Fuel oil prices

[Warbird]

Nope, no idea. How much, ya got us curious. Amount vs amount we use annually.

Taken from: http://www.anwr.org/archives/1002_is_where_the_oils_at.php

"The USGS used a very conservative 37% recovery factor in their ANWR assessment. If the recovery factor in ANWR fields can match Prudhoe Bay then the technically recoverable average increases to about 18 billion barrels. At today's oil price, and assuming a reasonable recovery factor, the amount of oil economically recoverable (the amount that can be profitably extracted), will be very close to the technically recoverable amount."

And:

"It is also true that existing data show that ANWR is the best onshore oil prospect in the United States. Some believe that the ANWR coastal plain is a kind of oil 'bank' where oil can be withdrawn when needed. This is simply wrong. Although ANWR has enormous potential, that potential will remain unrealized until drilling is allowed.

You may hear that developing ANWR is not necessary since it 'only provides a six month supply of oil.' Some say this is misleading; I think it's dishonest. ANWR, in the average case of 10 billion barrels of reserves, will produce a million barrels of oil a day for over twenty-five years. It will help offset our current 57% oil import rate. It will keep the Trans Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) running for many more years thus encouraging additional investment in exploration and production in Alaska. TAPS is currently flowing at less than half of its 2.2 million barrels per day capacity and can easily accommodate production from ANWR."

There is a ton of good info at that site.  The basics of it are that we don't know exactly how much oil is there until we are allowed to drill it.  From the many old time oil field folks I've spoken to about ANWR, the opinion is that the field actually contains a lot more oil than Prudhoe.  They can't prove it until they can drill it, though.

What I do know is that having ANWR producing would help stabilize and maybe even lower fuel prices in the US.

[turningfool]

with the profits of big oil nearly doubling from year to year i doubt that any oil discovery will lower prices at home..oil fuels us...greed fuels them :(

[Furby]

And what happens when the US, or what's left of it at the time holds the largest oil field left on earth ???

[LeeB]

Turningfool, do you sell any of your turnings? If you do, do you sell them for cost or less? I doubt  it. Oil companies, like all other companies, are a buisiness and the goal of a buisiness is to make money. Wells cost huge dollars to drill. The one we just completed drilling has a $28MM price tag so far and that doesn't include any of the cost to get it to the end user.
Blaming the oil companies for all the high prices is a little off base. Most of the worlds supply is owned by countries, not companies.  Most of the oil under the U.S. is owned by the government including oil locked up in the ANWR and off limit coastal areas.
These high prices should eventually lead to alternate fuel sources and conservation. Oil prices are market driven and when people can't buy it any more prices will drop. Hopefully we won't all go bankrupt before that happens. (Just because I work in the industry doesn't mean the prices don't affect me too.) We will most likely never see cheap oil again, there are too many growing economies around the world competeing for those same barrels and a dwindling supply.
Enough rambling from me. I'm sure I will have ticked a few off with this and hope no one takes it personal. Just stating my veiw.

[Warbird]

LeeB, yer right in that we shouldn't blame just the oil companies for the high prices.  There are many factors.  However, there is definitely profiteering going on and the oil companies (who have made record profits during these supply lulls) are, IMO, turning the screws.

[Engineer]

We need more alternative fuels and need to depend far less on the world's petroleum reserves - because they will eventually be gone.

80-100 years ago - wood crates, glass bottles and paper bags.  No plastics, no oil products to speak of, everybody kept warm with wood or coal heat.  We can develop new hydro sources, new solar and wind farms, even put nuclear plants to good use.   Unfortunately, there's always someone who opposes innovation - the "greenies" who preach the loudest also scream the loudest when their "view" is tarnished by windmills and wood smoke.

I'll stop burning wood as soon as the government bans fire.

[LeeB]

You mention heating with coal. There are still enormous reserves of coal around the world and technology has improved enough to make it eficient and clean but i doubt we'll ever see it in favor again.

[pineywoods]

To quote the former ceo of one of our largest corporations, "you better hope the oil companies continue to make record profits, and invest those profits in new energy sources"
As for those who are just agin it, whatever it is, "let'um freeze in the dark.

[Handy Andy]

  Hey turning fool, greed fuels us all.  Would you show up for work on time if you were to receive no check on payday?

[WDH]

greed fuels us all. 

I don't agree that greed fuels us all.  It is only one of the 7 deadly sins.  I do not believe it is reasonable to be controlled by large corporations whose actions in making exorbitant  profits can be rationalized by greed.  It is never good business when one party takes advantage of another in a business transaction.

[DouginUtah]

Ah, where to begin. I used to post frequently but took a couple of years off due to time constraints. But I have been reading most of the posts. [https://forestryforum.com/board/index.php?action=recent].

I have been building a house, by myself mostly. But to keep from going over the edge I have as a hobby the study of "peak oil". I read articles on the subject every day.

