jasond
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 5:23 am

Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:21 pm

I just caught a story on local TV news of a very large oil discovery in the Gulf of Mexico. Figures quoted:

15 Billion Barrel reserve;
Boost US reserves by 50%

Anyone confirm story and if true what will be the impact on fuel prices in the short, medium and longer term?
 
deltagator
Posts: 6170
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:56 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:04 pm

Move to NonAv.

Quoting Jasond (Thread starter):
Anyone confirm story and if true what will be the impact on fuel prices in the short, medium and longer term?

Heard this on the news while transiting through Singapore today. As for impact on fuel prices...you'll see nothing short or even medium term. It will take years to build up infrastructure to get the oil to the shore and still doesn't change the fact we need more refineries here in the States.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
 
BlazingCessna
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:17 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:09 pm

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 1):
still doesn't change the fact we need more refineries here in the States.

Thank the EPA for closing all of them. They put up the damned unattainable standards, so no one cuts the cheese anymore. Of cousre these are the same idiots that actually thing that a Peterbilt is gonna get 15mpg by 2010.

Someone needs to snap those screwballs back to reality.

In aviation related it wont help the price of 100LL or JET A anytime soon. HEll I hope it will, I pay 5.15 a gallon for 100LL!  banghead 

[Edited 2006-09-06 13:12:33]
Flown on:722, 731, 732, 742, 752, 763, DC8, DC9, DC10, A300, A319, A320, A330, PIC on C172, PA28R, D55, A36, DC3
 
nosedive
Posts: 2176
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 2:18 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:24 pm

Quoting BlazingCessna (Reply 2):
Someone needs to snap those screwballs back to reality.

Or someone needs to actually try to meet a standard without bitching about it  sarcastic 
 
BlazingCessna
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 6:17 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:30 pm

Those arbitrary standards cant be met with current technology. Most scientists and engineeers say it will be at least 10 years before they can be met. Most think about 15-20 years. Some will never be met, it just cant be done. That is the problem my friend. Those morons in Washington think they can write it down and it happens. It just don't work that way.  irked 
Flown on:722, 731, 732, 742, 752, 763, DC8, DC9, DC10, A300, A319, A320, A330, PIC on C172, PA28R, D55, A36, DC3
 
User avatar
falstaff
Posts: 5565
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 6:17 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:40 pm

Quoting Nosedive (Reply 3):
Or someone needs to actually try to meet a standard without bitching about it

Standards could probably be met, but people are not going to want to pay the higher prices that it will cost to build it. From a technicians view it is a lot easier to talk about building something more fuel efficient than to actually build one. There are huge amounts of cost in building plants, reworking machines, training workers, training techs on the repair end, research. It is easy top make standards it is difficult to implement them on a strict time schedule. When schedules are strict you get sloppy engineering and poor build quality to meet deadlines. Great example: 1981 Cadillac with the V-8-6-4 worked great in theory, was a junk pile. It saved gas, but the technology wasn't perfect. 20 years later Chrysler is using the same idea on V-8s and it works great. Just give engineers time and they will perfect things.

Quoting BlazingCessna (Reply 4):
Those morons in Washington think they can write it down and it happens. It just don't work that way.

I have a classic film strip, "The Metric Olyimpics",that says the USA will go metric on 1-1-1975. That didn't happen.
My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 10:44 pm

Quoting Jasond (Thread starter):
15 Billion Barrel reserve;
Boost US reserves by 50%

Lot's of stories on this in the media today. This doesn't include potential reserves off Florida and the West Coast. I remember reading that these could be potentially 80 billion bbl.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
ContnlEliteCMH
Posts: 1375
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:19 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:18 pm

Quoting BlazingCessna (Reply 2):
Thank the EPA for closing all of them. They put up the damned unattainable standards, so no one cuts the cheese anymore. Of cousre these are the same idiots that actually thing that a Peterbilt is gonna get 15mpg by 2010.

