The way I read it the article is purposely misleading. Ethanol is included in the total, which we all know is a horrible idea.

FTA:
The Energy Department forecasts that U.S. production of crude and other liquid hydrocarbons, which includes biofuels


The trend is fairly good, obviously, but the main argument about restricting oil drilling is still valid in other parts of the country. It's also fashionable to be scared of fracking, so if it's evil, isn't concentrating on it and polluting groundwater something BO should be avoiding?

impaler: That's the funny thing about the "Drill, baby drill" - it's not a viable energy policy, and current conditions prove it. Oil production in the US is the highest its been since the 90s while gas consumption is in the US is down. Yet gas prices are north of $3 a gallon. We don't have enough oil to significantly affect world oil prices.

That would be significant if oil prices were driven by supply/demand instead of by speculation.

Oil company breaking all previous profits and sales and you think prices are going down.


You have to treat the oil company like a pinata. Now does a pinata just give you the candy? No you have to beat it with a stick.

Looks like 1/3 of the posts in this thread got cut off, I'll finish them:

"So vote Republican"

/morans

evoke: This is happening in spite of Obama.

I am amazed by all these "positive" news articles and studies that seem to come out just before the election. It's like someone is intentionally releasing biased studies at a specific time to trick the American people in believing that a certain president's record is better than what it really is.

America has increased it's oil production every year for the last five years. This isn't new, and it was publicly available data to anyone actually interested in facts, rather than trying to make the fairy tale in their head reality.

Here is another fact. American demand for oil has dropped every year the last four. Given that supply is way up and demand is way down, we should be paying much lower prices for fuel now, right? That invisible hand of the free market and all dictates it. Right? RIGHT?

This text is now purple: impaler: That's the funny thing about the "Drill, baby drill" - it's not a viable energy policy, and current conditions prove it. Oil production in the US is the highest its been since the 90s while gas consumption is in the US is down. Yet gas prices are north of $3 a gallon. We don't have enough oil to significantly affect world oil prices.

That would be significant if oil prices were driven by supply/demand instead of by speculation.

It only becomes significant if we nationalize our oil supply and ensure that American refineries buy from an American market, rather than a global market. If we can drive consumption down even further (can haz high efficiency diesel?) I'd be perfectly OK with that.

impaler: evoke: I am amazed by all these "positive" news articles and studies that seem to come out just before the election. It's like someone is intentionally releasing biased studies at a specific time to trick the American people in believing that a certain president's record is better than what it really is.

Reality has a liberal bias.

FY 2009 budget signed by Obama... not his!

2009/10 drilling permits and state and private land drilling not signed by Obama... it is Obama!!!!!

Such a partisan joke.

This is obviously bad news for Obama.

Romney in a landslide!

impaler: MyRandomName: FY 2009 budget signed by Obama... not his!

2009/10 drilling permits and state and private land drilling not signed by Obama... it is Obama!!!!!

I have no idea WTF you're point is. Are the voices in your head getting out of control?

His point is how much credit (either good or bad) the POTUS gets for various situations, when the POTUS had absolutely no affect on the situation.

The article indicates the increase in oil production has been the result of advances in fracking technology.

Number of patent applications filed during the indicated timeframe with the terms "fracking" or "hydraulic fracturing":
01 January 2000 to 01 January 2004 - 456
01 January 2004 to 01 January 2008 - 943
01 January 2008 to 01 January 2012 - 1251

Rent Party: This text is now purple: impaler: That's the funny thing about the "Drill, baby drill" - it's not a viable energy policy, and current conditions prove it. Oil production in the US is the highest its been since the 90s while gas consumption is in the US is down. Yet gas prices are north of $3 a gallon. We don't have enough oil to significantly affect world oil prices.

That would be significant if oil prices were driven by supply/demand instead of by speculation.

It only becomes significant if we nationalize our oil supply and ensure that American refineries buy from an American market, rather than a global market. If we can drive consumption down even further (can haz high efficiency diesel?) I'd be perfectly OK with that.

