U.S. To Be World’s Top Oil Producer In 5 Years, Report Says...

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by ABM, Nov 13, 2012.

Moderators: 6

Moderators

  1. BrianFromWA
  2. Chris Craig
  3. Darkwebs
  4. Ed O
  5. PtldPlatypus
  6. SlyPokerDog
Page 1 of 2
  1. ABM

    ABM Happily Married In Music City, USA!

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    31,865
    Likes Received:
    5,785
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Commercial Real Estate
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    Very interesting..

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/b...op-oil-producer-in-5-years.html?smid=fb-share

    [​IMG]

     
    ABM, Nov 13, 2012
    #1
  2. BlazerWookee

    BlazerWookee UNTILT THE DAMN PINWHEEL!

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    13,200
    Likes Received:
    6,538
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Gear Finisher
    Location:
    Lebanon, Oregon
    Who is the "International Energy Agency?"
     
    BlazerWookee, Nov 13, 2012
    #2
  3. ABM

    ABM Happily Married In Music City, USA!

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    31,865
    Likes Received:
    5,785
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Commercial Real Estate
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    :dunno:

    http://www.iea.org/aboutus/history/
     
    ABM, Nov 13, 2012
    #3
  4. Fez Hammersticks

    Fez Hammersticks スーパーバッド Zero Cool

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    29,160
    Likes Received:
    9,840
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Phone Psychic
    Location:
    The Deep State, US and A.
    North Dakota (iirc) is booming with their oil production.
     
    Fez Hammersticks, Nov 13, 2012
    #4
  5. GriLtCheeZ

    GriLtCheeZ "Well, I'm not lookin' for trouble."

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    5,488
    Likes Received:
    2,923
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Gleaming the Cubicle
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
    USA! USA! USA!
     
    GriLtCheeZ, Nov 13, 2012
    #5
  6. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    USA used to be #1.
     
    Denny Crane, Nov 13, 2012
    #6
  7. TradeNurkicNow

    TradeNurkicNow piss

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,197
    Likes Received:
    678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    hell
    Location:
    shit
    Just what we need.
     
    TradeNurkicNow, Nov 13, 2012
    #7
  8. jlprk

    jlprk The ESPN mod is insane.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    30,672
    Likes Received:
    8,852
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired, while you work!
    Colorado shale oil is integrated with rock on a molecular scale. It costs more to process than regular liquid oil in underground pools. For 20 years I've read that when the world supply of regular oil decreases, the oil price will increase due to supply and demand, raising the liquid oil cost to something similar to shale. That's when shale mining will become cost-effective.

    Republicans criticize Obama that we have enormous unused shale deposits, but they are too dumb to understand that it's not yet cost-effective to mine them. All that this new report says is that in 20 years, China's enormous demand will decrease supply and increase the price, making it economical for the U.S. to start mining its shale, making us oil-independent from Saudi Arabia and other countries, losing us our economic influence there. The price will be a lot higher than now for this to happen.

    Good news, patriots!
     
    jlprk, Nov 13, 2012
    #8
  9. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,096
    Likes Received:
    9,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I haven't read up on it in a while, but I was under the impression that the long-term break-even points for both shale reclamation and Fischer-Tropsch are about $85-120/barrel. I don't remember the breakdown, but at around $7/gallon you start getting into a range where photobioreactors are feasible.
     
    BrianFromWA, Nov 13, 2012
    #9
  10. TradeNurkicNow

    TradeNurkicNow piss

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,197
    Likes Received:
    678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    hell
    Location:
    shit
    Isn't it more economical to attempt switching to renewable resources? I mean, big picture. I know all you mid life war hawks can't picture a time where fossil fuels aren't the standard, but I may live to see the day where the world economy grinds to a halt when oil prices sky rocket. Shouldn't we get working on this seriously about now?
     
    TradeNurkicNow, Nov 13, 2012
    #10
  11. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    I think lower than $80/bbl.
     
    Denny Crane, Nov 13, 2012
    #11
  12. ABM

    ABM Happily Married In Music City, USA!

