[meteorite-list] OT -Oil reserves, the reality
Meteorites USA
eric at meteoritesusa.com
Fri Apr 8 16:46:36 EDT 2011
Go electric.
Eric
On 4/8/2011 1:30 PM, Michael Gilmer wrote:
> Before Art politely asks us to shut down this OT thread, I wanted to
> add a little something.
>
> I lived in southern Louisiana for 10 years. For those of you who have
> never been there, let me describe the area in one word - DIRTY. Don't
> get me wrong, I met some of the nicest people there. But the land,
> air, and water are filthy by any definition of the word. Why?
> Because the oil industry is everywhere in southern Louisiana. It is
> not being "environmentalist" or "liberal" to say that oil is a dirty
> industry. It is the truth that the oil companies go to great lengths
> to obfuscate.
>
> Anyone who has been near an oil refinery or drilling rig will tell you
> - it is dirty. It produces copious amounts of pollution even under
> the best of circumstances and regulations. Everywhere oil has a
> presence, it's footprint is big and dirty.
>
> I'm glad our governor had the sense to restrict on-shore drilling. I
> enjoy clean beaches, wildlife, and unspoiled natural areas. I want my
> grandson to grow up with these same beaches. The fact that some
> self-centered, short-sighted people think we should destroy our land
> in order to drive Humvees and use gas-powered leaf blowers to clean
> their driveways does not impress me in the least. If they love oil
> that much, let them go build a house next to an oil refinery and have
> their children grow up in an area soaked with carcinogens.
>
> I sweep my driveway with a broom and I rake my yard with a rake. When
> I used to work at Lowes, I'd see people pull up in their Humvees and
> purchase a yard-vacuum attachment for their riding mower - so they can
> have an aesthetically pleasing yard free of bothersome leaves with a
> minimum of work. It's laziness and entitlement - pure and simple.
> The attitude is - "I worked hard for mine, so screw you, screw your
> kids and screw the planet. If I want to burn fossil fuels to clean my
> lawn, I am entitled to do so."
>
> If people would wise up, grow up, and act like adults, we could slash
> our oil consumption considerably. We burn oil and gasoline for the
> stupidest things - all because we have the freedom to do so. One of
> the first lessons every child should learn is - just because you can
> do something, doesn't mean you should. Many adults have never learned
> this lesson.
>
> I never want Florida to look like Louisiana. There is a reason nobody
> lines up to take vacations on Louisiana or Texas beaches. And there
> is a reason why Florida's beaches are famous around the world. That
> reason is very easy to see.
>
> Every time I hear somebody say "drill, baby, drill!", I want to drill
> them in their face with my fist. I could but I don't - because I am
> not a child and I can control my urges - unlike many fools who burn
> gas like it grows on trees.
>
> Best regards and back to meteorites,
>
> MikeG
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mike Gilmer - Galactic Stone& Ironworks Meteorites
>
> Website - http://www.galactic-stone.com
> Facebook - http://www.facebook.com/galacticstone
> News Feed - http://www.galactic-stone.com/rss/126516
> Twitter - http://twitter.com/galacticstone
> EOM - http://www.encyclopedia-of-meteorites.com/collection.aspx?id=1564
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> On 4/8/11, David R. Vann<drvann at sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>
>> AAAUGH! I was trying to stop, not start this thread.
>>
>> The Bakken formation: 1. Where do you people get this stuff? USGS estimates
>> for
>> the Bakken are around 3-4 billion barrels in oil SHALE, the stuff that can't
>> be
>> obtained economically yet. So it doesn't help today, or even tomorrow (next
>> decade, yes, maybe). 2. Do the math! We consume 6.6 billion barrels per year
>> -
>> even using the imaginary number of 24 billion barrels, that is only 3-4
>> years -
>> that does not free us from foreign oil (at least not in my lifetime - maybe
>> you're planning to pop off in the next year or so).
>>
>> To take this farther, the Green River formation has *way* more potential
>> than
>> the Bakken formation, and it is estimated that it can only yield some 1
>> million
>> bbls/day at maximum capacity, but we can't recover it economically yet; USGS
>> estimates put it out to 20yrs or more before the technical and economic
>> hurdles
>> are overcome.
>>
>> Greg, you are correct in noting that it has been determined that we are
>> better
>> off importing cheap foreign oil and keeping ours in reserve. We aren't
>> likely
>> ever to be oil exporters on the scale of Saudi Arabia, however. Mike, I
>> completely agree that petroleum should be used for plastic, not burned, but
>> we
>> don't have viable alternatives for transportation at this time. And the
>> other
>> Mike, yes, why don't we try to use less? That's a very good idea, and I, for
>> one, believe that reducing our dependence on foreign oil is good for our
>> national security, but we don't have enough of our own to do so (yet).
>>
>> Politicians are not preventing the oil companies from exploiting oil shales,
>> simple economics is. Politics seldom gets in the way of a determined
>> industries
>> profits.
>>
>> And Ted - thank you for your comments. The USGS is aware of the practices of
>> the
>> oil companies. The 'unreported' reserves are not ten times the reported
>> ones.