Yeah, that one makes me laugh. Do I think it's possible? Yes, but not by 2010, and probably not by 2020. You'd need to completely change the way the engines are designed and built (even higher compression ratios, even more turbo boost), the vehicle is geared, and you'd have to add massive complexity by using some sort of power load leveler, like a hybrid scheme.

Even if you did all this, and managed to substantially reduce the CD of a tractor WITH a trailer, I'm not sure you could get to 15 MPG. Everybody needs to understand that many of the people who set these policies have never done a shred of practical work in their life. They got a Ph. D. in "something policy" and went straight to work for government. They *think* they know what's happening in the real world, but they haven't a clue.

I put people who glibly say, "Maybe you should work harder to meet the standard" in the same bucket. Some of them know what the real world does and still maintain their purist's stance; most of them just have no idea.

But hey, if we covered an airliner in solar cells, it would get a lot more efficient, right?  Yeah sure
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
 
starrion
Posts: 970
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 1:19 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Wed Sep 06, 2006 11:53 pm

Funny how that now oil is worth $70 a barrel, the oil companies are going out and finding it again. I can't imagine why back when it was in the $20's they didn't want to bother with exploration.

Meanwhile we had to tolerate endless threads on "Peak oil here!" and how in the future we would be flying airliners on vegetable oil.

I bet we will have more major finds over the next couple of years as well. Now that there is big money to be made, a lot of companies are going to want to jump on the bandwagon.

Airliners will stil be using the same fuels 30 years from now. It was just a matter of making the searching profitable.
Knowledge Replaces Fear
 
Delta777Jet
Posts: 1225
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2000 6:19 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:26 am

I believe the discovery has something to do to decrease the price of oil in short to medium term and to bring relaxation into the market with an eye on the future of the Iran conflict. With this the US government can avoid the thread from Iran instantly and may execute some actions ?!?
B-717/722/737-200/300/400/500/600/700/800/900/B-747-100/200/400/SP/8i/B-752/3/B-762/3/4/B-772/LR/300ER/B-788/DC-10-10/30/L-1011-1/500/MD-81/82/83/90/A-319/320/321/AB6/312/313/332/333/342/343/346/359/388/TU154/IL-18/ATR-42/72/DH4/DH3/E145/E170/190/CR2/7/9
 
UPS Pilot
Posts: 828
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 1:17 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:31 am

http://pressroom.ups.com/pressreleases/current/0,1088,4694,00.html

Your fuel effcient Peterbilt might be here sooner than you think.
 
charlienorth
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:36 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
Lot's of stories on this in the media today. This doesn't include potential reserves off Florida and the West Coast. I remember reading that these could be potentially 80 billion bbl.

I'm sure this is true,the sad thing about is some envirofreak will probably file a lawsuit to prevent drilling and than whine about the price of gas!
Work hard fly right..don't understand it
 
ContnlEliteCMH
Posts: 1375
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 8:19 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:26 am

Quoting UPS Pilot (Reply 10):
Your fuel effcient Peterbilt might be here sooner than you think.

This is an example of the complexity I spoke of earlier. This new vehicle is considerably more complex than the box truck it replaces. However, urban use is ideal for such technology due to the common starts and stops. Delivery trucks, mail service, and buses could really benefit from this -- assuming that the organizations using the vehicles can acquire maintenance skills AND the fuel savings make sense (which I believe will continue to happen).

I'm particularly fascinated by the hydraulic drive. Cooooooool stuff.

Over-the-road is an entirely different animal. OTR cycle highs and lows are much smaller in amplitude. It's here that I'm skeptical such gains in fuel economy can be realized. I need to look up DOT figures for percentage of fuel and/or miles consumed by OTR vs. urban.
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Thu Sep 07, 2006 5:45 am

Quoting Starrion (Reply 8):
Funny how that now oil is worth $70 a barrel, the oil companies are going out and finding it again. I can't imagine why back when it was in the $20's they didn't want to bother with exploration.

