Yeah, Feburary 13, 08

submitter: 200 billion barrels of oil that could make it energy independent

um.....no.


Our strategic oil reserves would sustain us for about 6-12 months. Tops. Then we'd be hosed. I hardly call that energy-independent.

Hee hee.

Good luck with that. The energy cost to recover low-quality oil won't help much.

If only there was a way to refine bullshiat into combustable automobile fuel...

Barnacles!: um.....no.

Our strategic oil reserves would sustain us for about 6-12 months. Tops. Then we'd be hosed. I hardly call that energy-independent.

How in the heck did you get the SOR involved? I bet you didn't RTFA at all. This has nothing to do with the SOR. The Bakken Formation has been known about for decades. The problem, as mentioned my TFA, has been that it is a PITA to extract from there. Many wells were capped in the 1980's and 90's because of low oil prices. The well at Parshal is the first of many new wells that will likely be drilled

Lately in the western part of the state they have been upcaping the wells and upping production as fast as they can because of the high prices. People who were smart enough to buy the mineral rights to their land are sitting on a vast amount of wealth there.

Domain Name: NEXTENERGYNEWS.COM
Registrant: Domains by Proxy, Inc.


Not fishy at all...

Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x

That's right. Go ahead and buy that Land Rover, Vern.

The proper name of a deity is supposed to be capitalized.

This is just like when I was in college... and the kegs all ran dry... but then somebody remembered the extra fridge in the basement and it was totally full of PBR! We said... WOO HOO party on!!! Then we got so drunk and partied so hard that the house got too hot and everyone died in a fire.

hooray for penny stock pump and dump scams, scammitter.

fark'emfeed'emfish: The proper name of a deity is supposed to be capitalized.

Well said sir

I am skeptical. But still, most of the peak oil people are morons.

I just talked to my dad, who is a surveyor. He knew exactly what I was talking about. He doesn't think it will reduce prices too much as not only is it going to take time and money to get things built, but the "flow" to the well isn't very good so you have to have plenty of wells and not draw from them too fast. Might take us back down to sub-$80 a barrel crude.

So we will have oil, the issue is how fast can we get it to the surface.

Barnacles!: Our strategic oil reserves would sustain us for about 6-12 months. Tops

well, 200b barrels would give us 40 years of oil at 14m barrel a day usage.

500b barrels would give us 97 years of oil at 14m barrel a day usage.

Double each if we only imported half that from foreign countries. Say non-middle eastern countries.

I should add I'm not gonna get all gitty until I hear it from some place more...legitimate...

And I don't suppose anyone here remembers the inflation of "proven" reserves at the last Oil Peak in the 70's?

this is same BS went around in the 70s and the 80s and the 90s, usually was to get you to invest...

Spanky_McFarksalot: I should add I'm not gonna get all gitty until I hear it from some place more...legitimate...

gitty? wtf is gitty?

I haven't rtfa but I'm guessing this is about "Oil Shale"(snake oil) as this discussion comes up once every two years or so.

Or Alaska.

/also did not bother to read thread, will read to confirm whether I'm right or wrong

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh dear.

They also failed to mention that it's a pretty sour crude, and has a low yield. Go ahead and invest your life savings though, Prius owners still need gas.

ErikShocker: I haven't rtfa but I'm guessing this is about "Oil Shale"(snake oil) as this discussion comes up once every two years or so.

Or Alaska.

/also did not bother to read thread, will read to confirm whether I'm right or wrong

Most of the shale is in Colorado, but yeah, it comes up every time someone needs to do a "pump-n-dump".

bud jones: hooray for penny stock pump and dump scams, scammitter.

Exactly!

/too late to get in before the dump???

ErikShocker: I haven't rtfa but I'm guessing this is about "Oil Shale"(snake oil) as this discussion comes up once every two years or so.

Or Alaska.

/also did not bother to read thread, will read to confirm whether I'm right or wrong

It's oil shale. It isn't snake oil, but it probably won't get produced. If oil prices were like this 15 years ago you'd see it getting tapped, but shale is too energy intensive and produces too much emissions to produce it now. Maybe if prices of crude keep going up.

