Newly Discovered Oil Reserves Would Make US Leading World Oil Producer

[Hardrock69]

We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth.

Here are the official estimates:

* 8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
* 18-times as much oil as Iraq
* 21-times as much oil as Kuwait
* 22-times as much oil as Iran
* 500-times as much oil as Yemen



http://www.stansberryonline.com/OIL/20060405-OIL-COL.asp?pcode=WOILG428&alias=200604OIL&scode=XPPDW002

[binnie]

Really?

That's good news, right?

[LoungeMachine]

The link is to what looks and read like an online investment scam.

The WSJ quotes should be verified,.

Bottom line, why would this goon bother with this lame site, asking YOU to invest?

I smell scandal, and for once this year it may not have the -R after it....

[4moreyears]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth.

Here are the official estimates:

* 8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
* 18-times as much oil as Iraq
* 21-times as much oil as Kuwait
* 22-times as much oil as Iran
* 500-times as much oil as Yemen



http://www.stansberryonline.com/OIL/20060405-OIL-COL.asp?pcode=WOILG428&alias=200604OIL&scode=XPPDW002

What kind of dumb fuck would use this site as oficialestimates. It looks like a site that can halp me make millions selling vitamans.

[ELVIS]

Haha...

[Angel]

Originally posted by Hardrock69
We have more oil inside our borders, than all the other proven reserves on earth.

Here are the official estimates:

* 8-times as much oil as Saudi Arabia
* 18-times as much oil as Iraq
* 21-times as much oil as Kuwait
* 22-times as much oil as Iran
* 500-times as much oil as Yemen



http://www.stansberryonline.com/OIL/20060405-OIL-COL.asp?pcode=WOILG428&alias=200604OIL&scode=XPPDW002

So, why haven't they included Alberta Canada on there? We're second after Saudi.

http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/docs/oilsands/pdfs/NAOR2003.pdf

[FORD]

Originally posted by Angel
So, why haven't they included Alberta Canada on there? We're second after Saudi.

http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/docs/oilsands/pdfs/NAOR2003.pdf

He mentions the Alberta oil sands later on in the "report", but also says that it's more efficient to extract the oil from shale than it is from sand.

Looking at the map of the area where this oil reserve supposedly is, I can vouch for much of that part of Utah being about as barren as barren can be. You can literally drive for miles without seeing a single life form, even plants. I suppose there could be snakes there, and they might eat rats, but I'm not sure what the rats would eat. If this land could produce anything viable, the citizens of Utah would probably rejoice and sing Elohim's praises.

On the other hand, the Colorado area would appear to be right in the middle of the Rockies, and that I don't see happenning. Not just for the environmental reasons which SHOULD be enough, but also because of the total impracticality of drilling through all that rock before you even get to the ground level and then keep drilling.

The Wyoming area is probably not quite as post-apocalyptic in appearance as Utah, but it's mostly empty, no doubt. However, if there were any viable oil anywhere in Wyoming, you would think Cheney & Halliburton would have been all over it years ago.

So, while the theory is interesting, put me in the skeptic column for now.

[ELVIS]

Originally posted by Angel
So, why haven't they included Alberta Canada on there? We're second after Saudi.

Because it's bullshit...:rolleyes:

[FORD]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Because it's bullshit...:rolleyes:

No it isn't. Alberta has a huge reserve of oil. Problem is that it's all in sand, so it's harder to extract than the normal means of just pumping it out of a hole in the ground.

Just as the shale method being discussed in this report would be more difficult than traditional oil, because it's extracting from solid rock.

[Angel]

Originally posted by ELVIS
Because it's bullshit...:rolleyes:

Please, Elvis. You can't be THAT fucking stupid, can you?

Why the fuck is your government so interested?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Tar_Sands

Estimated oil reserves
The Alberta Government calculates that about 28 billion cubic metres (174 billion barrels) of crude bitumen are economically recoverable from the three Alberta oil sands areas at current prices using current technology. This is equivalent to about 10% of the estimated 1,700 and 2,500 billion barrels of bitumen in place. [1]. Alberta estimates that the Athabasca deposits alone contain 5.6 billion cubic metres (35 billion barrels) of surface mineable bitumen and 15.6 billion cubic metres (98 billion barrels) of bitumen recoverable by in-situ methods. These estimates of Canada's oil reserves caused some astonishment when they were first published but are now largely accepted by the international community. This volume places Canadian proven oil reserves second in the world behind those of Saudi Arabia."

John Snow visited Ft. McMoney, and almost creamed his jeans trying to get the news back to Washington. Cheney was supposed to visit later, but there was some sort of shit that went on in your country that precluded him from leaving. (So much shit goes on, I can't remember what it was).

According to Oil and Gas Journal, Canada had a reported 178.8 billion barrels of proven oil reserves in 2005, second only to Saudi Arabia.

Canada sends over 99% of its crude oil exports to the U.S., and the country is one of the most important sources of U.S. oil imports. During the first eleven months of 2004, Canada exported 1.62 million bbl/d of crude oil to the U.S., the single-largest component of U.S. crude oil imports. Canada also sent some 500,000 bbl/d of petroleum products to the U.S. during this period, the most from a single country. The largest share of U.S.-bound Canadian oil exports (65%) go to the Midwest (PAD District II), with smaller amounts heading to the Rocky Mountains (PAD District IV) and the East Coast (PAD District I). http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/canada.html

[Angel]

Originally posted by FORD
Problem is that it's all in sand, so it's harder to extract than the normal means of just pumping it out of a hole in the ground.

Ford's right, although they have come a long way since 1999 and are producing like SHIT! It's why our economy is so good.

