Oodles of Oil in the Earth?

[Bill in Houston]

I kind of wish that they would pick a reasonable number, and then enforce it tightly. Don't put 45 mph in the interstate construction zone just because you are hoping for people to slow down to 60. Put 60 mph, and write a $200 ticket to anyone over that... But that's just me.

Hey as far as oil running out, etc, something that I keep thinking is that a lot of our domestic oil was shut in when it became uneconomical to produce it for, say, $17 per barrel. It seems like if oil can hold at a steady $100 per barrel, we could see a new drilling boom on all the old fields where the wells have been plugged...

[MnFocus]

Originally Posted by Bill in Houston

our domestic oil was shut in when it became uneconomical to produce it for, say, $17 per barrel. It seems like if oil can hold at a steady $100 per barrel, we could see a new drilling boom on all the old fields where the wells have been plugged...

DingDing!! We have a winner !

[cfg83]

Bill -

Originally Posted by Bill in Houston

I kind of wish that they would pick a reasonable number, and then enforce it tightly. Don't put 45 mph in the interstate construction zone just because you are hoping for people to slow down to 60. Put 60 mph, and write a $200 ticket to anyone over that... But that's just me.

I was raised in the Jimmy Carter days, so I really really wish 55 MPH would come back. It should definitely be applied in urban areas where the oil usage is the greatest, as in LA.

Hey as far as oil running out, etc, something that I keep thinking is that a lot of our domestic oil was shut in when it became uneconomical to produce it for, say, $17 per barrel. It seems like if oil can hold at a steady $100 per barrel, we could see a new drilling boom on all the old fields where the wells have been plugged...

Egg-zactly. Higher oil prices make all those capped fields valuable again. Hrrmmmmm, but it also makes alternative energy more viable, so there's the rub.

I agree with Bruce in the sense that it is becoming harder to get the oil out. Like everyone is saying, if the rate of use exceeds the rate of production, shortages will abound. We all know that China is the next big industrial giant (and pollution accident) coming online, so I don't see any way for oil production to keep up.

The analogy I would use is logging and fishing. There is nothing wrong with logging and fishing if it does not outstrip the capacity of the environment to replenish itself, aka sustainable. If it is "strip mining" the resource, then eventually the resource is gone and nobody has a job.

When the price goes high enough, we still have the Tar Sands in Canada :

Tar sands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_sands

Oil sands may represent as much as 2/3 of the world's total petroleum resource, with at least 1.7 trillion barrels (1.7?1012 bbl or 270?109 m?) in the Canadian Athabasca Oil Sands and perhaps 1.8 trillion barrels (1.8?1012 bbl or 280?109 m?) in the Venezuelan Orinoco tar sands[citation needed], compared to 1.75 trillion barrels (1.75?1012 bbl or 278?109 m?) of conventional oil worldwide, most of it in Saudi Arabia and other Middle-Eastern countries. Between them, the Canadian and Venezuelan deposits contain about 3.6 trillion barrels of oil in place. This is only the remnant of vast petroleum deposits which once totaled as much as 18 trillion barrels, most of which has escaped or been destroyed by bacteria over the eons. See also below notes about limits to production capacity.

CarloSW2

[Bill in Houston]

Yeah, all those factors keep me optimistic that there will be a "soft landing" as we develop new technologies.

[cfg83]

Me -

Originally Posted by cfg83

Bill -

...

When the price goes high enough, we still have the Tar Sands in Canada :

Tar sands
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_sands


CarloSW2

Here come the tar sands :

Alberta oilsands frenzy slows to a more sustainable pace
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/69e55760-fd0...b5df10621.html

Iraq's oil boom isn't delayed, it's relocated to Canada
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/cl...092931,00.html

CarloSW2

[Mike T]

Most oil was from decayng plant matter, not animals (Dino the dinosaur).

[Sludgy]

It doesn't matter whether there's lots of oil on Earth. What does matter is the Islamic fascists who control most of it. They use oil profits to spread the most brutal (kill gays, Christians, Jews, and even atheists), misogynistic (women must wear the veil and submit to her husband in all things, else be beaten) way of life.

We gotta stop using oil.

[Accent-ident]

The oil is there, at a price

Even at a price it won't be enough IF consumption keeps growing, if you believe in Hubberts Peak Theory (I do) whats left at a high price in 50 years won't go far.

$200 a barrel oil is part of the solution, I don't think these dummies will get smart about conserving or switching over to other forms of energy until we see $200 (in todays dollars)

How long before we see $200? my guess is 5-10 years



Hubberts Peak Article http://www.financialsense.com/series3/part1.html

[ma4t]

So many factors come into play. Refinery capacity is the current scapegoat. I have heard so many different stories, all from interested parties, that I don't know who to believe.

M

[Snax]

The bottom line is an effort by the oil suppliers to maintain supply side control of thier commodity. They always refer to "proven reserves" in an attempt to mislead people about what is truly available to pump. Proven reserves are nothing more than what they have actually drilled down to confirm what is believed to be there. The reality is that there are massive oil stores within the earth - the majority of which is 'unproven' for no other reason than they have not drilled there yet.

'Peak oil' in reality only refers to what has been proven. Likely, it also more or less coincides with what is easy pickens for the most part. Hubbert however was wildly off the mark.

I strongly recommend reading Greg Palast's book 'Armed Madhouse' for a clearer picture of what I am contending.