We have alot of oil in alaska BUT it is in areas that have been long protected and very dangerous and remote . much is legislated and it would be a war to touch it.
this land belongs to the orginal americans , some of the legislation determines we can no longer even walk on the propertyor put shpis any here near the sea.
the point is once the easy oil is running low, the harder oil will be economically feasible. Producers that need oil at $35 to be profitable are maybe still on the sidelines. When OPEC drove oil down to $10 a few years ago, it bankrupt a lot of small producers that needed $20 to break even. I think I recall that the shale oil stuff would require oil at $45 or so to break even.
Coal seems to be promising for US, and later we can tap other vast reserves, after we bleed the Middle East dry. It seems the reports that the world is about out of oil are greatly overblown.
All that talk about protecting a few acres of flea infested ANWR will melt away if we ever start to run low on oil. In the mean time we will keep enriching nations that want to destroy us.
There's been plenty of interest in alternative fuels lately. Coal is probably the best alternative in many cases once the science and technology have figured out the clean way to burn it (and other uses too). Every barrel of oil burned is one less that could be used for other things that we can't make any other way.
In case you're unsure about this - - Google "petrochemicals" and see how many things you would miss once the last barrel of oil is gone.
Do you have a source for that info? One barrel to get three sounds high, unless they are talking one barrel in money terms to get three barrels. If that is the case, then the price of oil changes the equation. Years ago I'd read the Saudis could produce for around $8/barrel, which I guess is still largely true, except for inflation.
New technologies are developing for getting the oil out of shale oil or sand. I think when they speak of reserves they mean economically viable reserves, with today's technologies. This would have to include not only the cost of the oil to produce new oil, but all the other costs of production.
Recommended Posts
oilfieldmedic
Did someone say oil?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pond
We have alot of oil in alaska BUT it is in areas that have been long protected and very dangerous and remote . much is legislated and it would be a war to touch it.
this land belongs to the orginal americans , some of the legislation determines we can no longer even walk on the propertyor put shpis any here near the sea.
it isnt as easy as it sounds.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
the point is once the easy oil is running low, the harder oil will be economically feasible. Producers that need oil at $35 to be profitable are maybe still on the sidelines. When OPEC drove oil down to $10 a few years ago, it bankrupt a lot of small producers that needed $20 to break even. I think I recall that the shale oil stuff would require oil at $45 or so to break even.
Coal seems to be promising for US, and later we can tap other vast reserves, after we bleed the Middle East dry. It seems the reports that the world is about out of oil are greatly overblown.
All that talk about protecting a few acres of flea infested ANWR will melt away if we ever start to run low on oil. In the mean time we will keep enriching nations that want to destroy us.
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
krys
There's been plenty of interest in alternative fuels lately. Coal is probably the best alternative in many cases once the science and technology have figured out the clean way to burn it (and other uses too). Every barrel of oil burned is one less that could be used for other things that we can't make any other way.
In case you're unsure about this - - Google "petrochemicals" and see how many things you would miss once the last barrel of oil is gone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
also, something to consider
is how much oil it takes to get (and use) the oil
back in the 70s, it used to take 1 barrel of oil to get like 30 barrels out of the ground (and refine, distribute, blah blah blah)
by 2000, it was more like 1 barrel of oil to get 3 barrels
when the ratio gets to 1 for 1...it doesnt matter howmuch oil/coal we have
...of course, then there are also all those other things...
:blink:
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Do you have a source for that info? One barrel to get three sounds high, unless they are talking one barrel in money terms to get three barrels. If that is the case, then the price of oil changes the equation. Years ago I'd read the Saudis could produce for around $8/barrel, which I guess is still largely true, except for inflation.
New technologies are developing for getting the oil out of shale oil or sand. I think when they speak of reserves they mean economically viable reserves, with today's technologies. This would have to include not only the cost of the oil to produce new oil, but all the other costs of production.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
sorry, i dont have the source at my fingertips, Rhino
but i do recall it was from reports written by and for the energy sector
and like i said, then there are all those other things...
Here is a nice confusing article on ERoEI
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.