Sitting on an Ocean of Energy, Doing Nothing

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Do you trust the USGS? They say there is about 10 Billion barrels there.

So, according to another US Gov't survey current production of oil is at about 5 million barrels per day in the lower 48. Add Alaska and that's a grand total of 6 million barrels per day. Considering that our daily demand as a nation is much greater than that, lets first deal in absolutes and then factor in the global contribution:

6 million barrels per day: 6 * 365 = 2190 million barrels per year = 2 billion, 190 million barrels per year = 2.19 billion barrels per year.

10 billion / 2.19 billion = 4.57 years at this demand + consumption rate until ANWR is dry.

That would be at just the current production rate, of course, and is an absolute.

Looking at it from a consumption point of view:

20.7 million barrels of oil per day consumed by US Market

means

20.7million barrels per day = 20.7 * 365 = 7555.5 million barrels per year = rounded to 7 billion, 555 million barrels per year demanded/presently consumed. Lets say we got green and decided to consume only 7.5 billion barrels per year.

So if we consume this much it means that the 2.19 billion barrels we produce in one year currently will have a slight bump from the estimated 10 billion barrels in ANWR, but for how long? Lets say we only pump it at 1 billion barrels per year from ANWR. That's 10 years worth before it runs dry. Is that a sound investment? Are you considering the overhead costs to drill as well as the start up costs to set up the drilling ops in the first place? Sure, we'll save a few bucks until it runs dry up front... but what about consequential costs?

Not financially feasible to be honest. Windfall might be good for a couple of years... but what later? Same kind of irresponsible fiscal management we have in Iraq right now. Let others pay later, right?

The attitude that we don't really need to reduce our consumption of oil is a lot like the idea that you can eat all the great food you love and still lose weight....crazy.

[almaty 19]

excellent post, brother stevie..

[one...two...tree 2,762]

excellent post, brother stevie..

Che showed me the way, brother. Mao knows how.

[GaryC 7]

Do you trust the USGS? They say there is about 10 Billion barrels there.

So, according to another US Gov't survey current production of oil is at about 5 million barrels per day in the lower 48. Add Alaska and that's a grand total of 6 million barrels per day. Considering that our daily demand as a nation is much greater than that, lets first deal in absolutes and then factor in the global contribution:

6 million barrels per day: 6 * 365 = 2190 million barrels per year = 2 billion, 190 million barrels per year = 2.19 billion barrels per year.

10 billion / 2.19 billion = 4.57 years at this demand + consumption rate until ANWR is dry.

That would be at just the current production rate, of course, and is an absolute.

Looking at it from a consumption point of view:

20.7 million barrels of oil per day consumed by US Market

means

20.7million barrels per day = 20.7 * 365 = 7555.5 million barrels per year = rounded to 7 billion, 555 million barrels per year demanded/presently consumed. Lets say we got green and decided to consume only 7.5 billion barrels per year.

So if we consume this much it means that the 2.19 billion barrels we produce in one year currently will have a slight bump from the estimated 10 billion barrels in ANWR, but for how long? Lets say we only pump it at 1 billion barrels per year from ANWR. That's 10 years worth before it runs dry. Is that a sound investment? Are you considering the overhead costs to drill as well as the start up costs to set up the drilling ops in the first place? Sure, we'll save a few bucks until it runs dry up front... but what about consequential costs?

Not financially feasible to be honest. Windfall might be good for a couple of years... but what later? Same kind of irresponsible fiscal management we have in Iraq right now. Let others pay later, right?

The attitude that we don't really need to reduce our consumption of oil is a lot like the idea that you can eat all the great food you love and still lose weight....crazy.

Mavs math seems rather fuzzy. He is making assumptions that cannot be backed up. He also didn't quote everything I said. We need to drill in ANWR and off our coasts and exploit the oil shales and use coal and build nuclear plants. ANWR is just one small part of the overall plan. I don't understand why you have a resistance to that. You are saying we can't drill ourselves out of dependence but you also can't conserve our way to it also. It takes both.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Rocky Mountain Oil

Published on: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 Written by: Elizabeth Smith

Although they prefer not to publicize it too loudly just yet, Shell Oil Company and the U.S. government have taken steps toward tapping into the world’s largest known oil shale deposits using an innovative in-ground heating method.

The Green River Formation of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming “holds the equivalent of 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil—as much as the U.S. would use in 110 years, at current consumption levels, and three times the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia,” according to a Nov. 13 press release from the Bureau of Land Management.

http://www.nuwireinvestor.com/articles/roc...-oil-51062.aspx

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Do you trust the USGS? They say there is about 10 Billion barrels there.

So, according to another US Gov't survey current production of oil is at about 5 million barrels per day in the lower 48. Add Alaska and that's a grand total of 6 million barrels per day. Considering that our daily demand as a nation is much greater than that, lets first deal in absolutes and then factor in the global contribution:

6 million barrels per day: 6 * 365 = 2190 million barrels per year = 2 billion, 190 million barrels per year = 2.19 billion barrels per year.

10 billion / 2.19 billion = 4.57 years at this demand + consumption rate until ANWR is dry.

That would be at just the current production rate, of course, and is an absolute.