>> The Canadian oil shales are extensive, but it is very difficult to produce
>> gasoline from them; they are probably going to used as is, via burning along
>> with coal for energy. The large estimates there are energy equivalents (not
>> actual barrels of gasoline), and will not ever bring the cost of gasoline
>> down.
>> (OK, not ever is maybe a bit overstated, but it is hard to see how - unless
>> we
>> all switch to electric cars running on Canadian oil shale generated power).
>> Also, although there is a lot of rock there, it isn't all really
>> extractable.
>> Everyone - please do keep in mind that energy extraction from oil sands and
>> shales is extremely destructive (strip-mining) of lands that hunters,
>> fishermen,
>> etc now enjoy, and it uses absolutely unconscionable amounts of water, which
>> is
>> left polluted with oil traces. In an era when fresh water supplies are
>> dwindling, is this a good idea?
>>
>> Keep in mind that what started this was the notion that gas is 'expensive'.
>> We
>> may well have a lot of oil in shales, etc., but it is absolutely not cheap
>> oil.
>> If it were, the oil companies would be all over it - they are not idiots,
>> you
>> know. Unfortunately, for better or worse, cheap oil comes from the easy
>> stuff,
>> most of which is in the Middle East. Period.
>>
>> Is gas expensive? I remember 25 cent gas - do you? I started driving when it
>> was
>> maybe 50 cents. In pre-OPEC, inflation-adjusted dollars, we are paying
>> something
>> like $1.50 -$1.75 (envelope estimate) per gallon, about three times
>> pre-OPEC. My
>> parents bought the house I grew up in for $27K; my mother sold it for $175K,
>> or
>> something like 75K inflation adjusted dollars, or about three times initial
>> cost. Make of that what you will, but I contend that gas is cheap in the US
>> by
>> any measure.
>>
>> The next post I make here will be meteorite-related, I promise. Maybe about
>> how
>> the Chixulub impactor is why there is so much oil in the Mexican basin....
>>
>>
>> A silly quibble:
>> And, Tim-not PhD
>> - that is the default signature put on my email when at work, not my
>> attempt to
>> add authority to my words - I am not a petroleum geologist. And, I must now
>> get
>> back to work - I don't think I will say anything more on this, as it seems
>> to
>> bring out the blind optimists who refuse to accept the facts and do
>> something
>> about them.
>>
>> David R. Vann, citizen and voter of the United States of America, who is
>> concerned about rising energy costs and their toll on economic and social
>> conditions.
>> (is that better?)
>>
>> [opinions and facts expressed herein are my own and not necessarily the same
>> as
>> those of my employer, who strongly supports global sustainability issues]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> | -----Original Message-----
>> | From: Tim Heitz [mailto:midwestmeteor at earthlink.net]
>> | Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 2:51 PM
>> | To: David R. Vann; meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> | Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] OT -Oil reserves, the reality
>> |
>> |
>> | Hi David,
>> |
>> | 340 billion dollars leaves the U.S. every year to buy oil,
>> | when we have all the oil we need right here, its the 24
>> | billion barrels at the
>> | Bakken Oil Formation in S.D.
>> |
>> | Our politicians are running this scam and we are the fools.
>> | Think of all the
>> | jobs this would create
>> | and onshore drilling would also be much safer against oil
>> | spills, keeping
>> | the money here, would
>> | also greatly help America. Just what are the politicians thinking?
>> |
>> | Will the oil in the Bakken Formation free us from depending
>> | on foreign oil? You bet it will.
>> |
>> |
>> | We need more money to buy meteorites:)
>> |
>> |
>> | Best Regards,
>> | Timothy Heitz - not Ph.d
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> |
>> | ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "David R. Vann"<drvann at sas.upenn.edu>
>> | To:<meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>> | Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 1:16 PM
>> | Subject: [meteorite-list] OT -Oil reserves, the reality
>> |
>> |
>> |>
>> |> Thought maybe it was time to change the thread title, and
>> | maybe stop
>> |> this non-meteorite thread. In truth, I am responding to
>> | correct some
>> |> factually inaccurate statements.
>> |>
>> |> Guido, I respectfully suggest that you investigate the facts before
>> |> you
>> |> make
>> |> statements like "We are played for fools by the career
>> | politicians in
>> |> Washington
>> |> who pander to the environmentalists and prevent us from
>> | tapping our own
>> |> reserves
>> |> which are larger and easier to obtain than all the oil in
>> | the Middle East.
>> |> That's why we object to increased pump prices."
>> |>
>> |> Politicians are not pandering to environmentalists, they
>> | are pandering
>> |> to businesses, I think the events of the last thirty years
>> | speak very
>> |> strongly to this; attacks on the Clean Air and Clean water
>> | acts, the
>> |> Great Recession, the
>> |> Savings and Loan disaster, the Energy trading frauds, etc.
>> | (I can go on
>> |> for
>> |> quite a while here, but is not the forum).
>> |> Environmentalists have very little influence on the price
>> | of oil, if any.
