Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

World power swings back to America
The Telegraph ^ | Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

Posted on 10/23/2011 8:20:42 PM PDT by chuckee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last
To: Kennard

That’s what I suspected... a re-election article.


21 posted on 10/23/2011 9:50:09 PM PDT by txhurl (Did you want to talk or fish? Or feed the fish?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
He confuses shale gas and shale oil.

I read the article earlier today and am pretty sure he made a clear distinction between the two.

22 posted on 10/23/2011 9:50:28 PM PDT by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: chuckee
World power swings back to America

Not if Obama and the rest of the America-hating left have anything to say about it.

To them, any one/thing with power is inherently evil...any one/thing without power is inherently good.

I've heard it described as "Underdogma".

23 posted on 10/23/2011 10:10:09 PM PDT by Washi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
the new liquid fluoride thorium reactor

Is that a new technological development, or is someone actually building such a reactor?

24 posted on 10/23/2011 10:14:36 PM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
From the article:

Less known is that the technology of hydraulic fracturing - breaking rocks with jets of water - will also bring a quantum leap in shale oil supply, mostly from the Bakken fields in North Dakota, Eagle Ford in Texas, and other reserves across the Mid-West.

"The US was the single largest contributor to global oil supply growth last year, with a net 395,000 barrels per day (b/d)," said Francisco Blanch from Bank of America, comparing the Dakota fields to a new North Sea.

Total US shale output is "set to expand dramatically" as fresh sources come on stream, possibly reaching 5.5m b/d by mid-decade. This is a tenfold rise since 2009.

The US already meets 72pc of its own oil needs, up from around 50pc a decade ago.

This bears no relation to reality. Here are the facts: http://stocks.investopedia.com/stock-analysis/2011/Shale-Oil-Production-Rises-CLR-TRP-LINE-VLO0502.aspx?printable=1

E-P may also be confusing Shale Oil with Oil Shale, specifically the Green River deposit. Some unsupportable claims about Green River have been in the above range.

25 posted on 10/23/2011 10:21:02 PM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: chuckee

Called it. Apparently the one child policy isn’t a recipe for future prosperity. :)


26 posted on 10/23/2011 10:34:47 PM PDT by BenKenobi (Honkeys for Herman! 10 percent is enough for God; 9 percent is enough for government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
From the link that I sent you:

The EIA estimates that total U.S. crude oil and condensate production will increase to 6.12 million B/D by 2019, up marginally from the 5.51 million B/D produced in 2010, and certainly nowhere near enough to have a significant impact on prices.

...

The Bakken formation has generated the most interest from the industry with both large and small operators rushing to be involved. ... (Continental Resources') management recently predicted that the Bakken will produce 1 million B/D by 2020.

...

BENTEK Energy, an energy industry consultant, released a study on productivity of the Eagle Ford Shale and predicted that the area will produce 421,000 B/D by 2015.

27 posted on 10/23/2011 10:35:45 PM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88

Thorium? You must be mad.

Sure wish there were more mad folks out there. ;)


28 posted on 10/23/2011 11:23:12 PM PDT by BenKenobi (Honkeys for Herman! 10 percent is enough for God; 9 percent is enough for government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Yardstick
From the article: “The US already meets 72pc of its own oil needs, up from around 50pc a decade ago"

The facts:

U.S. crude oil imports:

2000: 10,419 bbl/day

2010: 9,441 bbl/day

reference:

http://205.254.135.24/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MTTNTUS2&f=A

U.S. crude oil field production:

2000: 5,822 bbl/day

2010: 5,474 bbl/day

reference:

http://205.254.135.24/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS2&f=A

Therefore, crude oil imports as % of crude oil imports plus U.S. crude oil field production:

2000: 64%

2010: 63%

I don't know where E-P got his information, but it is incorrect.

E-P's politics favor free enterprise, so I don't understand this slanted approach, except as an attempt to attract attention.

29 posted on 10/23/2011 11:32:38 PM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: Kennard
CORRECTION

U.S. crude oil field production as % total U.S. crude oil imports plus U.S. crude oil field production:

2000: 36%

2010: 37%

NOT 50% and 72%, respectively, as stated in E-P's article..

31 posted on 10/23/2011 11:42:37 PM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Soothesayer9

I’m not sure it’s ever been that low, not for any appreciable amount of time. 5-6% is about average for even relatively good times.


32 posted on 10/24/2011 4:13:41 AM PDT by MattAMiller
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

Oak Ridge National Laboratories actually built a five-megawatt test reactor using the LFTR design back in the 1960’s and successfully ran the reactor non-stop for five years without any problems. Indeed, the reactor was an outgrowth of the original program to put a nuclear reactor inside an airplane! They needed a reactor that was close to meltdown-proof, and the LFTR was the result.


33 posted on 10/24/2011 4:20:31 AM PDT by RayChuang88 (FairTax: America's economic cure)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RayChuang88
Thanks for the history bite on Thorium reactors. That's one of the most promising technologies I've ever seen, and it's not pie-in-the-sky.

Energy from Thorium, LFTR Technology by Flibe Energy - YouTube

34 posted on 10/24/2011 7:30:46 AM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: chuckee
The problem with articles like this, whether they are positive or negative, is the comparison to China. Manufacturing is going to ebb and flow in and out of countries, depending on many factors. For example, throughout the 90's, many labor intensive factories left the US. However, many foreign auto manufacturings opened up factories which continues til this day. More foreign auto manufacturers are on the way. And it may someday include a Chinese auto factory.

The reality is, China is a rising power with four times the US population. However, if you compare the US to all the other world powers, other than China, the US have been and will continue to tower over the others. America hasn't lost anything when compared to Japan, Germany, France, etc. The relative lost has been with China. And regardless of what manufacturing returns to the US, China will continue to rise. Simply because she is still a developing country who is .... still developing. And with four times the population of the US, the potential to become the largest economy is very real.

50 years from now, America will still be the largest economy in the world, outside of China.

35 posted on 10/24/2011 11:52:31 AM PDT by ponder life
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
One of the best "oil" intel sites I've found. Their email alerts are very good.

Oil Price.com
36 posted on 10/28/2011 8:50:07 PM PDT by Tainan (Cogito, ergo conservatus sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: chuckee

bttt


37 posted on 11/06/2011 11:51:12 AM PST by petercooper (2012 - Purge more RINO's.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kennard

Shale gas and shale oil are great but consider this, one or two deep water fields can equal all the production of North Dakota and it takes a lot less in the way of resources to do it. It is also a lot less demanding in terms of land area and is much less visible.

The deep water Wilcox trend stretches for hundreds of miles in the Gulf of Mexico and if developed efficiently would put the Baaken to shame. On top of the Wilcox the underlying Carbonate section could dwarf even the Wilcox. Technology is being developed to access this potentially immense hydrocarbon bearing horizon but foolish and unreasonable regulations borne of Mocondo and dictated by the obastard administration are blocking progress in every way possible.

Because of the salt canopy over most of the Gulf of Mexico the liquid hydrocarbon window extends past 40,000 feet. This is a national treasure unique in the world so far. Salt and deepwater allow the temperature in the earth in this region to remain low and within the liquid hydrocarbon window to great depths.


38 posted on 11/06/2011 1:41:27 PM PST by Sequoyah101 (Half the people are below average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sequoyah101

Have you seen any estimates of the recoverable hydrocarbons in these deposits, or do you have an opinion?


39 posted on 11/06/2011 2:37:48 PM PST by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-39 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson