Set America Free

The Washington Times ^ | March 8, 2005 | Frank J. Gaffney Jr.

[Red in Blue Maine]

Ticklish question.
How much personal fortune does one man need or want? Besides,as a born again Christian, Bush is not motivated by mo' money. Bush delights in being a contrarian, so the powerful and wealthy are not the issue that conventional wisdom assumes. In fact 43 strikes me as being one who cuts against the grain more than even Reagan.
Besides the abdication of American manufacturing to China, there are few issues that cut as closely to the national security jugular as energy dependency. I think we have the only President who would have the will and capability to pull it off. The bigger question is: Who is going to push for it among staff, and is there enough room to fit energy independence on the plate before the restaurant closes in '08? As for the line "Only Bush can go to Houston"...it was your previous comment that inspired it.

[ddtorque]

"Mexico has the third-largest proven conventional crude oil reserves in the Western Hemisphere after Venezuela, and the United States."

Unfortunately, Mexico comes in at at barely 1.4% of world oil reserves. See Dept of Energy numbers here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

The Middle East + North Africa have almost 70% of world reserves and other Muslim countries around the world have even more.

[Truth29]

What percentage of our energy problems are caused by a Mexican government policy of exporting its poverty to the US in the form of millions of illegal immigrants to the US?

[ran15]

Lol, very good analogy.

[ran15]

You might upset the farm lobby with that kind of thinking.

[hflynn]

Proven reserves are not a measure of future supply.

What makes a reserve conventional or how are How are reserves "proven" ?

As M.A. Adelman puts it:

Petroleum engineers estimate the cost of drilling and connecting new wells into a new or existing reservoir. A well can produce an initial daily amount, which will decline over time because of pressure loss, water encroachment and other factors... Because operating expenses per well are fairly constant, the cost per barrel must rise as output declines. When cost just equals the market value of the output, production stops at this "economic limit." The estimated aggregate output of the new wells over time is known as the "proved reserves added" or "reserves booked." In the United States, annual reserve estimates are accurate enough ... But except for the United states and a very few other countries, published reserves are not well defined and estimation methods are not revealed. Year to year changes usually do not mean much of anything.

The costs of extracting petroleum from the ground are as important as geology in coming up with reserve estimates since a proven reserve is one that can be developed economically. This is natural inside any industry. Investors need to know just how easy the oil will be to find and lift from the ground. They want to know how light and pure the oil is, how much it will cost to refine, how close the oil is to the marketplace. Oil reserves that fall below a standard index of profitability are not developed because no one wants to lose the money it takes to develop them. These undeveloped reserves are not listed as proven reserves.

Conventional wisdom has it that the oil companies make their investments and countries generally formulate their policies based on the world's "proven" reserves. But it is probably more accurate to say that oil company investments and friendly country policies are what make reserves "proven."

What is an unconventional oil reserve? The answer is it is an oil reserve not put into the "proven" category.

"Unconventional" petroleum reserves include:

Heavy oils, which can be pumped and refined just like conventional petroleum except that they are thicker and have more sulfur and heavy metal contamination, necessitating more extensive refining. Venezuela's Orinoco heavy oil belt is the best known example of this kind of unconventional reserve. Estimated reserves: 1.2 trillion barrels.

Tar Sands, which can be recovered via surface mining or in-situ collection techniques. Again, this is more expensive than lifting conventional petroleum but not prohibitively so. Canada's Athabasca Tar Sands is the best known example of this kind of unconventional reserve. Estimated reserves: 1.8 trillion barrels.

Oil Shale requires extensive processing and consumes large amounts of water. Still, reserves far exceed supplies of conventional oil.

Mexico, currently the 2nd largest supplier of crude oil to the US, claims to have at least 100 billion barrels of geologically known or unconventional reserves even though it is only assigned 27 or 28 billion proven reserves by the oil industry.

[hflynn]

Well according to Dr. Michael Savage a start of 1 barrel of crude per month per illegal Mexican in the US would start to offset their negative economic impact. That would 22 million barrels of oil per month which undoubtedly increase as the illegal immigration continues.

