Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: sprattjack on August 23, 2008, 10:48:57 PM
-
17- Threads started devoid of commentary will not be allowed (i.e. links, cut-n-pastes, clicky, read this...)
-
1: It will do nothing for today's or tomorrow's pump prices.
Doing nothing will do nothing. Doing something is a step in the right direction. The important thing to me is not gas prices but paying for oil from overseas. The prices will drop TOMORROW when the people that sell us oil realize we have a fix coming.
2: It endangers some of America's most treasured environments.
Popycock! Drilling today is safer then ever. Who treasures those murky depths anyway? I look from the coast of Florida and I cant possibly see the spot they will drill at anyway. The coastal beaches are constantly destroyed and rebuilt by nature (ever hear of hurricanes?).
3: Californians and Floridians detest the plan -- or should.
Should? The same liberal in Republican clothing (Crist) that this rag (RealClearPolitics) helped push on Floridians wrote and passed a bill that exceeds the States Constitutional rights for establishment of coastal treaties. Florida has not got the right to stop the drilling where it is planned to begin. Tourists and Real Estate magnates will come to Florida anyway. We have this place called Disney (so does Kommiefornia) that people love to visit for some reason. The golf courses here attract more people then the beaches (something to do with HURRICANES the press made sure everyone knew about SHARK attacks that are broadcast all the way to Jacarta and RED TIDE that scares visiting Canadians into a frenzy! and then theres the jellyfish so make sure you check the beach warning FLAGS).
4: The embrace of new oil drilling ignores the threat of global warming.
I pretty much ignore global warming too. I cant stop the sun and neither will not drilling for oil. Again (for those slow to learn) one good volcanic eruption (the explosive kind not the smoke fizzle poof kind) does more for global warming then 5000 years of automobiles (even figuring in escalating numbers on the worlds highways and roads). The real cause of global warming as indicated by all those temperature stations is the position of the stations and the sun.
p.s. If a volcanologist dies you know it was the explosive kind.
5: The drive to drill feeds into the public's delusions.
Its this rag (RealClearPolitics) that is delusional. Its time we stopped paying exorbitant prices to pirates for oil and its time we started to ignore environmentalists.
-
Follow the money. Nancy Pelosi receives graff from Oil speculators. It has nothing to do with nothing else.
-
It's a bad idea, mkay.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/offshore_drilling_candidates_c.html
That all you got?
-
"the press made sure everyone knew about SHARK attacks that are broadcast all the way to Jacarta and RED TIDE that scares visiting Canadians into a frenzy! and then theres the jellyfish so make sure you check the beach warning FLAGS"
you forgot the stingrays and sand spurs.
-
you forgot the stingrays and sand spurs.
And the fat americans who fart a lot on the beach. OH the hugemanatee! errr humanity!!
-
I find it funny how these guys say it will be 20 years before any of that oil will be brought up. Maybe they should look and see how long it takes to set up an oil rig because they haven't got a clue.
-
Did anyone read the comments attached to the article, this Froma person got ripped apart. Hehe
-
just because you have a drilling lease it does not mean you can drill, i have stock in a small oil company that had leases in state lands off Florida, every time they tried to drill the environuts with the help of the state would file another law suit and drag it out for another 12-18 months in the courts, this went on for more that 25 years.
Finally the state was ordered by the courts to let them drill or buy back the leases, the state used taxpayer money ( what else) to buy back the leases.
-
I challenge chalenge for a volcanic source.
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6635776/ (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6635776/)
-
Those emissions are so high that if the volcano were a new factory, it probably couldn't get a permit, Clint Bowman, an atmospheric physicist for the Washington Department of Ecology, told The Seattle Times.
Italicized for indifference.
-
Sprat....
Lets hear YOUR take on drilling and why it's a bad idea....mkay? Not some leaning political paper....your reason...why YOU don't think it's a good idea.
Wanna try?
-
Spratt....
