Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
U.S. Oil Output To Overtake Saudi Arabia’s  
User currently offlinezhiao From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 400 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1299 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

...by 2020

This means that US trade deficit will be dramatically reduced going foward given that this is a huge part of it. It also means higher GDP growth.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...-11e2-b631-2aad9d9c73ac_story.html

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

The US oil and gas boom is a phenomenal thing. Plenty of energy intensive manufacturers are expanding in the US thanks for the crazy low prices of gas.
Shame that Obama has only just warmed up to it. Hell, US greenhouse gas emissions are at the lowest in 20 years thanks largely to cheap gas easily replacing coal in generators which should theoretically get the lefties jumping for joy (it hasn't).
Farmers who've struggled are getting hundreds of thousands in fracking royalties.
The US's hand in foreign policy is getting constantly stronger the less oil they rely on.
Good time to be an oil or gas man in the US!



User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12562 posts, RR: 25
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Yes, add this to the increases in natural gas in North America, and you get a fracking good time! 


Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting zhiao (Thread starter):
his means that US trade deficit will be dramatically reduced going foward given that this is a huge part of it. It also means higher GDP growth.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine....html

It is very amazing, and with alternative energy we could become a much higher exporter of oil. However economics will probably dictate that oil will stay cheap enough to keep America addicted to it.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3044 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Shame that Obama has only just warmed up to it. Hell, US greenhouse gas emissions are at the lowest in 20 years thanks largely to cheap gas easily replacing coal in generators which should theoretically get the lefties jumping for joy (it hasn't).

I do not think Obama has warmed up to it. It just made a good campaign speech.
This was private investment on private land that the "guberment" had nothing to do with other than to put road blocks at every turn. So the development has been in spite of the present administration not because of it. The industry was already perturbed with government road blocks and took major offence when Obama is trying to take credit for their work, but the media never questions Obama's statements.
The main issue with coal is that it takes about 1/3 the energy produced burning it to clean the emissions, so cost wise coal is priced accordingly, but you end up producing a 1/3 more CO2 per kilowatt. The technology will eventually evolve and somewhere down the road 40 to 50 years then the coal industry will re-emerge as gas supplies start to dwindle some what and prices rise to the point that coal will be a fuel of choice for power generation.
Of course there is the holy grail of fusion which has been promising to be viable in 10 years for the last 50 years. Maybe they will eventually get it.

Okie


User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2075 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 4):
Of course there is the holy grail of fusion which has been promising to be viable in 10 years for the last 50 years. Maybe they will eventually get it.

I don't think we'll see commercial fusion at least not in our lifetimes. I wish that Western governments though would start expanding fission. Today's fission is safe, reliable and clean without being as costly as wind or solar and waiting for the holy grail to magically appear does no one any good.

Quoting okie (Reply 4):
I do not think Obama has warmed up to it. It just made a good campaign speech.

Was trying not to turn this into too political a thread but I certainly agree with you. Undoubtedly these achievements are due to the (mostly) men and women in the Bakken, Eagle Ford, Marcellus fields that are pumping out the oil and gas.


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7577 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting zhiao (Thread starter):
...by 2020

If Obama stops pushing his uninformed green agenda  
Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Shame that Obama has only just warmed up to it. Hell, US greenhouse gas emissions are at the lowest in 20 years thanks largely to cheap gas easily replacing coal in generators which should theoretically get the lefties jumping for joy (it hasn't).

He hasn't warmed up to it much, if any. Case in point- Keystone pipeline.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 2):
and you get a fracking good time!

What's the deal with people's issue with Fracking? Every single independent scientific peer reviewed journal article I've read about fracking says that it does NO damage to the environment.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinecws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1176 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
If Obama stops pushing his uninformed green agenda  

How and why, exactly, is it uninformed? Or do you simply disagree with it?

[Edited 2012-11-12 22:52:30]


volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1301 times:

If Fracking is allowed to continue...

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
He hasn't warmed up to it much, if any. Case in point- Keystone pipeline.

Have you researched it?

The oil companies love it because it will make it easier for them to export oil. Yes, EXPORT. Not IMPORT. If they can EXPORT it easier, guess what happens to supply here? It goes down. Guess what happens to a commodity when supply goes down? Price goes up.

Or are you just listening to what the GOP tells you? They wanted it built because it would raise gas prices and then they could blame the Democrats.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
What's the deal with people's issue with Fracking? Every single independent scientific peer reviewed journal article I've read about fracking says that it does NO damage to the environment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environ...tal_impact_of_hydraulic_fracturing

Not a bad review, actually.


User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3649 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
What's the deal with people's issue with Fracking? Every single independent scientific peer reviewed journal article I've read about fracking says that it does NO damage to the environment.

