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

Results 1 to 10 of 20

Hybrid View

  1. #1 This is no small amount. Offshore oil alone could fuel 65 million cars for 47 years. 
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    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/IBDArti...03433710389399

    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Super Moderator Constitutionally Speaking's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    4,301
    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/colo...een-river.html


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

  4. #4  
    Senior Member GrumpyOldLady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    1,304
    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!!)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumpyOldLady View Post
    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 !
    Last edited by megimoo; 08-24-2008 at 08:21 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Member talleyJudy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    River Falls, WI
    Posts
    35
    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.ne...___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/2008/0...-accounts.html

    http://www.searchanddiscovery.net/do...envolden01.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.
    "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." author Will Rogers
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •