PDA

View Full Version : 3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil



pipefitter
02-01-2009, 05:40 PM
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911


The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS.

ljb5
02-01-2009, 05:45 PM
At our current rate of consumption that would sustain the U.S. for 168 days.

ljb5
02-01-2009, 05:53 PM
yeah. were better off sending the money overseas to people who hate us. :)

If the only two options you can think of are burning our oil or burning their oil, it's clear that you're not going to be the one to find the solution to the problem.

LeeG
02-01-2009, 06:24 PM
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911

what is the cost of extraction and potential delivery per year? Remember we need about 20million barrels a day.


Unless you can provide that detail the information is meaningless. There's a reason US production has been declining since 1970, there's less oil to be extracted and there's cheaper oil elsewhere.

George Roberts
02-01-2009, 07:07 PM
The cost and delivery rate are certainly important.

The higher the cost and the slower the delivery rate ...

The higher the probability that the US will have the last oil extracted.

The higher the probability that we will look for alternatives in time.

LeeG
02-01-2009, 07:25 PM
the alternative to low cost oil is high cost oil. The alternative to high cost oil is using less oil.

pipefitter
02-01-2009, 08:08 PM
what is the cost of extraction and potential delivery per year? Remember we need about 20million barrels a day.


Unless you can provide that detail the information is meaningless. There's a reason US production has been declining since 1970, there's less oil to be extracted and there's cheaper oil elsewhere.

I really don't have an opinion on the subject either way. It is as it is and from the article, seems a lot yet has to be determined. In times when we are talking about squeezing oil from sand, it seemed relevant.


and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS

I just thought that minor historical fact was the interesting part and is why I quoted that part of the article. Every thread or question doesn't have to be about pillaging mother nature or some anti-liberal political stab, nor a depiction towards a solution of an ongoing crisis.

See? This is what happens when you poison your minds towards political altercation 24/7. Everything around you becomes such. My initial thought was more towards the amount of fossil matter it takes to become that much oil in one place.

Wasn't a member of the WBF, Paul Oman, who's career was related to this field of study? I would be interested to hear what he has to say about it, if he even bothers to look in here anymore.

watson1990
02-01-2009, 10:23 PM
Does anyone here know how large our underground federal oil reserves are? I don't but it might help put this "discovery into perspective for us all.
20 million barrels a day equals 168 days if the reserve is good for 3.3 billion barrels
After all 20 million X 100 days = 2 billion barrels

As this is an update from 1995 ,due to our ability to extract oil more efficently than before , perhaps by the time we get around to building this thing ,we will also have more refined ways .
After all , they are now ready to start extracting oil out of the sand dunes on the Athabasca river . I have canoed the Great Athabasca and I have seen the sand dunes ,,,with the ribbon of oil just sitting there,,,mile after mile,usually 8 -10 feet above the river level when I canoed it in 2000 ...We started in Jasper [ prov. of Alberta ] and canoed downstream for approx 210 miles,where we met our outfitter 5 days later. The very best oil sand dunes only just begin there and are much deeper and thicker the further south and then east/north east.
Watson

LeeG
02-01-2009, 10:30 PM
My initial thought was more towards the amount of fossil matter it takes to become that much oil in one place.

.


yep, lotso organic material layed down over a time period many times longer than homosaps has been on the planet.

ljb5
02-01-2009, 10:53 PM
Is that correct? A billion is a big number, a thousand million. I know we use a lot of oil, but just curious.

Yup, it's correct. Kinda shocking, isn't it?

U.S. Oil consumption is about 20.8 Million barrels per day. Our total reserves are about 21 billions, or 1,000 days -- less than 3 years. This "new" find is about 3.5 billion, which is good for about half a year.

Total world reserves (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#Estimated_reserves_in_order) are about 1.2 trillion barrels, which is good for approximately 40 years at our current rates. Less if the population grows or consumption increases.

ljb5
02-01-2009, 10:54 PM
nothing coming on line for the next 10-15 years or more is going to wean us off oil. wake up fools.:rolleyes:

Nothing coming on line?

