NationStates Jolt Archive

Hardball with Chris Mathews interviewing former Bush Commerce Secretary Don Evans.

MATTHEWS: James A. Baker from Texas, the former secretary of state, said the first war in the Gulf was about jobs, jobs, jobs. He said that was what the war about. I'm accepting your argument right now, your statement that this call for energy independence by the president is not because we have to rely on oil from the unstable Middle East. It has to do with our needs for economic growth. Is that your bottom line?

EVANS: Chris, that is my bottom line. The world is producing oil, the Middle East, every country at its full capacity and it's very unlikely that we're going to be able to see supply in the world grow from the levels where we are right now. There's a debate about that. I'm one that falls in the camp that says it's going to be very, very hard to do that. But what I do know is China needs to continue to grow, India needs to continue to grow, America needs to continue to grow. So what that simply says is we've got to develop new forms of energy for the United States and the world.


Holy Guacamole, Batman. The line about "it's very unlikely that we're going to be able to see supply in the world grow from the levels where we are right now" is pretty much the definition of peak oil. This guy is coming out and saying that the president is concerned about the growth levels seen in world oil production. Of course, if you've been following any of the comments by Matthew Simmons or Roscoe Bartlett, this is not a shock. But for myself and the other 10 people in the country watching Hardball, it was a bit extraordinary to have a former official on a mainstream media outlet just come out and say it.

He can say it because he is a former Big Cheese. Everyone else in power has to keep up the pretence that Saudi Arabia has not horizontally redrilled its wells, and Canada can easily liquify frozen rock with traces of tar to make up the impending necessary collapse in Saudi production.

It's a load of crap. The refinery bottleneck is an illusion too. People aren't avoiding building them because of environmental regulations, or because there aren't enough tax incentives. It's because everyone in the business not trying to score political points, knows that there is no point. Why build new capacity at peak?

He can say it because he is a former Big Cheese. Everyone else in power has to keep up the pretence that Saudi Arabia has not horizontally redrilled its wells, and Canada can easily liquify frozen rock with traces of tar to make up the impending necessary collapse in Saudi production.

It's a load of crap. The refinery bottleneck is an illusion too. People aren't avoiding building them because of environmental regulations, or because there aren't enough tax incentives. It's because everyone in the business not trying to score political points, knows that there is no point. Why build new capacity at peak?
It's also tellin that the one company in theUS that is investing in refining capacity, the largest company Valero (I reccomend their stock) is only building capacity for heavy, sour crude. They know that's all that's gonna be left.

It's also tellin that the one company in theUS that is investing in refining capacity, the largest company Valero (I reccomend their stock) is only building capacity for heavy, sour crude. They know that's all that's gonna be left.
Heh, it's all that's been getting found the last ten years. The Caspian Sea was supposed to be a giant new province with 200 MB of oil. Turned out there was 50 MB, and the few companies who stayed, are having to deal with sulphur and vanadium. Global exploration is pretty much done.

..., and Canada can easily liquify frozen rock with traces of tar to make up the impending necessary collapse in Saudi production.



The Alberta tar sands have a greater potential than all of the middle east. Does that mean the the US will invade Canada for the oil when they have finished with the middle east?

Canadian tar sands have about 50 years to live and that is a fact.

The Alberta tar sands have a greater potential than all of the middle east. Does that mean the the US will invade Canada for the oil when they have finished with the middle east?
No, because they know it cannot be exploited at anything near the same rate.

Heh, it's all that's been getting found the last ten years. The Caspian Sea was supposed to be a giant new province with 200 MB of oil. Turned out there was 50 MB, and the few companies who stayed, are having to deal with sulphur and vanadium. Global exploration is pretty much done.
Actually I think you meant Billion barrels. It is now estimated at between 17 and 33 billion barrels and was originally thought to hold mcuh more than that.

The Alberta tar sands have a greater potential than all of the middle east. Does that mean the the US will invade Canada for the oil when they have finished with the middle east?
Of course not. That's stupid. America is more than happy to buy oil from Canada and Canada is more than happy to sell it as evidenced by the fact that Canada is the number one supplier of oil to the US. AS for the Tar Sands, what people who don't understand oil don't get about the Tar Sands is that it isn't just the ultimate amount of oil held, its flow rate that matters. Using the Tar Sands as a remedy for oil depletion is like trying to piss out a forest fire. Even if you hold 400 trillion galonns of piss in yoru bladder it wont matter because you can't piss fast enough. It's like trying to save a person from starving by feeding him a sandwhich piece by piece over 40 years. North America, including Canada, needs 25 million barrels/day to run its economy. At maximum flow rate the Tar Sands are expected to produce about 2.5 million barrels per day. Even if you double that you haven't even begun to plug the leak. That's half of Saudi Arbia alone's production.

Actually I think you meant Billion barrels. It is now estimated at between 17 and 33 billion barrels and was originally thought to hold mcuh more than that.
Oops, noob error. :rolleyes:

Yeah, billion. Ultimate resource being 2 trillion or so.

Oops, noob error. :rolleyes:

Yeah, billion. Ultimate resource being 2 trillion or so.
And to date we've sucked about 1 trillion out...