NationStates Jolt Archive

I read that the Bakken oil formation under Montana and North Dakota (http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=42081&cat=1) may increase the United States oil reserves by 10 times. The Bakken oil formation may have 25 to 100 billion barrels of oil under southeastern Saskatchewan and southwestern Manitoba (http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/local/story.html?id=5f07f6b9-815f-4058-9e25-17fb0c61cd61). I have read some reports the the entire Bakken oil formation under the U.S and Canada may have around 500 billion barrels of oil. Has anyone else heard about this because if it is true it would mean that the U.S and Canada would surpass Saudi Arabia in oil reserves. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#Saudi_Arabia)

I read that the Bakken oil formation under Montana and North Dakota (http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?id=42081&cat=1) may increase the United States oil reserves by 10 times. The Bakken oil formation may have 25 to 100 billion barrels of oil under southeastern Saskatchewan and southwestern Manitoba (http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/local/story.html?id=5f07f6b9-815f-4058-9e25-17fb0c61cd61). I have read some reports the the entire Bakken oil formation under the U.S and Canada may have around 500 billion barrels of oil. Has anyone else heard about this because if it is true it would mean that the U.S and Canada would surpass Saudi Arabia in oil reserves. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves#Saudi_Arabia)
Canada already surpasses Saudi Arabia iirc.

Yeah but I bet it will cost almost $100 a barrel to get out. All the easy oil is gone from the world.

Yeah but I bet it will cost almost $100 a barrel to get out. All the easy oil is gone from the world.

Articles say 20-40 dollars/barrel.

I'd rather develop alternative fuels cleaner than oil.

I'd rather develop alternative fuels cleaner than oil.

Agreed.

However, to really develop these alternative energies, energy must be spent for manufacturing and development until such a time as they become self-sustaining. Opec knows this, which is why I think it's in our best interest to develop domestic sources of oil to eliminate our dependence on foreign suppliers at the same time we develop these alternatives.

I'm still partial to solar. Even with current on the market technology, we could generate enough solar power for the entire country using only a land area about the size of Los Angeles. Or as an alternative, about 50% of all residential and commercial rooftops would do it. And that's not taking into account recent and future advances.

I'd rather develop alternative fuels cleaner than oil.

but I wanna drive a Hummer...:(

I know there has been a thread about this already but the OP oil field is not as big as the the oil shale deposits in the west of 1.5 - 1.8 trillion barrels. I guess we can thank the previous great plains shallow sea for this.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/u_s__has_massive_oil.html

but I wanna drive a Hummer...:(


They are difficult to park in normal spots.

I'd rather develop alternative fuels cleaner than oil.

Rather develop alternative fuels, instead of burning relatively clean ones in order to extract crude oil? You must be mad! ;)

Actually, I'd say the recent breakthroughs in producing biogasoline from cellulosic crops is an even more important step forward. Biogasoline is basically conventional gasoline that is usable in current engines and shippable/refinable in current pipeline infrastructure but is produced from zero-carbon sources rather than the wasteful use of food crops currently used for ethanol or finite petroleum supplies. A big step forward in alternative fuels for sure, especially when you consider it suffers none of the fuel-economy compromises seen in ethanol.

However, the Bakken oil formation and other deposits (such as the apparently massive natural gas deposits being explored in Quebec or similar gas shale deposits in the US) will likely lead to a considerable increase in our endowment of fossil fuel resources as well as lead to lower, more stable prices for consumers. Hardly a bad thing.

However, the Bakken oil formation and other deposits (such as the apparently massive natural gas deposits being explored in Quebec or similar gas shale deposits in the US) will likely lead to a considerable increase in our endowment of fossil fuel resources as well as lead to lower, more stable prices for consumers. Hardly a bad thing.

Not to mention that those resources would be much more stable/dependable than sources from Venezuala, Nigeria, OPEC etc. which would also have a stabalizing effect on prices.

Not to mention that those resources would be much more stable/dependable than sources from Venezuala, Nigeria, OPEC etc. which would also have a stabalizing effect on prices.