Perhaps we should take some stuff off-line?

watson1990
02-01-2009, 11:10 PM
I was just thinking [yeah i know, a dangerous thing !]
While this new found ability to extract more oil from a prior site than we could do before,,,,
While we use about 20-21 million barrels a day [ a barrel is 50 gallons] .,,If we re opened this site and used not 20 million but 2 million a day or 3 million a day ,that would lower demand on opec and they would probably lower their output ,simply to keep prices stable for themselves.
NOw lets go one more step:
Lets begin drilling somewhere we are not and should be [ I don't want to touch anwr yet]
lets drill one other site that has been off limits...maybe Florida ,east coast.
I don't want it in my back yard but we must have some oil in New England
West coast??
Anyway ,lets strat drilling one other place and pump another 3-4 million a day ...now opec is feeling the crunch because we are now supplying 6-7 million barrels a day more than we presently are ..sure they can lessen production ...not much we can do about that except that they are now junkies,,,they are hooked on the dollar... they want the American dollar ...they NEED the American dollar ...a little infighting possibly a glitch or two in their manufacturing or refining abilities and BANG ..... they now know that while we do like them ,,,we are not so dependant upon them.
I would hope that in 20 years that Atomic energy will be allowed again as it is the most practicle and safest way to produce energy,,,That day will come ,,,its only a question of what we did in the interim....
Lets do SOMETHING !!!
W

LeeG
02-01-2009, 11:33 PM
"At our current rate of consumption that would sustain the U.S. for 168 days."

Is that correct? A billion is a big number, a thousand million. I know we use a lot of oil, but just curious.

a thousand is a big number too, what are you curious about?

The formation won't yield 20millionbarrels/d,,that amount representing our daily consumption comes from hundreds of sources but let's make some assumptions that smarter folks than us could say are valid or not.

The largest producer at present from the Bakken formation yields 53,000 b/d from a field that is expected to yield a total of 270,000,000b. So lets assume the rest of the Bakken formation will have a similar ratio of production to yield. This may be a fallacious assumption but what the heck.

If the formation can yield 3Bb then maybe the production will be 600,000b/d. Ok,,production won't be a flat line but ramp up, peak, then decline but for the sake of conversation let's say it's .6Mbd,,3billion/.6million=5000days. or about 14yrs. Cool, we consume 20Mb/d and the Bakken formaton could contribute .6Mb/d. Which is a good thing because all those other big fields in California, Texas, Ohio and Alaska are in decline, producing less and less. This field won't change the general trend where we produce less and less and import more and more.

This is what the president of Halliburton was talking about in 1999 to the UK petroleum institute, just to maintain production new fields have to be discovered EVERY YEAR that are as big as the fields discoved decades ago that we are drawing down. Here's the Catch22,,we aren't.

Check it out, Dick Cheney says that by 2010 we're going to need an extra 50mbd compared to 1999,,maybe Bakken can provide .6mbd in 2020 wooo,,wooo


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_Formation


http://www.energybulletin.net/node/559

From the standpoint of the oil industry obviously and I’ll talk a little later on about gas, but obviously for over a hundred years we as an industry have had to deal with the pesky problem that once you find oil and pump it out of the ground you’ve got to turn around and find more or go out of business. Producing oil is obviously a self-depleting activity. Every year you’ve got to find and develop reserves equal to your output just to stand still, just to stay even. This is true for companies as well in the broader economic sense as it is for the world. A new merged company like Exxon-Mobil will have to secure over a billion and a half barrels of new oil equivalent reserves every year just to replace existing production
..
For the world as a whole, oil companies are expected to keep finding and developing enough oil to offset our seventy one million plus barrel a day of oil depletion, but also to meet new demand. By some estimates there will be an average of two per cent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead along with conservatively a three per cent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional fifty million barrels a day. So where is the oil going to come from?
...
While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow.

LeeG
02-01-2009, 11:51 PM
I was just thinking [yeah i know, a dangerous thing !]

Anyway ,lets strat drilling one other place and pump another 3-4 million a day ...

we could also teach pigs to fly.

Why would we produce oil at higher cost than it can be purchased on the open market that would deplete our reserves even faster? The increase you suggest is about 50% over present production,,the historical trendline is DOWN for domestic production and you're suggesting we can turn that around by 50%?

might as well teach the pigs to sing and fly.

LeeG
02-02-2009, 12:42 AM
yeah. were better off sending the money overseas to people who hate us. :)

you mean the Canadians, Mexicans, Nigerians and Saudis?


We get most of our oil from Canada, do you have a problem with Canadians?

ljb5
02-02-2009, 09:10 AM
...you can only use your car on Sundays.

I got rid of my car two years ago. :)

It's called "personal responsibility." Instead of looking to the government to solve this problem for me, I took the initiative to reduce my own consumption.

Naturally, it involved a little sacrifice, but everything worthwhile usually does.

Rigadog
02-02-2009, 09:32 AM
yeah. were better off sending the money overseas to people who hate us. :)


The ones who are getting the money don't hate us; it's the people that they abuse with the money that wish us harm.

LeeG
02-02-2009, 09:34 AM
and what's even more shocking those economies that supply all that oil are growing their own economies from the income and increasing THEIR consumption of oil...how dare they.

Those Canadians!!!

Rigadog
02-02-2009, 09:35 AM
you mean the Canadians, Mexicans, Nigerians and Saudis?


We get most of our oil from Canada, do you have a problem with Canadians?

Let's begin with the insidious Tim Horton. And what about the stuff they dare to call bacon? And the geese that have prove so ruinious to our lakefronts! Curling! THEY UNDERMINE OUR REPUBLIC!

LeeG
02-02-2009, 09:40 AM
well they did give us William Shatner


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvQwXOCKNLY&feature=related

ljb5
02-02-2009, 10:18 AM
thanks. now shut your computer off, and I wont feel responsible for getting rid of my truck. :)

Oh, so you do understand the concept of carbon trading?

Of course, you'd have to pay me...

But of course, conservatives insist that carbon trading doesn't work.

LeeG
02-02-2009, 12:33 PM
Speaking of Canada(those overseas people who hate us according to Dutch),,this is interesting

http://business.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090130.ROB2PG16/TPStory/Business/


The Arab states invest their oil fortunes in the craziest things, from the proposed Mile-High Tower in Jiddah to the indoor ski resort in dry-as-dust Dubai. Perhaps the craziest idea yet is Saudi Arabian wheat. Some 30 years ago, the lake- and river-less kingdom decided it should be self-sufficient in wheat.

It worked. But the subsidies to farmers at times approached $1,000 (U.S.) a tonne. Last year, the Saudis finally concluded that desert wheat made no more sense than Nunavut pineapples. The farms will disappear within a few years, after which the country will be entirely dependent on imports. But from where?

Answer: from any nation willing to sell or lease vast tracts of its farmland and-here's the kicker-allow the Saudis to export most or all of the food grown there back home, bypassing the international market. Such "offshore farms" are a quiet, though burgeoning, form of neo-colonialism. And they have the potential to unleash a new food crisis.

The Saudis are not alone in the global land grab. Any country that worries about long-term food security because of a shortage of fertile land, and has the wealth to do something about it, is on the hunt: United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Libya, India, China, Japan, plus a number of investment and private-equity funds. A report published in the autumn by the United Nations International Fund for Agricultural Development said that "public and private corporations and industrial groups are buying millions of hectares of land in Africa, Asia and Latin America to produce food or agrofuels."

ljb5
02-02-2009, 12:40 PM
sounds like a great idea. paying to pollute. Think the Indians and Chinese, and Russians will play?

It's called "creating a market." It uses a concept called "economic incentive." Perhaps you've heard of it?

Will Russia, China and India participate? It depends on if we have strong international agreements which require them to.

They like selling their products here and they won't do anything that endangers their ability to export to us. That gives us a powerful position to influence their policies.

ljb5
02-02-2009, 03:15 PM
Last Id heard we quit buying. I think theyll find other markets in 3rd world countries that are more receptive to their way of doing business.

Oh, yes.... there's tons of money to be made selling 42" plasma HDTVs in Chad. :rolleyes:


.... and also stop financing our government debt., which will sortly be built upon the speed at which we can print dollars. Why cowtow to a developing soon to be 3rd world economy like the US?

Thanks to the Bush economy.