Boom in US oil

PLC1

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 20, 2007
Messages
10,664
Location
The Golden State
The U.S. oil boom is moving to a level not seen in 45 years

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) — U.S. oil production is on track to reach an annual all-time high by September of this year, according to Rystad Energy.

and gas is back below three bucks despite Sacramento's push to tax it out of existence.

Sounds good to me.

But, wasn't the Obama administration accused of waging a "war on fossil fuels"? Oh right.

War on drugs = more drugs
War on poverty = more poverty
War on terror = more terrorists
War on fossil fuels = well, you get the picture.
 
Werbung:
Oil from federally regulated sources is down while oil from independant sources is way up.
The others can be evaluated on their particulars.
 
But why? Why this glut of oil now? Would this not have made more sense a decade ago than it does today when we are on the verge of moving away from fossil fuels in a major way?

Elon Musk, Tesla, and Solar City ring any bells in those hard heads of your? If not then you better get a hammer and do the ringing yourself to catch up with the rest of us. Fossil fuels will likely be completely phased out within the next fifty years whether the industry likes it or not.
 
But why? Why this glut of oil now? Would this not have made more sense a decade ago than it does today when we are on the verge of moving away from fossil fuels in a major way?

New technology....

Elon Musk, Tesla, and Solar City ring any bells in those hard heads of your? If not then you better get a hammer and do the ringing yourself to catch up with the rest of us. Fossil fuels will likely be completely phased out within the next fifty years whether the industry likes it or not.

In 2013, fossil fuels accounted for 87% of the world's energy use - a number that had not changed over the 10 years prior. The shale boom can kick back up should the price of oil start to increase again - and the shale technology has not been used worldwide at all. Cheap, and abundant, fossil fuels will continue to compete with higher priced alternatives for now. Fossil fuels will not be completely phased out even with new technology unless we simply stop manufacturing a majority of the products used around the world.
 
New technology....



In 2013, fossil fuels accounted for 87% of the world's energy use - a number that had not changed over the 10 years prior. The shale boom can kick back up should the price of oil start to increase again - and the shale technology has not been used worldwide at all. Cheap, and abundant, fossil fuels will continue to compete with higher priced alternatives for now. Fossil fuels will not be completely phased out even with new technology unless we simply stop manufacturing a majority of the products used around the world.
What would we do with the by-product of oil? If we didn't use for fuel,, great point..
 
I'm hoping nuclear fusion will put all energy out of existance. It would be better for the planet. According to a science magazine, a huge breakthrough in fusion should take place in the 2040s. of course, until then, we got solar energy, but I think fusion will be the granddaddy of them all.
 
Sometime next year we will export more oil than we import.
We are the world leader in the production of LNG.
LNG is liquefied natural gas. During the liquification process the volume of natural gas is reduced by something like 400%.
What used to occupy the volume of a very large beach ball winds up about the size of a ping pong ball.
Easy to transport and a serious money maker.
LNG costs $4.00 in the US and as much as $18.00 in Japan. And worldwide demand is rising around 7%/year.
A huge new plant in Louisiana is about to go online.
We have a 100 year supply of LNG here in the US. And S. America, Europe and Asia all want as much as we can sell.
I have always thought LNG was a superior choice to gasoline: cleaner burning in your engine, less emissions and cheaper.
Some of you might want to redirect some of your 401K savings in this direction.
 
I don't think we need to sell oil products to other nations. We should keep it for ourselves. We have had too many oil crises in the past to take oil lightly.
 
Jason76
I understand your opinion in this matter and share some of the same feelings.
Our balance of trade is CRAPPY with way more dollars leaving our shores than foreign currency coming in. We buy more from foreign countries than they buy from us and that has been the case for at least 40 years.
In the area of LNG, we can reverse that trend.
As to saving the LNG for ourselves, we probably don't need all we have.
There are a whole bunch of tech advances right around the corner that will reduce everyone's need for oil and gas.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a12983/35000-tesla-model-iii-coming-in-2017/

If Tesla can build an electric car for $35K with a 200 mile range, Ford and Nissan can do it for $20K.
I'm confident that technology is about to reduce a great deal of the world's need for oil and gas.
 
Jason76
I understand your opinion in this matter and share some of the same feelings.
Our balance of trade is CRAPPY with way more dollars leaving our shores than foreign currency coming in. We buy more from foreign countries than they buy from us and that has been the case for at least 40 years.
In the area of LNG, we can reverse that trend.
As to saving the LNG for ourselves, we probably don't need all we have.
There are a whole bunch of tech advances right around the corner that will reduce everyone's need for oil and gas.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a12983/35000-tesla-model-iii-coming-in-2017/

If Tesla can build an electric car for $35K with a 200 mile range, Ford and Nissan can do it for $20K.
I'm confident that technology is about to reduce a great deal of the world's need for oil and gas.

Generally speaking, an electric car doesn't really cut down on fossil fuels. It would only help the environment if the energy came from some alternative energy source, like solar power or nuclear fusion. However, I hope they do produce an environmentally friendly car that will also keep the US energy independent. As you said, it could become a reality soon.
 
We have to ask ourselves a question about the sustainability of the current boom in oil production based on the historical record. Take a look at this graph:
US_P_Time.jpg


Note the high rise of the peak and then subsequent fall. During the last years of the terminal rise, the actual profitability of that production increase got worse every year yet production continued to rise for quite awhile before nosediving. That's more an artifact of the longer-term nature of oil exploration and production, and perhaps even more the high finance behind it than anything else.

Today's shale boom is already experiencing the same kind of shift, but it probably won't be obvious to all for quite awhile. Hubbert didn't include unconventional oil in his Peak Oil calculations, and I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see why. An awful lot of people want to naysay Peak Oil but in pure thermodynamic terms, it seems to be pretty much right on schedule.
 

Attachments

  • 48States.jpg
    48States.jpg
    40.3 KB · Views: 0
You boys noticed that the Arabs have been fighting back by flodoing the market ?
Lack of demand is sinking the price of oil caused by global slowdown and overproduction.
 
Yes... markets ARE competition, after all.

If we were to use the exponential increase in world oil production (All Liquids) of the decade or two up to 2008, we should actually be at an All Liquids production/consumption rate over 100 million barrels per day, and we're almost 10 million below that. World Primary Energy Production is simply flattening out. One thing that most people (and especially journalists) seem to miss is that energy production can STILL rise while the net delivered energy to the consumer can concurrently fall, and that IS what's been going on. Efficiency gains can offset some of that, but we're getting towards the uneconomic side of THAT curve.
 
The U.S. oil boom is moving to a level not seen in 45 years



and gas is back below three bucks despite Sacramento's push to tax it out of existence.

Sounds good to me.

But, wasn't the Obama administration accused of waging a "war on fossil fuels"? Oh right.

War on drugs = more drugs
War on poverty = more poverty
War on terror = more terrorists
War on fossil fuels = well, you get the picture.
The supply of fossil fuels is ultimately limited. Even before then, the fuel that remains will become more expensive to get than the energy it provides. So let's use what we have wisely, until we can find an energy source that won't run out.
 
Werbung:
The supply of fossil fuels is ultimately limited. Even before then, the fuel that remains will become more expensive to get than the energy it provides. So let's use what we have wisely, until we can find an energy source that won't run out.
And don't limit science to look at only certain ways.
 
Back
Top