[jcook11]

Originally posted by FORD
He mentions the Alberta oil sands later on in the "report", but also says that it's more efficient to extract the oil from shale than it is from sand.

Looking at the map of the area where this oil reserve supposedly is, I can vouch for much of that part of Utah being about as barren as barren can be. You can literally drive for miles without seeing a single life form, even plants. I suppose there could be snakes there, and they might eat rats, but I'm not sure what the rats would eat. If this land could produce anything viable, the citizens of Utah would probably rejoice and sing Elohim's praises.

On the other hand, the Colorado area would appear to be right in the middle of the Rockies, and that I don't see happenning. Not just for the environmental reasons which SHOULD be enough, but also because of the total impracticality of drilling through all that rock before you even get to the ground level and then keep drilling.

The Wyoming area is probably not quite as post-apocalyptic in appearance as Utah, but it's mostly empty, no doubt. However, if there were any viable oil anywhere in Wyoming, you would think Cheney & Halliburton would have been all over it years ago.

So, while the theory is interesting, put me in the skeptic column for now.


YOU would think that

[bobgnote]

ANYTHING AT ALL, to keep from admitting that HEMP must be grown, a a bottom line hedge against ALL outcomes.

It has the MOST possible uses, the highest quality swing to savings AND product gains, from disasterous drug war, to AWESOME US TRADE FACTOR, in one fell act of re-legalization.

But the US is determined to not only lose at hoops and baseball, but also at NUKES and flying forms, and eventually at football besides soccer, and NEVER AGAIN, at ice hockey. Already lost, at brains.

[ODShowtime]

that's one of the more sensible things you've ever said. It almost made sense!

keep reaching for that brass ring!

[jcook11]

Originally posted by ODShowtime
that's one of the more sensible things you've ever said. It almost made sense!

keep reaching for that brass ring!

Hell I thought it was just me but I almost understood that

[Nitro Express]

Having an oil field somewhere is one thing but you still have to get to it and refine it. The world's cheap oil is still the Persian Gulf. You pump it and pipe it to a dock. It gets no cheaper.

Alberta has a lot of oil but it's trapped in sand. They actually strip mine it and then the oil has to be sepparated. It's an expensive process that requires a good price for oil to make it profitable.

[Romeo Delight]

Originally posted by FORD
No it isn't. Alberta has a huge reserve of oil. Problem is that it's all in sand, so it's harder to extract than the normal means of just pumping it out of a hole in the ground.



It requires alot of water

[Ally_Kat]

05/28/2006
U.S. Senators to visit oil shale operations as energy prices rise
Associated Press


WASHINGTON -- As sky-high energy prices continue to worry lawmakers in Congress, senators are taking a field trip to see oil shale operations in the West that they hope will one day provide a rich domestic source of oil.


Sen. Pete Domenici, chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, and others next week will tour sites in Colorado and Utah where some energy companies think there is a good chance they can tap the petroleum locked in vast rock deposits beneath federal land.


The senators also are expected to hear from industry and residents. Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Ken Salazar, D-Colo., also have said they will attend.


Their interest comes at a time when lawmakers are eager to show they are taking action to stem soaring gas prices and reduce the country's reliance on foreign energy.


"One sure way to drive oil prices down is to increase the supply of oil, especially here at home," said Hatch, a longtime champion of oil shale development. "We have more recoverable oil in Wyoming, Utah and Colorado than there is in the Middle East, and this field hearing will help us learn how to tap into this resource as quickly and responsibly as possible."


Shale yields oil when heated. Parts of northern Colorado and Utah and a corner of Wyoming contain an estimated 500 billion to 1.1 trillion recoverable barrels, a reserve at least three times that of Saudi Arabia.


Industry and government have long considered getting oil from shale too expensive to be economically feasible. But with conventional oil hovering around $70 a barrel -- and unlikely to drop far any time soon -- there is new excitement about the prospect.


The energy policy approved by Congress and the president last year dramatically reversed the nation's approach to shale development, opening the door within a few years to companies that want to tap deposits on public lands.


The Bureau of Land Management expects to issue leases by late summer to a handful of companies that want to try research and development projects. BLM officials are analyzing the environmental impacts now.


Domenici wants to see the area and better understand the technology used to get oil from the rock, said his spokeswoman Marnie Funk. Details are still being worked out, but the trip is expected to begin May 31 in Colorado. The group will visit sites near Vernal, Utah, on June 1.


As senators are growing more excited about the potential, residents are concerned about the effect oil shale development could have on their communities.


Many remember the last time industry and government tried to take advantage of oil shale deposits.


High oil prices in the 1970s led Congress under President Carter to create the Synthetic Fuels Corp., to find new, domestic sources of crude. Entire towns in Colorado were created and all but abandoned after oil prices bottomed out in the 1980s.


Garfield County, Colo., Commissioner Tresi Houpt worries the government is pushing development too fast. She said residents want government to encourage industry to carefully develop its methods before issuing commercial leases.


"The people who were here remember the loss of not only numerous jobs related to the industry but also all of the jobs that were started to serve the people who were working in the industry," said Houpt, who grew up in Denver. "It really plunged the area into a deep depression that took some time to climb out of."


Houpt and others also are concerned about how oil shale development will affect the environment.


Salazar spokesman Cody Wertz said Salazar shares residents' fears and is especially interested in ensuring the government does everything it can to avoid a repeat of the boom and bust of the 1970s.


"There's a lot of potential, and the potential is great," Wertz said. "But hearing from local people and making sure their concerns are heard (by government) is one of Senator Salazar's major interests