So nationalizing our oil supply magically makes the USA have enough oil to be self sufficient? I work in the oil industry here in the USA. In fact I have spent a fair amount of time in North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming where we are seeing production increases in the last five years after decades of decline. The creativity, hard work, and perseverance of the people in this industry at all levels is amazing. We are doing things, and getting oil from places that was simply not possible a few years ago. We have always known that we have world class supplies in tight rock for years now, but have not had the technology to go get it. With the combination of efficient horizontal drilling and multistage fracture stimulations (Frack jobs) we are able to recover 200,000 to 500,000 barrels of oil per well from rock that would barely give us 10,000 barrells through old conventional techniques. This is what is leading to the huge new supplies of oil available to the United States domestically. Add to that the increases we are seeing in Canada in their tar sands in Northern Alberta. North America and the USA can become basically self sufficient in oil. we will still have to import some supplies from outside North America to meet demand.

All of that said, no matter what we do, oil is a global commodity. The price of a barrell of oil will be largely the same across the world no matter what we do. With the ever increasing and acceleration of demand for oil in the developing world (because they want to have the standard of living enjoyed in the USA and Western Europe) the price for a gallon of gasoline will most likely remain high. There is not a whole lot that can be done about this. Other than produce as much as possible to keep the gap between supply and demand as small as possible. I see no scenario where "nationalizing" our domestic supply would make any sense at all. that would be one of the most destabilizing things we could possibly do in this price environment.

Hydraulic Fracturing is a safe process that has very little inherent risk to groundwater supplies. The biggest issue is not the frack job itself, it is the cement job in the near surface that is the biggest issue. Tight regulation exists to verify the integrity of the cement jobs in the near surface environment. deep underground hydraulic fracturing poses little threat to groundwater. The cement jobs and disposal of frack fluid that comes back to the surface through the well are the biggest threats to the environment and groundwater. Those two things should be the focus of regulators and companies that it is done responsibly and safely. The vast vast majority of oil companies are responsible operators that do not want to destroy the land and deal with lawsuits that arise from that. It is incumbent on these companies to make sure that those few companies that are not responsible operators to change their practices or leave the business.

It is absolutely ridiculous though to "nationalize" the USA's oil industry to help control price and supply......it would do the exact opposite destabilize price and decrease supply.

Rent Party: evoke: This is happening in spite of Obama.

I am amazed by all these "positive" news articles and studies that seem to come out just before the election. It's like someone is intentionally releasing biased studies at a specific time to trick the American people in believing that a certain president's record is better than what it really is.

America has increased it's oil production every year for the last five years. This isn't new, and it was publicly available data to anyone actually interested in facts, rather than trying to make the fairy tale in their head reality.

Here is another fact. American demand for oil has dropped every year the last four. Given that supply is way up and demand is way down, we should be paying much lower prices for fuel now, right? That invisible hand of the free market and all dictates it. Right? RIGHT?

Given that it's a global commodity, dont' you have to factor global supply and demand?

barrel Zirconium: So nationalizing our oil supply magically makes the USA have enough oil to be self sufficient? I work in the oil industry here in the USA. In fact I have spent a fair amount of time in North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming where we are seeing production increases in the last five years after decades of decline. The creativity, hard work, and perseverance of the people in this industry at all levels is amazing. We are doing things, and getting oil from places that was simply not possible a few years ago. We have always known that we have world class supplies in tight rock for years now, but have not had the technology to go get it. With the combination of efficient horizontal drilling and multistage fracture stimulations (Frack jobs) we are able to recover 200,000 to 500,000 barrels of oil per well from rock that would barely give us 10,000 barrells through old conventional techniques. This is what is leading to the huge new supplies of oil available to the United States domestically. Add to that the increases we are seeing in Canada in their tar sands in Northern Alberta. North America and the USA can become basically self sufficient in oil. we will still have to import some supplies from outside North America to meet demand.

All of that said, no matter what we do, oil is a global commodity. The price of a barrell of oil will be largely the same across the world no matter what we do. With the ever increasing and acceleration of demand for oil in the developing world (because they want to have the standard of living enjoyed in the USA and Western Europe) the price for a gallon of gasoline will most likely remain high. There is not a whole lot that can be done about this. Other than produce as much as possible to keep the gap between supply and demand as small as possible. I see no scenario where "nationalizing" our domestic supply would make any sense at all. that would be one of the most destabilizing things we could possibly do in this price environ ...

You'd think someone who works in the oil industry could at least spell barrel correctly . . .

WTFDYW: What part of Ohio are you from? I'm from Belmont County originally. That area definately needs the econonmic shot in the arm the drilling is bringing. That's why I moved away.

