Community Forums

Its Paid For · 02-23-2011, 10:18 AM

Not happy, but a realist. What surprises me is that you are upset or caught off gaurd. Some of us have seen all of this coming for decades. I wrote about all of this in 1986. Way back then I estimated 2017 as total decline based upon facts at that time. Not much has been very far off other than I did think we would have begun fixing entitlments around 2000. Well, we didnt lol, so I moved my target date to 2013.

Midniteoyl · 02-23-2011, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Not happy, but a realist.

Yep...

dajudge · 02-23-2011, 03:27 PM

Don't let anybody lie to you, the US has eight times the oil reserves than Saudia Arabia. The only reason we are not taking it out of the ground is because of the envirenmentalists. They cry about causing polution and the regulators jump. Look at the moratorium on the Gulf of Mexico. This is killing our oil industry. Drilling companies and oil service companies are going belly up or laying off people and going out of business. Do the powers that be care? Hell no, they just care about the almighty vote. If we would allow drilling wherever the oil is, we could get oil at about $20 a barrel.

Its Paid For · 02-23-2011, 05:50 PM

Not sure where you get your facts, but here is a lil theory for you. Remember the days when they would tap a well and it would just fly into the air from all the pressure it was under. Well now they have to pump fluids down to float the oil up. It costs more to get oil these days because all the easy flying out of the ground oil is gone. 8 times Saudi Arabia huh?

I have very solid sources that say that isn't even possible.

radams · 02-23-2011, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Its Paid For

Not sure where you get your facts, but here is a lil theory for you. Remember the days when they would tap a well and it would just fly into the air from all the pressure it was under. Well now they have to pump fluids down to float the oil up. It costs more to get oil these days because all the easy flying out of the ground oil is gone. 8 times Saudi Arabia huh?

I have very solid sources that say that isn't even possible.

Actually "dajudge" is a tad conservative if US oil shale estimated reserves are included, as they should be. Estimated reserves of oil shale are 2.6 trillion barrels which is right at 8 times Saudi Arabia's estimated oil reserves. Now add in the Utah oil sands, our oil reserves, and the new extraction methods for oil wells and you are comfortably there.

Its Paid For · 02-23-2011, 07:33 PM

Not at $20 a barrel, all of those cost much more to extract. They are not proven reserves either, estimates are a dime a dozen.

Obama estimated stimulus would create 3-4 million shovel ready jobs, only to prove $800 billion dollars later "there is no such thing as shovel ready jobs" lol

1oleman · 02-23-2011, 07:43 PM

Just a thought, vote all the know-it-alls out of DC and put in people with guts to tell the other countries where to go.

Midniteoyl · 02-23-2011, 07:50 PM

As the old saying goes: "Re-elect Nobody"

radams · 02-23-2011, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Its Paid For

Not at $20 a barrel, all of those cost much more to extract. They are not proven reserves either, estimates are a dime a dozen.

Obama estimated stimulus would create 3-4 million shovel ready jobs, only to prove $800 billion dollars later "there is no such thing as shovel ready jobs" lol

Actually those estimates were put together by the USGS using a variety of methods too complex to go into here. You can Google USGS oil shale reserves if you're interested in learning more. You're right that it can't be done for $20 a barrel . . . yet. Royal Dutch Shell has a very interesting in situ process that is driving the cost down below $40 a barrel and that's in it's early stages. There are always further cost savings as volume increases and there are similarities between extracting oil from sand and from shale. Canada has process for sand being worked on that would be below $20 so who knows where it will end up.

Don't see the relevance of comparing Obama's job estimates with oil reserves. Seems to me to be two totally separate issues.

Its Paid For · 02-23-2011, 09:53 PM

Because our proven oil reserves are a published fact and none of your ideology is included in those proven reserves, so until they are, it is a bit like Ponce De Leon and the Fountain Of Youth in Florida or Bigfoot in Bluff Creek. It may or may not exist, but as of today we don't have a body, fountain, shale process, sand process, and not a drop has been added to our proven reserves that continue to decline since 1972.

Although we have drilled many new wells, we have increased consumption every single year and in no year has the gap narrowed.

Until it does, there is literally nothing there but hope. just like Ethanol didnt close the gap, even though we were promised it would solve everything. I can even buy ethanol, didnt help at all.

Midniteoyl · 02-23-2011, 10:01 PM

Again... argue all you wish on whether the reserves are 20 billion or 200 trillion...all the oil in the world means jack without the refineries to go with it...

w6pea · 02-23-2011, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Midniteoyl

Again... argue all you wish on whether the reserves are 20 billion or 200 trillion...all the oil in the world means jack without the refineries to go with it...

With all of the "tree huggers and do gooders" around you will not see an refinery's built anytime soon in the USA. Also the "do gooders" are sending foreign aid to countries that want our money but they do not want American Policies.
I could go on for hours but my opinion would get this thread closed and me kicked out of this forum.

Its Paid For · 02-23-2011, 11:22 PM

It isn't a lack of refineries, although that argument is still very valid, but the number of fuel blends existing refineries have to deal with make them very low efficiency as well. Also in an effort to hurt the

puddinhead · 02-24-2011, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WOODYDEL

This is how the NYMEX has changed the definition of SUPPLY AND DEMAND.

"
The price is determined by the instantaneous equilibrium between the forces of supply and demand among competing buy and sell orders on the exchange at the time of the purchase or sale of the contract."

That's different than what it should be. It is no longer supply and demand of oil. supply and demand among competing buy and sell orders ?

This is GAMBLING. This is what's wrong. Especially when the big boys are all talking to each other.

In case you didn't look it up. When did oil hit the NYMEX? Heating oil 1978 , crude oil 1983 , unleaded gas 1984. It took them a few years to sort out but they finally got the formula right to manipulate the "MARKET".

Take oil off the NYMEX.

It USED TO BE that anyone speculating in oil had to have the capacity to actually hold on to that oil. The wonderful federal government ended that. What wonderful people they must be.

Leave it on the NYMEX but require buyers to take delivery. I’d like to see a NY trader get a tanker of oil dumped in his/her front yard in the Hamptons