US to become world’s largest oil exporter

[gfh77665]

Originally Posted by Donald
Else climate change will be worse than it already is. And its pretty bad according to the UN reports.




UN reports? ....ROTFLMAO!

 

[Mr Nice]

Hopefully gas and diesel prices stay low.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Originally Posted by Donald
And its pretty bad according to the UN reports.


You mean the same UN that says we should eat insects??


Sure. The FDA allows all sorts of insect parts in our food supply. Plus they're high in protein for those on a high protein diet.

https://www.livescience.com/55463-fda-food-defect-types.html

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by IndyFan
The US is leaving PLENTY of oil in the ground. We've just made more and more discoveries in areas where there is access, as well as finding new techniques to get more from existing wells and fields. You don't hear anyone moaning anymore about tapping into some of the large, off limits areas of Alaska these days, do you?

The guys predicting "peak oil" decades ago are the ones predicting other catastrophes now. It's always something.

 

[53' Stude]

Great topic and may I ask how much oil, etc Canada consumes? Excuse my ignorance but i like learning and your posts

 

[SubLGT]

Will the USA become the #1 exporter of natural gas in the future?

Quote
In 2017 the United States exported 3.17 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas and only imported 3.04 Tcf of natural gas, making net imports negative for the first time in 60 years, according to the US Department of Energy (DOE).


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/01/20190101-fotw.html

Not sure why the USA is importing so much natural gas, when we have abundant domestic sources.

 

[Zee09]

Originally Posted by SLO_Town
Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by Donald
I would like to see the US leave more in the ground than export.

Why is that? There is plenty of oil in the ground and I doubt oil will be the dominant energy source in 50-100 years.

Oil in the ground is a war chest of self sufficiency if world supplies channels are disrupted or exhausted.

Scott


Exactly
In the end those with the most resources win!

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by Zee09
Originally Posted by SLO_Town
Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by Donald
I would like to see the US leave more in the ground than export.

Why is that? There is plenty of oil in the ground and I doubt oil will be the dominant energy source in 50-100 years.

Oil in the ground is a war chest of self sufficiency if world supplies channels are disrupted or exhausted.

Scott


Exactly
In the end those with the most resources win!

If oil were rare you'd have a point. We have vast reserves we haven't touched. We should be using it while there is a market.

We're never going to have another WWI or WWII type war. The boomers would come out long before that and we'd back to chopping wood for awhile.

 

[Zee09]

I respectfully disagree.
I don't like exporting energy.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by Zee09
I respectfully disagree.
I don't like exporting energy.

Do you like exporting lumber? There are plenty of people still alive from when that was a dominant global energy source.

 

[Zee09]

No I don't
I don't like importing Chinese drywall either

 

[hatt]

What exactly do you like to export? Everything is a strategic resource if you get extreme. I also don't prefer to buy anything from China if I can help it.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted by MRtv
I am all for the drilling. I don't follow the leave it in the ground idea myself. I like gas in my vehicle and I like it at a lower price than higher. I would like to see more refineries built. All new jobs. I would do public transportation more but I live out west where that really isn't an option. It is just talked about and I hear talk of studying public transportation where I live. What that really means to me is I will probably be dead or so old I and unable to even use public transportation. So I like gas in my cars and I am glad we as a nation are drilling. We may or may not eventually get public transportation here but like I said talking about it doesn't allow me to use it. Let's keep drilling until we actually have another solution.


The crude price may collapse if you pump too much out too quickly, and when the price collapse so will the stock market (oil money is controlling the financial market), and that will cause a downward spiral of the producers and make them pump even more out to break even.

And it is in the interest of everyone in the producing side to manipulate the market to a stable price on the high side, and keep our potential enemies (China, Japan, UK, Germany, Vatican, etc) on the leash with energy independence.

On the accounting side it makes your nation's net worth look higher by keeping inventory underground and limit the supply.

 

[dave1251]

I can not recall the last year the U.S. did not import the majority of oil from the western hemisphere. I'm not going to get into the politics of the global crude market.

 

[dave1251]

Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by IndyFan
The US is leaving PLENTY of oil in the ground. We've just made more and more discoveries in areas where there is access, as well as finding new techniques to get more from existing wells and fields. You don't hear anyone moaning anymore about tapping into some of the large, off limits areas of Alaska these days, do you?