Looking at it from a consumption point of view:

20.7 million barrels of oil per day consumed by US Market

means

20.7million barrels per day = 20.7 * 365 = 7555.5 million barrels per year = rounded to 7 billion, 555 million barrels per year demanded/presently consumed. Lets say we got green and decided to consume only 7.5 billion barrels per year.

So if we consume this much it means that the 2.19 billion barrels we produce in one year currently will have a slight bump from the estimated 10 billion barrels in ANWR, but for how long? Lets say we only pump it at 1 billion barrels per year from ANWR. That's 10 years worth before it runs dry. Is that a sound investment? Are you considering the overhead costs to drill as well as the start up costs to set up the drilling ops in the first place? Sure, we'll save a few bucks until it runs dry up front... but what about consequential costs?

Not financially feasible to be honest. Windfall might be good for a couple of years... but what later? Same kind of irresponsible fiscal management we have in Iraq right now. Let others pay later, right?

The attitude that we don't really need to reduce our consumption of oil is a lot like the idea that you can eat all the great food you love and still lose weight....crazy.

Mavs math seems rather fuzzy. He is making assumptions that cannot be backed up. He also didn't quote everything I said. We need to drill in ANWR and off our coasts and exploit the oil shales and use coal and build nuclear plants. ANWR is just one small part of the overall plan. I don't understand why you have a resistance to that. You are saying we can't drill ourselves out of dependence but you also can't conserve our way to it also. It takes both.

So with all these threads you've made on drilling oil, where are the ones on how we can reduce consumption? What's your idea for reducing consumption?

[HAL 9000 96]

Do you trust the USGS? They say there is about 10 Billion barrels there.

So, according to another US Gov't survey current production of oil is at about 5 million barrels per day in the lower 48. Add Alaska and that's a grand total of 6 million barrels per day. Considering that our daily demand as a nation is much greater than that, lets first deal in absolutes and then factor in the global contribution:

6 million barrels per day: 6 * 365 = 2190 million barrels per year = 2 billion, 190 million barrels per year = 2.19 billion barrels per year.

10 billion / 2.19 billion = 4.57 years at this demand + consumption rate until ANWR is dry.

That would be at just the current production rate, of course, and is an absolute.

Looking at it from a consumption point of view:

20.7 million barrels of oil per day consumed by US Market

means

20.7million barrels per day = 20.7 * 365 = 7555.5 million barrels per year = rounded to 7 billion, 555 million barrels per year demanded/presently consumed. Lets say we got green and decided to consume only 7.5 billion barrels per year.

So if we consume this much it means that the 2.19 billion barrels we produce in one year currently will have a slight bump from the estimated 10 billion barrels in ANWR, but for how long? Lets say we only pump it at 1 billion barrels per year from ANWR. That's 10 years worth before it runs dry. Is that a sound investment? Are you considering the overhead costs to drill as well as the start up costs to set up the drilling ops in the first place? Sure, we'll save a few bucks until it runs dry up front... but what about consequential costs?

Not financially feasible to be honest. Windfall might be good for a couple of years... but what later? Same kind of irresponsible fiscal management we have in Iraq right now. Let others pay later, right?

The attitude that we don't really need to reduce our consumption of oil is a lot like the idea that you can eat all the great food you love and still lose weight....crazy.

Mavs math seems rather fuzzy. He is making assumptions that cannot be backed up. He also didn't quote everything I said. We need to drill in ANWR and off our coasts and exploit the oil shales and use coal and build nuclear plants. ANWR is just one small part of the overall plan. I don't understand why you have a resistance to that. You are saying we can't drill ourselves out of dependence but you also can't conserve our way to it also. It takes both.

Do explain where actual rates go fuzzy- USGS gives one estimate of actual volume, so volume / time = volume per time unit. Pretty simple math, actually. If you have per diem rates of actual consumption, that implies that's at minimum what we demanded as a market. So you can plug in the numbers.

Since there are 365 days in a year, the math is pretty clear. But perhaps you know more, so we'd like to see your math.

Show your work too.

[SteveLaura 0]

A Maths Throw-down! Cool!

We haven't seen anything like this since the Great VJ Latin Translations of 1908!

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You forget the Venn Diagram Competitions of 2006!

[SteveLaura 0]

You forget the Venn Diagram Competitions of 2006!

Of course! Womens' knees still tremble at the memory.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You forget the Venn Diagram Competitions of 2006!

Of course! Womens' knees still tremble at the memory.

No, no. You're confusing the Venn Diagram Competition with Eric's powerpoint demonstration on his massive dong.

[HAL 9000 96]

Damn that math...

[SteveLaura 0]

You forget the Venn Diagram Competitions of 2006!

Of course! Womens' knees still tremble at the memory.

No, no. You're confusing the Venn Diagram Competition with Eric's powerpoint demonstration on his massive dong.

You're right. It was the overlapping parts and shaded areas that confused me.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You forget the Venn Diagram Competitions of 2006!

Of course! Womens' knees still tremble at the memory.

No, no. You're confusing the Venn Diagram Competition with Eric's powerpoint demonstration on his massive dong.

You're right. It was the overlapping parts and shaded areas that confused me.

[HAL 9000 96]

Blinded by the math...