Lets hear YOUR take on drilling and why it's a bad idea....mkay? Not some leaning political paper....your reason...why YOU don't think it's a good idea.
Wanna try?
Synapses.
-
Here's a good read: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1834888,00.html
-
Here's a good read: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1834888,00.html
Good read Sandy...thanks
-
How can it not affect speculators if you drill for offshore and ANWAR oil and add 2-20 million barrels of domestic oil into the mix?
I think that the best proof is that the price went down just on the news that we would probly drill.
We will always need oil.. it is not just for cars.. it is in almost everything we use. It is prudent to conserve if possible but it is also prudent to make sure that we have a domestically produced supply that exceeds what we buy from other nations.
Just to get people out of their cars and into the ghettos the democrats would destroy our economy. Nothing a socialist hates more than people not living in the big blue cities.. unless it would be armed people not living in the big blue cities.
lazs
-
The only possible downside to off shore drilling would be a major spill, and with todays technology I'd be willing to take the chance since the odds are in our favor of there not being a major spill.
On the plus side, it would be GREAT for the economy. Thousands of jobs would be created and those jobs would pay well for American workers. All those rigs have to be manned, pipelines have to be built, storage facilities have to be built, long term transportation requirments, new refineries or update the existing refineries. By drilling here at home we could jump start the ecomony and get this country back on track inside of 5 years because the money being spent to do the drilling would stay here in our country. All the workers being paid by the oil companies will need houses, food, cars, schools for their kids, everything, and they will spend the money they make out on the rigs and pipelines right here in the USA. That's a BIG plus to drilling domestic oil.
The predictions that it would take at least 20 years to bring the fields online is total rubish. I grew up in SW Oklahoma right in the middle of oil country. I watched an oil field come online (over 100 wells drilled), pipeline built, and storage facilities for that oil all go up in about 18 months. Off shore and ANWR would take longer due to the logistics involved but the oil companies have already been there and done that. No new technology needs to be invented, just money invested and the will to do it. Off shore rigs and pipelines could be built, in place, and producing within 2-3 years from the word go. Not 20 like the nay sayers keep spouting, that is if they'll stay the hell out of the way.
-
IMO the thing liberals hate most about the oil business is you cant just put kids from our education system to work on the oil rigs. They dont have the brains anymore. Same goes for nuclear plants. Those are jobs that once created will be manned by people that will never vote democrat. Thats another reason 'they' try to hit high tech job markets and tear them apart with high tax structures. Once you lose your high tech job because the market goes overseas you either work along 'party members' or you are forced onto entitlement programs. Then once they have control of where your money comes from you either vote for them or cease to exist. True Marxist thinking.
-
I find it funny how these guys say it will be 20 years before any of that oil will be brought up.
Is anybody saying that? Production is expected to peak about 20 years after work begins, but oil should start flowing within about 5 years.
It's just there won't be very much oil. Lazs' figures are plucked from thin air.
The EIA estimates about 200,000 barrels a day, peak, from offshore in the lower 48, and about 800,000 barrels a day peak from ANWR. IIRC they are saying 10 years for ANWR to begin production, 5 years for offshore.
Off shore rigs and pipelines could be built, in place, and producing within 2-3 years from the word go
2 - 3 years is a bit optimistic. Take as an example Shell's Perdido field. They drilled test wells in 2004, started construction on the platform in 2006, anchored the platform in place recently and expect production to begin in 2010.
-
The only possible downside to off shore drilling would be a major spill, and with todays technology I'd be willing to take the chance since the odds are in our favor of there not being a major spill.
Most of the major spills are not caused by drilling they're caused by transporting the oil. The closer you drill to the refinery, the less distance the tanker has to travel and that lessens the chance an accident causing a spill. Not to mention you save oil the transport isn't burning up traveling halfway around the world from the Middle east.
-
If you don't explore for the oil then how do you know how many millions of barrels a day of oil is out there?
even 1-2 million barrels a day in 2-5 years is a huge help. why not do it?