I like that we have all this gas available, but that statement is ridiculous. Of course it does and the more people can't just say it does and deal with it, the stronger your opposition gets. Maybe you need to read more.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
The oil companies love it because it will make it easier for them to export oil. Yes, EXPORT. Not IMPORT. If they can EXPORT it easier, guess what happens to supply here? It goes down. Guess what happens to a commodity when supply goes down? Price goes up.

This is nutz too. Keep it domestic or export it matters not, it is all going into a world market, even the oil that never leaves our shores. Unless you are suggesting we nationalize the oil fields?


User currently offlineblueflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 4002 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1299 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Overall, I think it is great news, but it does raise a number of questions as well.

What happens in 2030 and the years after? According to the IEA report, this leadership position will last all of five years, apparently because fracking, as an exploration method, generates a high output early on and then dwindles very fast. It isn't a steady, decade-long, supply like more traditional methods. How fast will production drop and to what level? Is self-sufficiency a flash-in-the-pan event or not? That answer is key to anything from environmental regulations to energy policy to exploration companies' decision to invest...

What will be happen with the tax revenue? I trust politicians to take some sensible measures, such as shoring up Social Security perhaps, but I trust them to squander a lot of it too, whether it is on pet projects on the left, or by using them as an excuse to demand temporary tax cuts that will be treated as anything but temporary, even when the revenue starts diminishing, by the right... I do not trust politicians to have Norway's wisdom: set the revenue aside, invest sensibly and only use the interests year on year.

Will the infrastructure be ready on time? I am in favor of adequate environmental regulations, but I think the entire process is far too complex and too burdensome. This is in part due to the environmental movement that doesn't trust oil and gas companies to play fair, and in part due to these companies that would use a comma out of place to discredit an entire EPA report if they could... 2020 seems pretty far off, but if new refineries are needed, now is the time to get started.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
What's the deal with people's issue with Fracking?

Environmental consequences set aside, there's also the issue of water use. In my neck of the woods, where some landowners get a royalties check and others don't, there was a lot of grumbling over the summer about water restrictions not being applied to fracking operations. As the drought gets more severe, which seems to be the forecast, expect more grumblings, and possibly restrictions being enforced across the board.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
If Obama stops pushing his uninformed green agenda

Funny enough, it doesn't go as far as the energy efficiency proposals pushed by the IEA, the same agency that forecast self-sufficiency in the US. In fact, they forecast that if governments around the world did implement their proposal, not only would the US still reach self-sufficiency, but overall demand would drop by a volume equivalent to the production of Russia and Norway combined.
Of course, oil companies will still complain that this "uninformed agenda" will increase their cost, but they will never admit that the thing they really fear is lower demand!



I've got $h*t to do
User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13608 posts, RR: 61
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1299 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
qThe oil companies love it because it will make it easier for them to export oil. Yes, EXPORT. Not IMPORT. If they can EXPORT it easier, guess what happens to supply here? It goes down. Guess what happens to a commodity when supply goes down? Price goes up.

You DO know it all goes into the same marketplace to be bought and sold, right? Adding extra oil to the overall market reduces the price.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5608 posts, RR: 8
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
Case in point- Keystone pipeline.

So you support politics being used and politicians getting involved in pushing things through? I mean you must realize that it was happened with the Keystone pipeline. TransCanada could not get the approvals it needed for its preferred route and they figured it would be easier/cheaper to go through the politicians rather that utilize the alternate path being given them. They dragged the politicians into this and made it political trying to force their right of way instead of working with the people. What Obama really did was not allow this.


Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
What's the deal with people's issue with Fracking? Every single independent scientific peer reviewed journal article I've read about fracking says that it does NO damage to the environment.

Sources? All drilling has some level of environmental impact, normally with groundwater supplies.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 11):
You DO know it all goes into the same marketplace to be bought and sold, right? Adding extra oil to the overall market reduces the price.

You are right and wrong. Right now the "extra oil" is sitting in Cushing OK, that is creating a glut in the USA that brings the overall prices for fuel down because it can't easily be sent overseas. Its not a huge difference because there are then other costs involve with getting the oil to where ever it needs to go within the nation but it does make a difference. Once all the transportation elements are in place and the oil can be sold on the world market, the price in the USA will adjust to the higher world market level. Again, it won't be the end of the the world and will encourage more green and efficient technologies within the USA, but it will impact prices in the USA to the higher side.

An interesting article to read on the spread and issue involved:
http://www.businessweek.com/articles...aders-are-making-millions#r=lr-fst

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlinepu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 697 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

I think its marvelous news for America, this alone could invigorate the economy when some of us were wondering what else might.



Suddenly the need to be so concerned (interventionist) about the Middle East can be strictly and indisputably reduced to one issue: Israel. Kind of simplifies the debate.



