PDA

View Full Version : This is no small amount. Offshore oil alone could fuel 65 million cars for 47 years.



megimoo
08-12-2008, 08:33 PM
Pelosi's Ploy Or Breaking The Back Of High Oil

" The U.S. is awash in oil, so much that it's almost mind-boggling ."

Let's take just that crude that exists in U.S. coastal waters — whether off Alaska or California, or in the Gulf, or off the Atlantic Coast. According to recent data from the American Petroleum Institute and U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. has 86 billion barrels of oil offshore — and that's only what we can recover using today's technology. Future technologies will boost that.

This is no small amount. Offshore oil alone could fuel 65 million cars for 47 years.

Energy Policy: After calling plans to drill for more oil a "hoax," Speaker Nancy Pelosi now says she'll allow a vote on drilling for more crude to reach the floor of the House. We'll believe it when we see it.

If Pelosi & Co. try instead to come up with a phony, watered-down drilling bill just to get the voters off their back, her fellow Democrats would be wise to remove her from the speakership — or face the justifiable wrath of voters in November.
...................
Breaking The Back Of High Oil

It's not that we think Pelosi won't let something with the word "drilling" in it come up for a vote. It's just that it's likely to be stuck in one of those big omnibus bills with all sorts of pork-barrel spending, new taxes, restrictions on oil use, new economy-damaging limits on global warming gases or plans to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to lower prices — a silly idea most sensible centrist Democrats are walking away from.

"They have this thing that says drill offshore in the protected areas," she told CNN's Larry King Live.

"Now she says " "We can do that. We can have a vote on that."

Why Pelosi's sudden change of heart?

It isn't likely she was struck by a bolt of common sense. Too many of her stances in the past argue against that. Rather, it's likely that when she closed Congress for its August recess, House members went home and got an earful.

They discovered their constituents in fact want more oil — a Rasmussen Poll this week said 64% now support offshore drilling — and are angry Congress has done nothing.

Moreover, many Democrats likely heard that Pelosi isn't very popular — and having her as the point person for the Democrats' energy policies is a big political mistake. No surprise here.

Under her leadership, Congress' approval rating has sunk to all-time lows.


House Republicans, too, should beware of Pelosi's ploy. They'll be offered a chance to show constituents they "voted for" more oil drilling, even if it's an awful bill. They shouldn't take the bait. Instead, they need to make the case that the U.S. must exploit all of its energy resources — including its vast oil reserves.

Signs that Congress might do just that, coupled with President Bush's renewed requests to open oil-rich federal lands to more exploration and production, have already kicked the legs out from under oil speculation.

snip

We've said it many times, but it bears repeating: The U.S. is awash in oil, so much that it's almost mind-boggling. The idea we're somehow energy-deficient is simply false — a lie, if you will.

Let's take just that crude that exists in U.S. coastal waters — whether off Alaska or California, or in the Gulf, or off the Atlantic Coast. According to recent data from the American Petroleum Institute and U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. has 86 billion barrels of oil offshore — and that's only what we can recover using today's technology. Future technologies will boost that.


Go onshore, and the bonanza gets even bigger. Some 11.7 billion barrels of conventional oil are available in the Lower 48, and a recent U.S. government report has identified another 45 billion in Alaska and the Arctic region. Which explains why the U.S. this week dispatched an exploration vessel to begin to stake our claim.

Government estimates say there could be as many as two trillion barrels of oil locked in shale-rock formations in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah. Of that, at least 800 billion barrels is recoverable using today's known technology and at prices below what we're now paying. That's three times the oil reserves of today's No. 1 oil country, Saudi Arabia.

In short, America is an oil-rich nation. Our economy — the world's economy — depends on oil for growth. And it will depend on oil and coal at least through the middle part of this century, most estimates show.

Of course, things seem to be improving right now, with prices falling and demand declining. Indeed, U.S. oil demand in the first half plunged 800,000 barrels a day from last year, the biggest drop in 26 years, the Energy Information Administration reported Tuesday.

Pelosi and other anti-energy Democrats will use this to try to argue there's no need to drill for more. They're wrong.

The reason prices are falling is because people think we'll produce more oil in the future. We need to actually provide more crude to the markets, so we'll have reasonably priced energy available with which to grow our economy — and to save some of the $700 billion we send to foreigners each year to pay our oil bill.

