Posted on 09/05/2006 10:03:24 PM PDT by demlosers
The elephants aren't extinct yet.
Chevron Corp. and its partners say they have tapped into an area that may contain as much as 15 billion barrels of oil in the ultradeep waters of the Gulf of Mexico — the kind of massive reservoir of crude that the industry dubs an elephant discovery.
The days of such discoveries were supposedly gone, with oil supplies peaking as the world simply ran out of big oil-producing fields, according to pessimistic forecasters. Instead, high technology and sky-high oil prices have combined to transform dud prospects into billions of barrels of crude.
“The industry is still very capable of coming up with new ways of producing oil,” says Michael Lynch, a prominent opponent of the notion of peak oil — that global supplies of crude are set for a marked decline.
The exact size of the reserves at the Chevron well, called Jack, aren't yet known. But the company said the wider area, known as the Lower Tertiary, could contain between three billion and 15 billion barrels of recoverable oil. At the upper end of the range, that would rival the Prudhoe Bay deposits in Alaska.
And it could increase U.S. domestic reserves by 50 per cent. Only part of that overall total, however, could be attributed to the Jack prospect, which some analysts said Tuesday is likely to amount to 500 million barrels.
Whatever the ultimate size of Jack, its true importance lies in when it was discovered — earlier this decade, rather than in the 1960s or 1970s, said Mr. Lynch, president of Strategic Energy and Economic Research Inc. It is proof positive that higher commodity prices and improvements in exploration technology can result in major new discoveries, he said.
That is the case at Chevron's Jack well in the Gulf of Mexico, nearly 300 kilometres from the U.S. coast. Massive caps and peaks of prehistoric salt had defeated earlier exploration efforts, chewing up the sound waves that the industry uses to create seismic pictures of reservoirs.
“It soaks it up, distorts it,” said Stephen Hadden, senior vice-president of exploration and production at Devon Energy Corp., which has a 25-per-cent stake in Jack and other prospects in the Lower Tertiary region.
Devon, with proved reserves of 2.1 billion barrels of oil and gas, said it could more than double its reserves from its holdings in the area. Devon said its Lower Tertiary prospects could contain the equivalent of six billion barrels of oil, using the expansive measure of unrisked resource potential. Despite the caveat, Devon shares jumped 12 per cent, with analysts saying the firm is an alluring takeover target.
“The larger companies are running out of room to grow and the deepwater Gulf of Mexico is right down their alley,” said Oppenheimer & Co. analyst Fadel Gheit. “They really have no options left — Russia is for all practical purposes closing its doors, the Middle East is radioactive, Venezuela is kicking us out, and the Canadian oil sands, I think, are played out.”
Devon's Mr. Hadden said several new technologies and techniques were brought to bear on Jack, combining to allow the partners to fashion a picture of the reservoirs underneath the previously impenetrable salt caps. More powerful computers and refined algorithms were part of that success. “It's a technology that's really evolved over the last six or seven years,” he said.
Such technology reduces the risk of ultradeep exploration in the gulf, where future wells are likely to cost up to $120-million (U.S.), Mr. Hadden said, declining to say how much Jack cost.
Jim Lovasz, senior engineering analyst at Ross Smith Energy Group Ltd. in Calgary, said new simulation technology is also playing a part in opening up new frontiers to oil exploration.
New frontiers such as the Lower Tertiary will keep the global supply of oil growing, Mr. Lynch said — although it's not likely to silence the advocates of peak oil.
“This won't convince the bulk of them. For the rest of us, it does serve as a reminder that there are still a lot of things that can still be done.”
From the Des Moines Register.
This article does sound somewhat pesimistic, but I would encourage Freepers to check out some of the ethanol threads that ran this spring. There was a lot of interesting detail, including some from race car enthusiasts, who pointed out that cars run on ethanol last a lot longer, and that there are things that can be done to improve the efficiency of ethanol. When cellulosic ethanol takes off, that will be a definite improvement over corn and other food ethanol. We should diversify our energy sources so as to free ourselves of foreign dependence.