Right now I am in Guernsey (grew up in Muskingum) It's slowly starting to get better around here, rental property is going like crazy because of all the out of state drillers. I'm hoping that some GIS jobs pop up soon (I work in CAD, but my degree is GIS) and I am already getting inquires about GIS training from some people around here.

Zirconium:
So nationalizing our oil supply magically makes the USA have enough oil to be self sufficient?


If we can drive about another 6 million barrels a day out of our demand, yes. I'm fine with supplementing that from Canadian oil fields if needs be. NAFTA and all that.


I work in the oil industry here in the USA. In fact I have spent a fair amount of time in North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming where we are seeing production increases in the last five years after decades of decline. The creativity, hard work, and perseverance of the people in this industry at all levels is amazing. We are doing things, and getting oil from places that was simply not possible a few years ago. We have always known that we have world class supplies in tight rock for years now, but have not had the technology to go get it.


Exactly my point. You guys are doing all of this work getting at our oil, and then your boss is turning around and selling it to China and India.

It is absolutely ridiculous though to "nationalize" the USA's oil industry to help control price and supply......it would do the exact opposite destabilize price and decrease supply.

It is ridiculous to assume adding our supply to global markets where it is impacted by global demand ,which is rising, will result in lower gas prices at home.

If we can produce enough to be self sufficient, it won't make us self sufficient because your boss isn't selling in America. It would destabilize global prices, and upset your boss. But that doesn't bother me because that guy is an asshole. Venezuela has the cheapest gas on the planet for a reason.

Zirconium: Rent Party: This text is now purple: impaler: That's the funny thing about the "Drill, baby drill" - it's not a viable energy policy, and current conditions prove it. Oil production in the US is the highest its been since the 90s while gas consumption is in the US is down. Yet gas prices are north of $3 a gallon. We don't have enough oil to significantly affect world oil prices.

That would be significant if oil prices were driven by supply/demand instead of by speculation.

It only becomes significant if we nationalize our oil supply and ensure that American refineries buy from an American market, rather than a global market. If we can drive consumption down even further (can haz high efficiency diesel?) I'd be perfectly OK with that.

So nationalizing our oil supply magically makes the USA have enough oil to be self sufficient? I work in the oil industry here in the USA. In fact I have spent a fair amount of time in North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming where we are seeing production increases in the last five years after decades of decline. The creativity, hard work, and perseverance of the people in this industry at all levels is amazing. We are doing things, and getting oil from places that was simply not possible a few years ago. We have always known that we have world class supplies in tight rock for years now, but have not had the technology to go get it. With the combination of efficient horizontal drilling and multistage fracture stimulations (Frack jobs) we are able to recover 200,000 to 500,000 barrels of oil per well from rock that would barely give us 10,000 barrells through old conventional techniques. This is what is leading to the huge new supplies of oil available to the United States domestically. Add to that the increases we are seeing in Canada in their tar sands in Northern Alberta. North America and the USA can become basically self sufficient in oil. we will still have to import some supplies from outside North America to meet deman ... 

The highlighted section voids any point you are trying to make or defend.

Cythraul: Didn't read the article. I guess this is good and bad. Slack regulations on things like Hydraulic Fracturing is bad. But it could create jobs, so that's good. But I doubt it'll lower energy prices, since there's no guarantee that a significant amount of this oil will be sold to the U.S., unless there's some regulation I'm missing.

Since we use much more oil than we produce, wouldn't you think most of the U.S. production will remain in the U.S.?

Lunaville: Ideally, it would also be coupled with increased energy standards for most products and all vehicles as well as a hefty additional gasoline tax. I'd like to see proceeds from such a tax invested in mass transit, bike lanes, environmental clean-up, and research into alternative energy

About that alternative energy investment

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:[so far] and the amount of tax payer dollars they have recieved to date.

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
1.Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
4.Beacon Power ($43 million)*
5.Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
6.SunPower ($1.2 billion)
7.First Solar ($1.46 billion)
8.Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
9.EnerDel's subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
10.Amonix ($5.9 million)
11.Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
12.Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
15.Johnson Controls ($299 million)
16.Schneider Electric ($86 million)
17.Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
18.ECOtality ($126.2 million)
19.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
20.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
21.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
22.Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
23.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
24.Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
25.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
26.Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
27.GreenVolts ($500,000)
28.Vestas ($50 million)
29.LG Chem's subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
30.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
31.Navistar ($39 million)
32.Satcon ($3 million)*
33.Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
34.Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

Cythraul: Didn't read the article. I guess this is good and bad. Slack regulations on things like Hydraulic Fracturing is bad. But it could create jobs, so that's good. But I doubt it'll lower energy prices, since there's no guarantee that a significant amount of this oil will be sold to the U.S

But it comes with a free Frogurt.