There may be fields that surpass all the oil that has been discovered so far.
lazs
-
If you don't explore for the oil then how do you know how many millions of barrels a day of oil is out there?
even 1-2 million barrels a day in 2-5 years is a huge help. why not do it?
There may be fields that surpass all the oil that has been discovered so far.
lazs
true
-
Is anybody saying that? ...
From the article cited from 'RealClearPolitics' in the original posters message:
It will do nothing for today's or tomorrow's pump prices. The U.S. Energy Department says it: Drilling in these previously banned offshore areas "would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030."
That sure looks like someone says 20 years from now.
-
There may be fields that surpass all the oil that has been discovered so far.
lazs
That is a lot of oil you are joking again RIGHT. :O
-
not really.. we have explored only a tiny portion of the planet and it seems that oil was/is being made everywhere. Ok... say it is somewhere between several hundred million gallons a day and more than has ever been discovered so far.
There is no way to know if we don't look. To dismiss the very real possibility that there is hundreds of millions of gallons a day just waiting to be discovered is foolish in the extreme.. or... agenda driven.
lazs
-
So what is your non-agenda estimate for how long until we hit the peak lazs(the point where we will slowly be only able to refine less and less instead of more)?
For those interested here is some well laid out data:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/country_energy_data.cfm?fips=US (http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/country/country_energy_data.cfm?fips=US)
-
how do you know what is there until you look for it and find or don't find it?
did they know there was gold in cal before they found it?
did they know there was oil in alaska before they found it?
-
From the article cited from 'RealClearPolitics' in the original posters message:
It will do nothing for today's or tomorrow's pump prices. The U.S. Energy Department says it: Drilling in these previously banned offshore areas "would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030."
That sure looks like someone says 20 years from now.
That's saying there won't be a significiant impact on prices for 20 years, not that oil won't start flowing for 20 years.
I believe EIA's analysis shows there won't be a significant impact on prices at all. A peak of 1 million barrels a day, when the world already consumes 85 million a day, won't lower prices by much. In fact by 2030 we'd better have got oil production about 100 million barrels a day or we'll be in real trouble.
If you don't explore for the oil then how do you know how many millions of barrels a day of oil is out there?
Because you don't have to drill test wells to have some idea where oil is to be found. Western oil companies have been prospecting for oil for over a century, they have a pretty good idea what sort of rock formations hold it.
even 1-2 million barrels a day in 2-5 years is a huge help.
Again you are making up numbers. The forecast is 1 million barrels a day in 20 years, nothing in 2 years and possibly 100,000 barrels a day in 5 years.
why not do it?
I think they should. The counter argument would be that it will raise unreasonable expectations, which will cause people not to try so hard to conserve oil now. With the talk of 2 million barrels a day in 2 years, and the silly claims that the president caused the oil price to fall $30 a barrel just by signing the bill, that argument makes a lot of sense.
I think they should allow drilling in ANWR and the OCS. I just think people should realise it's not going to make much difference in the grand scheme of things.
There may be fields that surpass all the oil that has been discovered so far.
I doubt it. All the super fields were discovered a long time ago.
Ghawar in Saudi was discovered in 1948, Samotlor in Russia in 1965, Burgan (Kuwait) in 1938, Cantarell (Mexico) in 1976. There haven't been really major discoveries for a long time.
Put simply the oil companies have a rough idea where to look, and they've already looked in the good places. There is oil out there, but it tends to be in much smaller fields. That's why the amount of oil discovered these days is way down on the heydays of the 50s and 60s.
-
You don't actually drill down to look for oil. I guess you could... but it's kind of a waste of effort. You roll out the seismic truck, fire it off, and very clever software gives you a graphical display of what's there.
-
well... to put it another way... why not allow them to explore if there is no oil out there anyway?
bongie.. no one knows what "peak" oil is.. it is a term that has been thrown around for at least 30 years and no one has been the least bit accurate.