Warbird posted a site I had not seen. I visited it and got a feel for the biases expressed.

First a comment on the info and then a few of my biases:

Quote by the author:

You may hear that developing ANWR is not necessary since it 'only provides a six month supply of oil.' Some say this is misleading; I think it's dishonest. ANWR, in the average case of 10 billion barrels of reserves, will produce a million barrels of oil a day for over twenty-five years.

Do the math. At our current consumption that is 106 days worth of crude.

People just don't "get it" yet. Our current automobile life style can not continue. No alternative fuels are going to replace the energy we get from gasoline. A combination of all of them will probably at best replace about 15% of our current usage.

The thing about ANWR that really get to me is this:

Where did we get the idea that we have the right to find and use every last barrel of oil? How self-centered can we be!

I wonder what kind of world we are leaving for our children. By saying, "Let's open up ANWAR, because we need the oil", we are saying we don't care how resource-poor this country is for future generations.

Let me say it again: Where did we get the idea that we have the right to find and use every last barrel of oil? It is so selfish and inconsiderate. Do you think technology is going to provide a replacement for crude so that your children will live as good of life you and I are living? Not very likely!

I maintain that a hundred years from now we will be severely despised for our squandering of this irreplaceable resource.
Please don't tell people that we have to drill in ANWR. Not yet. Let's let our great-grandchildren do the drilling when they really need the oil.

I pretty much agree with LeeB, (not his coal post) except when he says, "...when people can't buy it any more prices will drop." There are enough people in the world who will pay whatever it takes so that as crude becomes more scarce the price will continue to rise.

And Furby's question is a really good one. I think it will sort of be like the end of a Monopoly game. He who has the resource (money/crude) wins.

I can't end this without stating my dismay with one of the worst energy-related government decision ever made--subsidizing corn ethanol production. Not only is it reprehensible for turning food into fuel, and increasing inflation, it only marginally provides more energy than it consumes in producing it. [EROEI]

Just to make it worse, natural gas production peaked in 2003. I envy you guys who are heating with wood, but that will soon be problematic when wood is a replacement for natural gas.

How is your gasoline-powered sawmill operation going to be affected by $6.00 a gallon gasoline?

[turningfool]

lee b heres the deal with my turnings..usually give them away...all but the hats ;D

[LeeB]

Weren't trying to pick on ya, just using an example.

[Warbird]

Quote by the author:

You may hear that developing ANWR is not necessary since it 'only provides a six month supply of oil.' Some say this is misleading; I think it's dishonest. ANWR, in the average case of 10 billion barrels of reserves, will produce a million barrels of oil a day for over twenty-five years.

Do the math. At our current consumption that is 106 days worth of crude.

If ANWR was the only place we were getting oil from.  Doesn't mean we shouldn't drill it.

People just don't "get it" yet. Our current automobile life style can not continue. No alternative fuels are going to replace the energy we get from gasoline. A combination of all of them will probably at best replace about 15% of our current usage.

Cite?  That statement is preposterous and fallacious.

Where did we get the idea that we have the right to find and use every last barrel of oil? How self-centered can we be!

Ummm..  we are paying for the oil.  And every nation looks after their own interests.

I wonder what kind of world we are leaving for our children. By saying, "Let's open up ANWAR, because we need the oil", we are saying we don't care how resource-poor this country is for future generations.

It's "ANWR" - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.  Anwar is an old Arabic word and means something else entirely.  Ironic, no? 

You've been reading too many leftist sites and have bought into their diatribe.  There is a *lot* of oil under the ground yet.  Places like Alaska, Siberia, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Middle East.  There is no danger that the oil is going to dry up tomorrow.  Or in 6 months.

[Warbird]

Not only is it reprehensible for turning food into fuel, and increasing inflation, it only marginally provides more energy than it consumes in producing it. [EROEI]

And BTW...  what you describe above is a form of the perpetual motion myth.  Currently, there is no existing process that provides more energy than is consumed.  Cold fusion, last time I checked, hadn't been invented yet.  ;)

[DouginUtah]

Warbird,

Cite?  That statement is preposterous and fallacious.

You can say it is preposterous and fallacious but I don't believe it is. How can we use 86 million barrels a day, day after day, and not run out. Perhaps you believe in abiotic oil?

I don't see much value in citing my sources as you would probably just dismiss them as being  "leftist" sites. I suppose they are but that doesn't make the message wrong.

Nevertheless I invite you to read www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net , especially the second page (link at the bottom of the first page).
Also Google Kunstler peak oil for the name of a site which has a bad word which I can't post here.
Also www.energybulletin.net and http://www.aspo-usa.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=1

And don't forget Matthew Simmons who wrote "Twilight in the Desert" (which I have read). I don't believe you could get away with calling him a leftist. Very respected and he says the supply is not capable of meeting the demand.