Burr: WTFDYW: What part of Ohio are you from? I'm from Belmont County originally. That area definately needs the econonmic shot in the arm the drilling is bringing. That's why I moved away.

Right now I am in Guernsey (grew up in Muskingum) It's slowly starting to get better around here, rental property is going like crazy because of all the out of state drillers. I'm hoping that some GIS jobs pop up soon (I work in CAD, but my degree is GIS) and I am already getting inquires about GIS training from some people around here.


Dude there are a TON of GIS/CAD tech jobs right now in WV due to the new drilling. Many of them along the Ohio River (like Parkersburg up) and som in the Morgantown/Wetzel/Marion Counties. Look 'em up!

Gas pipeline GIS, while it pays well, is shoot-yourself-in-the-face-boring, but it gets the job done. I did it for 4 years and then got into Emergency management before I went insane.

Mangoose: It's weird but I thought the Ohio Shale find was the biggest find of all? Was that just hype?

The Marcellus and Utica shale extends through Ohio, PA, VA, parts of KY and NY. The estimated amount of gas and oil is one of the largest ever discovered.

Getting it out is the hard part, it's very deep and wont flow without fracturing the shiat out of the shale. We've only just now tapped into it because of advancements in drilling and fracturing technology. But the wells are capable of producing incomprehensible amounts of gas, some with pressures over 8,000 PSI.

hasty ambush: Lunaville: Ideally, it would also be coupled with increased energy standards for most products and all vehicles as well as a hefty additional gasoline tax. I'd like to see proceeds from such a tax invested in mass transit, bike lanes, environmental clean-up, and research into alternative energy

About that alternative energy investment

The complete list bankrupt green-energy companies:[so far] and the amount of tax payer dollars they have recieved to date.

1.Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
4.Beacon Power ($43 million)*
9.EnerDel's subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
12.Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
19.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
20.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
21.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
22.Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
23.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
24.Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
25.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
26.Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
30.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
32.Satcon ($3 million)*
33.Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*

There, cut out your 'faltering' companies and only included companies that have gone or are in bankruptcy. According to your numbers, that represents $1.6 billion dollars - which sounds like a mighty sum. But when you look at the total amount earmarked for energy investment in the Obama Stimulus package is $90 billion dollars, $1.6 billion in loss is tiny in comparison. Considering the failure rate represents 1.7% of the public investment in *energy loans,* I'm not all that worried. As long as 90% of the companies repay their loans, with interest, the public is going to make money on the venture, and the USA will be far more competitive in the energy sector.

Considering the Bush meltdown on the banking and investment sector, it makes complete sense to open up public capital for loans. 

/math is hard for Republicans

hasty ambush: Lunaville: Ideally, it would also be coupled with increased energy standards for most products and all vehicles as well as a hefty additional gasoline tax. I'd like to see proceeds from such a tax invested in mass transit, bike lanes, environmental clean-up, and research into alternative energy

About that alternative energy investment

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:[so far] and the amount of tax payer dollars they have recieved to date.

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
1.Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
4.Beacon Power ($43 million)*
5.Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
6.SunPower ($1.2 billion)
7.First Solar ($1.46 billion)
8.Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
9.EnerDel's subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
10.Amonix ($5.9 million)
11.Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
12.Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
15.Johnson Controls ($299 million)
16.Schneider Electric ($86 million)
17.Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
18.ECOtality ($126.2 million)
19.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
20.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
21.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
22.Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
23.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
24.Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
25.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
26.Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
27.GreenVolts ($500,000)
28.Vestas ($50 million)
29.LG Chem's subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
30.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
31.Navistar ($39 million)
32.Satcon ($3 million)*
33.Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
34.Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

When you're right you're right. It reminds me of some of these failures - Link and these Link

Investing in science and research is such a waste of money. When will we Americans learn our lesson?

Rent Party: evoke: This is happening in spite of Obama.

I am amazed by all these "positive" news articles and studies that seem to come out just before the election. It's like someone is intentionally releasing biased studies at a specific time to trick the American people in believing that a certain president's record is better than what it really is.

