Hubbs Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 All the Oil that has been pumped out of the ground in the last few centuries would not even fill Lake Tahoe. Believing there is a shortage is insanity. That can't possibly be true... can it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 That can't possibly be true... can it? definitely true. I'll post article on it in a few minutes. (gotta find it) I've posted the article on here before. EDIT: Search is all kinds of busted and I can't find it in my old posts. But basically, it clearly shows that all the Oil ever pumped out of the ground all over the world COMBINED would not even fill Lake Tahoe. The author challenges anyone to prove him wrong and no one has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy Burner Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Don't be surprised to hear of a MAJOR (and I mean MAJOR) oil strike in an area that you probably never thought of until now. It may take a few years - and a few idiot politicians/environmentalists. Where? It's not new. It's not unheard of either. But most people don't know about it. Ready? Ok. Southern Illinois. And don't be surprised to learn of new places in the next ten years or so. Places that will dwarf the ME, Alaska, Canada, the Gulf, Brazil, Norway, the North Sea, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjinhan Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Don't be surprised to hear of a MAJOR (and I mean MAJOR) oil strike in an area that you probably never thought of until now. It may take a few years - and a few idiot politicians/environmentalists.Where? It's not new. It's not unheard of either. But most people don't know about it. Ready? Ok. Southern Illinois. And don't be surprised to learn of new places in the next ten years or so. Places that will dwarf the ME, Alaska, Canada, the Gulf, Brazil, Norway, the North Sea, etc. yeah well that area has been getting some attention and the area in mississippi.. but the key to all of these "finds" is the price of oil and gas... You guys heard all this talk about oil sands and Shale plays for oil and gas recently but if the oil prices stay at $50-60 and gas prices at $4 then its not worth for companies to take on risk to drill these wells when the pay off does not offset the inherent risk of drilling a dry or poor performing wells... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 That can't possibly be true... can it? There are 39 trillion gallons of water (almost 1 trillion barrels) in Lake Tahoe. Anyone know how much oil gets consumed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofSparta Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 There are 39 trillion gallons of water (almost 1 trillion barrels) in Lake Tahoe. Anyone know how much oil gets consumed? I can't vouch for the valitidy of information here, as I found it via a google search, but here's a site with some statistics: http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.html U.S. Petroleum Consumption 19,498,000 barrels/day Total World Petroleum Consumption 85,534,000 barrels/day Gallons of Oil per Barrel 42 So doing some quick math (you guys can feel free to check it) 42x19,498,000=818,916,000 gallons of oil/day US 42x85,534,000=3,592,428,000 gallons of oil/day Worldwide Now I may be doing something wrong, math is not my forte', but according to those stats it would only take 11 days for the world to use enough oil to fill Lake Tahoe. :whoknows: Either way, we need more nuclear power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Now I may be doing something wrong, math is not my forte', but according to those stats it would only take 11 days for the world to use enough oil to fill Lake Tahoe. :whoknows:Either way, we need more nuclear power. Math isn't my thing either, but according to this chart: The world consumed about 30 billion barrels in 2005. So, what, 30 years to fill up Tahoe at 2005 levels of consumption? That could probably account for all oil ever consumed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 This is what I don't understand. We know there are trillions and trillions and trillions of barrels of oil in non-traditional deposits like the oil sands. So we aren't anywhere near running out of oil. The only problem is that these sources are more expensive. So don't we see a natural and sustainable weaning process happening? As we're forced to turn to these sources, oil will become more expensive but we certainly won't run out of it. Not for a VERY long time. It will just become less attractive. So obviously, alternative sources will become more attractive. So what's the problem here? Where's the energy crisis? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sjinhan Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 This is what I don't understand. We know there are trillions and trillions and trillions of barrels of oil in non-traditional deposits like the oil sands. So we aren't anywhere near running out of oil. The only problem is that these sources are more expensive. So don't we see a natural and sustainable weaning process happening? As we're forced to turn to these sources, oil will become more expensive but we certainly won't run out of it. Not for a VERY long time. It will just become less attractive. So obviously, alternative sources will become more attractive. So what's the problem here? Where's the energy crisis? you got it right on.. this is the real energy picture right now... there is no energy crisis as long as people are willing to pay for it.. and sadly we got no option BUT to pay for it... I understand people's concern that high energy prices might have negative effect on the economy and on and on.. The people that really annoy me are people who complain about how we need to do something about oil and gas prices BUT complain that off shore rigs will be hurting their view of the ocean... *poke *poke Floridians... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I can't vouch for the valitidy of information here, as I found it via a google search, but here's a site with some statistics: http://www.eia.doe.gov/basics/quickoil.htmlU.S. Petroleum Consumption 19,498,000 barrels/day Total World Petroleum Consumption 85,534,000 barrels/day Gallons of Oil per Barrel 42 So doing some quick math (you guys can feel free to check it) 42x19,498,000=818,916,000 gallons of oil/day US 42x85,534,000=3,592,428,000 gallons of oil/day Worldwide Now I may be doing something wrong, math is not my forte', but according to those stats it would only take 11 days for the world to use enough oil to fill Lake Tahoe. :whoknows: Either way, we need more nuclear power. think I've got the wrong lake. Hopefully I'll find the article. It's a good one, you guys should check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubbs Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 This is what I don't understand. We know there are trillions and trillions and trillions of barrels of oil in non-traditional deposits like the oil sands. So we aren't anywhere near running out of oil. The only problem is that these sources are more expensive. So don't we see a natural and sustainable weaning process happening? As we're forced to turn to these sources, oil will become more expensive but we certainly won't run out of it. Not for a VERY long time. It will just become less attractive. So obviously, alternative sources will become more attractive. So what's the problem here? Where's the energy crisis? I heard a very good explanation of this problem once. It's not about how much oil is technically left within the earth's surface. It's about how much energy it takes to extract the remaining oil, because the oil's eventual use is, of course, energy. When oil is easy to extract, a large percentage of its energy can be used for other things, from construction to transportation to consumer goods. When oil is difficult to extract, most of the energy from the new oil has to be expended to extract even more of the hard-to-get oil. In other words, if there's a bunch of oil left in the planet, but it's incredibly energy-inefficient to extract/refine said oil, it's no more of a useful energy source than, say, a bunch of hamsters running on a bunch of treadmills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mardi gras skin Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 In other words, if there's a bunch of oil left in the planet, but it's incredibly energy-inefficient to extract/refine said oil, it's no more of a useful energy source than, say, a bunch of hamsters running on a bunch of treadmills. Yes, I read about this. "Energy Returned on Energy Invested," right? But it looks like shale oil is getting about a 5:1 return. Not nearly the 30:1 that oil gets, but still very positive. a 5:1 ratio would mean that 1 trillion barrels of shale oil will result in 800 billion barrels of new usable oil. Enough oil to run the world for decades. And I guess that new technology will make shale oil extraction more and more efficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 OK, it had been awhile since I read the article but here it is... What was said in the article was "...all the petroleum discovered and produced in the U.S. since 1857..." wouldn't fill Lake Tahoe. http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski82.html So I was wrong earlier. It's not world produced. Just US produced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.