Not too long ago, people didn't think of Canadian oil sands as a normal source of oil either.

It makes no sense to tap it now. Wait until a catastrophe where wells start running dry and countries start cutting off exports. Why tap it at $100/bbl when you can wait for $200/bbl oil?

They're talking about oil shale deposits. I've heard they are up there. We're the Saudi Arabia of oil shale. Only problem is, there is not a good way to get it out, as quel points out. Break even is when crude gets to around $100... so I would expect it to start becoming more viable soon. Chevron is working on some techniques, though the Isrealies have had the best luck. Look as ticker ASFK on the Isreali exchange. They have a sub-section of their company that has some good patents on it.

Shale has a handful of things going against it, and insiders have been saying every time the price of crude hit some benchmark, it would be worth pursuing.

I can specifically remember hearing that we would be pursuing oil shale when:

Crude hit $40
Crude hit $60
Crude hit $80
Crude hit $88, and everyone said that $88 was the highest the economy could support...
Crude hit $90
Crude hit $100

My first bf's family has a lot of land in NW South Dakota, right where that huge oil field is. I should have held on to that one. If I'm not mistaken, they're building a pipeline right across SD.

Oil is going to be used up. There isn't enough to sustain life as we know it in to perpetuity. Whether is in 10 years or 100 years really shouldn't matter. We need to make steps to get off the oil before it's too late. I think this is the point that people are missing.

Spanky_McFarksalot: Say non-middle eastern countries

That would accomplish nothing. Global market and all that. For every barrel we buy from Norway instead of Saudi Arabia, someone (probably China or India) will buy one barrel from Saudi Arabia instead of Norway.

What would happen if shale and other "cost inefficient" oil drilling methods were made cost efficient so that we stopped tapping the Middle East?

Would China's demands be enough to keep the Middle East in cash, or would there be economic chaos as the bottom fell out of their economy?

The_Time_Master: What would happen if shale and other "cost inefficient" oil drilling methods were made cost efficient so that we stopped tapping the Middle East?

Would China's demands be enough to keep the Middle East in cash, or would there be economic chaos as the bottom fell out of their economy?

Short answer: Yes, China and India could keep the Middle East afloat.

Oiliness is next to Godliness.

I am just here to point out that this web site as a free energy section.

Buster Hermano: Shale has a handful of things going against it, and insiders have been saying every time the price of crude hit some benchmark, it would be worth pursuing.

I can specifically remember hearing that we would be pursuing oil shale when:

Crude hit $40
Crude hit $60
Crude hit $80
Crude hit $88, and everyone said that $88 was the highest the economy could support...
Crude hit $90
Crude hit $100

I always wonder how they figure a profitable cost for oil extraction. Does it consider that over time the extraction method(which is tied to energy) costs may also increase?

darcsun: They're talking about oil shale deposits.

Nope, they're talking regular ol' oil from regular ol' wells.

Here's wikipedia:

The formation consists of three members: lower shale, middle dolomite, and upper shale. The shales were deposited in relatively deep marine conditions, and the dolomite was deposited as a coastal carbonate bank during a time of shallower water. The middle dolomite member is the principal oil reservoir, roughly two miles below the surface.

Trouble is the oil is low pressure. Some cracked areas where it pools have decent pressure, but there's a low recovery rate over all ('bout 1 - 5%). This company is estimating 10% or more, pushing up the the total size of the reserves.

My car burns coal and that's the way I likes it.

EmmaLou: My first bf's family has a lot of land in NW South Dakota, right where that huge oil field is. I should have held on to that one. If I'm not mistaken, they're building a pipeline right across SD.

I DRINK YOUR MILKSHAKE

EmmaLou: My first bf's family has a lot of land in NW South Dakota, right where that huge oil field is. I should have held on to that one.

Farkers' condolences, try again with a boobjob.

