ANWR, the last pristine wilderness. Oh really?

F8L writes:

"I also disagree that we will be the first generation to hand our children a crappier place to live (degradation has been rampant since the late 1800s) but I agree that we may be the first to subject them to a lower standard of living."

Perhaps that is the crux of the problem,,,we are living beyond our means, (environmentally) borrowing resources from future generations, living largely at the great expense of the developing world. Perhaps it is time for US to do with just a bit less! As I have said, I don't advocate going back to the cave, but 2-3 car families instead of (good) public transit, more modest homes, not 5000+ sq ft McMansions that take tons of energy to heat and cool. Perhaps giving up some of our green lawns (especially in the sun belt!) and going with native planting.

As I say, it's time we grew up, and give up a bit of our selfishness.

Icarus

 

Until it is proven to me with some reputable citation of peer review science, that the problem of waste storage has been solved, I will continue to be anti Nuke to the core,,, (Pun intended!)

The reason you keep hearing about "the chinese drilling off Cuba" is because that is what the administration and the drilling lobby want you to hear. The fact that there may not be even on shred of truth to it doesn't matter, either to the administration or the right wing media (read drilling lobby). I think we have been here before with this and consider the source(s)

Icarus

 

You don't believe Dick Cheney?

The story started by George Will, who I'm pretty sure was either paid by a lobbyist to say that or is just another fear monger, sad, because I used to like him. All other right wing talk shows have picked it up since then, the motto of most talk shows, if you say it enough, it becomes true. Cheney just picked up on it because of the fear factor, which is what the entire Cheney presidency has been about. Cheney did have to admit it was a lie when he was shown the proof, otherwise he would not have apologized.

The only problem I have with the whole deal is, Cheney was speaking to the US Chamber of Commerce, a prestigious group, why did he make a statement that was untrue for one, and two, not checked out, that shows a very low respect for that group.

 

The Chamber is probably lucky that VP Cheney wasn't carrying his shotgun at the time.

 

I don't want to butt in, but I read an article less than aweek ago about Gazprom wanting a cut of the pipeline coming out of ANWR. We need to wake up to the fact that this whole misconception, that peak oil is here, is an inconvenient LIE! The truth be told, the world as a whole is being manipulated for the sake of a buck or a pound or a EURO.

TPMMuckraker | Talking Points Memo | Searching For The True Source Of A Bogus Story "It is true that Sinopec, the Chinese oil company, along with a half dozen other foreign firms, signed an agreement with the Cuban government to possibly explore for drilling opportunities offshore. The Sinopec deal was forged back in 2005, and any actual drilling has been delayed until at least 2009."

Honestly guys, I am for conservation, (I just purchased an 08 #2) I am averaging about what I did 14 years ago when I rode a Harley among other things and got about 42 mpg. I live in the country, grow organic and free range birds. We don't use chemicals for mesquites or any thing else, but we do need fuel for our home and to cut our grass once a week for 5 months out of the year. (We also use the dead trees from around the area after they have done there job and need to be recycled, to help heat our home, I suppose I will catch hell from some one out their for emitting pollutants-because of this, but so be it) It’s always some thing!

I chose to live where I do because I have lived in CA., TX., amongst other places and am not impressed by the, "I am from California, there for I am an expert on all things environmental and what's good for CA needs to be good for every one else in the world. Every one else in the world should do so because I am over educated, politically correct and freaked out about what every one else says or does syndrome!

The truth of the matter is we live in the now, we should try to rule by the mind and common sense and not gold, or oil for that matter but that is what's driving us over the cliff.

Honestly when was the last time we were in this bind? Think real hard?????????. It was the mid 70"s and I was living in CA and guess who came on to the world scene and created those real nasty gas lines? Could it be Iran? Could it be a repeat? The only difference is now they have a weapon of mass destruction, Not nuclear - We'll get to that later, could it just be OIL? (Where are Al and his gang when you need them, Oh yah, Appeasing those who need Nuclear energy for electrical usage. North Korea, The Can's - No offense!)

With the Chinese and for that matter any other industrialized nation becoming friends not enemies, consumption is going to increase. We have paved the way for others to follow, be it oil, nuclear, solar or just good old pig poop!

What is driving the bus we are all on is greed and ambition! Iran now wants to be a nuclear power so as to dominate that particular part of the world and they are playing the oil card very well! By the way Our old nemesis has got the whole of Europe by the gonads over energy, if you haven't noticed!

