Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
USA: Where Is The Oil?  
User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1500 times:

Greetings and Salutations,

I today declare and ask. USA: Where is the oil?

For shame.

The war on Iraq was supposed to make the world safer. Debatable yes but at least Saddam has gone.

One of the reasons for the war was to find oil. Hoorah. But where is it?

So far, it seems only a trickle has come from the vast oil fields of Iraq. Why? I am unimpressed at this slow procedure of extracting the oil. The Coalition of the Willing must be rewarded with the oil (e.g.: The Republic of Singapore and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).

Especially in the UK, this oil is much needed to avert silly fuel protests.

Do explain.


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineL.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

What???? Is this someone criticizing the USA for not taking the oil?! Oh boy Alpha and 777 will have fun with this (so will I)

User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1496 times:

"One of the reasons for the war was to find oil. Hoorah. But where is it?


WTF? Do explain.....


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1489 times:

If bush is telling the truth (I have my doubts), then the oil is in the hands of the Iraqi people.

That or Halliburton is stockpiling it.

What I'm really trying to say is: I don't know and neither does anybody else on this forum.



User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13650 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1490 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

One of the reasons for the war was to find oil.

And Singapore_Air strolls boldly off the map of logic and reason...  Nuts



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1485 times:

"Halliburton is stockpiling it. -dlkapa"

yea, sure. Like they can stockpile a million gallons plus a day...  Insane


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1481 times:

Oh come on. If there were no oil fields then there would've been no war... almost.

And yes, Bush says the oil is in the hands of the Iraqi people. However, from a cynical point of view, one would expect that the oil would be sold at a substantially discounted rate to today's prices to 'the Coalition of the Willing' so that we can reap the benefits of our effort and support n'est-ce pas?



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 1472 times:

I would have no problem if there was some taken off the top for our effort. But I have not heard of that happening, and I'm still paying $2 bucks a gallon. Give it time, and it will flow.

User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1468 times:

yea, sure. Like they can stockpile a million gallons plus a day...

apparantly you missed this part:

What I'm really trying to say is: I don't know and neither does anybody else on this forum.






User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 984 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1459 times:

I am unimpressed at this slow procedure of extracting the oil.

Sorry the world doesn't opperate on your time. Many of the facilites and pipelines needed to export oil have been attacked or threatened by local fighters making it very risky to export large volumes of crude oil.

One of the reasons for the war was to find oil. Hoorah. But where is it?

In the ground  Insane

The Coalition of the Willing must be rewarded with the oil

Sorry the U.S. at least tries not to rape and pillage. Iraq might have a tangental similarity to Vietnam, but this is no Nanking.

However, from a cynical point of view, one would expect that the oil would be sold at a substantially discounted rate to today's prices to 'the Coalition of the Willing' so that we can reap the benefits of our effort and support n'est-ce pas

Wow looks like someone knows nothing about the oil industry. The high price of gasoline in the United States is do to high demand. Around this time of year, gasoline in the U.S. switches from winter mix to summer mix. These two types of gasoline are configured to burn efficently in different enviornments. I believe it has to do with evaporation of vapors entering the atmosphere.

Anyway, when refineries swich produciton, chaos insues as stockpiles of the necessary mix run dangerously low. When supply decreases and demand stays constant (or rises) obviously cost increases. There is nothing that can be done about this (other than manage inventory more efficently), OPEC could increase production (as they have done today) and prices will still remain high.


User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1458 times:

Where is the oil?
I try to answer your question: It's beneath the Iraqi dessert.

pelican


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 1453 times:

I can tell you where 1 million barrels a day of it is, that would last 20 years.

Unfortunatly until congress gets back on the ball and passes legislation opening the 1002 area of Alaska, it is going to stay there.

In 1995 Clinton, the great dick, vetoed legislation to open this area, as payback to the granola crunchers that supported him. So it remained closed. That field by rights should just now be comming on line.

And yes, 1 million barrels a day from a secure source would have an effect on prices.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineL410Turbolet From Czech Republic, joined May 2004, 5728 posts, RR: 19
Reply 12, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1428 times:

Why shoud you turn Alaska with its natural beauty into an oilfield, unless it is absolutely and desperately necessary? The two words: EXXON VALDEZ were a too costly lesson learned, don't you think?