Yet, Pelosi earlier this month let Congress out for its August recess without voting on an energy bill. This outraged some Republicans, who stayed behind to stage a protest in the House chamber.

Initially ignored by the media and derided as a stunt, the energy revolt is starting to attract crowds of average Americans who are increasingly fed up with this do-nothing Congress' inability to exercise its basic duties.

Democrats would do well to note: People are angry, and getting angrier all the time. For Pelosi to stand in the way of drilling is unconscionable, imposing a huge deadweight tax on our economy.

We'll be watching carefully what she lets the House vote on in the way of a drilling bill. After all, she promised before — July 30, to be exact — to allow a vote. Her office later retracted that, implying she either doesn't know where she stands on energy, is simply not telling the truth, or some combination of both.

Even so, Pelosi and the Democrats may be forced to hold a vote. This September, the moratorium on offshore drilling is set to expire, and Congress must act to keep it in place.

We hope Republicans and sensible Democrats will get together and force Pelosi and Congress' energy extremists to abandon our foolish ban on drilling offshore.

If Pelosi & Co. try instead to come up with a phony, watered-down drilling bill just to get the voters off their back, her fellow Democrats would be wise to remove her from the speakership — or face the justifiable wrath of voters in November.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=303433710389399

lacarnut
08-13-2008, 07:31 PM
The Democrats like to downplay (lie in my opinion) about the amount of oil that will come out of the mountain states, offshore on the east and west and in AK. The facts are that the Prudhoe Bay field in AK was only supposed to contain 6 billion barrels of oil. It has already produced 14 billion and still counting. So predictions by the left wing kooks are probability going to be on the low side. Plus every barrel produced in this country is money that stays in this country rather than being sent to a foreign government. I don't understand why it's so hard for these liberals to grasp that fact.

Constitutionally Speaking
08-15-2008, 07:18 AM
In the Green River Formation ALONE we have enough oil to meet the TOTAL
current US demand for over 100 years.


http://geology.com/news/2006/12/colorado-oil-shale-leases-green-river.html


The TRAITORS in the Democratic party will not allow us to go after it.

GrumpyOldLady
08-24-2008, 07:03 PM
This drilling issue really ticks me off.

I don't understand how any American could be against drilling.

It's a matter of national security.

It's a matter of reality.

UGH!! (major frustration!!)

megimoo
08-24-2008, 08:18 PM
This drilling issue really ticks me off.

I don't understand how any American could be against drilling.

It's a matter of national security.

It's a matter of reality.

UGH!! (major frustration!!)
Were not talking about Americans .Pelosi has sold her limp little soul to the anti-American San Francisco Code Pink and Maoist crowd and has to 'toe' their line ."I'm trying to save the world." is her latest battle cry in deference to her Tree_Humping masters !

talleyJudy
08-27-2008, 09:37 AM
Here's more food for thought on the subject of oil and its procurement...


The following are a few links and quotes about the alternative theory of the origins of petroleum and its abundance.

In a simplified 'nutshell', petroleum/crude oil is produced by natural chemical reactions below the base crystalline rock of earth, and this production is still going on because the core of the earth is still active as evidenced by volcanoes and earthquakes.

So her goes with some copy/paste from: http://www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net/Geopolitics___Eurasia/Peak_Oil___Russia/peak_oil___russia.html



An entirely alternative theory of oil formation has existed since the early 1950’s in Russia, almost unknown to the West. It claims conventional American biological origins theory is an unscientific absurdity that is un-provable. They point to the fact that western geologists have repeatedly predicted finite oil over the past century, only to then find more, lots more.

Not only has this alternative explanation of the origins of oil and gas existed in theory. The emergence of Russia and prior of the USSR as the world’s largest oil producer and natural gas producer has been based on the application of the theory in practice. This has geopolitical consequences of staggering magnitude.
...

In 1956, Prof. Vladimir Porfir’yev announced their conclusions: ‘Crude oil and natural petroleum gas have no intrinsic connection with biological matter originating near the surface of the earth. They are primordial materials which have been erupted from great depths.’ The Soviet geologists had turned Western orthodox geology on its head. They called their theory of oil origin the ‘a-biotic’ theory—non-biological—to distinguish from the Western biological theory of origins.