Some people didn't read the "article" very carefully. This is about the Bakken Formation, a large, oil-rich, and not very successfully exploited pool of oil. The Wikipedia article seems to be informed. It says that there are about 175 billion barrels of "technically" recoverable oil. "Technically" is worse than "economically" but better than "unfeasible". So the article isn't as nutters as you might think. Oh, I love Google. It makes you sound so smart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_Formation

Yep, energy independent. Until the day the 200 billion barrels run out. Then what?

beer4breakfast: I always wonder how they figure a profitable cost for oil extraction. Does it consider that over time the extraction method(which is tied to energy) costs may also increase?

Of course. Usually it's tied to the index estimate for the day product will leave the ground, so to speak.

One of the biggest problems with shale isn't so much the changes in the index, it's that there is currently no way to extract the crude without getting the NIMBY's panties in a bunch, so there isn't a magic number where it becomes feasible. My point about listing the crude prices above, was that in 2003, NO ONE thought crude would hit $40/bbl. So it seemed reasonable to assume that once we hit that unreachable barrier of $40/bbl, we'd have it all figured out.

I thought the proper name was "Petroleum", as in "Petroleum V. Nasby". By the by, exploitation of the oilsands in Alberta and Saskatchewan is economical at $60-65 a barrel. It's anybody's guess how much "oil" from non-conventional sources is recoverable at various prices. "Oil reserves" are often slight-of-hand. Remember when Shell had to cut its reserves by a quarter? Some suspect "coal reserves" are also exagerated, especially because China and Russia haven't lowered their estimates for years.

datdamwuf: this is same BS went around in the 70s and the 80s and the 90s, usually was to get you to invest...

At 110$ a barrell you better invest.

My guess is that we have seen "Peak Oil" in the conventional sense but that there is enough fossil fuel left to utterly destroy most life on Earth, leaving the Ocean in a pre-vertebrate state (mostly jellyfish, algae, etc., no bony fish or shellfish) and the land ravaged by floods and droughts. In other words, taking us back to the Permian or early Devonian era, more or less. Hope you like calamari. If not, get used to it.

EmmaLou: Oil is going to be used up. There isn't enough to sustain life as we know it in to perpetuity. Whether is in 10 years or 100 years really shouldn't matter. We need to make steps to get off the oil before it's too late. I think this is the point that people are missing.

But it does matter. If it runs out in 100 years, I'll be dead and won't care. Sorry, very little empathy here. ;)

Right-tards are still thinking they can solves the United States energy problem by digging themselves deeper into the same hole. Silly right-tards. Let the adults do the thinking.

Rovian: Right-tards are still thinking they can solves the United States energy problem by digging themselves deeper into the same hole. Silly right-tards. Let the adults do the thinking.

My troll-fu is weak, but on the off-chance that you're not, can we please stop making every goddamn issue under the sun a partisan one?? it's not always (or ever, really) about (D) vs. (R), or left vs. right, or liberal vs. conservative. There are great minds and there are dickbag retards on both sides of the aisle. You're not helping.

all your america are belong to us(middle east)

Didnt read the article, but...

I believe there's a shiat ton of oil somewhere in the US. We won't dig for it though. Why? Because it would cost us too much in labor to pay Americans to work for it. If we ever go for this oil, it'll probably cost a ton of money just because of those pesky labor costs associated with it.

Companies don't like helping the economy

brantgoose: My guess is that we have seen "Peak Oil" in the conventional sense but that there is enough fossil fuel left to utterly destroy most life on Earth, leaving the Ocean in a pre-vertebrate state (mostly jellyfish, algae, etc., no bony fish or shellfish) and the land ravaged by floods and droughts. In other words, taking us back to the Permian or early Devonian era, more or less. Hope you like calamari. If not, get used to it.

Hard to say for sure, since everybody looking at the issue has a different way of looking at it. Most of the doomsdayers only look at middle-east light sweet, since it's the benchmark for quality and ease of extraction. Other take into consideration the other grades, like heavys and heavy sours. Others yet add in the shales, bitumen (oil sands) and untapped reserves.

Website? It's static spam.

/Can I get greenlit for a website announcing a major medical breakthrough that is guaranteed to Give Me A Huge D!ck?