New Oilfields?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,365
Location
orwellian sheep land?
Let's say US oil producers 're'discover and pump two new bigger-than-anyone-would-have-ever-guessed oil reserves right here on the home turf. Well, does anyone think this is even possible? probable? imminent? Secondly, how do you think it would affect the global market? Could it halve today's current price/barrel? What effect would that have on the economy if it happened relatively soon?


Perhaps delusion is well setting in, but it would be interesting. I know (deep down inside lol) that we're sitting plenty of oil trying to get out, especially in the Arctic. I also believe that it's one of the best kept secrets. If this were to happen, it would probably cripple and halt Alberta's oil-mining operation. Why mine for oil in a big, energy intensive process when it can come gushing from another North American source? Something big is going to happen, I can feel it in muh boones! (only the most controlled scientific methods for me, apparently)
happy2.gif

*zips up flame suit*
 
It won't be enough oil to be a significant share of the worlds oil supply.

Any oil found in the arctic will just go into the world market at world prices. It will have essentially no effect on USians except for some indirect help because of it's favorable effect on balance of trade.
 
When/if the global economy surges again, demand is going to go up even further unless technology improves. Alternatives have to be developed along with strong conservation efforts.
 
Well many people don't know that the price of oil has been largely driven up due to the US economy's sudden and unexpected apoptosis. It seems nothing at this stage will save the North American economy. The wheels are in motion and it's been inflated so badly, while people are still unsure as to 'whether theres a recession or not'. Once the crack-pipe of 'stimulus' (no pun) is pulled, never for the dollar to smoke again, the economy's true face will show; it will suffer brutal withdrawals, convulsions, sleeping in drain gutters whimpering. The dollar's days are done. What has happened so far will take years to recover here at home.

So how can this situation be used? What has it been set up for, really? It seems to be a cardinal rule to leave North American oil unknown and untouched. So we don't really see that happening, but what if (the big what if) oil from somewhere else were to suddenly appear and literally flood the market, somewhere that was not the Middle East, what effect would that have? What would become of the arab & Dubai's dubious economy?

This whole oil scare has driven the big guys (China, Russia ) to source their own oil. Russia has more than enough, especially since some of that oil-rich arctic land was GIVEN to then by the US as part of 'some deal'. (I know, it makes no sense.. theyre up to something) China is in Africa, Sudan to be exact, buttering then up and swinging deals without anyone elses blessing. People are definately on the move now more than ever to find oil and it wont be that hard for them to do. Worst case scenario is they pull from domestic sources, but thats really last resort for them. Then imagine suddenly all this oil shows up (on purpose). Like the 'supply-bomb', we're talking enough to put Saudi Arabia to shame. Wouldnt that spell doom for the middle east? It would be the shock of a lifetime for everyone, esp. them. They would be instantly devalued overnight and honestly, from things I've been hearing, it almost sounds like a plan... but how far would the implications extend? We already have more and more crippling conservation and taxation infrastructure in place. That means control. Control that probably would not have been so easily seized should this sudden oil crisis have never happened. We would already have major changes in the lifestyles of americans, already having been sheared the good portion of their wool prompting considerable downsizings which many thought was impossible to see. Cheap oil soon would comeletely screw with everyone, wouldnt save america but crush and destabalize the middle east (even more), drive demand way up, and benefit growing economies; the next 75yr empire. It could happen couldnt it?
 
Originally Posted By: MarkC
What if money grew on trees alongside lollipops and beautiful naked girls rode bareback on unicorns to bring us all refreshments, and ...?



hahaha, I'd accept $300/barrel for that scenario right there, no complaints
wink.gif


But seriously, I'm all on this whole speculation tangeant after being tipped off with some information. The same source that said with authority " 150+/barrel by summer '08 ", no one would have seen that coming. Now how many pounds of salt I should take that tip with? not sure yet, but it really has me thinking. I mean, not even a year ago during the manufactured "peaks" they'd have tankers lined up 60miles off the coast, just sitting there withholding their cargo. If the future oil flood is true, someone's got big plans. $150/barrel just can not continue, for either side.
 