The problem is not oil but diversification - NOW! Not tomorrow. This I want it but not in my back yard is what's killing us.

I live in a state that will build power plants at the site of the source, be it wind or fossil! We have a refinery and would build an other if the Environmentalists in CA and MA would let us. We have vast amounts of oil and are drilling today. What is the left and right coast’s doing besides tying every one up over their self inflated EGO’S? I want it all, I want it NOW! But with one caveat, not in my back yard.

Enough said.

Why can’t we just get along?

 

Your rant is all over the place and frankly hard to read and produce a clear opinion.

How many oil geologists do you know and talk to on a fairly regular basis?

I'll play along and put up one of my references who regularly does "Geologic History of California" presentations at my college and worked for Mobil.

Do not attempt to belittle education just because you don't agree with the subject. My opinions have nothing to do with identifying myself with a state in this country, it does however, have everything to do with what I study, who I talk to (professionals), and what I see in my work and in the field. If I seem one-sided it is because I am commenting on what I've learned through study and observation, not what I hear on the radio, TV, or some other corporate media source. I do not study oil geology in class but the subject does come up in classes and during academic discussions.

 

We're gonna drill it because I am a part of it. Equipment is getting ready as we speak. I'm gonna work damn hard like people did in the start of the industrial age to make sure America has it's energy source.

 

Invention vs. Innovation
EERC Director Dr. Gerald Groenewold commonly quotes Thomas Edison who said, "Don't invent something that nobody wants." Popular history usually gives credit to Thomas Edison for inventing the lightbulb, Alexander Graham Bell for inventing the telephone, and Guglielmo Marconi for inventing the radio. But the truth is they invented none of these things. Their recognition and association with these successful technologies are largely due to their inspired business practices. Their success and fame resulted from their ability to cost-effectively translate inventions into marketable products or, in other words, to be innovative. The same innovative spirit is at the heart of the EERC. The invention of the lightbulb by Heinrich Goebel led to the innovation of the Edison Electric Grid (a marketable product). The invention of the telephone by Antonio Santi Giuseppe Meucci led to the innovation of the Bell Public Switched Telephone Network, and the invention of radio transmission by Nikola Tesla led to the innovation of wireless telegraphy and the opening of the world's first "wireless" factory by Marconi.

The U.S. Geological Survey has reported the Williston - Bakken Formation could hold more than 400 billion barrels of recoverable oil!
Until recent years, the technology simply wasn't available to economically extract the oil from the Bakken shales. But with breakthrough techniques such as horizontal drilling, the full potential of the Bakken play can now be developed.
And unlike Northern Canada's oil sands, the Bakken's oil can be extracted relatively cheap, without the use of energy intensive processes.

 

The paper from the USGS I saw said 200-400 billion barrels of oil and there was no mention of the whole amount being recoverable. They did mention a large percentage being located in horizontal fractures:

This is indeed a huge amount when one considers the Energy Information Administration estimates the total recoverable crude oil in the U.S. to be aprox. 174 bilion barrels.

While this is indeed a great development if it can truely be recovered in an efficient and clean way (very tall order), it does not change the fact that we need to get off the stuff NOW and not allow it to be so cheap that consumers can waste it like they have been. We need this "cheap" energy to springboard our efforts at developing alternatives before energy becomes very cost prohibitive.

Some sources of info for Bakken:

2008 USGS Slideshow

Energy Information Administration

USGS professional paper

 

Has nothing to do with rant! I studied under Groenewold during the mid 80's and hope you will consider him an adequate reference concerning the subject.

Not to mention I was an actual field hand in the TX oil patch at about the same time and was surrounded by working professionals every day.

Oh and by the way, wouldn't your source be considered a corporate media source?

 

I also Agree with you on the fact we need to get off of the stuff, but it just so happens to be in just about every thing.

The boomers are headed for the home and those in line are fewer in numbers so you would also think that consumption will also decrease in the US but not China or India.

This is why it is important for us to lead the way.

They are moving away from 2cycle motor bikes to auto's, and they want to be like US.

 

Whats everyones thoughts on Hydrogen fuel cell technology?

Saw a commercial tonight about Hondas new fuel cell powered car.

I find nothing wrong with oil usage. It's ok!

