• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Oil rises above $90 amid US crude supply drop

You're really not. Russia's got the world's largest oil reserves, then Saudi Arabia, and on. The oil under Alaska could sustain the US at current rates for about 11 months. The solution is to find better energy, not vainly wish that oil will start growing in the dried up Texan rigs.

The oil in Alaska is a drop in the bucket compared to what is in the Dakotas and under the Rocky Mountains, not to mention what's in the Gulf and off our west coast.
 
Not so in Mazatlan.....must be state taxes....

I'm sure gas prices vary in Mexico just as they do here. I posted the national average price.

Are you sure you used the correct currency value and converted from liters to gallons properly ??

By the way, did you go fishing there? I caught two fantastic Pacific Sailfish (9 footers) the last time I was there.
 
Yes, and in places other than the few places they are located now. Production and Distribution are often impaired during hurricane season. :

What does that do for the oil companies? Higher prices and higher profits. Why would they want to ruin that?
 
The oil in Alaska is a drop in the bucket compared to what is in the Dakotas and under the Rocky Mountains, not to mention what's in the Gulf and off our west coast.

So how many year supply do we have there?
 
It's estimated to be somewhere between 3.0 and 4.3 billion barrels.

Is that recoverable and how long would that last us at todays consumption?
 
Is that recoverable and how long would that last us at todays consumption?

The experts think it's recoverable. There is a huge oil boom going on in the Dakotas now. There's even a tv show about it. I believe N. Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country.

If my math is right, it would replace around 9 years of oil imports at the 3.0 billion barrel estimate.
 
The experts think it's recoverable. There is a huge oil boom going on in the Dakotas now. There's even a tv show about it. I believe N. Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country.

If my math is right, it would replace around 9 years of oil imports at the 3.0 billion barrel estimate.

Don't we consume 7 billion bbl a year?
 
Perhaps a few. It doesn't change the fact that it's not survivable. Change the energy supply, and you don't have the problem of impending doom.

It's thought that we have between 100 and 400 years of oil left. More and more, that estimate is moving to the higher end.

We shouldhave a RELIABLE alternative source within 100 years. Hint: air, solar, corn, etc, are not it. The next source of energy will by nuclear, or something much like it.
 
It's thought that we have between 100 and 400 years of oil left. More and more, that estimate is moving to the higher end.
.
You need to supply a link for that comment.
BP's Statistical Review of World Energy, published yesterday, appears to show that the world still has enough "proven" reserves to provide 40 years of consumption at current rates
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_int...l_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2010.pdf
The Bakken has 3.6 billion bbls and we use 7 billion a year
 
Last edited:
You need to supply a link for that comment.

http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_int...l_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2010.pdf
The Bakken has 3.6 billion bbls and we use 7 billion a year

The fact is, no one knows. We keep finding new sources of oil, and our demand keeps going up.

However, I'm not worried about it. 50 years ago, how'd people make a phone call? How'd they get their information from around the world? What junk did they drive?

Put a laptop and a iPhone in someone's lap in 1950, and they would have freaked out. Just like if someone from 2060 were to come back and show you the technology of that day, you and I would freak out, too.

We'll handle it.
 
The fact is, no one knows. We keep finding new sources of oil, and our demand keeps going up.
.

So you just decide that 100 to 400 years is a good guess?
Research shows its probably closer to 40 to 50 years at todays consumption. If consumption doubles in the next twenty years we will be out of oil.
 
So you just decide that 100 to 400 years is a good guess?
Research shows its probably closer to 40 to 50 years at todays consumption. If consumption doubles in the next twenty years we will be out of oil.

No, I've heard varying opinions like everybody. The problem is, it's such a politically charged issue, that you can find someone to support what you want the answer to be no matter what.

Here's one (by MSNBC, no less) that says we have 122 years left.

World oil supply still plentiful, study shows - Business - Oil & energy - msnbc.com

Here's one that says there are huge amounts that we haven't even located yet.

Not

The fact is, no one knows for sure. Right now, we have so little idea of what is below the first couple of miles of the earth's crust, it's impossilble to make any real calculations.
 
No, I've heard varying opinions like everybody. The problem is, it's such a politically charged issue, that you can find someone to support what you want the answer to be no matter what.

Here's one (by MSNBC, no less) that says we have 122 years left.

World oil supply still plentiful, study shows - Business - Oil & energy - msnbc.com

Here's one that says there are huge amounts that we haven't even located yet.

Not

The fact is, no one knows for sure. Right now, we have so little idea of what is below the first couple of miles of the earth's crust, it's impossilble to make any real calculations.

Don't you think the oil industry has a better handle on how much is left than MSNBC? Is it smarter to use the low number or the high number?
 
Don't you think the oil industry has a better handle on how much is left than MSNBC? Is it smarter to use the low number or the high number?

Which one makes more money per barrel the less we have?

Relax, we'll solve it.

100 years ago, we were riding horses.
 
Not true. Price of regular gas in Mexico on February 12 was $2.81 American dollars. About the same as here.

The gasoline tax increase you propose is the worst thing imaginable in this economy. A dollar increase in federal gas taxes would send the economy immediately into a double dip recession. Inflation would strangle everyone with the huge increase in all goods delivered, which is everything.

What the don't understand it would also include diesel which means transportation costs would increase the cost of everything
 
Yes and no. Our refineries are built to refine the type of oil we import; however, I've read that the oil here is a different composition (more sulfer, etc) and requires a different type of refinery.

I don't profess to be an expert on this, but I've heard that we don't have the facilities in place to do everything on our own, and that it would take 10 years for us to get to that point.

With all the red tape the democrats put in place to please environmentalists it takes 10 years and millions of dollars to get permits
 
What the don't understand it would also include diesel which means transportation costs would increase the cost of everything

This is the hidden devil. The inflation on basic needs is going to send a bunch of Americans over the edge. It'll be a nuisance for some; it'll lead to more foreclosures for others.

Not to mention, the additional layoffs that will result.

Until we button up our energy issues, we will continue to wax and wane with the idiocies of crazy people halfway around the globe.
 
With all the red tape the democrats put in place to please environmentalists it takes 10 years and millions of dollars to get permits

Yep, which is why we must take the presidency and Senate in 2012.

Americans are overwhelmingly frustrated that we don't go after our own oil reserves.
 
You're really not. Russia's got the world's largest oil reserves, then Saudi Arabia, and on. The oil under Alaska could sustain the US at current rates for about 11 months. The solution is to find better energy, not vainly wish that oil will start growing in the dried up Texan rigs.

The US has Bakken
 
Which one makes more money per barrel the less we have?

Relax, we'll solve it.

100 years ago, we were riding horses.

This is typican instant gratification republican thinking. Live for today, pollute the environment, use up all our resources and don't worry about it. Our kids will solve the problems. 100 years from now we will be riding horses again if we haven't eaten them all.
 
on the topic of ENERGY, we have fantasies on the one hand

and raunchy reality on the other

for example, obama's interview with the sf chron:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4

we must "do the right thing"

"under my plan electricty rates would necessarily skyrocket"

"if someone wants to build a coal power plant they can, it's just that it will bankrupt them"

with ideologues like this in the white house, how's america ever gonna solve its energy problems

BAN, baby, BAN!
 
With all the red tape the democrats put in place to please environmentalists it takes 10 years and millions of dollars to get permits

Why didn't the republicans do something? They had 6 years of total control. The truth is the oil companies are happy with the way things are. They like shortages and huge profits.
Using our own reserves up even faster will not solve anything.
 
The US has Bakken

The Bakken is 8 months suppy at current US consumption. It's 3.6 billion barrels and we consume 7 billion barrels a year. Do the math.
You people just don't get it.
 
Back
Top Bottom