Another example of the American education system at its best.  Wink

Maybe it wasn't discovered before now because oil from the field at issue wasn't economically recoverable at 20 dollars a barrel.

Why should an oil company expend resources to look for oil where it cannot be economically recovered?

[Edited 2006-09-06 22:46:08]
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
Boeing Nut
Posts: 5078
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2001 2:42 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 12:30 am

Heard this on line recently, but correct me if I'm wrong. Citgo is one of the "members" of the group of this find. Is it not true that Citgo is owned by Venezuela? If so, look for the Chevez soap opera to continue.....
I'm not a real aeronautical engineer, I just play one on Airliners.net.
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 12:33 am

Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 1):
and still doesn't change the fact we need more refineries here in the States.

Not only have oil companies refused to build more refineries that have been permitted for years, but they aren't running those they do have at full capacity.

Quoting BlazingCessna (Reply 2):
Thank the EPA for closing all of them.

Wrong.

Quoting BlazingCessna (Reply 2):
Of cousre these are the same idiots that actually thing that a Peterbilt is gonna get 15mpg by 2010.

There is no reason they can't right now and there is further no reason the entire US trucking fleet can't be running on bio-diesel.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:50 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
Quoting DeltaGator (Reply 1):
and still doesn't change the fact we need more refineries here in the States.

Not only have oil companies refused to build more refineries that have been permitted for years, but they aren't running those they do have at full capacity.

Ah yes, the voice of accuracy speaks again. Only thing is, the above isn't all that accurate. According to the International Herald Tribune (a NYT paper) here are the real facts about refinery production.

Quote:
Nationally, the number of refineries dropped from 324 in 1981 to its current level of 149 and refinery capacity is approximately 1.5 million barrels per day lower according to the Energy Department.

Current refinery production of 17.7 million barrels per day, however, is 3.7 million barrels per day higher than in 1981 as refineries are producing at 92 percent of their capacity compared to 69 percent in 1981. This comes largely thanks to expansions.

That's why building new refineries is not practical, industry executives said. So oil and gas companies prefer to boost supplies through expansion

So tell us, N1120A, how is running at 92% of capacity today compared to 69% in 1969 evidence of the evil oil companies manipulating prices?

And let's don't overlook the fact that current production is higher today than in 1981.

Isn't it more accurate to say that the oil companies are just trying to run their businesses more profitably and efficiently?

And why should they build new refineries when it is cheaper to expand existing ones?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:28 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 13):
Why should an oil company expend resources to look for oil where it cannot be economically recovered?

This is a very good point, but using extreme measures for oil recovery is not sustainable. Oil prices are volatile, which can burn those who invest large sums of money to recover oil under the assumtion that market prices will remain high.

Let's say we drop to $30-40 a barrel in 2010-2015, right as production in this new field would likely go active. Is this oil field still desirable?

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 16):
Isn't it more accurate to say that the oil companies are just trying to run their businesses more profitably and efficiently?

Let's not be that naive...

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 16):
And why should they build new refineries when it is cheaper to expand existing ones?

I can think of a few:

1) All-new refineries can take advantage of more integrated efficiency-improving techniques that are difficult to retrofit

2) Our refineries are geographically concentrated to just a few areas. Katrina showed how one natural or man-made disaster could disable a huge portion of our oil supply. We need new refineries to solve this problem
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:38 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17):
I can think of a few:

1) All-new refineries can take advantage of more integrated efficiency-improving techniques that are difficult to retrofit

2) Our refineries are geographically concentrated to just a few areas. Katrina showed how one natural or man-made disaster could disable a huge portion of our oil supply. We need new refineries to solve this problem

1) My father worked 37 years for a major oil company at one if its largest refineries. It was first built in the 1920's. When he retired in 1994, the existing facility was nothing like its original state. The water they discharged into the harbor was cleaner than the water they took in, and they sold excess electricity to the city produced from all of the latest co-generation technology installed at that location.