A report on the evening news, said this drilling was done in 6,000 feet of water, and went down 20,000 feet into the earth, not a cheap solution by any means. Then there is the continuing hurricane threat to consider. Also they don't yet know the quality of this oil. Is it high or low sulfur? Also it will be 6 or 7 years before it comes on the market. So we should continue to develope our other energy sources in the meantime.
The fact that there is no E85 available to the public in such East Coast places as Connecticut, Maryland, DC, and Virginia is rediculous. Certainly the first three entities have plenty of pro environment folks who would use it if it was available. Seems like the major oil companies don't want to encourage that.
If a Democrat (or a Nixon) had been president during the recent rise in global oil prices, we would have had rationing and artificially-controlled gasoline prices which perhaps would have surpressed market-induced developments such as this.
That's the point!
Actually, I really like the idea of natural gas for cars. It makes sense on so many levels, I'm still looking for flaws in the concept. The only one I've found so far is lack of infrastructure, and the market could address that in short order.
If you spend 5-10-15 years trying to develop something that costs several billion $$, why would you divert those resources to a totally different product?
Examples:
" ... Chevron's Tahiti project, another deepwater Gulf site that will begin producing in 2008, carries a $3.5 billion price tag and will produce an estimated 125,000 barrels per day. Its Blind Faith project will cost $1 billion and yield an estimated 30,000 barrels per day. Chevron is building two deep-drilling ships that'll be capable of drilling 7.6 miles below the ocean's surface. ..."
So how do they tell if what "looks" like oil thru the new eyes actually is that. Have to poke a drill down it. Hope Jack ain't mostly fools gold rather than black gold.
So where would the excess carbon go??? Coat the walls of the pocket???
Is a compressed tankful of methane more of a bomb if ruptured suddenly in a wreck, than the same energy's worth of gasoline in an unpressurized tank?
Oh cool, a graphite well.
This forum would be as good as any to ask a related question. I have heard of theoretical research implications that the planet may be producing crude oil at a rate higher than we are consuming it. These reports seem centered on the oceans.
Is there any validity to these implications?
I googled Louisiana oil and found what I was looking for:
Tuscaloosa
In no way was the validity of this foresight better demonstrated than shown by a recounting of what has occurred in the Tuscaloosa trend in Louisiana. The sand is so named because it outcrops at Tuscaloosa, Alabama. In Louisiana, around Baton Rouge, it is fifteen or more thousand feet deep. Now, it so happens, that the present Mississippi River apparently parallels the course of the ancient river that flowed into the sea at Port Hudson, the site of a famous Civil War battle. The old coast line was a short distance to the north. Presently, the greatest abundance of fish and marine life is found near a delta and the coastal waters around it. The most significant oil fields are found in and around old deltas. When the fact that Port Hudson also lies over a salt dome is considered, it is not surprising that it has turned out to be, The Jewel of the Tuscaloosa and to date has produced one-half trillion feet of natural gas and fifty million barrels of oil and yet is still in its infancy from the standpoint of future production.
Prior to any drilling in the Tuscaloosa, LeBlanc had purchased large tracts of land overlying the eastern and southern portions of the Port Hudson dome. The mineral spread controlled by LeBlanc and associates was the only land in the area not committed now to a major company. The geology derived from wells drilled around the properties, augmented by 3D seismic, clearly demonstrate that this property will not only be productive in the Tuscaloosa but also in the newly targeted Austin Chalk. LeBlanc has only recently negotiated a sublease of these properties.
This is being overly hyped. It isn't that much oil.
Time to switch to clean coal liquefaction.
We have a minimum 250 years of proven reserves. It keeps all cash from ownership, mining, transportation, refining, delivery, merchandising, and pumping at the gas pump in our OWN economy. It would create and/or shore up mega numbers of GOOD jobs.
Time to change.
Time to cut the Middle East off.
My thought exactly. There must be some corporate political spin going on there.
BUMP
"So can we stick it to Iran, already??"
Not yet. First we stick it to the envirocrats and tell them to piss off. Then build a few more refineries and then we tell Iran where to put it.
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.