400 Billion Barrels in North Dakota

[Holden McGroin]

Old news. I heard about this 4 years ago. Just because you have a large amount of a raw product, oil, isn't going to make the price go down. Until we build more and new refineries in the U.S. the price will stay up and probably go higher. We pump the oil up and no place to refine it so now we have to ship it, cost, export tax, cost, refining, cost, import tax, cost, storage and transportation to the pumps, cost, taxes, more cost. It's the to many fingers in the pie deal. Until we have a reliable system of production, refineing and distribution of an energy source here in the U.S. we are basically hostages to big oil and our own government.

If from this domestic resource our cost is say $80 / bbl sent to somebody from Bismark ND, who spends his huge amounts of profit in say, America, and every barrel produced reduces the need to send the money to the middle east or Venezuela.  You can tax it all you want, the taxes are collected by Americans. If the present refining capacity is used up by a domestic crude, all the better.  Big oil can refine and distribute and profit off American resource, and big fat cats in Houston can build mansions in Houston, hiring local carpenters, and buying local concrete to make huge cement ponds...  they can spend their windfall profits in say, America.

[JBA]

This is typical Liberalism, they drag the Gas Co. into congress to wage their collective fingers, then make statements like this.

CHEYENNE, Wyo. - Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal, a former Clinton administration appointee, announced Wednesday that he will support Illinois Sen. Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination……

The governor also said Obama gave him an honest answer about putting the Wyoming Range in western Wyoming off-limits to oil and gas drilling, something Freudenthal would like to see the U.S. Senate approve.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080402/ap_on_el_pr/obama_endorsement
hay cuddlinghunk, reducing supply will increase prices. When the Gas Co. turn a 200B profit the next year you can drag them in for another talk.
How about dragging in an economist first.

[lasersailor184]

the other thing few want to understand is that we will use up all of the planets known reserves in other parts of the globe before we dip into our own.

Good point.  I believe China is doing the same.  IIRC, China is sitting on a pretty good sized oil patch.  They are going to tap that last.

[john9001]

take the bus to work, just like the poor people.

[Napoleon II]

Holden

Ever since I got Windows Vista, those RSS news feeds come up on my screen. I rather like having it there!

The amount of oil present under ND, according to MSNBC is 4.3bn barrels, not 400bn. So you were a couple of decimal places out. MSNBC link : http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24057222/

At the current rate of consumption, 4.3bn barrels is enough to last the US about 7 months.

[myelo]

Brakken is shale oil, not crude. It's more expensive to process, which means oil prices have to be higher to make it worth gong after.

Besides, if the US substantially increases oil production, OPEC will just decrease their's so they keep supply:demand and price where they want it. In technical economic terms it's what's known as having you by the short hairs.

[Holden McGroin]

Brakken is shale oil, not crude. It's more expensive to process, which means oil prices have to be higher to make it worth gong after.

Besides, if the US substantially increases oil production, OPEC will just decrease their's so they keep supply:demand and price where they want it. In technical economic terms it's what's known as having you by the short hairs.

So if you grow your own tomatoes, independant of ther farmer or the supermarket, why does the market price of tomatoes worry you?

And Napolean:

A landmark paper by Dow and a companion paper by Williams (1974) recognized the Bakken as
a tremendous source for the oil produced in the Williston Basin. These papers suggested that the
Bakken was capable of generating 10 billion barrels of oil (BBbls). Webster (1982, 1984) as part
of a Master’s Thesis at the University of North Dakota further sampled and analyzed the Bakken
and calculated hydrocarbon generation capacities to be about 92 BBbls. This data was updated
by Schmoker and Hester (1983) who estimated that the Bakken was capable of generating 132
BBbls of oil in North Dakota and Montana. Price (unpublished) used a more complete database
and estimated that the Bakken was capable of generating between 271 and 503 BBbls of oil with
an average of 413 BBbls. New estimates of the amount of hydrocarbons generated by the Bakken
were presented by Meissner and Banks (2000) and by Flannery and Kraus (2006). The first of
these papers tested a newly developed computer model with existing Bakken data to estimate
generated oil of 32 BBbls. The second paper used a more sophisticated computer program with
extensive data input supplied by the ND Geological Survey and Oil and Gas Division. Early
numbers generated from this information placed the value at 200 BBbls later revised to 300
BBbls when the paper was presented in 2006.