2) We have a large concentration of refineries in the gulf region because - surprise - that's where the oil is. Are you suggesting we should build new refineries where the oil isn't? How efficient is that?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 2:39 am

Quoting BlazingCessna (Reply 2):
Someone needs to snap those screwballs back to reality.

Perhaps not a good example, but saw a TV program were the E-85 Ethanol that is proposed to be used to fight pollution not only gives a car a lower gas mileage, but costs more. So where are the savings then?

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
Lot's of stories on this in the media today. This doesn't include potential reserves off Florida and the West Coast. I remember reading that these could be potentially 80 billion bbl.

There is plenty of reserves in the US, some areas are not allowed to be drilled, however. Example: my uncle stepped into a big natural tarball at the beach in LA. But there are no offshore rigs close to LA at all.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 13):
Maybe it wasn't discovered before now because oil from the field at issue wasn't economically recoverable at 20 dollars a barrel.

This discovery is located in a deep area of the ocean, and there werent sufficient drilling ships available 20 years ago to locate them all.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 16):

And why should they build new refineries when it is cheaper to expand existing ones?

Redundancy. There is a concentration of refineries in the gulf area. This makes them susceptible to natural or artificial catastrophes. Plus transportation costs to transport the product to the farther away markets.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:14 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 19):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 13):
Maybe it wasn't discovered before now because oil from the field at issue wasn't economically recoverable at 20 dollars a barrel.

This discovery is located in a deep area of the ocean, and there werent sufficient drilling ships available 20 years ago to locate them all.

Incorrect. The field has long been suspected of containing significant amounts of oil. the question - until now - has been, will the field produce oil at a flow rate sufficient to be economic. Part of that equation is the fact that this is oil located deep beneath the seabed where the seabed is some 7000 below the surface of the water, and will thus require an enormous investment to build and maintain the infrastructure necessary for recovery of the oil.

I sailed in the Gulf of Mexico 1975-79. there was no shortage of drill rigs and ships at that time.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:16 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 20):

I sailed in the Gulf of Mexico 1975-79. there was no shortage of drill rigs and ships at that time.

As an aside to the oil in the gulf, are there natural occurring tar balls in Gulf of Mexico beaches as well?
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:21 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 19):
Example: my uncle stepped into a big natural tarball at the beach in LA. But there are no offshore rigs close to LA at all.

LA being Louisiana or Los Angeles? There are plenty of rigs in the gulf off of Louisiana, plus north of Los Angeles offshore of Santa Barbara.
International Homo of Mystery
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:07 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 22):

LA being Louisiana or Los Angeles?

Los Angeles.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 4:17 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 23):
Los Angeles.

While I'm not a geologist, upon further thinking, I don't believe it would be all that odd for a tarball to wash up on the beaches of L.A. There is this, afterall:

http://www.tarpits.org/
International Homo of Mystery
 
Go3Team
Posts: 3156
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 1:19 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 5:14 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
There is no reason they can't right now

The EPA rules that took effect in Oct. of 2002, reduced the entire fuel economy of our fleet by almost 15%. The 10/02 engines get an average of about 4.5mpg. The older trucks get almost 6.
Yay Pudding!
 
miamix707
Posts: 3848
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:22 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 5:21 am

Quoting Jasond (Thread starter):
Anyone confirm story and if true what will be the impact on fuel prices in the short, medium and longer term?

Not sure if it's related but oil prices have already come down a bit in the last few days.

Quoting Charlienorth (Reply 11):
I'm sure this is true,the sad thing about is some envirofreak will probably file a lawsuit to prevent drilling and than whine about the price of gas!

I was visiting a friend at Florida International University in miami a few weeks ago and some girl called me up to give me a brochure and sign up to give money to support the fight against new oil drilling. She said Exxon Mobil wanted to drill offshore in the Gulf I think.

I say go for it. What ecological reserves are in the Gulf that are so important besides maybe Flower Garden reefs which is far away from shore pollution anyways.