Regardless of the amount of new discovery, we're at a point of no return on demand. There are 5.5+BILLION customers that are screaming for the chance to use the stuff ..or the stuff that access to it provides.

I can't see us pumping our way out of the monster we've created.
 
Oil is a fixed resource. Its price will never go down. If you look at one of the premises of peak oil theory, then you will know all the easy oil has been found. Any large oil fields currently found today will have an extra expense added due to their hard to reach/access nature. I am not talking about middle eastern oil, as that is off limits to private companies and is controlled by the government of the respective country.

The US needs to work on efficiency. Here is why. China and India alone are entering new vehicles into service at a rate of millions per year. What do you think these vehicles run on? Water - nope. Bubble gum - nope. Gasoline - yep. Where do you get gasoline? An oil refinery - yep.

China subsidizes gas, "so what" you say? That just means demand for oil is going to go up, regardless of anything that goes on in the US. Now remember, the amount of oil underground is fixed. Demand is going to go up no matter what - OK, any people here with an education in economics? No, well then read the newspapers they will cater to your mentality on this issue. People with an education in economics will know what this scenario means.

Days of $2 gas will never ever be seen again. $3 gas may been seen for a limited time only. $3.50 -$4.50 gas will be the norm if America works on efficiency and doesn't discourage domestic production. Hello $5 gas if efficiency isn't worked on and domestic production is stalled by regulations and tree huggers.

The only way new domestic oil fields can make a big impact on the US is if both fields were to pump over 500,000 bpd. Plus, they would have to be very close to existing infrastructure so there wasn't an undue expense in bringing it to market. The impact these fields would make would have to be coupled with due diligence in continually pushing efficiency, if efficiency isn't pushed with increased production then there will be no benefit, just a delay to another big oil shock.

These discussions are difficult to have on a forum like this, because there are so many factors involved from wellhead to gas tank. Plus, oil is a commodity that can be put into a tanker and sold to the highest bidder. So, look out, high oil prices are here to stay.
 
Quote:
The only way new domestic oil fields can make a big impact on the US is if both fields were to pump over 500,000 bpd. Plus, they would have to be very close to existing infrastructure so there wasn't an undue expense in bringing it to market. The impact these fields would make would have to be coupled with due diligence in continually pushing efficiency, if efficiency isn't pushed with increased production then there will be no benefit, just a delay to another big oil shock.


That would only be about a 1.5% increase in world oil production. It wouldn't have much impact on price.

It would be better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but that's about it.
 
I'd be happy for any positive effect it could have on our economy.

Unfortunately we the people are destroying it from within too.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7529277.stm

So, I was the fool who bought the property for an over-inflated price, now I default on my debt and the lender loses a fortune. Who cares about the bank? Only the bank, perhaps, until the spiderweb of banking crumbles and our country's economic wellbeing goes with it.

60% of defaults these days can afford to pay their mortgage??!
 
Originally Posted By: BearZDefect
I'd be happy for any positive effect it could have on our economy.

Unfortunately we the people are destroying it from within too.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7529277.stm

So, I was the fool who bought the property for an over-inflated price, now I default on my debt and the lender loses a fortune. Who cares about the bank? Only the bank, perhaps, until the spiderweb of banking crumbles and our country's economic wellbeing goes with it.