America has increased it's oil production every year for the last five years. This isn't new, and it was publicly available data to anyone actually interested in facts, rather than trying to make the fairy tale in their head reality.

Here is another fact. American demand for oil has dropped every year the last four. Given that supply is way up and demand is way down, we should be paying much lower prices for fuel now, right? That invisible hand of the free market and all dictates it. Right? RIGHT?

If the oil market was US only, sure. Trouble is, even as our demand goes down, the demand from China and India are going up faster. Oil is fungible, which is to say as good as money regardless of where in the world it is (kind of like gold, hence 'black gold') so their increased demand affects our oil prices. It is the free market at work, it is just much larger in scope than most in the US are thinking about - the world is the market, not just the US.

I guess the war for oil worked out, sorta?

BuckTurgidson: Cythraul: Didn't read the article. I guess this is good and bad. Slack regulations on things like Hydraulic Fracturing is bad. But it could create jobs, so that's good. But I doubt it'll lower energy prices, since there's no guarantee that a significant amount of this oil will be sold to the U.S

But it comes with a free Frogurt.

Which is good, right?

From TFA:

The increase in production hasn't translated to cheaper gasoline at the pump, and prices are expected to stay relatively high for the next few years because of growing demand for oil in developing nations and political instability in the Middle East and North Africa.

Read this, then read it again. Let it sink in.

These "new" oil reserves in the US are not new; they've been known for years. However, the cost to extract the oil from them has made them not worth exploiting. Now that the price of oil has gone up, they're starting to become profitable. But they won't--they CANNOT--bring down the price of gas.

Mouser: From TFA:

The increase in production hasn't translated to cheaper gasoline at the pump, and prices are expected to stay relatively high for the next few years because of growing demand for oil in developing nations and political instability in the Middle East and North Africa.

Read this, then read it again. Let it sink in.

These "new" oil reserves in the US are not new; they've been known for years. However, the cost to extract the oil from them has made them not worth exploiting. Now that the price of oil has gone up, they're starting to become profitable. But they won't--they CANNOT--bring down the price of gas.

We'll just terraform Mars and 3D print a space elevator, Mr Negative.

Mouser: These "new" oil reserves in the US are not new; they've been known for years. However, the cost to extract the oil from them has made them not worth exploiting. Now that the price of oil has gone up, they're starting to become profitable. But they won't--they CANNOT--bring down the price of gas.

But as the price of transportation fuel rises, the more cost-effective these become:

+


Let US based energy companies (and shareholders) make obscene profits from the rest of the world. We should use a portion of that wealth to further reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.

MrSteve007: Mouser: These "new" oil reserves in the US are not new; they've been known for years. However, the cost to extract the oil from them has made them not worth exploiting. Now that the price of oil has gone up, they're starting to become profitable. But they won't--they CANNOT--bring down the price of gas.

But as the price of transportation fuel rises, the more cost-effective these become:
[www.nachi.org image 640x480]
+
[www.blogcdn.com image 630x419]

Let US based energy companies (and shareholders) make obscene profits from the rest of the world. We should use a portion of that wealth to further reduce our dependency on fossil fuels.

I see a bizarre face in that car's front end.

meat0918: GAT_00: Is that why MItt Romney said oil production is lower than it was 4 years ago?

Mitt Romney says a lot of things.

I saw him on TV just now. He was still saying things.

Mouser: These "new" oil reserves in the US are not new; they've been known for years.

Nice misleading statement. But I won't try to argue potential vs probable vs proven.

Mouser: However, the cost to extract the oil from them has made them not worth exploiting. Now that the price of oil has gone up, they're starting to become profitable.

More simplistic interpretation. Some areas are going to be much more profitable than others. Anyone can post that "Shale Oil and Shale Gas" basin map and think they can do some areal extent and determine how much oil is in various places... and they'd be wrong. The folks at EIA could only guess how many reserves are in each basin, but until actual wells are drilled, they (and everyone else) were clueless as to whether the wells would actually produce ANY oil, at any price. The Eagle Ford in Texas is considerably more productive per acre than the Niobrara, yet you wouldn't know that until you actually tried to complete a well in either.

Mouser: Now that the price of oil has gone up, they're starting to become profitable. But they won't--they CANNOT--bring down the price of gas.

