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

Skip to comments.

Scarce Oil? U.S. Has 60 Times More Than Obama Claims
Investor's Business Daily ^ | 03/14/2012 | John Merline

Posted on 03/14/2012 12:51:06 PM PDT by IBD editorial writer

When he was running for the Oval Office four years ago amid $4-a-gallon gasoline prices, then-Sen. Barack Obama dismissed the idea of expanded oil production as a way to relieve the pain at the pump. "Even if you opened up every square inch of our land and our coasts to drilling," he said. "America still has only 3% of the world's oil reserves." Which meant, he said, that the U.S. couldn't affect global oil prices....But the figure Obama uses — proved oil reserves — vastly undercounts how much oil the U.S. actually contains. In fact, far from being oil-poor, the country is awash in vast quantities — enough to meet all the country's oil needs for hundreds of years.

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; anwr; bhofascism; democrats; domesticoil; drillbabydrill; drillheredrillnow; drilling; elections; energy; gasprices; keystone; keystonepipeline; keystonexl; nobama2012; obama; obamabinlying; oil; oilreserves; oilshale; opec; thegreenlie; usdrilling; usoil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

1 posted on 03/14/2012 12:51:15 PM PDT by IBD editorial writer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thackney

Ping.


2 posted on 03/14/2012 12:56:14 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IBD editorial writer

Once again, it is my understanding that we can only use 2% of what we have. Not that we only have 2% of the worlds oil. They are playing with numbers here while our people suffer and we support the Middle East, which hates us.


3 posted on 03/14/2012 1:00:20 PM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2

Let me add one thing here. If we produced our own oil for our own use, and not export it, that would leave more of the Middle East oil for the rest of the world. Prices for oil would drop.


4 posted on 03/14/2012 1:02:01 PM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RC2

Maybe we’re drinking their milkshake while the oil in our ground gets more valuable.


5 posted on 03/14/2012 1:03:56 PM PDT by REDWOOD99 ("Everyone should pay taxes. Everyone should pay the same rate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: IBD editorial writer
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king...in the land of energy and progess, he who holds all the oil, is king.

obamablueboy
6 posted on 03/14/2012 1:04:12 PM PDT by FrankR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: REDWOOD99

—Maybe we’re drinking their milkshake while the oil in our ground gets more valuable.—

I started wondering that in the early 80’s. Why else would we so overtly NOT drill what we have?


7 posted on 03/14/2012 1:33:07 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FrankR
I know there's video of Obama saying he wants gasoline prices to rise but more slowly, I know there's video of him saying energy prices under his administration will necessarily skyrocket and his energy secretary saying he wants gasoline in the $8 to $10 range. I know there's video of him rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline. My question is: Why the hell don't the Republicans have a commercial playing every half hour on TV with these videos? No money they spend would have greater bang for the buck.
8 posted on 03/14/2012 1:34:56 PM PDT by anoldafvet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: REDWOOD99

—Maybe we’re drinking their milkshake while the oil in our ground gets more valuable.—

I just thought of something that strengthens this belief. There have been a lot of proponents of Peak Oil over the last several decades. If the people in charge of granting oil leases really believe that we are on the verge of sing oil reserves plummet, they may choose to hold on to them for when it is really needed.

Except the rumors of Peak Oil have turned out to be greatly exaggerated. We keep finding more. Lots more.


9 posted on 03/14/2012 1:39:39 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: REDWOOD99; cuban leaf

The stone age didn’t end because we ran out of stones.

Neither did the bronze or the iron age.

We will eventually move on to something else. Nor will the world stay with oil as the price climbs to precious metal rates.

So at that point, do we really believe the US will continue to use the previous century’s technology, while the world moves on?

All we are doing by not producing, is enriching our neighbors and enemies while billions leave this country.


10 posted on 03/14/2012 1:46:26 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thackney

—All we are doing by not producing, is enriching our neighbors and enemies while billions leave this country.—

Exactly how I see it.


11 posted on 03/14/2012 1:48:11 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: IBD editorial writer

There might be oil but that doesn’t mean it’s cost effective to extract. The cheap to get out oil is already being tapped.

And how much capital is there around to spend getting at this oil?

These are the items rarely discussed.


12 posted on 03/14/2012 1:57:42 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RC2

Wouldn’t we have to nationalize the oil industry to do that?


13 posted on 03/14/2012 1:59:58 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

People mischaracterize Peak Oil.
It’s not peak oi, it’s peak CHEAP oil.


14 posted on 03/14/2012 2:02:17 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

People mischaracterize Peak Oil.
It’s not peak oil, it’s peak CHEAP oil.


15 posted on 03/14/2012 2:02:34 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
Why else would we so overtly NOT drill what we have?

Have you ever read Michael Crichton's "State of Fear"?

There is an amazing number of people that believe they know what is "best" for "those other people". And far too many of them get elected to positions of power.

It can be rather amazing in hind sight what sounded "right" to people back in history.

Why Politicized Science is Dangerous
http://www.michaelcrichton.net/essay-stateoffear-whypoliticizedscienceisdangerous.html

16 posted on 03/14/2012 2:09:03 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Whichever country or person (Soros) is awarded our energy supplies in satisfaction of debt, said sources discovered or not, along with our arable land and potable water, is not going to worry about EPA regulations. We’re gonna have the dirtiest air, oiliest beaches and biggest holes on the face of the earth. The EPA goons will simply be turned to goo and shot into space, along with many of the rest of us.


17 posted on 03/14/2012 2:12:09 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: IBD editorial writer

If ever there were a time to switch to a majority nuclear power generation, this would be it. If the French can make it work (75% of their electricity is nuclear generated for the last 40 years) we can do it.

Or we can spend another 30+ years in costly wars and geopolitical intrique to get oil and still be in this same position in 2042.


18 posted on 03/14/2012 2:18:40 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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

Thanks IBD editorial writer.


19 posted on 03/14/2012 2:42:19 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (And a sight-unseen STFU and NTSA to Bush-bashers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: IBD editorial writer

It’s not a “supply and demand” thing right now that drives the oil...it’s a combination of speculators driving the oil Futures’ market skyward using the Middle East/Iran thing as a catalyst. Consumption (demand) is DOWN with near-$4 prices of gasoline, BUT, Supply is UP.....unfortunately, oil is trading well-over $110/barrel with futures being high-buck traded now.


20 posted on 03/14/2012 2:50:02 PM PDT by traditional1 (Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IBD editorial writer

if so then why is our goverment choking the h%$# out of us . they should let the free market have it.


21 posted on 03/14/2012 2:55:01 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dalebert

oops ..I forgot we dont have that anymore(free market) or any other freedoms. we paid our politicians to take all that away.


22 posted on 03/14/2012 2:56:57 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
Wouldn’t we have to nationalize the oil industry to do that?

Not necessarily; there could be a tariff for the export of petrol and its products.

23 posted on 03/14/2012 3:10:30 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
If ever there were a time to switch to a majority nuclear power generation, this would be it.

Because we are running out of coal? Because Natural Gas is too expensive?

I don't plug my truck into the wall receptacle. Battery technology does not yet exist to make electrical power a reasonable conversion for liquid fuels.

24 posted on 03/14/2012 3:25:30 PM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
—Maybe we’re drinking their milkshake while the oil in our ground gets more valuable.—

I started wondering that in the early 80’s. Why else would we so overtly NOT drill what we have?

I too thought the same thing, but it has become evident that they have more oil than we have money. We must drill or go broke.

25 posted on 03/14/2012 3:50:33 PM PDT by TexasRepublic (Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: anoldafvet

“I know there’s video of Obama saying he wants gasoline prices to rise but more slowly, I know there’s video of him saying energy prices under his administration will necessarily skyrocket and his energy secretary saying he wants gasoline in the $8 to $10 range. I know there’s video of him rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline. My question is: Why the hell don’t the Republicans have a commercial playing every half hour on TV with these videos? No money they spend would have greater bang for the buck.”.....

Good question. I have no doubt that this is being considered. I know if Newt Gingrich was the candidagte, it would definitely be a part of his campaign. Ditto for Santorem. What we have to insist is that the GOP candidate, whether Newt, Rick, or Mitt, - must absolutely use all the idiotic comments by Obama against him. No more the stupid antics of McCain who refused to actually attack Obama with his own words out of some sort of suicidal honor against a black opponent.


26 posted on 03/14/2012 6:50:38 PM PDT by Gumdrop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

That seems to me to be essentially the same thing


27 posted on 03/14/2012 7:22:39 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Coal is used to make electricity.
Natural gas, you have a point. But there is still a lot of conversion to go through if you’re limiting the discussion to transport.


28 posted on 03/14/2012 7:24:15 PM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Everything you stated is clear and basic logic. Very solid thinking on your part. I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately, it somehow all gets lost in the shuffle of BS created by those trying to motivate the situation politically.

29 posted on 03/14/2012 7:45:24 PM PDT by VideoDoctor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

Perhaps I am missing what you were suggesting.

Did you mean to put nuclear reactors into vehicles?


30 posted on 03/15/2012 4:54:59 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
Why else would we so overtly NOT drill what we have?

To destroy the US economy!

Oil is the lifeblood for the economy, our standard of living and our national defense!

Only leftwingnut socialists who hate America want to limit our oil drilling.

31 posted on 03/15/2012 5:05:07 AM PDT by newfreep (Breitbart sent me...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

The point, for the elitists, is to make energy use too expensive for the commoner,

so, while we huddle in our huts burning a few twigs we can gather to keep warm and cook,

they have a lot less competition and crowding in the areas of consumption that they prefer.


32 posted on 03/15/2012 5:07:47 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
The cheap to get out oil is already being tapped.

The article states otherwise.

33 posted on 03/15/2012 5:08:43 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dalebert
I explain the whole motivation for "choking" us here:
32
34 posted on 03/15/2012 5:10:25 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: VideoDoctor

The concept can be applied to many different things.

The information age didn’t move beyond books and newspapers because a lack of paper and ink.

Transportation didn’t move past carriages because we ran out of horses.

We will, someday, move past petroleum for transportation fuel. Those that think we should hold on to ours while funding everyone else should consider, who will have the funds left to develop what comes next?


35 posted on 03/15/2012 5:15:12 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MrB
No, the article isn't stating otherwise. From the article:

To be sure, energy companies couldn't profitably recover all this oil — even at today's prices.

That means we have reached peak CHEAP oil.

There might be plenty of oil.

But it will not be cheap.

Cheap oil is over.

36 posted on 03/15/2012 7:39:14 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

Why weren’t we drilling all this oil when the right was in power?


37 posted on 03/15/2012 7:41:17 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: newfreep

Why weren’t we drilling all this oil when the right was in power?


38 posted on 03/15/2012 7:41:37 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I wasn’t limiting the discussion of energy to transportation. I gave the example of France which meets 75% of her energy needs through nuclear.


39 posted on 03/15/2012 7:45:08 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
You said:

If ever there were a time to switch to a majority nuclear power generation, this would be it. If the French can make it work (75% of their electricity is nuclear generated for the last 40 years) we can do it.

Or we can spend another 30+ years in costly wars and geopolitical intrique to get oil and still be in this same position in 2042.

I see the two as totally unrelated. Do you see it differently? If so, how are they related.

France doesn't have our coal or natural gas reserves. Also today we import most of the uranium we use. I just don't see shutting down coal and natural gas to build more expensive reactors and depending on an outside source for uranium a good move by any measure.

40 posted on 03/15/2012 7:49:42 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

>That seems to me to be essentially the same thing

Tariffs are not the same as nationalization; they are merely a tax/duty on imports (or exports).
Yes they can be abused, but that is true of almost all powers.


41 posted on 03/15/2012 8:07:22 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

It is essentially telling private companies where they can sell their product by penalizing them if they sell on the international market ... meanwhile other oil companies would be free to sell on the international market.

Also, unless we also set domestic prices (which would be tantamount to nationalizing) the price of oil would not be cheaper domestically.

Now, maybe that’s the way we’ll have to go. But I’m just making the point that oil is not going to be cheaper by strong-arming companies to sell domestically.


42 posted on 03/15/2012 8:26:54 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: thackney

I don’t think we have to shut down our coal and natgas operations. I don’t know that coal mining is any cheaper long term than nuclear.

Thorium reactors would not rely on uranium.


43 posted on 03/15/2012 8:33:30 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

So when you said “switch to”, what was going to be switched to nuclear?


44 posted on 03/15/2012 8:47:06 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
I don?t know that coal mining is any cheaper long term than nuclear.

I do. Do you want a link?

Of course I mean in the real world, not the "Kill Coal" Obama world.

45 posted on 03/15/2012 8:53:11 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne

>It is essentially telling private companies where they can sell their product by penalizing them if they sell on the international market ... meanwhile other oil companies would be free to sell on the international market.

It is taxing the sale on foreign markets of domestically produced petrol, true. (Though I should point out that traditionally tariffs were applied against incoming goods.)

>Also, unless we also set domestic prices (which would be tantamount to nationalizing) the price of oil would not be cheaper domestically.

I think the domestic prices are a bit more complex than most think, mainly to do with taxation and regulation bureaucratic nightmares, but not uninfluenced by “speculation.” (Ever notice that any time there’s strife in the mid-east speculation id the price goes up, in fact, the speculation is almost always “the price goes up”.)

>Now, maybe that’s the way we’ll have to go. But I’m just making the point that oil is not going to be cheaper by strong-arming companies to sell domestically.

No; the obvious solutions would be: a) release the environmental stranglehold on development (industrial as well as the extraction), and b) drop taxes to something reasonable (IIRC about 50 cents is tax, and 3 cents is profit; though these may be outdated it still illustrates the ridiculous ratios involved).


46 posted on 03/15/2012 9:05:27 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Sure, link would be good.


47 posted on 03/15/2012 9:26:49 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: thackney

We’re talking in the context of offsetting oil energy with some other form of energy. For transport, that wouldn’t make much difference, I agreed ... we probably couldn’t produce enough electriciy to displace oil for transport. So that’s a separate nut to crack (maybe natgas will be the answer but a lot of infrastructure changes would have to take place.)

But nuclear could make a huge difference in our other energy needs and make us much less dependent on foreign sources of oil and being at the mercy of price fluctuations.

I will post a separate graph of energy use by sector.


48 posted on 03/15/2012 9:35:05 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: thackney

49 posted on 03/15/2012 9:37:34 AM PDT by Lorianne (fedgov, taxporkmoney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Lorianne
I will post a separate graph of energy use by sector.

I am quite familiar with that chart.

Which of the lines from Petroleum do you think your are going to replace? We have already ruled out 71% of the choices. Do you think you can use nuclear to replace the one feeding industry for petrochemical feedstock?

50 posted on 03/15/2012 10:07:02 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-56 next last

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