Posted on 06/07/2008 10:38:39 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan
Energy: Mexico and the United States engage in an energy dispute in the Gulf of Mexico. So why does Mexico want to protect and develop its offshore oil but we don't?
On May 13, Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., rose on the Senate floor to demand that arms sales to Saudi Arabia cease unless that kingdom "increases its oil production by one million barrels a day" — coincidentally the amount that would be flowing from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge today had President Clinton not vetoed drilling in its frozen tundra in 1995.
In arguing that Saudi Arabia "holds the key to reducing gas prices in the short term," Schumer showed that even Democrats recognize the law of supply and demand.
As for the long term, Schumer et al. have no interest in drilling in ANWR or anywhere else. They say the added supply would take 10 years to reach our gas tanks, something they've been arguing for at least the last 10 years.
----snip----
The irony here is that while we drill for oil close to Mexico, we can't drill for oil close to the United States. And we turn a blind eye while others do.
Cuba's state-run oil company, Cubapetroleo, has inked a deal with China's Sinopec to explore for oil in its half of the Florida Strait, and is using Chinese-made drilling equipment to conduct the exploration. The U.S. Geological Survey estimated the North Cuban Basin contains 4.6 billion barrels of oil.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
“Schumer and his fellow Democrats better smell the coffee or they will be toast.”
...I hope you’re right D.R.Fan....and overall I hope that $4.00 gas will hurt the Dems and discredit the enviro-whackos....environmentalism has become the new religion of the Left.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
The analogy I prefer is Death By a Thousand Cuts.
Each of the tiny cuts went unnoticed or accepted over the years. Then one day there was $5.00 a gallon gas. the body was too weak to resist
It should be so simple. That would be about the peak flow and wouldn't last long.
How long? What's the best estimate...give or take?
According to the Original Peak Oil theory, the world ran out of oil in 1975
Only 20 years.
The Oil Companies don't normally invest in enterprises without expecting a decent return on their investments.
If they decide to drill that's a good indication there are suffcient reserves. If you can't decide whose got the best info, just follow the money.
20 months would be somewhat closer to reality.
That would be the USA domestic and would be peak rather than running out.
The industry chart posted by thackney indicates a peak near one million per day lasting perhaps a year and tailing off in a few years to less and less as has happened at Prudhoe.
Doesn't seem like an oil company can get a decent return on their investment with only one year to peak supply.
I wonder what their total capital investment would amount to for this limited supply.
Have any oil companies expressed interest in drilling there?
I'd like to see the projected financials.
Actually, King Hubbert, the person host associated with the term "peak oil" in the late 1950s predicted a peak in the U.S circa 1970 ... about when it happened. His prediction for a world peak was circa 2000, but he hedged that one with the recognition that massive new discoveries could push the world peak back a little.
If what we are seeing is the peak, it was the 1970s oil shock not the massive new discoveries that pushed the world peak back a decade.
BTW, Hubbert believed passionately in energy alternatives including nuclear fission. He wasn't a world is ending tomorrow doomer. He was a geologist who knew how oil production peaks and declines on a field by field basis, and since aggregate production is a function of the production of individual fields knew that somewhere down the road peak oil would happen.
It can be produced and make a dollar. A pipeline spur of about 100 miles length would have to be tacked onto the existing TransAlaska oil pipeline and the wells drilled and required earthworks laid, etc. The rest of the infrastructure might need some maintenance through to the Valdez terminal. Can be done, but it’s not the huge construction project Prudhoe Bay was.
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.