come on you can't know... and Yeah I do...
Is the End Near? For fossil fuels?
- Thread starter Ernst
- Start date
come on you can't know... and Yeah I do...
canndo
Well-Known Member
The Saudi find was in the 50's I believe. People actually think that finding oil is like prospecting and that the motherload is just around the corner. The truth is that is doesn't work that way. We have yet to check the poles very thoroughly, there could be your saudi sized find there. But it is far more likely that there isn't one. If it isn't there then we are about out of places to look. We haven't found anything even remotely like the size of the Gahwar field. And it isn't for lack of trying. Why would you believe that we will find another when we have not done so in 60 years of avid attempts to do so?
jeff f
New Member
my point exactly. they didnt all die from your alarmist sky is falling mentality.
jeff f
New Member
liar.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/sep/02/bp-oil-find-gulf-of-mexico
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/energy/6809339.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/06/business/worldbusiness/06oil.html
http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news2.13s.html
http://2012poleshift.wetpaint.com/p...osit+Would+Free+USA+of+Foreign+Oil+Dependence
We are Canada's #1 Oil customer already.
canndo
Well-Known Member
canndo
Well-Known Member
Yer funny. 3 billion brls in the first find? That is a fraction of the north slope find (13 billion I believe) The north slope field peaked at 1.2 million a day - for a couple of years. I don't lie about this stuff, there is no need to.- Your first article says "we need to find six new Saudi Arabias to meet the growing demand in the future. the Tiber find is a tiny fraction of one "Saudi Arabia field"
The second link is about natural gas - I never said there was a shortage of that.
The third is "huge" wow, a projected total of 3 to 15 billion barrels, still a drop in the bucket and not technicaly a "large" field.
Everyone points to the Baken field - here's news, they can't recover the stuff. The USGS assessment claims only a fraction of the find is recoverable.
And of course another link to that magic Baken field.
Nope, nothing there.
Boonierat
Well-Known Member
Wow. This is starting to get a bit stupid. Once again. Light sweet crude oil provides a ridiculous amount of energy at low cost. I'm totally pulling this out of memory and don't feel like looking it up but it was something like 1 calorie of energy spent for every 30 calories of energy gained. The tar sands however was something like 7 calories of energy spent to gain 10 calories of energy. Once again, it isn't about running out of oil completely. We will never do that. It is about not being able to sustain the amount of energy we need RIGHT NOW.
Because the Goverment has not allowed the oil companies to drill in places they want to drill. I mean let them drill where they wanna drill. If they have done there research and think it may be there then let them do it. Also in the Gulf Of Mexico, I understand that oil companies also think there is oil outside the lease areas but have not been able to really research to find out.
canndo
Well-Known Member
This is correct, it has little to do with reserves it has everything to do with total global production. This is because we use it at such a fantastic rate and we don't store very much. It is also because of the fungible nature of the resource. But it seems you probably know all that.
canndo
Well-Known Member
Of course there is oil off the Gulf. But you are blaming the U.S. government for oil companies not finding enough? If this is true, then why are global finds shrinking as well? Or is the U.S. government prohibiting drilling everywhere on earth?
Not trying to be a smart ass here because you seem informed. However, oil companies can only work in off shore lease areas. they can't just go wildcat a well somewhere off the coast of Florida or Miss. or La. or Texas.
canndo
Well-Known Member
No, they can't but all in all total global rigs are one third higher than they were 10 years ago and we are producing less than we did before. Oil companies have lots and lots of leased land. Why is it that they want more and claim that there is oil under the land they don't lease? The fact is that the U.S. is indeed holding back some drilling but the oil they might produce is inconsequential. U.S. reserves peaked in the 70's, We could drill a million wells and we wouldn't be self sufficient. The fields in Texas are in tertiary mode, the ones in Alaska are in secondary, pumping just a fraction of what they used to. There is no true production left in the Continental U.S. I can't, for the life of me figure out why people want to believe fairy tales about what is quite obviously a limited natural resource.
jeff f
New Member
there you go, the propaganda...thanks for showing yourself
I don't know that reserves peaked in the US maybe production did.
1st I don't think we have reseached enough sites here in the US to make the statements you are making.
2nd I don't believe its a limited Natural resource. I think the limits are the goverment limiting where we can drill due to enviromental concerns.
canndo
Well-Known Member
How about some scientific fact disproving my "propaganda" then. Something other than some "sensational" find that winds up being 3 billion brls, enough for about a year or two for this country alone.
Similar threads