How can you know what "peak" oil is if you don't know how much there is or even how it is made? It may be being made faster than we are using it at this point.
lazs
-
Peak oil is pretty real, it's been proved by countless fields.
US oil production peaked in 1970 with 3.5 billion barrels produced. By last year it was down to 1.8 billion barrels.
North sea production peaked in 2000 at 6.4 million barrels a day. It's now down to about 4.5 million barrels a day.
Mexico peaked at 3.824 million barrels a day in 2004, it dropped to 3.477 last year.
Peak oil is real, it's just a question of when world production will peak, rather than individual countries.
-
1: It will do nothing for today's or tomorrow's pump prices.
EMT: Doctor! Doctor! The patient is having trouble breathing!
Doctor 1: Entubate and put him on oxygen
Doctor 2: That won't help him breathe long term.
Doctor 1: You're right... best let him struggle and if he dies, he dies.
EMT: WTF?
-
I guess no one really expects the Honda hydrogen vehicle to succeed or for natural gas engines to become more popular and the Chevy Volt is just a hoax then? Yes there is no reason to believe that all the oil that can be found has already been found but also as technology improves gasoline engines will probably stay with us as other types are developed and begin to see more and more use. The stubborn 'no drill zone' attitude has to be dealt with just the same.
-
You don't actually drill down to look for oil. I guess you could... but it's kind of a waste of effort. You roll out the seismic truck, fire it off, and very clever software gives you a graphical display of what's there.
Seismic data is useful but that's only how one decides to start exploration. Real good data requires drilling & analysis of what comes up. Look at the Bakkens. Based on 1995 seismic data, the USGS said there was 151 million barrels of oil. Some enterprising oil exploration companies sank a bunch of exploratory holes. Based largely on the data from these holes, the USGS updated their estimates in 2008 to 3-4 billion barrels, a 25 fold increase over the estimate from the initial seismic data. Others say there are 350+ billion barrels in the Bakkens. Time will tell. This story repeats itself for most oil fields.
All US oil reserve estimates come from the USGS. Almost all USGS oil reserve estimates are from the 1980-90's and based on oil staying at $20-30/barrel until 2020 or later. There is lots more US oil than the USGS says there is.
-
IIRC they are saying 10 years for ANWR to begin production, 5 years for offshore.
You are correct about the EIA plan. The EIA is great for collecting/presenting data (I use it all the time) and for doing what they are told, in this case by the Democratic Congress. I'm guessing the EIA was told to generate a 10 year plan, so they did. For some strange reason (political) the EIA plan doesn't start work on the oil delivery system until year 5 and they plan for the delivery system to take 4-5 years to build, hence 10 years to delivery. Why not start work on the delivery system on day 1 and have a 5 year plan? Also note that the ANWR fields are just down the road from the existing Alaska pipeline (which has large spare capacity) so why should it take 4-5 years to connect to it? There are many other "time savers" available if the goal was to get oil ASAP.
-
There are many other "time savers" available if the goal was to get oil ASAP.
And why do we do we need oil ASAP?
-
And why do we do we need oil ASAP?
In all fairness, I said *IF* the goal was to get oil ASAP.
IMO ASAP is a good goal. Additional US domestic oil ASAP would be a great way to reduce the hemorrhage of US $$$ to foreign counties and gain better control of the US energy supplies while the US works on the longer term goal of making renewable energy sources more mature and built out. It's going to take decades. Whatever the pricing impact, if any, the new oil has is a bonus.
-
Give it a few months, the fearmongering will die out. We'll never see a buck 99 again, mind you; but the pump's will drop significantly.
Shame to the outgoing, liners of thy pocket.
-
For some strange reason (political) the EIA plan doesn't start work on the oil delivery system until year 5 and they plan for the delivery system to take 4-5 years to build, hence 10 years to delivery.