User currently offlineGlobalexpress From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2002, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1423 times:

Come on now Turbolet, since when did the importance of the environment get in the way of industrial development? Give it a few years, maybe FOUR more (lol) and it will be up and running as one big oil production facility.

But HEY, we all need to fill up our SUV's don't we!!


User currently offlineL.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 14, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1422 times:

L410, that section of ANWR that L-188 is talking about is basically.......................................................snow. Snow. Just snow. I can see snow on my front lawn in winter, I don't need to go to Alaska. However, I cannot extract oil from my front lawn.

User currently offlineGlobalexpress From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2002, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1414 times:

Actually its an important nature reserve. The paths of many migratory species are already disrupted by the pipeline, and many other species would be lost or affected should the ANWR be developed.

But you don't care about nature. I'll go "hug my tree" now.


User currently offlineL.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1408 times:

Globalexpress,

Sorry but when animals can build oil pipelines, they can build all the ones they want. (Globalexpress gets granola all over his sandals and in his waist legnth hair)  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineGlobalexpress From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2002, 251 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1405 times:

Haha, thats quite funny. I guess I can't say anything more to change your opinion on that, but imagine if you were a native person of Alaska, climbing out of your dwelling to find that your hunting ground was now a construction site.

If the nature card doesn't work, what about the effect on those brilliant humans you so ferverently applaud?  Smile

(Globalexpress smokes another joint)


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13650 posts, RR: 62
Reply 18, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1394 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The two words: EXXON VALDEZ were a too costly lesson learned, don't you think?

Spare me. The Exxon Valdez accident was just that - an ACCIDENT. It's hardly indicative of what will happen should drilling take place in the ANWR.

Besides, it's hard to crash a supertanker on tundra.  Insane

And can someone please tell me why is it a crime to develop oilfields in the ANWR, but there's no battle cry of "Protect the environment!" when people wanted to "exploit" Texas, Oklahoma, and so on? Why is THAT ok, but ANWR is treated with the sanctity of a newborn's crib?





"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1389 times:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/iraq.html#oil


Iraq is estimated to hold 115 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, and possibly much more undiscovered oil in unexplored areas of the country. Iraq also is estimated to contain at least 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

On April 22, 2003, the first oil production since the start of the war began at the Rumaila field, with the restart of an important gas/oil separation plant (GOSP). Starting in mid-May 2003, the USACE -- which has the lead in restoring Iraq's oil output to pre-war levels -- began a major effort to ramp up production in the country. As of mid-March 2004, Iraqi oil output was fluctuating somewhat, but generally was averaging around 2.4-2.5 million barrels per day (bbl/d) on a "gross" basis.

For much of the past year, some Iraqi oil -- perhaps 200,000-300,000 bbl/d -- has been reinjected into northern oil reservoirs due to constraints on both domestic processing ability as well as export outlets. With the opening of the Kirkuk-Ceyhan oil pipeline, however, this practice may come to an end. According to the U.N. Joint Logistics Centre (JLC), in August 2003 "about 40% of [northern Iraqi] production [was being] transferred to the Baiji refinery, with the balance reinjected into the fields, ostensibly to maintain pressure.


Wow. That is a lot of Mobil1..  Big grin


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 984 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1386 times:

The paths of many migratory species are already disrupted by the pipeline, and many other species would be lost or affected should the ANWR be developed.

I did research on this subject (for over 7 months) on this subject when I volunteered with a local debate team last year. There is only one species of animals that would be placed in any serious threat if ANWAR were to be explored- the mating habits of caribou. By the way, outside of ANWAR, deer and caribou are usually considered pest. In some parts of North America there is so much overpopulation that herds die of starvation.

Back at ANWAR, the only reasonable risk was to the mating habits of the caribou. For some reason or another they like to reproduce (gotta keep it PG) at night, and the lighting on the rig structures would somehow make them uneasy, meaning decreased rates of reproduction.

Easy solution, turn off the fricking lights at night.

Why shoud you turn Alaska with its natural beauty into an oilfield, unless it is absolutely and desperately necessary?

First, a case could be made that it is absolutely and desperately necessary to drill in ANWAR. Personally, I don't find it necessary, but for different reasons than misplaced fear of disrupting "natural beauty."

Oil exploration is not a messy, pollution causing, environmental disaster that it use to be. The areas outside of ANWAR have been explored without any adverse effects on caribou or other wildlife. After a well is completed, the structure is disassembled and the only sign that anything took place is a patch of dirt that takes a few weeks for grass grow back.