If they were right, oil supply on earth would be limited only by the amount of hydrocarbon constituents present deep in the earth at the time of the earth’s formation. Availability of oil would depend only on technology to drill ultra-deep wells and explore into the earth’s inner regions. They also realized old fields could be revived to continue producing, so called self-replentishing fields. They argued that oil is formed deep in the earth, formed in conditions of very high temperature and very high pressure, like that required for diamonds to form. ‘Oil is a primordial material of deep origin which is transported at high pressure via ‘cold’ eruptive processes into the crust of the earth,’ Porfir’yev stated. His team dismissed the idea that oil is was biological residue of plant and animal fossil remains as a hoax designed to perpetuate the myth of limited supply.
...
Following their a-biotic or non-fossil theory of the deep origins of petroleum, the Russian and Ukrainian petroleum geophysicists and chemists began with a detailed analysis of the tectonic history and geological structure of the crystalline basement of the Dnieper-Donets Basin. After a tectonic and deep structural analysis of the area, they made geophysical and geochemical investigations.

A total of sixty one wells were drilled, of which thirty seven were commercially productive, an extremely impressive exploration success rate of almost sixty percent. The size of the field discovered compared with the North Slope of Alaska. By contrast, US wildcat drilling was considered successful with a ten percent success rate. Nine of ten wells are typically “dry holes.”
...

They then went to Vietnam in the 1980s and offered to finance drilling costs to show their new geological theory worked. The Russian company Petrosov drilled in Vietnam’s White Tiger oilfield offshore into basalt rock some 17,000 feet down and extracted 6,000 barrels a day of oil to feed the energy-starved Vietnam economy. In the USSR, a-biotic-trained Russian geologists perfected their knowledge and the USSR emerged as the world’s largest oil producer by the mid-1980’s. Few in the West understood why, or bothered to ask.


That is why Russia is "energy independent" !!!!!!!!!!

To bolster this theory of a-biotic oil being produced deep in the earth is the matter of crude oil seeping into the oceans, especially off the western North American continent -duh, we have refused to release some of the pressure of these seeps/pool/deposits BECAUSE CONGRESS WON'T LET US DRILL !!!!!!!!!

http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2008/07/oil-seepage-from-ocean-floor-accounts.html

http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/documents/abstracts/hedberg2002/kvenvolden01/kvenvolden01.htm

So all those 'green', renewable, very expensive, and lacking means of distribution energy alternatives are actually NOT NEEDED, for a long, long time to come !!!! And they can be perused at leisure, researched and developed until they are economically viable/competitive without government subsidy.

This info was found by just 'googling' "abiotic oil" & "petroleum seepage into oceans".
I have not googled "tar pits" yet, but know that there are naturally occurring tar pits in southern California. Folks, that's oil seeping to the surface.

Goldwater
08-27-2008, 10:45 AM
In reality there probably isn't much oil there, worth a look though.

lacarnut
08-27-2008, 11:02 AM
In reality there probably isn't much oil there, worth a look though.

How do you come to that idiotic conclusion? Huge amounts of oil and gas are now just being discovered like the Haynesville, LA natural gas find. No one knows EXACTLY how much natural gas is in that field that covers 6 or7 parishes (counties). However, oil companies are paying out hundreds of millions to landowners for their mineral rights.

The reality is that unless you are a geologist are have some back up for your assertion, you don't know what you are talking about and sound like a liberal dummie.

wineslob
08-27-2008, 01:01 PM
In reality there probably isn't much oil there, worth a look though.


Facts to back this up?





















Diden't think so.

megimoo
08-27-2008, 01:14 PM
In reality there probably isn't much oil there, worth a look though.
In who's reality,yours ?
How can you make a such a silly little remark without any evidence.The geologists have been conducting sismic evaluations of these areas and they wouldn't recomending investing any money in new 'holes' without documentary evidence that is very strong for oil paybacks.seismology is an exact science and has years of successful oil drilling as proof of its accuracy !

lacarnut
08-27-2008, 01:18 PM
Facts to back this up?

Diden't think so.

He is just parroting his DU, Pisslosi, Reid, KOS talking points. I left out the liberal media. Ops

megimoo
08-27-2008, 01:23 PM
Facts to back this up?























Diden't think so.
How about these slobber ?

Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x
America is sitting on top of a super massive 200 billion barrel Oil Field that could potentially make America Energy Independent and until now has largely gone unnoticed. Thanks to new technology the Bakken Formation in North Dakota could boost America’s Oil reserves by an incredible 10 times, giving western economies the trump card against OPEC’s short squeeze on oil supply and making Iranian and Venezuelan threats of disrupted supply irrelevant.