60% of defaults these days can afford to pay their mortgage??!
32.gif


The default rate doesn't mean squat unless you also curse the false euphoria that ran out of steam. That is, you didn't have nearly the economy that you think you had due to the false stimulus of new home starts made available by cheap and abundant money. What you're upset about is the ebb to the flow. The alternative was more of a stagnant tidal pool. Now I really wouldn't mind it all that much; stability that is, but some insist in expanding things at all costs ....and ..well, now you're seeing the consequential costs
21.gif
 
Gary, you are right about the over expansion, and subsequent ebb. Both the lenders and borrowers are to blame for the defaults that follow the cheap money and false economy. The root appears to be human recklessness, carelessness, and greed:

1. The lenders were making false profits from selling loans to those who couldn't afford them (or for overinflated properties), then bundling and selling those loans as if they were good debt.
2. The borrowers borrowed what they could not afford (or in the case I cited above, an inflated price they could afford), and now are ditching the properties at the expense of the lenders.

Now who has to pay the price as the lenders' spiderwebs unravel under the strain?

I pay my mortgage.

Sorry about going off topic here.
 
Originally Posted By: XS650
Quote:
The only way new domestic oil fields can make a big impact on the US is if both fields were to pump over 500,000 bpd. Plus, they would have to be very close to existing infrastructure so there wasn't an undue expense in bringing it to market. The impact these fields would make would have to be coupled with due diligence in continually pushing efficiency, if efficiency isn't pushed with increased production then there will be no benefit, just a delay to another big oil shock.


That would only be about a 1.5% increase in world oil production. It wouldn't have much impact on price.

It would be better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but that's about it.


I am not going to argue with what you say. What I am getting at is - if theses "magical" fields came on line next to existing infrastructure and the oil was not allowed to be exported. Efficiency was still being pushed. Meaning that efficiency gains made a decrease in oil usage per day, year over year. Then this would stabilize prices to the extent it would not be a destructive force to economic development. This would buy a few more years to develop better technologies to get of off ground pumped hydrocarbons.

Whatever the solution, the best bet will be with whatever will make use of the existing transportation structure of our current hydrocarbon based fuels. Ethanol is great, but you can't pump it through a pipeline. Bio-diesel is awesome, it can be mixed with diesel and transported in existing infrastructure. The drawback is there isn't enough technology/effeciency to the process to go to 100% bio-diesel.

Anyways, its a moot point mostly. The only person in control of the oil markets is the consumer. Most people aren't ready yet to make sacrifices to their daily lives to cut down on consumption. They would rather just complain about it, and then hop in their gas-guzzler and drive to the local fast food place and wait in line with the a/c blasting.

$4 gas is good for one thing. The marketplace will dictate efficiency. This is why detroit's big 3 are in big, big trouble. They never invested in common sense with the evolvement of their products. Contrary to popular belief, they make good vehicles, they just didn't consider the costs of operating them on a daily basis.

Rant over, I could bable on forever, but what good would it do, it might make me hungry and I'll have to go idle in line at the Jack in the Box.
 
Originally Posted By: LTVibe
Originally Posted By: MC5W20
Ethanol is great, but you can't pump it through a pipeline.


That's about to change.
wink.gif


Central Florida Pipeline to carry first ethanol flow





Thanks for the link. Our fuel supply would be in a better shape if this type of project was possible on the entire pipeline system. However, let me clarify what I was writing earlier, as I just whipped it out fast without much detail.

Allmost all ethanol is transported separate from gas and then blended just before distribution. If the ethanol and gas could be blended and sent through the distribution system then it would make sensse to use it. Ethanol should be seen as a local fuel solution next store to the bio-refinery as opposed to shipping it long distances from the plant and then splash blending it.

Ethanol gets some bad press, but none of it is true. I have researched this topic thoroughly and the only thing I have found that should have never been allowed is some ethanol plants are using coal to fire their boilers.

All the technology is available to run ethanol plants in an environmentaly responsible manner and have a positive impact on the environment. The regulators should not allow any to be built if they want to cut corners on start-up costs.

Man, can I ramble on over nothing. I'm still waiting for the day when I can use corn oil to do an oil change on my 660cc motor of the future. Because thats where we will be in 10 years.
 
Quote:
Alternatives have to be developed along with strong conservation efforts.


The market will provide both, if allowed to do so. The later is already proven.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top