>> |> Rather, market forces determine this entirely. Examples: in
>> | the late '70's
>> |> oil
>> |> did not skyrocket because of environmentalists, it did so
>> | because OPEC was
>> |> flexing its newfound muscle. Oil prices did not jump prior
>> | to the Great
>> |> Recession because of environmentalists; it jumped because
>> | of speculators
>> |> and
>> |> because the oil refiners underestimated demand by China and India,
>> |> resulting in
>> |> inadequte production capacity (there was plenty of crude
>> | oil). The cost of
>> |> oil
>> |> is related to the cost of drilling; I could, again, go on,
>> | but this isn't
>> |> really
>> |> the forum. Suffice it to say, the price of oil is driven by
>> | market factors
>> |> that
>> |> are *not* related to supply, as the supply can be (and
>> | frequently is)
>> |> increased
>> |> to meet demand.
>> |>
>> |> So, environmentalists atempting to reduce drilling are not
>> | affecting
>> |> the
>> |> price,
>> |> regardless of how one wants to view it. Most recently, the state of
>> |> Florida,
>> |> under a Republican govorner, decided to limit in-shore
>> | drilling to protect
>> |> the
>> |> states' fishing and tourist industries. They were deemed
>> | more valuable (to
>> |> the
>> |> state) than the short-term gains from onshore drilling - an
>> | economic
>> |> argument,
>> |> not an environmental one.
>> |>
>> |> Our oil prices are lower because we consume so much, getting a
>> |> discount,
>> |> and
>> |> because we subsidize the oil companies with tax dollars. Government
>> |> subsidies
>> |> for profitable companies are not defensible, yet they keep
>> | getting them,
>> |> because
>> |> the politicians are pandering to the industries paying for their
>> |> reelection.
>> |>
>> |>
>> |> The final inaccuracy, " tapping our own reserves which are
>> | larger and
>> |> easier to
>> |> obtain than all the oil in the Middle East" is the most
>> | egregious. This is
>> |> simply wrong. The proven resources in the US are about 22
>> | billion barrels
>> |> of
>> |> oil; Saudi arabia *alone* has an estimated 270 billion
>> | barrels. Although
>> |> that
>> |> number has been questioned as possibly politically
>> | motivated, it is not
>> |> overestmated by a factor of ten. If we take the 1968
>> | numbers (before
>> |> OPEC), they
>> |> had something like 170 billion barrels, still fabulously
>> | more than our
>> |> reserves.
>> |>
>> |> Our remaining reserves are not easier to obtain (discounting the
>> |> politcal
>> |> issues
>> |> related to dealing with the Middle East), as they are
>> | increasingly deep
>> |> water
>> |> reserves (whose difficulty was amply demonstrated last
>> | summer) or in
>> |> shales,
>> |> which are environmentally destructive and energetically and
>> | mechanically
>> |> difficult to extract; in fact, to date, there has been no
>> | economically
>> |> viable
>> |> method to extract these (but we will, when gas is expensive
>> | enough). The
>> |> oil
>> |> companies are going for the easy fruit first, as it is the most
>> |> profitable.
>> |>
>> |>
>> |> Sorry, but I have a difficult time letting false information get
>> |> distributed -
>> |> much like the NYT article. Plenty of others responded to
>> | that, so I'm
>> |> responding
>> |> to this one. The fact is, the Middle East holds more than
>> | one-half of the
>> |> total
>> |> reserves in the world. North America, including the shale
>> | sands in Canada
>> |> holds
>> |> maybe 16%. The largest reserves are in Venezuela, Saudi
>> | Arabia and the
>> |> former
>> |> USSR.
>> |>
>> |> We consume about 6.6 billion barrels per year, so we have
>> | about 3 or 4
>> |> years, if
>> |> we drilled everything (that we 'own').
>> |>
>> |> The world average consumption rate vs the reserves
>> | indicates that we
>> |> have
>> |> about
>> |> 50-60 years left (at current consumption rates, which are increasing
>> |> substantially each year).
>> |>
>> |> So, to recap this too long message:
>> |>
>> |> Oil prices reflect market forces, not environmentalist obstruction.
>> |> The US does not have more oil, easily obtained or not, than
>> | the Middle
>> |> East.
>> |>
>> |> We complain about high oil prices, not because of politicians, but
>> |> because
>> |> it
>> |> means we have fewer dollars left to buy meteorites.
>> |> (that puts it back on topic. Sort of.)
>> |>
>> |>
>> |>
>> |>
>> |>
>> |>
>> |>
>> |> David R. Vann, Ph.D.
>> |> Department of Earth and Environmental Science
>> |> THE UNIVERSITY of PENNSYLVANIA
>> |> 240 S. 33rd St.
>> |> Philadelphia, PA 19104-6316
>> |> drvann at sas.upenn.edu
>> |> office: 215-898-4906
>> |> FAX: 215-898-0964
>> |>
>> |> ______________________________________________
>> |> Visit the Archives at
>> |> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> |> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> |> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> |> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>> |>
>> |
>> |
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>> Visit the Archives at
>> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>
>>
>
> --
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>
More information about the Meteorite-list
mailing list