Slashdot Mirror


Oil May Be Finite, But U.S. Production Is Ramping Up

Hugh Pickens writes "The WSJ reports that the discovery of the gigantic and prolific Bakken oil fields of Montana and North Dakota have already helped move the U.S. into third place among world oil producers, and according to Harold Hamm, CEO of Continental Resources, the 14th-largest oil company in America, if fully developed the field in Bakken contains 24 billion barrels, doubling America's proven oil reserves. One reason for America's abundant supply of oil and natural gas has been the development of new drilling techniques, including 'horizontal drilling,' which allows rigs to reach two miles into the ground and then spread horizontally by thousands of feet." Not surprisingly, Hamm considers some of the current administration's loans and subsidies for alternative energy ventures to be misplaced.

13 of 745 comments (clear)

  1. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So they maybe found enough for three years and a half years of consumption at current rates. The problem is now truly solved.

    1. Re:Wow by mattcsn · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh, come on. Don't you know anything about capitalism? If there's sufficient demand for oil, then the market will provide for more dinosaurs to be turned into oil on the supply side. Didn't you ever take an economics course?

  2. Idiot by vlm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not surprisingly, Hamm considers some of the current administration's loans and subsidies for alternative energy ventures to be misplaced.

    That guy is an idiot.

    24e9 barrels / 20e6 barrels per day just for the US / 365 days per year = a bit more than a 3 year supply, assuming it can all be recovered. Realistic recovery ratios are always WAY less than 100%... Figure just several months supply, realistically.

    So, some 1%er will make hundreds of billions of profit.. nice for him... and 3 years later, we'll be wishing you had a solar panel...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Idiot by Pav · · Score: 5, Interesting

      For anyone who hasn't seen it, check out this old mathematician (Albert Bartlett) talking about energy and exponential growth. He makes it so obviously clear why we'll be running out of oil shortly even given the most optimistic projections of future growth. It's clear enough for Joe Sixpack to understand - as Einstein would say "as simple as possible, but no simpler".

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

    2. Re:Idiot by chrb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      People have been saying that since 1920... well... they said it would run out in 1920... and then they said it would run out in 1950... and then they said it would run out in 1980... and then they said it would run out in 2000...

      I get it. I was running a little short on breakfast cereal this week. I thought that my remaining breakfast reserves would run out on Thursday, but I managed to reduce consumption a little by only eating three quarters of a bowl. And then on Friday I added some fruit to eke it out a bit further. On Saturday I discovered some leftover bread and ate that. So here I am, on Sunday, and I still have some bread left. THEREFORE I CONCLUDE THAT I WILL NEVER HAVE TO GO SHOPPING AGAIN AS I WILL NEVER, EVER RUN OUT OF BREAKFAST RESERVES. WHEN MY RESERVES ARE LOW, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE NEW FOOD TO DISCOVER IN MY KITCHEN.

      See any problem here?

    3. Re:Idiot by AbRASiON · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Christ you deniers freak me out. It's simple mathematics. The stuff is finite, we've been tapping it for years, it's beginning to reduce in discoveries and production, in the very least - less is being found. It doesn't 'magically grow back' - logically we should be preparing for the possibility that we simply have none.

      Same with the 'keep breeding' crowd. Finite sized rock with finite resources, oxygen, water, food capable land, wood, oil, minerals, hell even finite real estate for solar panels.

      Simple logic dictates we must be sensible about this. Infact DECENT logic actually implies we should abso-damn-loutely be self sufficient, capable of living indefinitely, assuming the sun doesn't die out (soon) - however it will (eventually)

      Humanity is reducing the quantity of fish, wood and minerals from the planet, we simply can't live how we live now, it's simple mathematics and logic. It makes utterly no sense to be anything BUT self sufficient for the long haul.

  3. Re:Thank . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kind of sounds like a drug addict. "I'm going to quit eventually, but right now I need that hit."

  4. Oil "may be" finite by fermion · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Unless one is a religious/capitalist wacko who believes in the abiotic origins of oil, at the current rate of consumption petroleum is a finite product.

    Economically, petroleum is even more of a finite resource. Currently Saudi and other middle eastern oil keep prices down. Estimates say it costs about $2 a barrel to extract oil in Saudi Arabia. Venezuela oil might costs three times that much to extract. US oil might be as much as $20 a barrel. At these extraction costs a barrel of oil is $80, and it costs over three dollars at the pump in the US. Now, one can blame the greed of the oil companies, but that is not going to change. Explorations costs are not going to decrease either.

    OTOH, conservative extraction costs for so-called shale oil, the better name is tar pits, is $75 dollars a barrel. If the oil companies sell at a comparative markup, this means that the selling price would be $300 a barrel. If we just add $60 profit, that would still be $135 a barrel. This puts gas firmly in the $5 a gallon range.

    Recall that the oil companies were going bust when oil was below $50 a barrel. This was still a large markup over extraction costs, but oil companies appear to be extraordinarily inefficient and require a large markup. It would be fantasy that the oil companies are going to give away the product. If shale oil forms a large percentage of the petroleum mix prices will go up, consumption will eventually go down as it did a few years ago. Oil companies will either have a choice of selling at higher prices for lower volumes, or find another product.

    Therefore shale oil is not an indication of a long term prosperous oil economy, but a clear signal that oil is becoming too costly to base an economy on.

    --
    "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  5. Re:Reserves isn't the only reason... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    As opposed to renewable energy sources who's sites are crewed by unicorns?

  6. Re:Reserves isn't the only reason... by Lonewolf666 · · Score: 5, Informative

    CO2 concentrations have already significantly increased due to human influence (burning of fossil fuels). So there should be more than enough for the growth of plants.

    The contribution to the Greenhouse effect is estimated at 9-26% of all greenhouse gases according to Wikipedia. Not dominating, but not negligible either.

    So GP was either uninformed or trolling. Probably the latter.

     

    --
    C - the footgun of programming languages
  7. Re:Reserves isn't the only reason... by SlippyToad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What about the tens of thousands of jobs that we could use in our economy, right now

    Renewables are much more likely to produce jobs, and improve our economic outlook. Continuing to service the needs of the oil companies has not improved our economic outlook for a decade now. Why do you think it might suddenly start?

    --
    One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
  8. Re:Reserves isn't the only reason... by Lockejaw · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because his "no warming since 1998" claim relies on some serious cherry-picking of temperature data, and he's afraid of people linking this dishonesty back to him.

    --
    (IANAL)
  9. Re:Thank . by Spoke · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's those low prices which have "killed the economy". Going from $1.50 gallon to $3.50 gallon is a much bigger shock than going from $4.00 to $6.00 gallon.

    Gas taxes need to be raised - at a minimum enough to pay for road infrastructure, but probably a good amount more (gradually, of course). But no-one has the balls to do it.