[lazs2]

couple of things should jump out at people...

the same scientists who claim that they know how the globes climate works.. can't even tell us how much oil we have or confirm any deposits.

Not only that but they don't even really know how it came about.. no.. worse.. they don't even know if it is replenishing itself.

You could take nelsons view tho..   that no matter what..  suffering is good.

lazs

[AKIron]

One thing you're unlikely to hear the wealthier greenies demanding is energy rationing. High prices don't bother them nearly as much as it does those just getting by. If everyone were limited to a specific and reduced amount of energy consumption without regard to their situation I bet the drilling restrictions and the focus on reducing c02 would all but disappear overnight.

[Napoleon II]

Oh I think the oil companies would have a pretty good idea of exactly how much oil is down there. Whether they disclose that to you or me is another matter, but don't confuse the two! They might try to hide the fact, to keep the price high, but as we can see, the oil companies are doing very nicely, and they didn't get that way by drilling where there's no oil. They will have done their own seismic exploration to assess the exploration prospects.

[bj229r]

Oh I think the oil companies would have a pretty good idea of exactly how much oil is down there. Whether they disclose that to you or me is another matter, but don't confuse the two! They might try to hide the fact, to keep the price high, but as we can see, the oil companies are doing very nicely, and they didn't get that way by drilling where there's no oil. They will have done their own seismic exploration to assess the exploration prospects.

What would it matter? They're not allowed to drill in any new places, and they are all but not allowed to build new refineries. Did you know we actually IMPORT gasoline?

[Napoleon II]

What would it matter? They're not allowed to drill in any new places, and they are all but not allowed to build new refineries. Did you know we actually IMPORT gasoline?

Sure, I've known that for a long time. The US daily consumption of crude oil is ~20m barrels, of which ~13m barrels is imported - most of that from OPEC.

[bj229r]

I didnt mean oil, I meant that we actually have to import refined gasoline

Gasoline refiners figured they got a green light to substantially expand production in 2003, when the Bush administration eased costly clean air rules that kick in when industrial plants make big additions to capacity. The Bush regulation would have let refineries modernize existing plants and expand capacity by nearly 20%, without requiring the installation of scrubbers. But a three-judge panel on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals squashed expansion plans when it overturned the Bush regulation, saying the plain language of the Clean Air Act required a stricter approach.

Advocates for the Bush regulation, including refiners, electric utilities and chemical makers, aren't ready to concede yet. But with several years' worth of court appeals certain, it's unlikely that refiners will proceed with plans to expand capacity by 1.3 million barrels a day, raising daily output to about 18.5 million barrels by decade's end. Although some small incremental U.S. production increases are still likely, the ruling virtually guarantees that imports of gasoline will rise significantly. Already about 17% of U.S. gasoline use, the imported share will probably climb to nearer 25%.

That's likely to leave motorists fuming because it costs more for foreign refiners than their U.S. counterparts to make the variety of gasoline blends mandated by clean air standards and marketed only in this country.

http://www.kiplinger.com/businessresource/forecast/archive/gasoline_imports_set_to_surge__.html

[Napoleon II]

Oh wow, didn't know that! Thanks for the link.

Time to fire up those nuclear powerplants. Bring it on!

[Nashwan]

I didnt mean oil, I meant that we actually have to import refined gasoline

If you are going to import crude, it makes sense to import finished product as well. Refineries in the third world can refine cheaper than in the US because they only have to pay third world wages and safety and environmental standards are lower.