The guys predicting "peak oil" decades ago are the ones predicting other catastrophes now. It's always something.



And many wells were dry decades ago and now there is oil. It's a finite resource but not nearly as the sky fallers have predicted it is.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted by SubLGT
Will the USA become the #1 exporter of natural gas in the future?

Quote
In 2017 the United States exported 3.17 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas and only imported 3.04 Tcf of natural gas, making net imports negative for the first time in 60 years, according to the US Department of Energy (DOE).


https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/01/20190101-fotw.html

Not sure why the USA is importing so much natural gas, when we have abundant domestic sources.


Pipeline constraints. We have high energy costs for gas because there's a limit on the pipelines that can feed the area. When I worked at a power plant, there were certain days that the gas company could shut down the gas power plant because when the temperature really dropped, you couldn't have people freeze in their homes and so the gas power plants were forced into curtailment. But they were only allowed to do it for so many days. They could burn oil instead but mostly they just shut down as the electric rate during the winter wasn't as high as during the summer. So they also imported LNG so they could make up for the shortfalls from the pipelines. It's been very hard to build pipelines lately.

Originally Posted by dave1251
I can not recall the last year the U.S. did not import the majority of oil from the western hemisphere. I'm not going to get into the politics of the global crude market.


I believe the last time the US was a net exporter was 1943. If you recall, we cut off Japan's oil which eventually led them to declare war on the US.

 

[Nyogtha]

The town I grew up in just became a LNG export hub; as pipeline debottlebecking in the Eagle Ford and Permian Basin moves forward, this will continue to grow.

https://www.energy.gov/articles/dep...l-gas-exports-corpus-christi-lng-project

I remember National Geographic decades ago showing how imported natural gas to the Northeast US from Canada was beneficial, and I'm sure it continues to be so. In the future however Utica and Marcellus fir6ld development may shift that pattern - or may drive LNG export in the Northeastern US. Only time will tell.

 

[Nyogtha]

The town I grew up in just became a LNG export hub; as pipeline debottlebecking in the Eagle Ford and Permian Basin moves forward, this will continue to grow.

https://www.energy.gov/articles/dep...l-gas-exports-corpus-christi-lng-project

I remember National Geographic decades ago showing how imported natural gas to the Northeast US from Canada was beneficial, and I'm sure it continues to be so. In the future however Utica and Marcellus fir6ld development may shift that pattern - or may drive LNG export in the Northeastern US. Only time will tell.

However, most domestic refineries geared for light sweet crude went out of operation during the prolonged period of high differentials between light sweet and heavy sour crude, they were too disadvantaged on feedstock costs. I very, very seriously doubt that such refineries of any significant capacity will ever be built again in the USA with uncertanties in not only current but future regulatory changes as large unknowns for such investment in the US.

However, with luck, parts of the former HOVENSA refinery on St. Croix, shuttered for some time now, may be recomissioned using domestic light sweet crude as feedstock. The conversion sections are likely to remain shuttered since that facility doesn't have access to low cost natural gas and USEPA tegulations regarding burning heavy fuel oil are what rendered the facility non-competitive to operate which led to it being shuttered. Again, only time will tell.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by SubLGT
Not sure why the USA is importing so much natural gas, when we have abundant domestic sources.


There's weirdness in all these markets.

Oz signed contracts to sell all of our natural gas, with no domestic reserves, with all the anlysis showing that it would lead to higher gas wholesale prices (it did, going from $4/GJ to $12 - household gas prices mean that it would be cheaper to heat the house with unleaded - they are running gas peaking plant on diesel when the gas price goes up).

So now that there's domestic shortages, and high wholesale prices, there are two proposed import terminals to get gas into the economy.

It's barmy.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted by Donald
I believe the scientific numbers are that we need to leave 1/3 of the fossil fuel in the ground.


1/3 of which number ?
The number we had before we learned to find/frac it ?
Or the current number ?

Looking at coal, for example, we would be hard pressed to extract 66 percent of the stored carbon no matter how hard we tried, and for as long as we tried.

"Leaving a third" sounds like someone has the math/science...but I doubt that they do.