I live in Texas, my family is in the oil business, I've been to oil rigs owned by 3 different companies in the last few years, and visited past sites that have been decommissioned. Oil exploration is not the menace, its consumption.

The two words: EXXON VALDEZ were a too costly lesson learned, don't you think?

Two words: big deal

Little known fact- oil and gasoline leaked from cars and trucks in the United States leads to petroleum runoff into rives and oceans at a rate of an Exxon Valdez spill per year or more. I'm not concerned about the minute risk of an oil spill during production and transport, I'm concerned with the oil spill taking place every day that no one knows about.

But HEY, we all need to fill up our SUV's don't we!!

Yes. All American's are sloppy, fat, rude, arrogant SUV drivers who yak on cell phones while sipping cafe lattés from Starbucks while zipping all over town.. taking pleasure in the environmental destruction we are causing and extracting sheer joy from supporting Saudi oil barons  Insane

Don't criticize the way the United States works without understanding the way Americans live. The U.S is not Europe, and if you try to think of the U.S. as a European entity you won't understand why Americans find it necessary to drive SUVs.

No more than 5 years ago, gas was hovering at or below $1.00 a gallon, depending on location. If gasoline were this cheap in Europe, don't moralize me and say you wouldn't drive an SUV. I, by the way, don't drive an SUV. I drive a Toyota Camry, 4-cyllender and an LEV if it matters.

Next, why do American's do so much driving in the first place? American cities, I am going to use Dallas as an example, are the victims of suburban sprawl. I work an outrageous 30 minutes from my home. I could live closer to my employer, but I'd rather live in the family friendly city of Plano and send my kids to schools way better than DISD. Plano itself is a huge city, 9th biggest in Texas. If I want to go to say Wal-Mart, its 3-4 miles away. I could easily walk or bike this, but the city is not designed for pedestrians, it is designed for cars. I would be putting my life at risk just trying to cross the street. Most streets in Plano are 6-lanes with heavy traffic!

As to why Americans choose big cars, think of the American family, the so called "Soccer Mom." My wife must drive our kids to school, pick them up, shuttle them to and from their many activities ect. My coworker who now lives in the UK sends his daughters to boarding schools, and only they return on the weekend. Different location, different culture, different lifestyle.

My family a decade ago would have a family car (sedan most likely) and a minivan of some sort. Today, minivans are the single most "uncool" vehicle on the road, SUVs like the aptly named Suburban and Expedition are in vogue. Who wants to look stupid driving a lame car when gas is so cheap? And if the mother has an SUV, the father just looks plane silly in a Toyota Camry! Make that a Suburban and a 4Runner for that household.

I am the Northwest Airlines of car ownership and still have not found it necessary to replace my Camry, but when I do, it will probably be another sedan. Many Americans feel the same way, but I'm not going to stop those of my fellow Americans who want an SUV from buying one. I just get the satisfaction of knowing I am not suffering immensely at the current gas prices. I don't like them, but hey that's life.

Come on now Turbolet, since when did the importance of the environment get in the way of industrial development?

Yeah, Americans hate the enviornment. That's exactly why Boeing is aiming to reduce fuel burn by 15-20% on the 7E7  Big grin


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1378 times:

Greetings and Salutations,

$0.99 cents a gallon IS natural beauty  Big grin


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1347 times:

The area of ANWR is called the 1002 area. It was designated by Carter when he stole have the state to make into his personal park as being set aside for oil development.

The total footprint required for ANWR development will be approximately 2,000 acres of the 1,500,000 acre coastal plain which is part of the 19,600,000 acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge which is in the 57,000,000 acre North Slope borough, which is in the 378,000,000 Acre State of Alaska.

Oh just for reference in Alaska 158,000,000 million acres of land that are designated as National Parks, Refuges, Wilderness Areas, Monuments and other conservation areas. And I haven't even gotten into the state park/refuge system and it's protected acreage either. That area is larger then the 135,000,000 acre land area of France.

Kind of makes you realize how small the 2000 acres of development in question would be and how little impact it would have.

Just for comparison purposes the North Slope borough is slightly larger then either the state of Idaho or Utah. So we are talking about a 2000 acre development in the state of Idaho. And even that figure is misleading because it won't be a 2000 acre parking lot, but spread out along several pads, which like the recently developed Alpine filed, won't require interconnecting roads, or service roads along the supporting pipelines. Also note the pipeline corridors themselves are counted as part of that 2000 acre figure.

I keep getting the feeling that oil development on the north slope looks something like the Soviets did on the Caspian Sea in the 1950's. It does not. Hell do you guys even realize how undeveloped the allegedly "unprotected" lands are?

As far as caribou goes, it should be noted that the caribou numbers in Prudhoe have gone up over the last 20 years. I personally note that the credit lies in the 5 mile buffer either side of the fields where hunting/shooting is prohibited, for obvious reasons. By logic, the same should happen to the east.





[Edited 2004-06-04 08:36:28]

[Edited 2004-06-04 08:41:59]


OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineTbar220 From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7013 posts, RR: 26
Reply 23, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

L-188,

I believe the fact is that it is a National Wildlife refuge. I am just as opposed to drilling in this area as I would be opposed to drilling in our nations National Parks. Our enviornment is something that not only do we have to treasure, but is something I firmly believe is necessary for our survival.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 24, posted (10 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1336 times:

Well see Tbar220.

That refuge was created by Carter with the ANILCA law that created some 130 million acres of new parkland in this state.

In order to get that past a specific exhemption was written into the law that would allow for development with congressional approval in the 1002 area. Otherwise with the energy crisis that was going on at the time, congress was never going to approve his stealing of that much Alaskan land to make parks for people in the lower 48. Part of the comprimise was that better technology would allow much lower impact on the land and the technology has gotten that much better since then. Directional drilling, slant wells, ice roads, all reduce the need to have drilling pads. Right now the estimate is that a drill pad will be able to reach formations about 6 miles off it's center. So you are looking at only having one pad every 12 miles at this point. Definatly what I don't think most people picture when they think of oil well.

The think of some desert location with Derreks practically sitting on top of each other.

What we are seeing now is that clause in work.

The area was always intended to have development in it.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
25 JBirdAV8r : Ah, great! It's some more nonsensical diatribe from Singapore_Air!! It's about time! I missed it. No, really, I did!!
26 Post contains images Globalexpress : Quote from DfwRevolution:: Yes. All American's are sloppy, fat, rude, arrogant SUV drivers who yak on cell phones while sipping cafe lattés from Star
27 Post contains images DfwRevolution : Well done for economizing with a Camry, btw :P lol.. I somewhat question if I am economizing these days. Its a 1993 and doesn't run nearly as good as
28 Post contains images Learpilot : Where is the oil? I try to answer your question: It's beneath the Iraqi dessert. It's under the Iraqi cakes and pies?
29 IMissPiedmont : One million barrels per day. Just a little simple math here. Thats 42 million gallons of crude daily. multiplied by a high number of 45% efficiency to
30 Post contains images L-188 : Still out of my price range. Besides if it was going to get a Hummvee I would make a bid on one of the USMC surplus M998's that have come on the marke
31 Post contains images JGPH1A : RE: but there's no battle cry of "Protect the environment!" when people wanted to "exploit" Texas, Oklahoma, and so on? That's because Texas and Oklah
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...
Where Is The Wourld's Largest Oil Complex? posted Mon Jan 22 2001 05:02:03 by Boeing in pdx
Where Is The Outrage Over The Daily News Leak? posted Sat Jul 8 2006 22:36:17 by Tbar220
Where Is The Outrage Over Fuel Prices?! posted Sat Apr 22 2006 06:48:13 by Corey07850
Where Is The Cat In A Bag? posted Thu Oct 6 2005 15:41:00 by Gordonsmall
Where Is The Q & Z posted Thu Sep 29 2005 00:23:50 by VSMike
Where Is The Fox's Property? posted Thu Sep 8 2005 06:01:19 by Swisskloten
Where Is The Religious Left? posted Fri Mar 25 2005 01:50:04 by Zrs70
Where Is The Condemnation For Russia On Iran? posted Sat Feb 26 2005 05:09:05 by Falcon84
Where Is The EU Going (Pat Cox Ex-Parliament Pres) posted Fri Dec 3 2004 03:04:00 by Teahan
Where Is The Condemnation From The Arab World? posted Sat Jun 19 2004 04:36:35 by Rjpieces