Does anyone know if there is a good amount of oil platforms in waters surrounding the Middle East, and if there has ls been any significant impact to the environment? Coral reefs in the Red Sea etc..
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 6:09 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 18):
1) My father worked 37 years for a major oil company at one if its largest refineries.

And my father was an off-shore geophysicst with Arco, Sun, Oryx, Kerr-Mcghee, and now a senior VP of a firm he co-founded. If you want to be condescending because your father worked in the industry, try someone else...

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 18):
It was first built in the 1920's. When he retired in 1994, the existing facility was nothing like its original state. The water they discharged into the harbor was cleaner than the water they took in, and they sold excess electricity to the city produced from all of the latest co-generation technology installed at that location.

1) I didn't say that a refinery is never improved during it's life. To suggest that I implied that is blatantly twisting my words.

2) I correctly stated that an integrated system is more efficent than one that is upgraded in pieces. As an engineer myself, I can authoritativly say this is a valid axiom.

3) I correctly stated that from a cost efficency standpoint, retrofitting capabilities is not always as effective as building a new system. This is especially true when you're talking about the scope of some of these refineries.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 18):
2) We have a large concentration of refineries in the gulf region because - surprise - that's where the oil is. Are you suggesting we should build new refineries where the oil isn't? How efficient is that?

1) No, not just along the Gulf but in 2-3 highly concentrated areas along the gulf. As Katrina demonstrated, a single hurricane with the right strength and track can almost completly shut down such concentrated areas.

2) More than 40% of our oil is from trans-Atlantic sources like Saudi, Nigeria, Iraq, Angola, and the North Sea. Another 15% is from South American nations like Venezuela, Columbia, and Ecuador.

Not even 30% of our oil comes from the Gulf

Sine a larger fraction of our oil can make the trip across half the world to get here, I suspect a few of our tankers could "make it" around the tip of Florida...

3) If you're going to refine oil you are going to distribute the result. The refinery is the starting point for distribution, not the end. In that regard, it isn't terribly inefficent to ship oil from the Gulf to the north-east for refinement when the alternative is to ship to a Gulf port then transport the refined product to the NE anyway...
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 8:39 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 28):
And my father was an off-shore geophysicst with Arco, Sun, Oryx, Kerr-Mcghee, and now a senior VP of a firm he co-founded. If you want to be condescending because your father worked in the industry, try someone else...

Just pointing out that I do know a little bit about the subject. You want to call me a liar, be my guest.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 28):
1) I didn't say that a refinery is never improved during it's life. To suggest that I implied that is blatantly twisting my words.

You implied it, despite your impassioned denial. The refinery where my father worked was located in an urban area in a state with extremely harsh environmental regulations. In an area of declining local production, such that almost all the raw crude came to the refinery by tanker. When it was severely damaged due to a fire, the company could have easily closed it and built a new "more efficient" plant somewhere else. But they didn't. Why not. After all, since you are an engineer, don't you kow the right answer?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 28):
2) I correctly stated that an integrated system is more efficent than one that is upgraded in pieces. As an engineer myself, I can authoritativly say this is a valid axiom.

 rotfl  you chide me for being condescending and inflating my subject matter knowledge, but we're supposed to accept at face value YOU are a MIGHTY engineer, and we must accept YOUR opinion at face value?  rotfl 

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 28):
1) No, not just along the Gulf but in 2-3 highly concentrated areas along the gulf. As Katrina demonstrated, a single hurricane with the right strength and track can almost completly shut down such concentrated areas.

And just where along the gulf can we logically predict that hurricanes won't hit?

Should we space all of our critical industries equidistant from each other? Sure, in a perfect world. Who is going to pay for this perfection?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 28):
Another 15% is from South American nations like Venezuela, Columbia, and Ecuador.

