Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We'd Be Crazy To Turn Backs On Oil Sands
IBD Editorials ^ | August 26, 2011 | ROBERT J. SAMUELSON

Posted on 08/27/2011 4:17:28 AM PDT by Kaslin

When it comes to energy, America is lucky to be next to Canada, whose proven oil reserves are estimated by Oil and Gas Journal at 175 billion barrels. This ranks just behind Saudi Arabia (260 billion) and Venezuela (211 billion) and ahead of Iran (137 billion) and Iraq (115 billion).

True, about 97% of Canada's reserves consist of Alberta's controversial oil sands, but new technologies and high oil prices have made them economically viable. Expanded production can provide the U.S. market with a source of secure oil for decades.

We would be crazy to turn our back on this. In a global oil market repeatedly threatened by wars, revolutions, and natural and man-made disasters — and where government-owned oil companies control development of about three-quarters of known reserves — having dependable suppliers is no mean feat.

We already import about half our oil, and Canada is our largest supplier with about 25% of imports. But its conventional fields are declining. Only oil sands can fill the gap. Will we encourage this? Do we say "yes" to oil sands? Or do we increase our exposure to unstable world oil markets?

Those are the central questions posed by the proposed $7 billion Keystone XL pipeline connecting Alberta's oil sands to U.S. refineries on the Texas Gulf coast. The pipeline requires White House approval, and environmentalists adamantly oppose it.

To be sure, there are dangers. Pipelines do crack; there are spills. Susan Casey-Lefkowitz of the Natural Resource Defense Council reminds of recent spills of about 1 million gallons into the Kalamazoo River in Michigan and about 40,000 gallons into the Yellowstone River in Montana.

(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...


TOPICS: Canada; Editorial; US: Michigan; US: Montana; US: North Dakota; US: South Dakota
KEYWORDS: 911flightschool; canada; kenyanbornmuzzie; michigan; montana; northdakota; opec; southdakota

1 posted on 08/27/2011 4:17:30 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I turn her back on the Canadian oil sands. The Bakken Oil Strata in North Dakota, Montana and South Dakota are tremendous resources within our borders.

BTW it's been estimated that we have about 100 years worth of lighnite coal which can be gasified to produce gasoline, diesel fuel, natural gas and helium with NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT!

2 posted on 08/27/2011 4:29:27 AM PDT by Young Werther (Julius Caesar said "Quae cum ita sunt. Since these things are so.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
OIl Shale
While oil shale is found in many places worldwide, by far the largest deposits in the world are found in the United States in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Estimates of the oil resource in place within the Green River Formation range from 1.2 to 1.8 trillion barrels. Not all resources in place are recoverable; however, even a moderate estimate of 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale in the Green River Formation is three times greater than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U.S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day. If oil shale could be used to meet a quarter of that demand, the estimated 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from the Green River Formation would last for more than 400 years.
3 posted on 08/27/2011 4:42:33 AM PDT by lbryce (BHO:Satan's Evil Twin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
Aw, gee...thanks, Young Werther.

I bookmark interesting articles for my husband so he can look over them later.

This cannot be bookmarked, Young Werther, because of your (ahem) post. I'll have to cut and paste or read it out loud.

Either way, one of us have to do extra work because of you photo!

BWAAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAWAW.......

4 posted on 08/27/2011 4:48:52 AM PDT by hummingbird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

Let the Canadians drink their oil, we can turn coal into gas cheaper.


5 posted on 08/27/2011 4:51:15 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

With that rocker who would need heat in the winter.


6 posted on 08/27/2011 4:52:45 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Come now, our policy ever since OPEC has been to pay inflated oil prices to the Arabs so we could ‘bring them into the twenty-first century’, although actually it was the twentieth century when we agreed to this.

And now that Zero is in the WH, why in the world would we want to undercut our devotion to paying blackmail to Muslims? Nobody has been honest with the American taxpayer. Nobody. And it’s appalling. Well, I understand now why honesty isn’t in the cards, it’s not PC.


7 posted on 08/27/2011 4:55:07 AM PDT by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

You obviously didn’t get the message that the arrogant pos that currently resides at 1600 wants to ban coal


8 posted on 08/27/2011 5:00:12 AM PDT by Kaslin (Acronym for OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Berosus; bigheadfred; Bockscar; ColdOne; Convert from ECUSA; ...

Thanks Kaslin.


9 posted on 08/27/2011 5:05:42 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (It's never a bad time to FReep this link -- https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Susan Casey-Lefkowitz of the Natural Resource Defense Council reminds

Sister of Debbie Wasserman-Schulz? Hmmm.

10 posted on 08/27/2011 5:18:16 AM PDT by jnsun (The Left: the need to manipulate others because of nothing productive to offer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

When it’s on our continent and it comes from a stable source we better take advantage of it. I want to use shale, sand, coal, bio waste and anything else that makes sense.


11 posted on 08/27/2011 5:19:11 AM PDT by Recon Dad ("Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way..")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

We have energy supplies like oil,gas and nuclear that would more than suffice America but we have fools and liars and thieves in DC who hate America, the politicians, who have corraled the foolish of America into using useless energy supplies like wind and solar by fiat laws.
Before we can use our God provided energy supplies, we must rid ourselves of the evil democrats and rinos who are destroying us in DC.