In the next 30 days the USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) will release a new report giving an accurate resource assessment of the Bakken Oil Formation that covers North Dakota and portions of South Dakota and Montana. With new horizontal drilling technology it is believed that from 175 to 500 billion barrels of recoverable oil are held in this 200,000 square mile reserve that was initially discovered in 1951. The USGS did an initial study back in 1999 that estimated 400 billion recoverable barrels were present but with prices bottoming out at $10 a barrel back then the report was dismissed because of the higher cost of horizontal drilling techniques that would be needed, estimated at $20-$40 a barrel.

It was not until 2007, when EOG Resources of Texas started a frenzy when they drilled a single well in Parshal N.D. that is expected to yield 700,000 barrels of oil that real excitement and money started to flow in North Dakota. Marathon Oil is investing $1.5 billion and drilling 300 new wells in what is expected to be one of the greatest booms in Oil discovery since Oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia in 1938.

http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news2.13s.html

LogansPapa
08-27-2008, 01:45 PM
Diden't think so.

Obviously, didn’t think. :rolleyes:




But back to the subject at hand, why doesn’t the Commander in Chief just declare an emergency and over-ride all legal objections to the off-shore drilling? Is this simply a matter of not having a man’s nut-sack?

Or is it a matter of oil company’s influence and over acting the position that their hands are tied by legislation that - in the end - will allow them to make even better profits in the future?

If the issue is lack of production from refineries, much bemoaned by folks with lack of vision, then the oil companies could have invested - a couple of decades ago - IN MEXICO, where environmental concerns are without existence and simply tankered the finished product in to Gulf ports.

We’re being bullshitted to folks - and not just from Greenpeace.

lacarnut
08-27-2008, 02:00 PM
Obviously, didn’t think. :rolleyes:




But back to the subject at hand, why doesn’t the Commander in Chief just declare an emergency and over-ride all legal objections to the off-shore drilling? Is this simply a matter of not having a man’s nut-sack?

Or is it a matter of oil company’s influence and over acting the position that their hands are tied by legislation that - in the end - will allow them to make even better profits in the future?

If the issue is lack of production from refineries, much bemoaned by folks with lack of vision, then the oil companies could have invested - a couple of decades ago - IN MEXICO, where environmental concerns are without existence and simply tankered the finished product in to Gulf ports.

We’re being bullshitted to folks - and not just from Greenpeace.

My God, you are stupid. The President can not willy nilly over-ride legislation that has been on the books for the last 26 years. Prez Bush has urged Congress to lift the ban which Pisslosi will not let come to the floor for a vote. Looks like you do not have a clue what legislators in your own state stand for or against.

LogansPapa
08-27-2008, 02:17 PM
My God, you are stupid. The President can not willy nilly over-ride legislation that has been on the books for the last 26 years. Prez Bush has urged Congress to lift the ban which Pisslosi will not let come to the floor for a vote. Looks like you do not have a clue what legislators in your own state stand for or against.


......why doesn’t the Commander in Chief just declare an emergency and over-ride all legal objections to the off-shore drilling?

What part of this didn't you grasp? :confused:

lacarnut
08-27-2008, 04:22 PM
What part of this didn't you grasp? :confused:

Because there are 3 branches of government. What part don't you grasp?

megimoo
08-27-2008, 05:49 PM
Because there are 3 branches of government. What part don't you grasp?He Just enjoys 'Scattering Mindless Crap' into an argument .He is an marginal idiot pay him no mind !

LogansPapa
08-27-2008, 05:52 PM
Reference ‘vesting clause.’ :rolleyes:

lacarnut
08-27-2008, 06:00 PM
He Just enjoys 'Scattering Mindless Crap' into an argument .He is an marginal idiot pay him no mind !

According to him, we could chunk out the other two branches of government and change the Prez. title to KING.

Goldwater
08-27-2008, 07:14 PM
Facts to back this up?

Diden't think so.

Well hang on, where are the facts that theres another Middle East down there? Both sides are spewing out garbage about how much is there in a desperate push to either get drilling going or to stop it. I merely say I doubt theres a great deal there as oil companies do have some space around the region to explore.

And I've said it's worth a shot to look.