 

This engineer just got back from a business trip and he's too tired *and* too wired - damn airline coffee! - to sleep

Point #3 I already covered the refinery process here

http://priuschat.com/forums/freds-h...efinery-discussion-jay-jimmie-production.html

I'll be the first to admit I'm not a very good teacher, but I think I covered the essential details, certainly various steps involving rare earth catalysts

Point #1, If anybody wants me to, I can go into detail on how conventional crude oil medium depth extraction is performed. Note: this does not apply to deep ocean extraction - an entirely different set of rules - and not to "tight" formations that require frac'ing

I have touched - briefly - in other posts about shale extraction. I'm concerned that a Utah congressman, Chris Cannon, is purporting that shale oil or Syncrude would result in gasoline being a buck a gallon. That is complete and utter bulls***, the reason why syncrude has not been pursued in any large scale to this point is it being the most expensive oil source on the planet

The shale in Alberta, Canada, was a curiosity and an expensive taxpayer boondoggle until oil exceeded $100/barrel. I've also touched on why the shale must be "washed" to remove trace heavy metals - like arsenic and cadmium - that all shale have.

Shale is used in some countries that for political reasons, cannot source conventional crude oil. They pay a steep price for it, both in terms of cost and the environmental impact from the resulting toxic sludge after "washing" the pulverized shale

Point #2, to go from greenfield to production for a typical medium-depth extraction can be up to 3 years. You just don't poke a hole in the ground and hope, that's exotically expensive to do. Assuming you already have a geotech profile, time to production can be measured in under a year

Point $4, is a topic for policymakers.

 

Not everyone has the same thoughts on H2 fuel cell vehicles. Some people still think it is a good idea. Just like some people think that more oil drilling is the solution to our energy needs. Every car maker - save for Honda - has finally realized that they can no longer milk the FC train any longer, and have jumped ship. It is a non-starter, almost by definition! Almost as inefficient as using oil for transportation, and about 4x as inefficient as other, cheaper, tested solutions we've had for many years. Are you just now learning about transportation alternatives to oil? It would seem so.

*Nothing?* You can't be serious, so I won't even go there.

 

On average, the US consumes 25% of global petroleum production, while making up under 5% of global population. That is *not* a balanced equation

Or, in other words, every year the US will consume around 8 billion barrels - not million, BILLION - of crude, and around 20 trillion cubic feet of natural gas

Considering the current price of crude oil, client demand for my consulting services has *never* been better. Not only will ANWR be considered, at current prices it will even be profitable. ANWR will mostly follow the production peak - and decline - that Prudhoe has followed.

Even ANWR boosters admit that Prudhoe has peaked and is now in decline. Assume a 20-30 year productivity curve for ANWR

anwr.org - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Again, I fully expect ANWR to be developed, especially if oil prices stay above $100 a barrel. At those prices, it will have a slight profit. But there is no way that ANWR can displace imported demand

 

Oh boy did Cheney ever make a Dick out of himself for uttering that

No proof China drilling off Cuba - World - Kentucky.com

Matter of fact the "potential" drill leases aren't even to Chinese companies, primarily to South American operators

 

Good to hear. As long as oil remains above $100 a barrel, the field will have a slight profit

 

I'm all new to the hybrid technology. I'll admit it...

 

Boondoggle. Other threads already cover this.

Hey, I think we got a replacement for Malorn! (FYI, the GM dealer who predicted gas would drop 50 cents this last spring.)

So nothing wrong with oil includes the fact that it's our single largest source of trade deficit, that our whole economy is dependent on foreign countries that don't particularly like us, and that most of the financing for terrorists comes (indirectly) from oil money - we're funding both sides of the war in Iraq. Real patriots don't waste gas!

This is besides a total unpreparedness for peak oil, whenever that might be, and the environmental aspects - air pollution has been definitively linked to a variety of respitory ailments that cost our country significant amounts in lost productivity. And then there's the whole greenhouse thing as well. Working/living in MN you should be seeing some of these effects. I grew up in northern MN and we had -40'F several times a winter every year, lately that's been pretty rare. Ice-out dates are moving earlier all the time, Lake Superior water levels has been dropping partly due to less ice cover in the winter (more evaporation). Opossums are moving into southern MN. Doesn't take a scientist to see something's going on.

Thanks for your input Jayman. I was just reading some reports from EIA on ANWR and OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) saying that it would take a decade in both cases from the point where leases would be made before production would be seen, and another decade before it really ramped up. Is it because these are not medium-depth extractions like you're familiar with, there are other factors involved, or somebody's just being pessimistic with the numbers? (It also said that neither would basically change the world price of oil).