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2008
    Messages:
    31,865
    Likes Received:
    5,785
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Commercial Real Estate
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    [video=youtube;PSxihhBzCjk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSxihhBzCjk[/video]
     
    ABM, Nov 13, 2012
    #12
  13. jlprk

    jlprk The ESPN mod is insane.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    30,672
    Likes Received:
    8,852
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired, while you work!
    Same answer. Later in this century, when China's demand has decreased supply and increased the price high enough to be the same as exotic technologies, renewables will become widely used. At this point 40 years ago someone would chime in that Karl Marx discovered that economics, not religion or politics or great leaders, determines history. But that's so passé now.
     
    jlprk, Nov 13, 2012
    #13
  14. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    No.

    http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/428145/the-great-german-energy-experiment/

    Energy costs increased in Germany, and it will cost them as much as 7% of GDP for nearly a decade, and that won't get them close to able to switch to renewable energy.

    A similar expense by the US would be equivalent to half what the entire nation, including govt., spends on health care.

    Germany is 137,00 sq miles, the USA is over 9,000,000. I think we can't possibly be as efficient as Germany. If we spent an equivalent pct of GDP per square mile, we would have to spend more than 100% of our GDP.
     
    Denny Crane, Nov 13, 2012
    #14
  15. jlprk

    jlprk The ESPN mod is insane.

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    30,672
    Likes Received:
    8,852
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired, while you work!
    In a few decades, oil will eat up GDP even more than the 7% you cited, and worldwide, not just Germany. So you are right in the short-term but in the long-term, renewables will be as cost-effective as oil, and will eventually be cheaper as oil runs out late in the century.

    I've posted before that I predict China will make nuclear war around 2080 on a flaccid U.S. and Europe, then move half its surviving population into a Siberia 10 or 15 degrees warmer than today. China is taking over.
     
    jlprk, Nov 13, 2012
    #15
  16. speeds

    speeds $2.50 highball, $1.50 beer Staff Member Administrator GFX Team

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2007
    Messages:
    39,366
    Likes Received:
    3,383
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Calgary, AB
    Are you a crazy person?


    This won't happen until at least 2083.
     
    speeds, Nov 13, 2012
    #16
  17. PapaG

    PapaG Banned User BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    32,870
    Likes Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tualatin, OR
    Sure. Snap your magic fingers and make it happen without totally destroying the economy.

    You do realize that there is research is happening right now to try and make renewable energy cost-effective. The problem is, we aren't even close to doing so, and the government is having renewable companies go bankrupt even after giving them hundreds of millions of dollars. Sure, the Solyndra execs and others made out like bandits, but there is nothing to show in terms of production with that money.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2012
    PapaG, Nov 13, 2012
    #17
  18. Further

    Further Guy

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2008
    Messages:
    11,099
    Likes Received:
    4,039
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Stuff doer
    Location:
    Place
    I'm very pleased to see energy independence inching closer. When we are truly energy independent I will be more trusting that wars being fought are being done so for honorable reasons.

    As far as alternative energy sources, I don't know the economics of when it makes sense to switch, but I do know that the more research and development in energy fields the sooner we will reach that break even point. If we are intelligent we will pour money into research now. Breakthroughs don't happen out of the blue, they happen through painstaking effort. Also, this will keep America ahead of the curve technologically, environmentally, and economically. Economics will determine when we make the switch, but R&D will bring down the economic hurdles and shrink that timeline.
     
    Further, Nov 13, 2012
    #18
  19. Denny Crane

    Denny Crane It's not even loaded! Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    72,978
    Likes Received:
    10,673
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Never lost a case
    Location:
    Boston Legal
    We are nowhere near break even.

    Brian, what do you know of thorium reactors?
     
    Denny Crane, Nov 13, 2012
    #19
  20. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,096
    Likes Received:
    9,073
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Little bit. Thorium has some potential (and China, among others, are looking hard at it) but it's still at a stage where there are a bunch of pretty significant engineering concerns and not a large amount of cost- or environmental-benefit needed to invest in it.

    Chemistry-wise, it allows you to start up a reactor without fissile Uranium. However, U-233 and U-235 are both byproducts, and the Pa-233 byproduct is a significant neutron absorber, so you're not going to have either the efficiency or (probably, haven't seen detailed designs) the response time offered by Uranium-based fuels, so you're "decreasing" safety...which is something no one wants to hear, even though it doesn't necessarily mean what they think it means. Additionally, the gamma radiation is much, much higher than U-based fuels and their byproducts.

    IMHO, pebble bed technology is the safest and most promising next-step idea going forward. Gen IV High-Temp reactors are being looked at, but there's some nasty stuff you have to engineer around. That might be a while away.
     
    BrianFromWA, Nov 13, 2012
    #20
Page 1 of 2

Share This Page