[Mark in the Old South]

Mexico is just as much of a problem maybe even more so. It is doing everything it can to keep the border wide open for illegals both those of Mexican nationality as well as others. Muslim fascist know this.

ANWAR is another matter. I have no objection to drilling in ANWAR but I doubt the oil that is pumped there will be sold here in the lower 48. Remember the Alaska pipeline, all the political blood on the floor over that, well almost all the oil goes to Japan and other countries where they are willing to pay higher prices. It would relieve some of the pressure on the overall price but not by a great deal and they can compensate putting us right back where we started. The oil companies will make a lot of money and we will drain our biggest reserve which we may need for a bigger crisis.

Like I said I don't object but don't expect anything to change.

[hflynn]

You may not have seen Bush's speech on energy about an hour ago. The push for ANWR and new nuclear plants is on.

Regarding ANWR Bush said only 4000 acres of land could be used with modern slant drilling to reach an estimated 10 billion barrels of crude in ANWR. The environmentalist just took a hard right hook to the head.

[Mark in the Old South]

That changes nothing that I said. ANWAR is not about reducing gas prices but gas prices will be used as the excuse. I repeat I do not oppose drilling in ANWAR but it is not the solution people are hoping.

Demand is growing, China and India are needing more and more oil. The Middle East is loosing market share (from what I understand) Everyone is looking for more sources. ANWAR is a bandaide at best and one that can be overcome before the oil even hits the market.

[Species8472]

"almost all the oil goes to Japan and other countries where they are willing to pay higher prices"

This is a bold faced liberal/envirowacko lie. There has never been more that 10% of Alaskan Crude exported outside the United States.

References:

Data from Alaska Dept of Revenue

Congressional Report

[Mark in the Old South]

I did not know about the law that forbid export of the North Shore oil. Good it hear that correction. Big Media lies once again.

I still point out I have no objection to ANWAR drilling but I also stand by the notion those who want to keep the price high can do so ANWAR or no ANWAR.

[JarheadFromFlorida]

The price of oil will go through the roof, the more nervous that middle east dictators become as we deliver democray to the middle east. They know that their days are numbered and will gouge us as hard as they can before they flee in excile to France.

[Species8472]

"I also stand by the notion those who want to keep the price high can do so ANWAR or no ANWAR"

Agreed, But I would rather those dollars stay in the USA.

[hflynn]

Your wrong. We won't be producing oil for export. Whatever the production per day (most estimates seem to be 1 million barrels per day for at least 10 years of production) and whatever our increased daily need may be, ANWR produced oil still translates into 1 ANWR barrel = 1 less barrel of imported oil needed.

[Mark in the Old South]

Re: "ANWR produced oil still translates into 1 ANWR barrel = 1 less barrel of imported oil needed."

True but that will not necessarily translate into lower prices and can have the opposite if it response is fewer barrels pumped out of the ground elsewhere or no overall increase in oil production or if demand out paces the additional oil produced. It is not a vacuum there are market forces at work here and people who want to make money and do not give a fig for the fine people in this country, some people who fit this description are Americans and some of them "appear" to be good conservative businessmen. Their country is Lucre.

[hflynn]

It is not a vacuum there are market forces at work here . . . . .

I agree. Market forces will be at work. However if the market forces move the price of oil higher and higher or if not not enough oil can be produced worldwide what will have happened? The market forces preventing development of new sources and kinds of energy will have been eliminated. ANWR gives us a little bit more time, as well as oil, to bridge the inevitable move from an oil based economy to an alternate kind of energy whenever the tipping point away from oil is reached.

[Mark in the Old South]

I can live with that post.

I went out of my way with every single post to state I do not oppose drill in ANWAR. What I object to is the simplistic notion ANWAR will solve something. It can be a part of a solution but that is the best that can be hoped for with ANWAR. I would prefer some investment in other solutions. Such as better engines. There was some talk a few years back about magnetically charged ball bearings that worked like the monorails, reducing friction. I believed the super conductor in Texas was supposed to help develop these. Hybrid cars, alternative fuels, whatever works and has market viability.

[hflynn]

Yeah. I don't disagree with you.