Does it matter, Thackney?
Would they have gone after the oil in California anyway?
Drilling in California is not necessary. Leave them to their enviro lunacy and eventual bankruptcy.
So the Sierra Club got their people inside to write this report.
A great tactic to use against shale oil production.
Clever; we need to fight the same way.
Estimates for oil drop by 96% between scientific studies. This is the study of rock, geology, and current drilling technology and economics, all solid, measurable, and with not much variation over the short run.
In contrast, the global warming is “settled science”, “the debate is over”, on a topic where even the key drivers of temperature are being debated, where previous forecasts have proven totally worthless, and where the role of the sun seems to be barely looked at. And people wonder why the “deniers” laugh at the warmists’ efforts to suppress the debate!
Somebody inflated the numbers so that somebody could make a quick buck off of investors or grants, methinks.
I suspect political chicanery
” - - - The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) - the statistical arm of the Department of Energy - - - “
Do you have a typo? The correct term is the PROPAGANDA Arm, not the statistical arm, based solely on post mortems of their previous public estimates.
[Keep in mind that this IS an official estimate by the Keystone Cops, US Federal Government, proud provider of the VA Hospital and Obamacare failed money pits.]
BTW, will the Chinese, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, AG Holder, POS Obama and Jerry Brown be forbidden to bid on the soon to be decreased mineral rights value of the Monterrey Shale acreage?
Either bad science (estimates are worthless) or politics (screw the estimates) at work here. Wish I knew which.
I understand the cline isn’t doing well either.
or about 5 swimming pools worth, which in Hollywood is equivalent to 3-4 wells per city block.
If there was a Saudi sized oil field just 100 feet below ground in the middle of the desert east of San Bernadino they would ban its recovery for some stupid reason.
The California of today is the result of all those migrations to it for over a hundred years..................
Is this report more influenced by science or politics? It seems rather convenient.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
The article is so full of crap I don’t know where to start.
So I won’t.
Interesting article. There is no denying that fracking is good for local economies. It may already be having a large beneficial impact on the national economy. Despite the claims of environmental alarmists, I’m not aware of any significant adverse environmental impact from fracking.
That said, they do have water issues in California. According to the article, it takes as much water to frack a well as to meet the needs of a family of four. Is that a lot? How much oil and gas would they get from that well?
Last I heard, desalinization plants take a lot of energy which could be supplied by nuclear energy. Of course, nuclear energy is anathema to many so-called environmentalists. Are CA’s water problems partially self-inflicted? Maybe they have been ignoring a valid solution for years.
This revised report,no doubt,came after a big donation to Rat Party Headquarters by Earth First.
The estimate is expected to be made public in June? What’s this article then, chopped liver?
Why is that any surprise?
Is it a coincidence that unemployment rates "plunged" just before the 2012 election?
Is it a coincidence that obummercare enrollments suddenly surged above the "magic 6 million" mark on the last day of program enrollment?
I'll bet obummer never knew about this until he heard about it in the news.
They can actually frack an entire well with less water than a family of four uses in a single year?!
Seriously, that's a figurative drop in the bucket.
I know we have some folks here who’ve worked in the oil industry. I’d be more interested in what the industry is saying about the feasability of recovering oil that a bunch of FedGov fags.