Yes, energy security is a considerable boon from this discovery. I can only hope it would push the US back to its previous position as the world's primary oil producer...that would give us considerable sway in the world market above and beyond our current levels.

there are several domestic reserves that are untapped in the US and Canada.

most people in other countries I talk to know this, and they also feel it is so the US and Canada can control the worlds oil market once the Mideast and Russia run dry.

remember the US used to be a net exporter of OIL until the 1960's. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest bit if the Mideast ran dry and then north America reveals itself to hold even more oil. Texas light Sweet crude is the lightest and the sweetest oil (worth more easier to turn to gas and less sulfur)

but I wanna drive a Hummer...:(

People who drive hummers are subhuman scum and a waste of perfectly good oxygen.

screw oil. the use of combustion is self destructive and completely unnesccisary, for anything other then campfires and home heating units.

we DON"T NEED new sources of oil, nor new fuels, we need to get our heads out of monopolistic energy barronies, and start favoring as policiy the implimentation of REAL alternatives. like subisdising solar cells on EVERY roof and windmills in EVERY back yard.

if people can be expected to indenture themselves for cars and purchase their electricity centrally, why not the reverse? why not instead of cars, owning your own power generation which you get a compensatory return on your surplus shaired INTO the grid, and purchase, where practicable, which would be anywhere with a sufficiently high population density, which is a LOT more places then vested intrests want anyone to realize, their transportation from public infrastructures. or better yet, where practical means of doing so exist, make local public transit completely free.

wind, solar, geothermal, and of course efficient energy storage to smoote supply out, if adiquately, sufficiently and appropriately implimented, would be quite sufficient for everyone's refrigerator and personal computer, and even low energy lighting, and such industrial consumption is neccessary to supply the nuts and bolts to maintain such real physical infrastructure as people actually utilize and rely upon.

WE DON'T NEED OIL, NOR COAL, NOR conventional NUCLEAR FISSION power plants as we currently know them, and we don't need to "live in caves" to live without them either!

we DO need, REAL noncombustive, energy and transportation alternatives. and they ARE real and DO exist, not pie in the sky future ecotopia, but doable and implimentable right now, only prevented from being converted to, by policies which economically favor the bone headed, backward headed perpetuation of oil and automotive barronies.

=^^=
.../\...

People who drive hummers are subhuman scum and a waste of perfectly good oxygen.

*runs over with Hummer*

Bakken formation oil is in sands and otherwise difficult subterranean territory to get into. Oil shale in the Rockies is even more difficult to extract. Some estimates have the recoverable amount of the estimated reserves at only 5%.

Don't count those hydrocarbon chickens just yet.

Yeah but I bet it will cost almost $100 a barrel to get out. All the easy oil is gone from the world.

Yeah, the U.S. and Canada do have some pretty massive oil reserves, but they are mostly all Tar sand in Canada. Its an expensive process. They have to bulldoze forests, gather milions of tons of tar sand, and then squeeze the crude oil out. Its expensive, maybe not $100 a barrel expensive but it will cost more than hiring the A-rabs to just drill in their deserts.

but I wanna drive a Hummer...:(

Me too! Those sweet machines have 6.7 liter Diesel V-8s. I'm just gonna pour peanut oil in it when regular diesel gets too expensive. Thats better for the environment and the economy anyway. Oh wait, no its not. Whatever.

Whatever we do, it will be nice when we can tell the Middle East "Fine, blow yourselves up for all we care. You want infidels out of Mecca and the Holy Land? Aight we're gone. See you in hell."


It will also be nice when we can give Chavez a nice big fuck you and never pay any attention to him again.

Whatever we do, it will be nice when we can tell the Middle East "Fine, blow yourselves up for all we care. You want infidels out of Mecca and the Holy Land? Aight we're gone. See you in hell."


It will also be nice when we can give Chavez a nice big fuck you and never pay any attention to him again.

Energy independence is great, but it won't be the crippling middle finger you'd like to imagine. After all there's developing countries like China and India who wouldn't bat an eye picking up the oil purchasing slack that the United States leaves behind.

Energy independence is great, but it won't be the crippling middle finger you'd like to imagine. After all there's developing countries like China and India who wouldn't bat an eye picking up the oil purchasing slack that the United States leaves behind.

I'd want to see the US destabilize OPEC more than anything.

Energy independence is great, but it won't be the crippling middle finger you'd like to imagine. After all there's developing countries like China and India who wouldn't bat an eye picking up the oil purchasing slack that the United States leaves behind.

Oh, I dont want to cripple their economy.


It just will be nice to not give a shit about places in the world where nobody likes us anyway.

screw oil. the use of combustion is self destructive and completely unnesccisary, for anything other then campfires and home heating units.

we DON"T NEED new sources of oil, nor new fuels, we need to get our heads out of monopolistic energy barronies, and start favoring as policiy the implimentation of REAL alternatives. like subisdising solar cells on EVERY roof and windmills in EVERY back yard.

if people can be expected to indenture themselves for cars and purchase their electricity centrally, why not the reverse? why not instead of cars, owning your own power generation which you get a compensatory return on your surplus shaired INTO the grid, and purchase, where practicable, which would be anywhere with a sufficiently high population density, which is a LOT more places then vested intrests want anyone to realize, their transportation from public infrastructures. or better yet, where practical means of doing so exist, make local public transit completely free.

wind, solar, geothermal, and of course efficient energy storage to smoote supply out, if adiquately, sufficiently and appropriately implimented, would be quite sufficient for everyone's refrigerator and personal computer, and even low energy lighting, and such industrial consumption is neccessary to supply the nuts and bolts to maintain such real physical infrastructure as people actually utilize and rely upon.

