Mark & Juanita wrote:
Robatoy wrote:

On Jun 11, 7:31 am, "Swingman" wrote:
"dpb" wrote

Some or the largest reserves in the US are severely depleted and are
requiring extraordinary measures to continue to produce what they are
(like pulling vacuum, etc.) and what production there is is continuing
to decrease.
Many wells in this area that were drilled in the 50s and 60s and were
considered dry holes then were capped because they hadn't enough oil
production to pay are now being brought in as gas wells. But, those
aren't enough in production to make up for the far larger number that
are about tapped out...
LOL ... this has always been the subject of much "scientific" debate and
is not nearly as cut and dried it sounds above. I'm hear to tell you that
reserve estimates are historically "estimated" as much at four to nine
times too _low_, and there is inarguable poof of that:

FACT: in1976 by all estimates we (US) had 23 billion barrels of reserves.

FACT: In 2005 we (US) still had an estimated 23 billion barrels of oil
reserves, even though we produced almost 40 billion barrels of oil
between 1976 and 2005.

The reason is basically simple: technological advances in both drilling
and recovery.

Bakken alone has a USGS estimate of 400 billion barrels ... technological
advances and the incentive of "price" will almost guarantee that if only
3% is recoverable, there is still one helluva lot of reserves in this
country.

The "peak oil" folks, while being right about the finite nature of the
subject, remind me a bit too much of the "doom and gloom"
prognosticators/global warming crowd who appear to be in a hurry to see
this country brought to its knees.

Besides, there always horses.

Oh nos!! Next thing the Gorians will be bitching about the horse
turds!!

Naaa... the NIMBY's need to take a powder and back off on their
totally messed up ideas about 'environmental' impact.
Drill, dammit.. with caution.

Wow, we actually agree on something.

Here in congress, one side of the aisle been pushing to allow drilling;
the majority side is trotting out the same old argument they used to
torpedo drilling in ANWR ~7 YEARS AGO, their argument is that any drilling
now won't have an effect for another 7 to 10 years. SO? If we don't drill
NOW, then in 7 to 10 years we won't have ANY oil from the drilling that
should be starting NOW. Like what we AREN'T getting from ANWR NOW because
they rejected drilling there ~7 YEARS AGO! Bunch of frickin' fools, if
anything shows they have nothing but short-sighted, damage the economy
goals this is a glowing illustration.


Can't you hear JFK - "We would like to get to the moon, but it would
take most of this decade, so we canned the whole idea".