The EIA case for the OCS assumes the ban is lifted in 2012 and production starts in 2017, hence the 5 year timeline I mentioned.
For some strange reason (political) the EIA plan doesn't start work on the oil delivery system until year 5 and they plan for the delivery system to take 4-5 years to build, hence 10 years to delivery. Why not start work on the delivery system on day 1 and have a 5 year plan?
That's in effect what they have done. The restrictions on access to the OCS will expire in 2012, the EIA have based their report on what would happen then if they were not reinstated.
As to ANWR, the EIA timeline is:
• 2 to 3 years to obtain leases, including the development of a U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) leasing program, which includes approval of an Environmental Impact Statement, the collection and analysis of seismic data, and the auction and award of leases.
• 2 to 3 years to drill a single exploratory well. Exploratory wells are slower to drill because geophysical data are collected during drilling, e.g., rock cores and well logs. Typically, Alaska North Slope exploration wells take two full winter seasons to reach the desired depth.
• 1 to 2 years to develop a production development plan and obtain BLM approval for that plan, if a commercial oil reservoir is discovered. Considerably more time could be required if the discovered oil reservoir is very deep, is filled with heavy oil, or is highly faulted. The petroleum company might have to collect more seismic data or drill delineation wells to confirm that the deposit is commercial.
• 3 to 4 years to construct the feeder pipelines; to fabricate oil separation and treatment plants, and transport them up from the lower-48 States to the North Slope by ocean barge; construct drilling pads; drill to depth; and complete the wells.
I'd say that's optimistic, given the political difficulties involved. The EIA also provide 2 examples:
The Alaska North Slope Badami and Alpine oil fields are recent examples of how long it might take to develop new ANWR oil fields. Located near the western border of ANWR, on State lands, the Badami field was discovered in 1990 and went into production in 1998, thereby taking 8 years between the oil discovery and initial production. On the western border of the State lands, near the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, the Alpine field was discovered in 1994 and initial oil production occurred in 2000, thereby taking 6 years from discovery. These Alaska North Slope oil field development time delays do not include the time delays associated with BLM leasing, the collection and interpretation of seismic data, and the drilling of exploratory wells
-
nashwan.. "peak" oil for the world can't be shown since we haven't found all the oil there is to find. Until we explore all the planet for oil and have a way to assess the size of the fields and know how fast it is being replenished.. we will have no idea. If we find a way to make oil shale into oil in an economical way then that will change several countries ideas of what is "peak" oil.
If we use less oil per year than the planet makes per year then there is no such thing as "peak".
As it is.. the date for "peak" oil gets moved around on an almost monthly basis with wild swings. it is a pretty useless number since there is very little real knowledge involved in the calculation.
If we explore for and drill offshore.. we may find fields bigger than any discovered so far.. at the very least we will have a couple million barrels a day more in less than a decade.. 10 years from now we will be asking why we hadn't started ten years earlier..
I have heard that it will only lower the price a few cents at the pump.. only strengthen the dollar a cent or so.. the alternative is that the price continues to go up for ten years.
That is if we only find the stuff we absolutely already know is there. If we find some huge field.. all bets are off.. we will be swimming in the stuff..
I believe that is what democrats and socialists fear most... people being able to have good lives without them.
lazs
-
Crude oil is created by a natural process known as catagenesis. Organic material is trapped in sediment, and as it is gradually buried under more sediment it is warmed by heat from the earth and converted to oil and natural gas.
The organic material is composed primarily of phytoplankton (tiny plants) and zooplankton (tiny animals) that live in the ocean or in lakes. Some plant material is also trapped in sediments, generally carried into the ocean by rivers. In some instances this process may take place at the bottom of fresh water lakes. In order for the material to be preserved, there must be anoxic conditions within the sediments, meaning that there is no oxygen. The sediments are typically carried into a basin by rivers, but another environment where organic sediments are trapped are mudflats known as sabkhas, and some other lagoonal settings. The common idea that dinosaurs contribute to oil is wrong, because the bodies of large animals rot and decompose quickly, and the organic parts are almost never preserved. Most of the organisms that go into oil are microscopic in size.
