottle of tequila
and I am proud of it

because the more noise and smog you car can produce, the larger the size of your genitalia.
well at least thats how it works in America

by the way santa, when there is no more reefs and fish, we can always go ahead with our plan of diving hooped on LSD, our minds will make us see plenty of cooll stuff :-P

Eagler · « **Reply #25 on:** November 06, 2000, 06:18:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding:
Toad - some of us don't mind paying more taxes to have education and health care available for all. The problem with high fuel tax in this country is the fact that there is a budget surplus of $16 billion this year, so many people want some of this surplus to be used to cut petrol tax.

Don't mind paying taxes but want taxes cut/refund? huh?

Don't give them (the government) the money in the first place and there wouldn't be a surplus. Everyone has to live within a budget but the government. They can do it with less, much less in my opinion. I'm not happy paying any taxes! Privatize it, I'll then support it if it is something I believe in, not some hair brain idea from some fat arse politician that probably hasn't held a real job his/her entire life.

Eagler

Igloo · « **Reply #26 on:** November 06, 2000, 11:32:00 PM »

Canadians pay more taxes than most other nationalities. I happily pay my taxes because I know the money is being used properly. Our health care is free. If we break our leg, it is fixed up with no bill attached. If we need surgery of any sort. It is free. Our schooling systems are free as well. Our roads are in great shape, our cities are VERY clean and our crime rate is low.

Some European countries (I think Denmak and Norway) have VERY high taxes. But they also have free health care, free education, free university and many other benifets. I would much rather have that than HMOs and private schooling restricted to the rich.

------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York

"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]

Snoopi · « **Reply #27 on:** November 07, 2000, 02:41:00 AM »

The U.K. is screwed tax wise. ugh.

IN regards to the fuel alternatives.
They could be on the road today if the demand was there.
If the U.S. and Canada put a deadline of 5 years on having every transportation road vehicle be ultra low or zero emission vehicles it would happen.

Check out these links:

General Info About Fuel Cells
2001 Honda Insight (70mpg)
2002 Daimler-Chrysler Bus
Hyundai Fuel Cell SUV

[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-07-2000).]

Dowding · « **Reply #28 on:** November 07, 2000, 10:51:00 AM »

Eagler - please read my post again. Hopefully you'll find that I was objecting to high fuel taxes when there is a huge budget surplus. There is a apparently no need for so much tax on petrol. According to government sources, a 10p petrol duty cut would cost the treasury about 5 billion pounds. It might sound a small cut, but the surplus more than covers it.

Unfortunately, its not as simple as 'I agree with paying taxes' or 'I hate paying taxes'.

qts - I agree with you. But I think the economy seems to be doing ok compared to the ludicrous situation created by the Tories in the early nineties. I think Brown has done a good job as Chancellor, overall.

[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 11-07-2000).]