NationStates Jolt Archive

It's been all over the news: Chevron has discovered (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fi-oil6sep06,0,1353555.story?coll=la-home-world) a huge oil reserve in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico. The find could, according to Chevron (http://www.chevron.com/news/press/2006/2006-09-05.asp), yield "3 billion to 15 billion barrels of oil", and has the potential to increase US reserves by 50%.

So... problem solved, right? Our energy needs have been met. It's an oil feast. A bonanza. A petroleum banquet, if you will.

Of course, it's all bunk.

According to the Energy Information Administration (http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html) (EIA), a US government agency, the average US oil consumption for the year 2005 came to approximately 20,656,000 barrels of oil per day. Just do some simple math and the truth becomes clear:

15 billion barrels of oil / 20,656,000 barrels consumed per day = about 726 days, rounded to the nearest day. That's just a few days short of two years, total.

So, this "huge find" being hyped everywhere will in fact only last us for two years. And keep in mind that this is the most optimistic result -- Chevron itself estimated the Gulf reserve at 3 to 15 billion barrels, and oil companies are known for inflating their numbers to boost stock prices. Not to mention the fact that US and worldwide demand is inexorably rising...

Convenient how Chevron, and the newspapers, and the news networks, and the pundits all fail to mention this...

We're going to need to wean ourselves off oil at some point, and there's no time like the present. Scew oil. Let's go nuclear.

We're going to need to wean ourselves off oil at some point, and there's no time like the present. Scew oil. Let's go nuclear.


I've said that again and again, Nuclear energy is much more feasible and sustainable than oil, if handled correctly. As for the waste; in a few years we will be able to send it into space....

I've said that again and again, Nuclear energy is much more feasible and sustainable than oil, if handled correctly. As for the waste; in a few years we will be able to send it into space....

And what happens when that rocket blows up or the booster fails?

And what happens when that rocket blows up or the booster fails?

Nothing.. if you couldn't be bothered to evolve skin and lungs that protects against radiation whos fault is that?

Plus, without oil, where do you get plastics? Fertilizers? Pharmaceuticals? Almost every consumer product is tied to oil in some way.

And what happens when that rocket blows up or the booster fails?

Well, that's why you seal it inside the rocket; it's like those trains that transport waste...even if they derail, it doesn't get out regardless of the severity of the crash.

A 3-15 billion barrel find is still pretty big; a productive life of 750,000-1 million barrels is still significant on the scale of world oil consumption. It's especially important when you consider that the world oil market is not suffering from a dearth of supply but rather that there is a small reserve margin and most of our oil comes from unstable regions.

We have about 1.2 trillion in conventional proven reserves left, with up to another 2 trillion in unconventional reserves; that's still a lot of oil left even at global consumption rates. That doesn't mean it is desirable to consume oil at current rates, but there is still a lot of oil left. However, we also have to taken in to account that exploration of many areas is still fairly restricted and the demand picture is still cloudy; the fact that oil demand is only up 1.4% despite 5% world economic growth is remarkable, and is further remarkable when half of that demand comes from China. The rest of the world only consumed 800,000 more bpd than it did in 2005. If there is 1.2 trillion in conventional reserves, then global conventional production will peak most likely in 2020; if it's a smaller amount, like 600-800 then production will peak in about 10-15 years. Unconventional reserves are difficult to forecast because their viability depends on the price of oil; if oil moderates or plunges, these reserves may not be developed.

However, there is still a lot of natural gas; ideally, we will gradually shift our economy from oil to natural gas as petroleum supplies dwindle, and then we will shift from natural gas to coal as natural gas declines. Coal might be turned in to natural gas or petroleum rather than burned as coal, especially given the environmental friendliness of natgas compared to other fossil fuels. Eventually, we will shift completely from fossil fuels to renewables, nuclear, and a variety of biofuels and other products. However, this is on a pretty long time scale; if oil peaks in 2020, natural gas will most likely peak no earlier than 2050 and coal will be at least a few decades after that.

I'd say 2100 is a reasonable date for total decoupling from fossil fuels. 2070 is a reasonable date for the end of conventional natural gas demand, and I would say 2040-2050 is a reasonable date for the end of oil assuming a 2020 peak. Simply put, it's impossible to predict the future of fossil fuels since there are a lot of geopolitical "what ifs" and technological/economic developments that can't be factored in.

And what happens when that rocket blows up or the booster fails?

we could put the waste in near indestructible containers, that could survive explosion and a crash....

It is a huge find, regardless of how long it can be used to power the US. The biggest oil field in terms of proved oil reserves in the US is currently Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, which has 4 billion barrels. This new find could contain 3 times as much oil -- that is quite a lot.

Begoner21;11660348']It is a huge find, regardless of how long it can be used to power the US. The biggest oil field in terms of proved oil reserves in the US is currently Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, which has 4 billion barrels. This new find could contain 3 times as much oil -- that is quite a lot.

Also, it is important because it's the beginning of a trend; the level that this well was drilled to was fairly unexplored prior to the discovery, and shows that drilling at this level can produce extremely lucrative results and significant deposits of oil.

This will motivate further exploration of ultra-deepwater finds and may boost reserves even further. It's also important to note that there is a lot oil in depleted fields that hasn't been extracted; CO2 gasification of older fields could boost reserves by 89 billion barrels. However, it does have some cost complications that will inhibit such measures at lower oil prices.

I've said that again and again, Nuclear energy is much more feasible and sustainable than oil, if handled correctly. As for the waste; in a few years we will be able to send it into space....

Actually, if you use the fast breeder design, you use most of the energy contained in the fuel (as opposed to current designs, which only use 5% of the energy in the fuel).

You can also cook waste in the reactor, some as fuel, and some into short-lived isotopes that degrade in a few years.

You could eliminate a lot of waste this way.

Also, it is important because it's the beginning of a trend; the level that this well was drilled to was fairly unexplored prior to the discovery, and shows that drilling at this level can produce extremely lucrative results and significant deposits of oil.

Wasn't it being mentioned how unless there's other oil deposists that have sunk to that level (geologically) recently, anything down there would be gas? Was it TG or someone?

Wasn't it being mentioned how unless there's other oil deposists that have sunk to that level (geologically) recently, anything down there would be gas?

Yeah, he's correct. It would be mostly gas; however, that conceals an important fact:

The find is given in barrels of oil equivalent, which means it is most likely a significant gas deposit along with lease condensate (liquids in a gas deposit); however, given that gas-to-liquids technology is economically viable and profitable this can be viewed in the same way as a significant oil find. It's not conventional oil, but that is utterly meaningless on the oil markets. 1 barrel of oil equivalent is worth about $32-$33 (depending on wellhead price for natural gas) as natural gas, but it can be sold for at least $65 on the world markets if it's converted to a liquid; the economics of this deep find pretty much guarantee that Chevron will produce it and convert it to liquids rather than selling it as gas. A 15 billion boe find of natural gas would be gigantic; that's like 82.5 trillion cubic feet of gas, which is about 50% of the proven gas reserves in the US.

In fact, something like 15% of world oil is produced according to this method, and it will become more important as conventional oil peaks. GTL and lease condensate production is effectively the same as conventional oil on the world market, so this find is significant either way.

Pff, there is a far better way to produce energy. Puppies contain massive amounts of energy. Now if we murdered them and liquified their bodies, one barrel of puppy-mush could produce more energy than 1,260 barrels of oil.

And what happens when that rocket blows up or the booster fails?

Tear gas.