Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: thackney; Homer_J_Simpson

Reading the “Real Time Plus 70 Years” threads has been very intersting. There were articles in the New York Times back in 1942 or 1943 about Peak Oil, although they didn’t use the term. The estimates then were a 20 year supply at estimated post-war consumption levels. Of course they didn’t factor off shore drilling.

Also interesting was that they knew there was a significant amount of oil in shale that could extend the day of Peak Oil, but of couse they knew they didn’t have the technology to make it economical to extract it.


4 posted on 06/27/2014 9:32:20 AM PDT by henkster (Do I really need a sarc tag?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: henkster

There are several that would fit that type of thinking.

For example, on the Alaskan North Slope, in the area they have already drilled is a very large field not currently in production. The field is well known as it is shallow, many (most?) of the wells on the slope drill through it to get to the producing oil deeper down.

The field, Ugnu, has two problems. First it is a very heavy, thick oil that doesn’t flow well normally, secondly, it is so shallow it is relatively near the permafrost, making it quite cold compared to typical oil fields, making the thick oil flow even less.

It will be developed, eventually. It is very large. But there is other fields also know that while heavy oil, are not quite as hard to produce. They will be chased first.

More info at:
http://www.aoga.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/8.-Pospisil-Heavy-Viscous-Oil.pdf


5 posted on 06/27/2014 9:45:35 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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