And the closest point in the US from these countries are all in a hurricane zone.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 28):
In that regard, it isn't terribly inefficent to ship oil from the Gulf to the north-east for refinement when the alternative is to ship to a Gulf port then transport the refined product to the NE anyway...

again - who is going to pay for the massive relocation you advocate?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 8:54 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):
You want to call me a liar, be my guest.

I didn't call you a liar, I called you condescending. If you want to criticize the merits of American education like you did to Starrion, you should be able to appreciate the difference.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):
You implied it, despite your impassioned denial.

I've re-read my original post serveral times now, and how you come to such an judgement is beyond me...

"1) All-new refineries can take advantage of more integrated efficiency-improving techniques that are difficult to retrofit

I see nothing that suggest upgrades and expansions are never justified

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):
When it was severely damaged due to a fire, the company could have easily closed it and built a new "more efficient" plant somewhere else. But they didn't. Why not. After all, since you are an engineer, don't you kow the right answer?

That's a business decision Dill, not an engineering decision

We humble engineers are rarely in the positions of authority to build the most optimal system we are capable of...

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):
you chide me for being condescending and inflating my subject matter knowledge, but we're supposed to accept at face value YOU are a MIGHTY engineer, and we must accept YOUR opinion at face value?

Laugh it up. All I said was that as an axiom an integrated system will be more efficent than a patch-work system of upgrades. That's about as basic of an engineering precept as there exist.

Take it or leave it, I'm not even in the petroleum industry so I really don't care..

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):
And just where along the gulf can we logically predict that hurricanes won't hit?

We can't, which is why clustering refineries into a few concentrated areas along the Gulf isn't sound energy policy.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):
Should we space all of our critical industries equidistant from each other? Sure, in a perfect world. Who is going to pay for this perfection?

Ideally, yes. In fact, most large businesses have "de-centralized" opperations to some extent or another. Be it multiple office buildings in the same city or multiple offices in different states. My firm has data tape back-ups hundreds of miles away. We "pay" for that.

Now in terms of building all-new refineries, no additional cost are incurred because you are buying new land anywhere. The difference to build it right next to a refinery in Houston and a port in say Charleston is marginal.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:17 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 30):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):You want to call me a liar, be my guest.
I didn't call you a liar, I called you condescending. If you want to criticize the merits of American education like you did to Starrion, you should be able to appreciate the difference.

LOL, you used condescending as a dodge, because you apparently don't have the guts to say what you really think. That's OK, I can indeed take the heat.

BTW - are you taking the position that Starrion's post was accurate?

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 30):
"1) All-new refineries can take advantage of more integrated efficiency-improving techniques that are difficult to retrofit

I see nothing that suggest upgrades and expansions are never justified

You could have said "new refineries are inherently more economic and efficient," but you didn't.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 30):
Laugh it up. All I said was that as an axiom an integrated system will be more efficent than a patch-work system of upgrades. That's about as basic of an engineering precept as there exist.

 rotfl  whistling past the graveyard, eh? I'm not questioning your engineering axiom. I'm still wondering why we should accept carte blanche your claim of being an engineer when you've dismissed out of hand my assertion that my dad - also an engineer, BTW - actually worked at an oil refinery. Something you admit having never done.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 30):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):Should we space all of our critical industries equidistant from each other? Sure, in a perfect world. Who is going to pay for this perfection?
Ideally, yes.

Great. Problem is, we don't live in an ideal world. We live in the real world. So who is going to pay for the massive relocation you advocate?
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
mham001
Posts: 4190
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:01 am

Quoting Boeing Nut (Reply 14):
Heard this on line recently, but correct me if I'm wrong. Citgo is one of the "members" of the group of this find. Is it not true that Citgo is owned by Venezuela? If so, look for the Chevez soap opera to continue.....

IF thats the case, we just grab their share like they want to do to the other companies operating in Venezuela.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:23 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 30):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 29):Should we space all of our critical industries equidistant from each other? Sure, in a perfect world. Who is going to pay for this perfection?
Ideally, yes.