As this organic-rich sediment is buried under river deltas or other depositional processes, it will eventually reach what is called the oil window. This is the area of the subsurface where the temperature exceeds about 60 degrees Celsius (140 degrees F.). At that temperature, the organic material in the rock begins to convert to oil. As the sediment continues to be buried deeper and deeper it may warm to the point it reaches the gas window, about 160 degrees Celsius (320 F.), and will begin to form gas. If it stays this hot long enough, most of the oil will change to natural gas. If it gets too hot, both the oil and gas will eventually convert to graphite. This process of catagenesis can be duplicated in a laboratory.
One of the ideas that has been presented here is the hypothesis of abiotic oil generation. It has been proposed that oil may form from carbon deep within the earth's mantle. If this happens, it is extremely rare, and it is easy to verify that the vast majority of oil and natural gas do not form this way using isotopic testing, and the visible microscopic evidence of phytoplankton and zooplankton remaining in crude oil. Also, if the abiotic oil generation hypothesis were true, oil would be found in metamorphic and igneous rocks that originate deep within the earth. Oil is never found in these types of rock, so most geologists conclude that the abiotic process must be very insignificant. I don't know where the other answerer gets the idea that it is found there, as he doesn't give any sources for his information, and his explanation about clay is some sort of a combobulation of unrelated concepts (oil expulsion has nothing to do with the formation of oil). Oil is found in sedimentary rocks such as sandstone, limestone and shale. Some shale, known as a "source rock" is so rich in oil that it can be crushed and burnt. That is because shale is one of the original places where the remains of the plankton and plants were trapped and stored.
Reference:
Hunt, John M., 1996, Petroleum Geochemistry and Geology, New York: W. H. Freeman and Company, 743 pp.
Also see my answer to a question about the amount of time it takes for oil to form:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
1 year ago
Source(s):
Petroleum Geologist.
and
Four thousand years is the age of one of the youngest known examples of natural oil generation that was in a reservoir in the Guaymas Basin in the Gulf of California (Kvenvolden and Simoneit, 1990, AAPG Bulletin V 74, No 3, p 223-237). This oil was not generated by the most common process that creates oil in the subsurface, but the example does give an idea of the minimum time required for the process, known as catagenesis under natural conditions.
Catagenesis itself may not really be a long time-consuming process, but the deposition and burial of material that creates the right conditions and temperature for oil to be generated may take several hundred thousand to several million years. Oil is not generated from buried organic material until the temperature of the rock reaches about 140 degrees F (60 F.). This is known as the oil window. To reach this temperature, the rock may have to be buried to depths over ten or twenty thousand feet deep. At these depths the internal heat gradient of the earth reaches high enough temperatures to begin the oil generation process. The time involved is due to the rate at which sediment is being deposited by rivers, or by plate tectonic movement that may be forcing the rock that the oil originates from downward.
Most of the oil reservoirs found today probably come from rock that is 1 to 65 million years old. There are quite a few examples of oil reservoirs in rock that is as much as 540 million years old, but oil of that actual age is probably rare. In most cases the oil found in very old rock came from sources generated in younger rock that migrated into the older rock. I do know of examples of oil that was generated in the Mississippian Period, about 300 million years ago.
For more information see this text:
Hunt, John. M, 1996, Petroleum Geochemistry and Geology, W.H.Freeman and Company, New York. 743 pp.
1 year ago
Source(s):
Geologist
So a process that takes between 1 and 65 million years for the right conditions for oil creation is going to be producing as much as we take out lazs?
-
nashwan.. "peak" oil for the world can't be shown since we haven't found all the oil there is to find.
Peak oil is peak oil production. It's not the end of oil production.
Lately we are not finding enough oil to replace what we are using. Sooner or later production will no longer be increasing for the world as a whole. Some countries have already passed that point.
Until we explore all the planet for oil and have a way to assess the size of the fields and know how fast it is being replenished.. we will have no idea.
It's not being replenished. Some oil fileds may appear to refill because oil will seep back in to them from underground pockets. But the US experience proves oil fields are not self replenishing.
US production peaked in 1970. Fields are not replenishing themselves, and US production is falling. High oil prices have helped that flatten out, but the new fields coming on line are not enough to completely offset the declines at existing fields.
If we use less oil per year than the planet makes per year then there is no such thing as "peak".
We use a lot, lot more. That's why the North Sea is declining, it's why the US is declining, it's why Mexico is declining, and a host of smaller producers.
As it is.. the date for "peak" oil gets moved around on an almost monthly basis with wild swings. it is a pretty useless number since there is very little real knowledge involved in the calculation.
Agreed. No one knows when peak will be. It's not just geological factors, politics plays a big part in some countries as well. For example, Venezuela is showing large declines in oil output, but that's probably due to mismanagement and nationalisation.
If we explore for and drill offshore.. we may find fields bigger than any discovered so far.
No. The oil industry has a good idea where oil is and isn't, and the prospects for the OCS just aren't that good.
at the very least we will have a couple million barrels a day more in less than a decade.
No, the prediction is 1 million barrels, not a couple of million.
That is if we only find the stuff we absolutely already know is there. If we find some huge field.. all bets are off.. we will be swimming in the stuff..
No, that's if they find what they expect to find. It could be a bit worse, it could be a bit better. It's not going to be "swimming in the stuff".
I believe that is what democrats and socialists fear most... people being able to have good lives without them.
I don't think it's so much that they fear it, it's that they don't believe people can manage their own lives effectively without direction from above. That's true of all politicians to some extent, but doubly so for the left wing.
-
I didn't know that McCain was opposed to drilling in ANWR. Interesting.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080827/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_gop_platform (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080827/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_gop_platform)
-
nashwan.. I do not believe that they know of every oil deposit on the planet. I think that even you would not be tooooo surprised if suddenly they discovered a field as vast as any discovered so far.
They simply have no idea since they have not.. in some cases.. can not at this time explore the majority of the planet. The unexplored parts are much more vast than those that have been explored.. granted.. most of these areas are under miles of ocean and are not even possible to explore at this point but.. we really don't know what is out there.
Every few million barrels a day that we find and drill for will make us (America) better off..
lazs
-
so some of you say there no more oil so we should stop looking for any?
that makes no sense.
-
yep.. pretty much.. they are saying that there is no need to look because they are guessing that there is no more to find.
lazs
-
Geology 101
Oil is not found everywhere. And there are some places that you can look all you want and you will never find a drop. Oil is found in specific types of formations and no where else. These formations are found in certain parts of the world. Coal is found the same way. You will not find coal in igneous rocks so don't look. Right now we are looking for oil that is recoverable with good profit to be had. As the price of oil climbs you will find that some reservoirs will come back into production because they can economically recover it, NOT that the oil is growing in the earth.
BTW "we will never run out of oil but it will become unaffordable for most to buy" I heard that statement from a president of a mining company last month.
-
Geology 101
Oil is not found everywhere. And there are some places that you can look all you want and you will never find a drop. Oil is found in specific types of formations and no where else. These formations are found in certain parts of the world. Coal is found the same way. You will not find coal in igneous rocks so don't look. Right now we are looking for oil that is recoverable with good profit to be had. As the price of oil climbs you will find that some reservoirs will come back into production because they can economically recover it, NOT that the oil is growing in the earth.
BTW "we will never run out of oil but it will become unaffordable for most to buy" I heard that statement from a president of a mining company last month.
I think 'unaffordable' is a relative term....when people have to WALK, they will find money they never knew they had. I remember in late 70's people buying clunker used CARS because they came with a full tank of gas