The cost of oil has an effect, alright -- the effect of the rate of increase in oil supply. It hasn't affected the price because America needs such a large a supply of liquid hydrocarbons. The price of (natural) gas is showing the opposite effect lately, as the gas supply has overwhelmed the marketplace's ability to use it all. There are coal fired electric plants whose owners have been forced to invest in natural gas fired turbines, because they couldn't make a profit using coal.

In other words, the cost for electricity in the United States is low, and has remained low for some time, only because of the massive amount of fracking that has taken place.
If you pay for electricity in the United States, whether it be from wind or coal or natural gas, you have benefitted from the fracking of gas shales in North America.

...and we shall destroy ourselves while doing it. Our water will be too polluted to drink, and war will erupt.

meh.

finding me a nest in the hills. away from the open top mining.

you have pee hands: oldernell: What are they going to name the lake when the bedrock is so fractured in Ohio and Pa. that the region becomes a giant sinkhole? If the footings to your house were broken like that it would be condemned.

The Sandusky Hole

exactly

StanleyPuff: oldernell: What are they going to name the lake when the bedrock is so fractured in Ohio and Pa. that the region becomes a giant sinkhole? If the footings to your house were broken like that it would be condemned.

NotSureIfSerious.jpg

Maybe you know something that I do not, but there will be natural gas drilling on my families property soon and I've gotten pretty familiar with their process. It is also my understanding that oil drilling is very similar to gas drilling.

They punch one hole (can vary between 14" and 96" diameter) in the ground and then go horizontal, in "wagon wheel" fashion, for approximately 2,600' in 8 equally spaced directions (radially). If they decided to honeycomb the landscape with pumping rigs, that would mean there is a hole every 5,200 feet.

Were you implying that these equally spaced holes, a mile apart, would cause bedrock to become unstable? Is the oil drilling much more intrusive than natural gas?

Um, yeah. I suspect that in a ling term they would become unstable. Imaging that all the fuel pockets are interlinked, and then drained dry, a large cavern would form. in a wagonwheel pattern I would think that the blah blah blah insert scientific crap here. screw this, im going to stare at the moon for a few minutes.

Spot price of natural gas today in US markets was $2.69/MCF
Spot price for oil (WTI) is $88.67
The multiplier for gas to oil is about 6, give or take.

To do the same amount of heating as a single barrel of oil, you'd need about $16.14.

Natural gas is about 5.5 times cheaper in the US than oil.

The same can NOT be said for Europe. One of Russia's big natural gas suppliers just signed a big fat contract for 10 years with a German company at a price of around $10/MCF

At current estimates, it would cost about $2.50/MCF to transport natural gas from American ports to Europe.

The process for getting natural gas moving to Europe for those higher prices is slow, but is on its way to happen at present.

Lunaville: hasty ambush: Lunaville: Ideally, it would also be coupled with increased energy standards for most products and all vehicles as well as a hefty additional gasoline tax. I'd like to see proceeds from such a tax invested in mass transit, bike lanes, environmental clean-up, and research into alternative energy

About that alternative energy investment

The complete list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:[so far] and the amount of tax payer dollars they have recieved to date.

*Denotes companies that have filed for bankruptcy.
1.Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
2.SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
3.Solyndra ($535 million)*
4.Beacon Power ($43 million)*
5.Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
6.SunPower ($1.2 billion)
7.First Solar ($1.46 billion)
8.Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
9.EnerDel's subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
10.Amonix ($5.9 million)
11.Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
12.Abound Solar ($400 million)*
13.A123 Systems ($279 million)*
14.Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
15.Johnson Controls ($299 million)
16.Schneider Electric ($86 million)
17.Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
18.ECOtality ($126.2 million)
19.Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
20.Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
21.Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
22.Olsen's Crop Service and Olsen's Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
23.Range Fuels ($80 million)*
24.Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
25.Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
26.Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
27.GreenVolts ($500,000)
28.Vestas ($50 million)
29.LG Chem's subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
30.Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
31.Navistar ($39 million)
32.Satcon ($3 million)*
33.Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
34.Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

When you're right you're right. It reminds me of some of these failures - Link and these Link

Investing in science and research is such a waste of money. When will we Americans learn our lesson?

None of your examples involved tax dollars did they?

GAT_00: Is that why MItt Romney said oil production is lower than it was 4 years ago?

No. He said that because he's a disingenuous knob.

uttertosh: AWESOME!!

Now i don't need to worry about stupid farking alternative energy anymore!! Now we all can eat corn at a reasonable price again, cos we won't need it for biofuel!!!

There's still greenhouse gases to worry about.