Great. Problem is, we don't live in an ideal world. We live in the real world. So who is going to pay for the massive relocation you advocate?

The oil companies would. This is part of their infrastructure to sell their product. The key word that this industry needs in redundancy. There are many companies who strive for this, and many ways of creating redundancy to avoid the financial losses a shutdown cause.

Example would be our server. Every night we do a backup. Every day that backup gets taken to another place, just in case the building burns down or something, our data is still available and accessible so the work ($$) can continue uninterrupted.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:31 am

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 24):
While I'm not a geologist, upon further thinking, I don't believe it would be all that odd for a tarball to wash up on the beaches of L.A.

LA sits on top of one of the largest oil deposits in the United States, In fact prior to the 1940's and the development of fields in Texas LA was the largest producer of oil in the country.

I worked with a guy last summer who had previously worked for Exxon when they where building those platforms off Santa Barbara in the 1970's that all the granola crunchers and hollywood elitist types where produceing. He said that they hit oil at 500 feet. That is extremely shallow. The problem with the LA deposits from what I have read is that it is realitvly thick oil and spread over a very thick sand layer.

That and since LA grew up on the site, there ain't a lot of places to operate a drilling rig, but damm with modern drilling methods there could be some great production out from under the city.

Quoting Mham001 (Reply 32):
Heard this on line recently, but correct me if I'm wrong. Citgo is one of the "members" of the group of this find. Is it not true that Citgo is owned by Venezuela? If so, look for the Chevez soap opera to continue.....

IF thats the case, we just grab their share like they want to do to the other companies operating in Venezuela.

Yup and when CITGO was willing to sell below-cost gas to those needy charities in the Northeast last winter Chavez had a field day with the political milage he got by claiming he was helping the poor Americans the goverment had forgotten
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:52 am

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
LOL, you used condescending as a dodge, because you apparently don't have the guts to say what you really think. That's OK, I can indeed take the heat.

I have no idea if you are lying, so why would I call you a liar? You are acting condescending, so I will call you condescening.

I'll also point out that I only gave you feedback on a question you asked to the forum, after which point you went apeshit. Do you just want a confrontation? If so, let's drop the formality and send me a PM.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
BTW - are you taking the position that Starrion's post was accurate?

No. I'm simply pointing out that you criticized Starrion's education while failing to distinguish between middle-school vocabular words. I find that ironic

Dictionary.com if you need it...

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
You could have said "new refineries are inherently more economic and efficient," but you didn't.

Those statements are virtually identical in substance. What is your problem?

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
I'm still wondering why we should accept carte blanche your claim of being an engineer

You don't have to, I really don't care.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
when you've dismissed out of hand my assertion that my dad - also an engineer, BTW - actually worked at an oil refinery.

I didn't dismiss your assertion that your father worked at a refinery. I dismissed the notion that your father's occupation gives you credibility.

Unless (1) you followed in your father's line of work or (2) your family has a hereditary knowledge gene, why mention it at all? You mentioned you "know" something about this industry, so why the personal attacks? If you know so much, go for my arguments.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 31):
So who is going to pay for the massive relocation you advocate?

Find the word relocation in anything I've said. I dare you. Building new refineries does not imply tearing down old ones. There is no re-loaction involved.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 12:14 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 35):
I have no idea if you are lying, so why would I call you a liar?

I have no idea why you implied I was lying. I'm not a mind reader.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 35):
I'll also point out that I only gave you feedback on a question you asked to the forum, after which point you went apeshit.

How have I gone "apeshit?"

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 35):
Do you just want a confrontation? If so, let's drop the formality and send me a PM.

No thanks. I'm not the kind of poster who runs for the anonymity of a PM. But if YOU want to, feel free!

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 35):
No. I'm simply pointing out that you criticized Starrion's education while failing to distinguish between middle-school vocabular words.

LOL, good one! Pick nits instead of addressing the substance! I like it!

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 35):
Those statements are virtually identical in substance. What is your problem?

Do I have to say it slowly for you to understand?

I -- think -- your -- original -- post -- on -- this -- issue -- implied -- that -- rebuilding -- an -- existing -- refinery -- was -- inherently -- uneconomic.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 35):
Find the word relocation in anything I've said. I dare you. Building new refineries does not imply tearing down old ones. There is no re-loaction involved.

Right. Let's make oil companies build new refineries in new locations that make disruption due to storms less likely, but require them to keep the existing refineries that are located too close together operating. Of course, we will have more capacity than we need, but who cares?

On a more practical note, once the new refineries are built, you can't just walk away from the old ones. Someone has to pay for tearing them down.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography
 
roadrunner165
Posts: 788
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2000 6:28 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:03 pm

Quoting N1120A (Reply 15):
There is no reason they can't right now and there is further no reason the entire US trucking fleet can't be running on bio-diesel.

Bio-diesel isn't really all its cracked up to be. It will be quite a few years before bio-diesel has any large market share in the US.

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 19):
Perhaps not a good example, but saw a TV program were the E-85 Ethanol that is proposed to be used to fight pollution not only gives a car a lower gas mileage, but costs more. So where are the savings then?

Correct! E-85 gives you around 25% less fuel economy then straight gasoline. If you subtract all the subsidies (atleast in Minnesota), E-85 would cost around $3.00 per gallon. Many gas stations are hesitant to install E-85 because it is extremely expensive to install and maintain. Oh and Alcohol evaporates when it gets hot, so I hope your gas cap doesn't leak  Smile


Adam
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:08 pm

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 36):
I -- think -- your -- original -- post -- on -- this -- issue -- implied -- that -- rebuilding -- an -- existing -- refinery -- was -- inherently -- uneconomic.

Being in the construction industry, I would second the motion that rebuilding an old place IS inherently uneconomic and prone to cost overruns. I am all for keeping the current refineries going and economically upgrade them as time goes on. But a rebuild is always a nightmare in the making.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 36):
Right. Let's make oil companies build new refineries in new locations that make disruption due to storms less likely, but require them to keep the existing refineries that are located too close together operating.

Storm disruption is only one part of the problem. You can easily have fires, earthquakes, accidents, etc. The relocation has more to do with being able to sell your product w/o interruptions.

Quoting Halls120 (Reply 36):
Of course, we will have more capacity than we need, but who cares?

Everybody here would care. Engineering is built upon the idea of redundancy and failsafe systems. When I design an electrical system, the electrical capacity of the system is at least 100% more than required to avoid any type of interruptions that could occur.
 
halls120
Posts: 8724
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2005 3:24 am

RE: Big Oil Discovery For US

Fri Sep 08, 2006 9:39 pm

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 37):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 36):
I -- think -- your -- original -- post -- on -- this -- issue -- implied -- that -- rebuilding -- an -- existing -- refinery -- was -- inherently -- uneconomic.

Being in the construction industry, I would second the motion that rebuilding an old place IS inherently uneconomic and prone to cost overruns. I am all for keeping the current refineries going and economically upgrade them as time goes on. But a rebuild is always a nightmare in the making.

Sure it is. But many companies make that choice every day. There have to be advantages to upgrading existing facilities, otherwise, it would never happen.

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 37):
Quoting Halls120 (Reply 36):
Right. Let's make oil companies build new refineries in new locations that make disruption due to storms less likely, but require them to keep the existing refineries that are located too close together operating.

Storm disruption is only one part of the problem. You can easily have fires, earthquakes, accidents, etc. The relocation has more to do with being able to sell your product w/o interruptions.

Your last point is key. One of the reasons oil refineries tend to be clustered is that the product has to be shipped out. There are three ways to do it - tank trucks/railcars, seagoing tankers, and pipelines. A huge amount of product is shipped via the latter, which means moving the refinery involves more than just moving the refinery itself.
"Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." Mark Twain, a Biography

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: An767, Yahoo [Bot] and 8 guests