WE DON'T NEED OIL, NOR COAL, NOR conventional NUCLEAR FISSION power plants as we currently know them, and we don't need to "live in caves" to live without them either!

we DO need, REAL noncombustive, energy and transportation alternatives. and they ARE real and DO exist, not pie in the sky future ecotopia, but doable and implimentable right now, only prevented from being converted to, by policies which economically favor the bone headed, backward headed perpetuation of oil and automotive barronies.

=^^=
.../\...

Nearly everybody will agree with your post. However, such alternative technologies are not yet practical. These are goals that are currently being worked on and, true, are close to being accomplished. We've seen great leaps in solar panel technology lately that allows them to be incorporated smoothly into rooftops and even sculptures. However, car-wise, hydrogen cells are still a few years off, due to the unstable nature of the technology and its annoying habit to go "boom".

You mention windmills, and I do want to highlight in my post. Windmills are, truth be told, inefficient. They require steady winds in windy areas. I could place one in my backyard, and the only way I could get a revolution out of it is by nailing it with a baseball. Furthermore, it is exceedingly difficult and expensive to attach such machines to the existing grid due to their need for isolated development. Additionally, they are eyesores and ruin the natural environment.

Though I don't believe this is in your post, I do want to make a point of electric hybrids. These only lessen impact as long as they don't draw from coal plants. Otherwise, in terms of total pollution output, they're roughly the same as traditional gas-powered cars.

Nuclear fission is something I'd like to address too. Currently, this is one of the cleanest, practical power sources. It is easy to mine, nearly pollution free (excluding thermal pollution), is actually low risk (despite incidents such as TMI and Chernobyl, which were complete human errors), and the energy-to-fuel ration is exceptionally high. The only problem is disposal, which is easily addressed by isolating the waste and containing it back within the earth where it came from. I don't claim this technology is perfect. Currently, there is research going on in France (of all places) in the realm of nuclear fusion, which is absolutely zero-pollution. The test reactor has the capabilities to produce at least 10 times the power it consumes to run. It's fuel is hydrogen, which is readily accessible all over the planet (water, air). We should look into this in the future.

Now, the point of my exceedingly long post. Many technologies are a few years off. In the mean time, we're feeling the crunch. That's why we need to develop the available stores. Just as a stop-gap. Additionally, we can and should implement scrubber technology to remove carbon dioxide in the air.

While I understand your concern in the environment, please stop to take a good look at what is actually available and practical, and what is still in development and will take a few years, and try to understand that we aren't endorsing the eternal use of these combustible fuels, but discussing the need to lessen the pain of their use until sustainable technology is available and easy to acquire and maintain.

Oh, I dont want to cripple their economy.


It just will be nice to not give a shit about places in the world where nobody likes us anyway.

This.

Oh, I dont want to cripple their economy.


It just will be nice to not give a shit about places in the world where nobody likes us anyway.

Except with Israel still on the map, the nation won't fuck the Middle East even if we ever get energy independence.

Except with Israel still on the map, the nation won't fuck the Middle East even if we ever get energy independence.

I wish we'd stop caring about Israel too...

Yeah, the U.S. and Canada do have some pretty massive oil reserves, but they are mostly all Tar sand in Canada. Its an expensive process. They have to bulldoze forests, gather milions of tons of tar sand, and then squeeze the crude oil out. Its expensive, maybe not $100 a barrel expensive but it will cost more than hiring the A-rabs to just drill in their deserts.The price to get the oil out has been quoted at $20 - $40 a barrel. Here (http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/01/bakken-and-torquay-formations-saudi.html) is a more depth article on the Bakkan oil formation

Here (http://www.oilweek.com/news.asp?ID=13789) is another interesting article on microwave oil recovery that would be a much cheaper way of recovering America's 800 billion barrels of oil from oil shale and Canada's massive 2 trillion Barrels of oil reserves from oil shales.

Here (http://www.oilweek.com/news.asp?ID=13789) is another interesting article on microwave oil recovery that would be a much cheaper way of recovering America's 800 billion barrels of oil from oil shale and Canada's massive 2 trillion Barrels of oil reserves from oil shales.

You mixed up the numbers. America is the one with the 2.5 trillion barrels of oil in the rocks.