12 posted on 08/27/2011 5:20:40 AM PDT by kindred ( Third party conservatism is on the rise, God bless the conservative tea party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lbryce

That’s amazing.


13 posted on 08/27/2011 5:20:57 AM PDT by Aetius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kindred

Amen brother, Amen! Until we clean out the garbage in D.C. we will continue to be on a downhill spiral!


14 posted on 08/27/2011 5:51:24 AM PDT by gbscott1954 (Sarah 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
"You obviously didn’t get the message that the arrogant pos that currently resides at 1600 wants to ban coal"

And that's just for starters.

He would like to do the same for all fossil fuel and probably nukes, too. Exxon made a huge oil find in the Gulf and he pulled their drilling permit. Shale oil probably won't fare much better as long as he is around.

We have to get oust him in 2012 for the sake of the country.

15 posted on 08/27/2011 6:06:16 AM PDT by HangThemHigh (Entropy's not what it used to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Aetius

The fundamental drawback to oil shale, besides, the cost, production to extract the oil trapped in the shale is environmental.


16 posted on 08/27/2011 6:06:21 AM PDT by lbryce (BHO:Satan's Evil Twin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

You didn’t read the article, did you?


17 posted on 08/27/2011 6:06:56 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (We .. have a purpose .. no longer to please every dictator with a vote at the UN. PM Harper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; exg; Alberta's Child; albertabound; AntiKev; backhoe; Byron_the_Aussie; Cannoneer No. 4; ...

-


18 posted on 08/27/2011 6:11:36 AM PDT by Clive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
"Let the Canadians drink their oil, we can turn coal into gas cheaper."

I VERY seriously doubt that. I'm familiar with both processes, and getting the oil from sands is a LOT simpler than gasification and Fischer-Tropsch.

19 posted on 08/27/2011 6:25:33 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Recon Dad
"I want to use shale, sand, coal, bio waste and anything else that makes sense."

Amen, brother!

20 posted on 08/27/2011 6:26:56 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog

Extracting oil from shale is fairly costly from what I’ve read.
I’d bet on oil sands being much cheaper.

In any case, I think Keystone got US government endorsement yesterday.


21 posted on 08/27/2011 6:41:24 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (I want a Triple A president for our Triple A country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
"Extracting oil from shale is fairly costly from what I’ve read. I’d bet on oil sands being much cheaper."

Well, actually, my comparison was intended to be between oil sands and coal, but oil shale might not be that far off.

I recall reading somewhere some time back an article that Shell had come up with a process for "in-situ" pre-processing. As I recall, they basically drill two wells, run a cable down each, and then impose an electric current, heating the rock, and lowering the oil's viscosity.

Once "thinned" by heat,the oil is then able to flow to a horizontally drilled production well located between the "electrode wells".

22 posted on 08/27/2011 6:51:21 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
You're correct on both counts. Coal can become oil, but not without a huge investment. We do have 500 + years worth of coal, so we will never actually run out of motor fuel produced one way or another...

I remember an Exxon guy talking about the company's experience with early oil shale technology near Rifle, Colorado. Exxon dug up the shale, crushed it down to the size of golf balls, irradiated it to get the oil, then tried to dispose of the spent gob.
In the process, the golf balls had become tennis balls, so the piles of reject materials were 33 percent larger (and higher) than the original topography.
Nice subject for the Thursday night Sierra Club meeting, eh ?

23 posted on 08/27/2011 7:00:33 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (I want a Triple A president for our Triple A country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Wants to ban burning coal, the process the germans used in WWII to turn it in liquid fuel has been rediscovered. And if you want all the state of west Virginia to vote Obummer out you better get on to saving their jobs.
24 posted on 08/27/2011 7:21:27 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06229/714268-28.stm


25 posted on 08/27/2011 7:24:38 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Nothing there about it being less expensive than oil sands. Sasol's technology works fine......it just can't compete on an economic basis, unless some "non-economic" driving force is present, be that subsidies, "environmental laws", or "import/export" quotas, boycotts, etc.

I'm well aware of the Sasol process, and I once worked for a company who was looking to gasify coal to provide electricity and feedstock for their process plants. They had a full-size prototype plant up and running, but when the federal subsidies and oil price surge went away, they tore the whole thing down, and went back to natural gas electric power and oil-derived materials (naphtha) for feedstocks.

26 posted on 08/27/2011 9:31:18 AM PDT by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

We talk about the energy we’ll get from the oil shales. But what about the amount of energy it’ll take to extract the oil?


27 posted on 08/27/2011 2:19:05 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (Illegal aliens collect welfare checks that Americans won't collect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther

You might want to take a closer look at the map of the Bakken oil sands, and note that the majority of the deposit is North of the 49th parallel, extending well into Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and even part of Alberta. That 49th parallel would be the US-Canadian border there, for those from Rio Linda.


28 posted on 08/27/2011 4:22:55 PM PDT by Don W (You can forget what you do for a living when your knees are in the breeze.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Young Werther
For your edification:


29 posted on 08/27/2011 4:42:26 PM PDT by Don W (You can forget what you do for a living when your knees are in the breeze.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hershey

Could be that many of our pols and bureaucrats in the Federal government are in the employ of the Saudi’s.


30 posted on 08/27/2011 6:42:50 PM PDT by GregoryFul (Obama - Jim Jones redux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson