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

Skip to comments.

U.S. Might Have More Oil Resources Than Saudi Arabia, But...
Forbes ^ | april 29th 2012 | Robert Rapier

Posted on 04/21/2013 6:15:23 AM PDT by Laurent.w

Some claim that the U.S. has hundreds of billions or even trillions of barrels of oil waiting to be produced if bureaucrats will simply stop blocking development.

But the Green River formation is the source of talk of those enormous oil resources — larger than those of Saudi Arabia —.

The energy requirements — plus the fact that oil shale production requires a lot of water in a very dry environment — have kept oil shale commercialization out of reach for over 100 years.

It is not at all clear that even at $100 oil the shale in the Green River formation will be commercialized to produce oil, although a number of companies are working on it and will continue to do so.

Thus, my prediction is that despite having an oil shale resource that may indeed be far greater than the oil resources of Saudi Arabia, the reserve will continue to be close to zero for the foreseeable future because there are still many technical hurdles to overcome to realize a scalable, commercially viable process.

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: colorado; oil; saudi; shale

1 posted on 04/21/2013 6:15:23 AM PDT by Laurent.w
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w
If there's *that* much oil *that* close to the Pacific (isn't the Green River somewhere near Seattle?) then something can surely be done.
2 posted on 04/21/2013 6:31:49 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Leno Was Right,They *Are* Undocumented Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

Oopps...Colorado/Utah...not that close to the Pacific.


3 posted on 04/21/2013 6:33:24 AM PDT by Gay State Conservative (Leno Was Right,They *Are* Undocumented Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

I guess we shouldn’t try to get that oil then. Too hard.


4 posted on 04/21/2013 6:36:12 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w
First you have your oil and sometimes oil can be heavy and viscous. Then you have your bitumen, sometimes called tar, which is produced in Alberta Tar Sands. It is so viscous that it has to be diluted before it can be shipped, which is called diluted bitumen or dilbit. For example ship the light crude produced in the Bakken to Alberta to dilute the Alberta Tar oil into dilbit so that it can shipped down the Keystone pipeline.

Then you have your kerogen found in the Greenriver formation in the US west, Israel/Palestine, east europe, and Mongolia. This can be "cooked" into oil and then transported by conventional methods.

5 posted on 04/21/2013 6:37:08 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

You can pipeline oil all the way down from Alaska to the west coast!
Hey rocket sceintist you can pipe line water as well!


6 posted on 04/21/2013 6:39:04 AM PDT by Conserev1 ("Still Clinging to my Bible and my Weapon")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

We have the oil. We can get it out and process it now. The water needed can now be recycled. We lack the political will to do it.


7 posted on 04/21/2013 6:40:49 AM PDT by Kent1957
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

The USA has more carbon based energy than anywhere else in the world. When you drive in the oil shale areas of Colorado you can see oil seeping out of layers of rocks. Before fracking The Denver post had an article on drilling wells and removing oil by heat for about $35 a barrel. Now with fracking and horizontal drilling and other new techniques it could be at least as cheap except for the EPA and anti oil government policies. I don’t remember the figures but it seemed to be 36B barrels of oil.


8 posted on 04/21/2013 6:46:56 AM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
"Too hard"?

Too expensive. There are two techniques, Freeze Wall and Toe to Heel. Do a google search with the keywords Green River Freeze Wall.

Eventually, after Bakken, Eagle Ford, etc go dry and price goes up, then the Green River will be economically reasonable and technically feasible.

This is no different from the Bakken, Eagle Ford, or the Alberta Tar Sands. 10-12 years ago there was very little profit to be made producing there. But, under Bush, the price of oil quadrupled and there is very good profit to be made in those places

9 posted on 04/21/2013 6:51:19 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

What policies did Bush implement (that Obama has obviously carried on) to make the global price of oil explode like that?


10 posted on 04/21/2013 6:54:16 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

“The estimated amount of oil in place (the resource) varies widely, with some suggesting that there could be 400 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken. Because of advances in fracking technology, some of the resource has now been classified as reserves (the amount that can be technically and economically produced). However, the reserve is a very low fraction of the resource at 2 to 4 billion barrels (although some industry estimates put the recoverable amount as high as 20 billion barrels or so). For reference, the U.S. consumes a billion barrels of oil in about 52 days, and the world consumes a billion barrels in about 11 days.”

There’s your key takeaway. We’d probably be wiser to save it for a rainy day.


11 posted on 04/21/2013 7:02:38 AM PDT by Paraclete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paraclete
Green River formations weigh in at about 3 TRILLION barrels ....

of which 1 T is recoverable with todays technology....

As an insight, 1 Trillion barrels is about equal to the known world's reserves of oil.

12 posted on 04/21/2013 7:15:43 AM PDT by spokeshave (The only people better off today than 4 years ago are the Prisoners at Guantanamo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave

....and don’t forget the minor 15 billion barrels recently identified in the Monterey Shale in CA.


13 posted on 04/21/2013 7:17:33 AM PDT by spokeshave (The only people better off today than 4 years ago are the Prisoners at Guantanamo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
"What policies"

An interventionist foreign policy in the mideast.

Now, Obama has intervened because the liberal interventionists are influential in his administration but he hasn't militarily intervened, except for Libya because the liberal interventionists are also multilateralists.

But, if and when the bombing of Iran begins..............

Keep in mind that the NeoCon Republicans and the liberal interventionist democrats are foreign policy idealists and they want to intervene for idealistic reasons such as humanitarianism, nation building, and spreading democracy. They are opposed by the realists aka pragmatists who say we shouldn't intervene for idealistic reasons, only if it is in the US's interest.

14 posted on 04/21/2013 7:19:40 AM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

We probably can’t use it because it is collateral for all the debt we are issuing.

Maybe our mineral rights have been sold.


15 posted on 04/21/2013 7:21:43 AM PDT by moviefan8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
What policies did Bush implement (that Obama has obviously carried on) to make the global price of oil explode like that?

Devaluation of the dollar.

16 posted on 04/21/2013 7:40:33 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Ping


17 posted on 04/21/2013 8:18:42 AM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

Guess we are saving it for when they run out. I have friends like that.


18 posted on 04/21/2013 8:21:03 AM PDT by commonguymd (The enemy within is our MSM. War starts there imo. twitter @commonguymd)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Devaluation of the dollar.

How? Deficit spending? If that was the case, gas should be $40/gallon by now.

19 posted on 04/21/2013 8:25:06 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater

Devaluation. Dollar buys less, so price goes up. Horrible world economy has kept price low, or dollar drop would be giving us $200 oil.


20 posted on 04/21/2013 8:30:04 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w

isreal is suppsoedly sittign on a massive oil reserve too- if so- then we coudl import from them at a much lower price and hte rest of the world can go to .... wherever they wish-


21 posted on 04/21/2013 9:00:55 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin

We didn’t “liberate” Kuwait from Saddam for the Kuwait’s sake, we did it for our “friends” the Saudis.

Those same “friends” who have financed terrorism, including 9/11 and Boston.

Time to tell the Saudis to piss off.


22 posted on 04/21/2013 9:04:25 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kent1957

According to Shell, to produce 100,000 barrels per day, 5 million tons of coal are needed each year.

As the U.S. is using 18,4 million barrels a day...


23 posted on 04/21/2013 9:31:55 AM PDT by Laurent.w
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Conserev1
You can pipeline oil all the way down from Alaska to the west coast!

Do you know where the Alaska Pipeline starts and stops?


24 posted on 04/21/2013 10:17:29 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
the Bakken, Eagle Ford, or the Alberta Tar Sands. 10-12 years ago there was very little profit to be made producing there.

True for the first two, but in 1963 Sun Oil invests almost a quarter-billion dollars in the Great Canadian Oil Sands project. That facility remains in commercial operations today. Other commercial operations started and stopped going back to at least the 1920's.

25 posted on 04/21/2013 10:26:26 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: spokeshave

The next big oil strike that will be bigger than bakken and eagle ford combined will be the cline shale formation in the permian basin of west texas. That one is expected to weigh in at about 35 billion barrels.


26 posted on 04/21/2013 10:56:18 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan; Future Snake Eater

No. The world wide demand for oil has exploded as the rest of the world (including big population countries like china, india, brazil etc) have become rich.


27 posted on 04/21/2013 10:58:10 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

So that indicates that the high price of oil is here to stay; in fact, it may continually get higher as those countries and others become wealthier and more modern. So, perhaps it will remain economically feasible to develop our shale deposits.


28 posted on 04/21/2013 11:00:59 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w; Gay State Conservative; Future Snake Eater; Ben Ficklin; Conserev1; Kent1957; ...

The solution to both importing sufficient water for the green river oil extraction—and creating sufficient energy cheaply to freeze wall and then cook the oil out of the kerigen rock is...wait for it...thorium reactors.

These will produce electricity at half to 1/4 or less the cost of current cheapest coal based electricity...and they can be made in small modules...aka portable nuclear reactors or portable nukes.

There is right now a big and growing world wide race on right now to create these reactors using molten salt designs (mstr)that went into perfectly functional reactors that ran at oak ridge labratories from 1966-1970.

These reactors can run on both thorium and waste uranium of which there are enormous volumes ready to be used for free—all over the USA and around the world.


29 posted on 04/21/2013 11:09:43 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

I’ve heard of thorium reactors. How will they solve the “sufficient water” problem?


30 posted on 04/21/2013 11:12:03 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Been to India or Brazil lately? “Rich” is not the descriptor I would use.
Yes, Rest of World demand is increasing, but the demand curve of Europe, Japan, and the U.S. is depressed. That has indeed kept the price pressure lower than if the latter were enjoying robust growth.


31 posted on 04/21/2013 11:15:46 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w
I forget where I read this but apparently there is still enough oil out there for a billion people to drive their cars every day for a billion more years.

So even if we have five billion people driving every day, they will be able to do so for 200 million years.

Even if we eventually have 10 billion people driving cars everyday, we are still talking 100 million years. So we will likely run out of hamburgers way before we run out of fuel.

32 posted on 04/21/2013 11:20:41 AM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Laurent.w; Gay State Conservative; Future Snake Eater; Ben Ficklin; Conserev1; Kent1957; ...

This article discusses how Shell Oil in conjuction with the DOE is in the initial stages of funding research on thorium reactors. Shell Oil has an eye out to cheaply extracting keorgin in the green river formation where energy is half the cost of extraction.
http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/bulletin/and-the-doe-energy-innovation-award-goes-to-8230-a-new-type-of-nuclear-power/13905

Here are three designs for liquid floride thorium reactors

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/intelligent-energy/the-new-face-of-safe-nuclear/7712?tag=content;siu-container

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/512321/safer-nuclear-power-at-half-the-price/

canadian design
http://www.the-weinberg-foundation.org/2013/04/12/a-simple-and-smahtr-way-to-build-a-molten-salt-reactor-from-canada/

imho the DOD could more efficiently fund and support this sort of enterprise than the DOE—as they have a better record of success byo of the DARPA and other agencies.


33 posted on 04/21/2013 11:24:15 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
Oopps...Colorado/Utah...not that close to the Pacific.

Well, after Global Warming™ fully kicks in, they will be.

34 posted on 04/21/2013 11:41:48 AM PDT by Fresh Wind (The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan

Yeah you’re right overall. But, while all three countries still have many millions in poverty, hundreds of millions of people in these countries have moved into the middle class. That’s a huge surge in demand. So a country like India may have 1 billion people. 400 million have moved into the middle class. That represents an enormous leap in demand. But it still leaves 600 million people in poverty.

Yeah you’re right about demand in the USA—which has been falling in the last four years or so.


35 posted on 04/21/2013 11:58:56 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater

they’d be able to pump water from the Mississippi cheaply during spring floods.


36 posted on 04/21/2013 12:06:18 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: thackney

ok so it’s not the west coast they just stopped too soon lol!
I think my point was made!
I’ve ran about 5000 miles of water pipeline in my day.
Not all in the same direction! lol!


37 posted on 04/21/2013 12:24:00 PM PDT by Conserev1 ("Still Clinging to my Bible and my Weapon")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

MIT has a “Standing Wave Reactor” that was small and portable. It uses depleted uranium for heat source. Waste heat can heat oil for extraction. Salazar was a representative in Colorado but became secretory of the Interior and shut down Gulf drilling and drilling on public land. There will need to be a change of administration to do much as most of the shale is under government land. I think we will be amazed at the solutions they come up with for energy.


38 posted on 04/21/2013 12:29:19 PM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

Just how stupid the feds can be is the fact that if they can master the technology for extracting oil shale kerigen the feds stand to benefit to the tune of approximately 25 trillion dollar range over the lifetime of the fields with oil priced in the $30@barrel range.

Yet the feds do little to actually push this technology beyond allowing companies like shell to do experimental work.


39 posted on 04/21/2013 1:44:12 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
Just how stupid the feds can be...

They are doing it on purpose to collaps the economy. Look up UN Agenda 21.

40 posted on 04/21/2013 1:52:59 PM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

[[These will produce electricity at half to 1/4 or less the cost of current cheapest coal based electricity]]

Why aren’t htere such reactors producing the nation’s electricity? Dear leader whines about lowering our dependence on fossil fuels, and then doesn’t pursue a system that can cut the usage in half? Are we producing these reacotrs? Is congress stifling the production of these plants liek htey do with oil refineries to keep the price of domestic oil artificially high?

Oh yeah- I forgot- the dear leader’s ideology is to raise energy prices to thep oint where peopel are forced to stop using it just liek they did with cigarette taxes and soon with gasoline taxes-

There was also a big push on not long ago to use geothermal steam to power electric grids- I wonderr if that ever got started? or if that too was squashed by big govenremnt because it was prmkossing to be too effective at cutting costs?


41 posted on 04/21/2013 2:19:51 PM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative
Western Colorado, Eastern Utah--about as remote as you can get in the Continental US.
42 posted on 04/21/2013 10:28:00 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | 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