Pu


User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3044 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 12):
Sources? All drilling has some level of environmental impact, normally with groundwater supplies

Please expand, not sure you understand the construction of a well from surface to source. Practically impossible.

Gas and Oil has been naturally escaping to the atmosphere and surface of the earth and oceans for eons.
They find pockets of natural gas around here all the time at water well depth with no commercial oil, gas production or pipelines within 20 miles, although not in producible quantities. It is a natural occurrence.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
He hasn't warmed up to it much, if any. Case in point- Keystone pipeline
Quoting tugger (Reply 12):
Right now the "extra oil" is sitting in Cushing OK
Quoting QFA380 (Reply 5):

Was trying not to turn this into too political a thread but I certainly agree with you

Capture three birds with one stone. The Keystone is full of political twists.

The additional pipeline from Cushing to the Gulf Coast has been approved and is has been under construction for some time to transport the Cushing product. Remember Obama standing with a back drop stacks and stacks of 20" pipe in Cushing, where the heck to you think pipe was going. Think major Democratic campaign contributor in Tulsa, OK that happens to be involved with oil and gas that needs that pipeline from Cushing to the Gulf.

One of the other political twists here is that the Keystone line north from Cushing to Canada passes right through Koch brothers territory (Kansas) and will allow them access as the Keystone line, a major Republican campaign contributor. This is no secret in the oil industry.

I will not get anymore involved on the political front but pointing out that the approval of the Keystone pipeline is nothing but political.

Okie


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 9):
This is nutz too. Keep it domestic or export it matters not, it is all going into a world market, even the oil that never leaves our shores. Unless you are suggesting we nationalize the oil fields?

I am suggesting that bottlenecking the export will force more of it to be refined and consumed here, lowering the price. And that is exactly what has happened.


User currently offlineus330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3871 posts, RR: 13
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

This is why I'm glad I procrastinated researching my paper on the exportation of natural gas for an energy law class!
I think this thread is generally accurate, but there are some factual misrepresentations or oversimplifications that need to be cleared up.

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 1):
Hell, US greenhouse gas emissions are at the lowest in 20 years thanks largely to cheap gas easily replacing coal in generators which should theoretically get the lefties jumping for joy (it hasn't).

That is true. Data from several independent government agencies confirms that CO2 emissions from the US have dropped over the past couple of years, and will continue to drop as natural gas replaces the use of coal, because natural gas does in fact burn cleaner. It also helps that natural gas is also dirt cheap in the US market. So much so that the price of gas is serving as a possible economic disincentive to further exploration and drilling of natural gas fields.

The environmental movement has gradually shifted from being anti-coal to being anti-fossil fuelperiod over the past decade--even if certain fossil fuels may actually do more to alleviate certain environmental issues as a stopgap measure than the current state of renewable energy.

Quoting okie (Reply 4):
So the development has been in spite of the present administration not because of it

That is generally true--the current administration (as well as other private energy producers like T. Boone Pickens) wanted to actively encourage renewables, but has so far found that they are not economical (see Solyndra).

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
He hasn't warmed up to it much, if any. Case in point- Keystone pipeline.

Keystone is a complicated issue, and has been oversimplified by far too many in the blogosphere. It will pass over some environmentally sensitive territory, and could potentially contaminate the Ogalalla Aquifer, which runs under the Great Plains from the Dakotas to Texas' Permian Basin, and is a principal source of groundwater for communities and various agricultural producers in those areas. So it is not just simply enviros versus the oil companies--in some cases, its industry versus industry, or communities versus industry.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 8):
The oil companies love it because it will make it easier for them to export oil. Yes, EXPORT. Not IMPORT. If they can EXPORT it easier, guess what happens to supply here? It goes down

First off, it is actually illegal in the US to export crude oil because of energy security issues. The U.S. has always been very conservative with respect to the exportation of energy and other raw materials and natural resources. The economic benefit that will occur is from the cheap availabilty of energy in the US for certain industries that may offset the higher labor costs in the U.S.

Oil may also be a global market, but natural gas (LNG) technically isn't. While oil has one global price, natural gas prices differ dramatically by region--the price in Europe is about three or four times that of the US, and the price in Asia for LNG is even higher. LNG producers are allowed to export LNG to countries that the US has signed a free trade agreement with, but exportation to other countries requires approval by FERC and the DOE. And it also takes time and money to reconfigure current LNG plants geared toward accepting imports so that they can export LNG.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 6):
What's the deal with people's issue with Fracking? Every single independent scientific peer reviewed journal article I've read about fracking says that it does NO damage to the environment.
Quoting okie (Reply 14):
Gas and Oil has been naturally escaping to the atmosphere and surface of the earth and oceans for eons.
They find pockets of natural gas around here all the time at water well depth with no commercial oil, gas production or pipelines within 20 miles, although not in producible quantities. It is a natural occurrence.

The issue isn't gas or oil contaminating the groundwater, its some of the chemicals used as part of the fracking and drilling process that contaminates the surrounding groundwater and can leach into the ground. It's not an easy or clean process by any means.

Then there's also the issue of limited supplies of water for fracking--in certain parts of the U.S., like the West (there's a certain longitude line just west of the DFW area where those on the west side of the line do not receive enough rain to support agriculture w/out groundwater, and east of the line they do), it's not like there is a large volume of water freely available for industrial use that isn't needed for other purposes. That same water that industry wants to use is also the same water that communities need for basic household use, or that the agricultural industry needs to grow crops. the energy industry, however, is willing (And has the means) to pay higher prices for that water, though.


User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 3044 posts, RR: 3
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1301 times:

Quoting us330 (Reply 16):
Then there's also the issue of limited supplies of water for fracking--in certain parts of the U.S., like the West (there's a certain longitude line just west of the DFW area where those on the west side of the line do not receive enough rain to support agriculture w/out groundwater, and east of the line they do), it's not like there is a large volume of water freely available for industrial use that isn't needed for other purposes. That same water that industry wants to use is also the same water that communities need for basic household use, or that the agricultural industry needs to grow crops. the energy industry, however, is willing (And has the means) to pay higher prices for that water, though.

Water, Water, Water, which will be the next natural resource that will be contested.
Here in OK the Indian tribes are going to court to try and claim that the run-off water that comes off Indian lands that ends up in man made lakes for water supplies for towns and cities is their water. Not sure where that will end up, 10's of thousands of pages of federal and state rules regulations involved with run-off water that feed streams and lakes.

Most of the water that is used now for fracking is recovered and recyclable. As you mentioned the energy companies have the resources and motive to do so right on site at the completion of the process. When the recycle process happens at the well site then it relieves the responsibility of what happens to the recovered water as it leaves the site in a safe and clean condition. It is just a matter of having the cost structure built into the project. Then the recycled water is moved to the next project to be re-used again.

Quoting us330 (Reply 16):
The issue isn't gas or oil contaminating the groundwater, its some of the chemicals used as part of the fracking and drilling process that contaminates the surrounding groundwater and can leach into the ground. It's not an easy or clean process by any means.

As you mentioned about the blogosphere, do not believe everything that goes on there. A lot of the hype over the "chemicals" found in ground water are naturally occurring and would have been present if they were checked 200 years ago before oil production and generally do not involve the chemicals which are very few (largely sand and water) used in process.
Then of course we have the EPA and Oil industry getting profoundly different results from split samples only to find the EPA had a political agenda and was intentionally contaminating their samples with paint. So much for a government agency having much credibility, a few years worth of work went out the window.

Okie


User currently offlineus330 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 3871 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1299 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 17):
A lot of the hype over the "chemicals" found in ground water are naturally occurring and would have been present if they were checked 200 years ago before oil production and generally do not involve the chemicals which are very few (largely sand and water) used in process.

I'm guilty of doing this, as well, but there isn't one single "fracking fluid" or "fracking formula" used by the entire oil and natural gas industry--different companies use different formulas/chemical composition in their fracking fluid. And I wasn't talking about chemicals in the water ex post (after the drilling), but chemicals added to the fluid used in fracking. I should have been more clear, but I meant that there are concerns that the fluid may contaminate or leach into the groundwater--I didn't mean to claim that as fact.

I will caution you, though, about arguments organized around the logic of "if it's naturally occurring, it therefore must be safe" for human consumption, because that's clearly not the case (but it would affect liability in the case that an oil company was sued for contaminating ground water, but it was discovered that the ground water was already contaminated before the actions of the oil company).


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
EUR To Overtake USD As Global Reserve Preference posted Sat Dec 13 2008 06:50:02 by LXA333
Oil Down To $96....how Low Will It Go? posted Mon Sep 15 2008 09:45:06 by OOer
Russia May Cut Off Oil Flow To The West posted Thu Aug 28 2008 23:36:51 by MadameConcorde
Chavez Cuts Off Oil Sales To ExxonMobile posted Tue Feb 12 2008 19:25:07 by FriendlySkies
Russia Cuts Oil Supplies To Europe posted Mon Jan 8 2007 22:32:14 by L410Turbolet
Oil Supplies To Israel posted Mon Jul 24 2006 04:54:31 by Pulkovokiwi
More Oil In Alberta Than Saudi Arabia! posted Wed Jul 5 2006 22:12:55 by Emirates773ER
Oil Prices To Drop Sharply - BP CEO posted Mon Jun 12 2006 00:23:44 by RichardPrice
Oil Prices To Drop? posted Fri May 19 2006 02:17:16 by Texan
Shell Oil Returns To New Orleans posted Mon Jan 30 2006 17:14:58 by MSYtristar