Buffalo Roam
Registered Senior Member
Methane is simply CH3. Oil is a bit more complex.
Inverted, can you follow the logic of my method?
Methane is simply CH3. Oil is a bit more complex.
You forget that this list isn't finite, new descoveries are coming in every month.
Inverted, can you follow the logic of my method?
No you just lost.
Discovered over 50 years ago, the Bakken deposit
Heh.
Oops.
Cut and paste error:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=1852029#post1852029
Buffalo Roam:
Sure. But oil is way more complex than methane.
Oh, I took a second look at the OP:
Oh you superdummy! Bakken is not crude oil!
Peak oil is about crude oil and superdummies like you talk about oilshales and tar sands because well, you guessed it right, crude oil has peaked!!!
Man, I would love to hear a dude like you just for once to acknowledge that he was completely WRONG, but I won't hold my breath...
P.S.: I could explain the problem of tar sands, but you are too dumb to understand it anyway...
Sure. And they sure don't add up to 30 billion barrels per year, check back the last 5-10 years.
By the way the whole biotic-abiotic argument is useless and irrelevant as far as you can agree that oil is not going to be made in 50 years...
I never even played
Wtf is your problem ? Seek psychiatric help. I'm not kidding.
Bakken is the name given the find, no where did I say Bakken was the crude oil,
In the last 8 years 79 new elephants have been identified,
Now where do you come up with the hypotheses that Oil isn't going to be made in 50 year?
So what's this that Dakota has 200 bb? That seems like a hell of a lot of oil to me. I do think that oil will eventually run out and I want aa appropriate responce BUT it also seems like IF we have a lot of oil then we don't NEED to spent everything on new energy and instead can spend less while using other money to develop other tech.
Also, we don't HAVE to sell USA oil to China and India. We could, but we shouldn't have to .
Neither do I. Although I have to admit that I thought that oil was solely of organic origin.
Exactly, the problem isn't with quantity, it's is with capacity,
Then why are you bringing it up concerning peak oil?
The problem with Bakken is, as usual, that it will be just a drop in the ocean. Crunch the numbers again...
So you have to put any new numbers in this concept. We NEED to discover about 30 billion barrels a year every year from now on if we don't want to run out of oil.
Bakken Formation 100 billion barrels of oil = 3 years, and there are 79 new major discoveries since 2000, we are well past discovering 30 billion barrels a year, it is capacity that need to catchup.Oil companies see big Gulf of Mexico discovery - Oil & energy ...
Sep 6, 2006 ... A test well indicates it could be the biggest new domestic oil ... The U.S. consumes roughly 5.7 billion barrels of crude-oil in a year. ...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14678206/
Petrobras, Chevron Corp., Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Norsk Hydro ASA plan to start pumping oil from eight Brazilian fields in the next 2 1/2 years that will produce a combined 1.02 million barrels a day, enough to supply two-thirds of the crude used by U.S. East Coast refineries.
More discoveries will follow in Brazil's offshore basins, most of which have yet to be opened to exploration, Zeihan said. Repsol YPF SA, Exxon Mobil Corp. and Devon Energy Corp. are among the producers scouring Brazil's waters for reserves.
``The finds they've got so far are just the tip of the iceberg,'' Zeihan said. ``Brazil is going to change the balance of the global oil markets, and Petrobras will become a geopolitical supermajor.''
To contact the reporter on this story: Joe Carroll in Chicago at jcarroll8@bloomberg.net.
Through shortsighted actions, Congress and federal agencies have banned oil activity from more than 300 million acres of federal land onshore and more than 460 million acres offshore in the past 20 years. An estimated 67% of oil reserves and 40% of natural gas reserves are on federal lands in America's western states.
Studies of the ANWR coastal plain indicate it may contain between 6 and 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil (between 11.6 and 31.5 billion barrels in-place). With enhanced recovery technology, ANWR oil could provide an additional 30 to 50 years of reliable supply. Natural gas, produced with the oil, could be reinjected or added to a new gas pipeline originating in Prudhoe Bay.
Constantly improving technology has greatly reduced the footprint of Arctic oil development. If Prudhoe Bay were built today, facility designs show the footprint would be 64% smaller.
OK, now finally we agree on something. With all this oil shale and tar sand business the problem is the SLOW rate of production or capacity. When you have a burning house it doesn't help if the house is next to a lake if you can bring the water only in a few buckets.
That is the exact problem with the Canadian tar sands, the most we ever gonna reach as capacity goes is around 4 mbpd. Right now it is a bit more than 1 mbpd. Helps a little but we need way more.
The same thing applies to Bakken. Not to mention the enviromental problems and the high cost of producing or the need for lots of water as is the case in Canada...
Let's crunch some numbers again. World consumption is around 74 mbpd, and the predicted demand in 10 years is above 100, assuming it could be statisfied. So we need to find new reserves not just to replace the old fields, but to make up for the new extra demand...