New Large Oil Field?

Status
Not open for further replies.

tig1

Thread starter
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
14,884
Location
Illinois
 Originally Posted By: GROUCHO MARX
It might as well be on Mars. Domestic oil production is not part of the larger plan.
They won't rest till we are paying $7.00 A GAL.
 

Win

Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Messages
4,704
Location
Arkansas
Dang, I should have bought the V8. Agreed it might as well be on Mars. This administration intends to put carbon based domestic energy producers out of business. We will needlessly be even more dependent on foreign energy. A pity since there is so much gas around here, it surprises me that the whole place doesn't explode when somebody tosses out a cigarette.
 
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,402
Location
Iowa
It's just a scam to rip-off investors I bet. This is 2009. Can't do legit business anymore in the USA. All scams all the time.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
I'll give it a 50:50, river_rat. 50% scam 50% that it's true only to the extent that even at full production for it's projected potential lifetime, it won't amount to more than 6months to a year if the USA has to "stand alone" on only it's holdings to provide the stuff. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption This says over 20M bbls per day. What was the most productive well in the article? 4000 bbl/day? Companies have reported some Three Forks wells recovering more than 800 barrels daily, considered decent by Bakken standards. Denver-based Whiting Petroleum Corp. has drilled two wells in the Three Forks formation, with one that recorded more than 1,000 barrels of oil a day, said John Kelso, a company spokesman. "We are excited about Three Forks but it's early on in the play," Kelso said. "I do know a lot of companies are redirecting focus from the Bakken to Three Forks." Whiting has one Bakken well that recorded more than 4,000 barrels a day last year, thought to be a record for the formation and about double the highest Three Forks well drilled to date. Add them up ...figure out how many would be needed to provide our daily consumption ..and realize that any hype or hoopla about it ..is mostly hype and hoopla. You need a Saudi/Iran/Iraq II to make us energy independent and it would accomplish nothing of the sort. It would just upgrade our ability to consume it.
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2002
Messages
48,022
Location
Everson WA - Pacific NW USA
This not new news. That oil has been "known" for some time. Estimates on the size vary. But I agree, seems weird to discourage domestic production. The "D's" seem pretty bent on this.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
To WHAT GAIN? Deplete our own strategic reserve? To assure that we're even MORE dependent upon imported sources? It's a great strategy if you merely want to get rid of the stuff and bring your nation to its knees in total helplessness for the sake of ...what?
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
11,410
Location
The Sandhills of NewYorkistan
 Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
To WHAT GAIN? Deplete our own strategic reserve? To assure that we're even MORE dependent upon imported sources? It's a great strategy if you merely want to get rid of the stuff and bring your nation to its knees in total helplessness for the sake of ...what?
Funny, but I am thinking that reducing ANY trade deficit is a gain for the U.S.A.. But I guess I'm wrong.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
We could do that and reduce global consumption of the stuff by NOT buying foreign goods ..by not developing foreign interests into energy intensive industrial based economies. That is, Miyagi rule number one: Best defense is no be there.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2007
Messages
388
Location
Canada
 Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
We could do that and reduce global consumption of the stuff by NOT buying foreign goods ..by not developing foreign interests into energy intensive industrial based economies. That is, Miyagi rule number one: Best defense is no be there.
A little too late for that I'm afraid. Best to develop an infrastructure to utilize hydrogen. Most of what is required is already in place. The energy corporations would still be energy corporation, only dealing in hydrogen as well as supplying carbon based fuels for what remains down the road. Hydrogen, the most common element in the universe, and the oceans are overflowing with it.
 
Joined
Sep 28, 2002
Messages
39,802
Location
Pottstown, PA
 Quote:
A little too late for that I'm afraid.
I came back to this comment since I hear it time and time again ..yet before it was used on whatever topic that it's in response to ..there was another recurring comment to things that are "unright". (select one from the following) don't worry about it. You can't stop it, anyway. don't bother. this eventually ..inevitably ..results in this: A little too late for that I'm afraid. Now I know how Maleficent felt when her minions couldn't find Sleeping Beauty.
 

pbm

Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
9,049
Location
New York
Before America became a 'Can't Do' nation we would have found an alternate energy to fossil fuel. Now we just produce more lawyers.
 
Joined
Jul 24, 2002
Messages
11,410
Location
The Sandhills of NewYorkistan
 Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
We could do that and reduce global consumption of the stuff by NOT buying foreign goods ..by not developing foreign interests into energy intensive industrial based economies. That is, Miyagi rule number one: Best defense is no be there. .
Rule no. 2: Only way is Gary's way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top