Ummm..  we are paying for the oil.  And every nation looks after their own interests.

And future generation be damned? Or are you one of those who thinks "technology will save us".

It's "ANWR" - Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

That's getting pretty desperate--to criticize a typo on the forestry forum. :D

There is a *lot* of oil under the ground yet.

Yes, and probably it is going to stay there. Most of the light, sweet crude has been used and heavy, sour is what is left.
Cantarel in the Gulf of Mexico is depleting at about 10% per year, This is where the Mexican government gets most of its money. When Cantarel stops producing sufficient quantities for export to the U.S. we will be hurting but not as much as Mexico. And we think we have a border problem now. Just wait!  :(  Also, the North Sea fields are declining rapidly, as are many others. It's time for us to get our heads out of the sand--and I don't mean oil sands--which I just read are costing 50% more than expected to process.

Currently, there is no existing process that provides more energy than is consumed.

Hello.  :D The mining of crude oil does not take more energy than it produces. That's why crude oil is so important. The EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) is way above whatever is in second place. Ethanol has approximately a 1.3:1 ratio. Hardly worth it.

As for cold fusion, that's probably the only thing that can save us--but as you say, it hasn't been invented yet.

I'll give you one thing though. Drilling in ANWR would be good for Alaskans.   

[Norm]

So what's the solution to all of this Doug?

[submarinesailor]

Doug,

I don't know when you get your natural gas data, "Just to make it worse, natural gas production peaked in 2003."  But all the documentation I have been reading talks about there is plenty of natural gas.  The biggest problem is moving it.  NIYBY is killing a lot of natural gas pipeline projects.  Example:  Long Island has some of the highest cost for gas, I think Maine is the only one higher, but Connecticut is keeping one of the pipeline companies from running a line under the sound, thus getting more gas onto the island.

The Power River Basin in Wyoming is one of the best sources of natural gas we have in the country, but we can't get it out of the area. So, it almost always sales for a much lower price than the rest of the country.   The new Rocky Mountain Express pipeline runs eastward from Cheyenne to Missouri right now – should commence operation late this month or early next.  And LOTS of the other pipeline companies are working on tapping into it when it gets into Ohio.

As to the quantity of (proven dry) reserves, the Energy Information Administration (EIA) just released their latest reserves report and the numbers are up AGAIN for the 8th straight year.  Proven reserve set a new record at 211 Trillion cubic feet.  I need to update my briefing charts because the last natural gas briefing I give (Dover AFB) the total was only 198 Trillion CF.

The number of natural gas drilling rigs is at an all time high.  Last time I checked, there were about 1250 rigs drilling for natural gas.  When I first got into the business, 7 years ago, there were only around 500-600 rigs.  Because of this and if I remember the numbers correctly, natural gas production is up by 3.9% from CY2006 to CY2007 or was it 2005 to 2006 – I forget.  The difference between production and reserves;  production is actual gas flowing out of the ground and reserves is we know it's there, but how and when do we get it out.

IMHO, the supply of natural gas is looking very good.

Bruce

[LeeB]

Boy howdy, I got the bees a buzzing now.

[Warbird]

In addition to there still being plenty of oil, there is a *lot* of natural gas available.  They inject the DanG stuff back into the ground in Prudhoe.

Anyway, I'm going to bow outta this one now.  Cold hard facts are just going to start arguments and I've come to greatly detest forum drama.

[DouginUtah]

Norm,

I know we are not on the same page here, Norm, but the gist of your question is pretty transparent. Big oil, governments, and the world's scientists don't have the solution but I do.  :D

Actually, they know what is coming but they don't want the public to panic. Carry on for as long as possible.  8)

My mission is not to change your mind. My mission is just to let people know what is coming—in case they haven't heard or figured it out for themselves.

The truth is there is no solution, other than changing the way we live, i.e., back to the 1850s. Except society is so much "cruder" today than it was back then, that it ain't going to play out tomorrow like it did back then. What do you think starving people are going to do?

Speaking of tomorrow, there are some who believe it is going to hit the fan suddenly—a quick decline. I'm not in that camp. I see this playing out for many more years—a gradual decline. But starting next year. (I believe I made my prediction of 2008 two years ago here.)

This is not like global warming where there can be disagreement as to the cause, etc.  Peak oil is real and there are facts which are undeniable. Unfortunately, there are a few deniers who use tactics similar to those used to discredit the anti-smoking campaigns of years ago.

I'd like to hear your beliefs in regard to peak oil and declining resources.

[farmerdoug]

I have been following this thread with interest.

I have come to beleive that our energy policy of this country is to burn everyone else's oil.  Sure we could pump alot out of our soil but if we burn the foreign oil while it is cheap then we will have our oil for later.  I see this for economic and military reasons.  We are taking the hit now but will be in better shape later, we hope.  Our military is very dependent on oil as is everyone else's.  If we have the only major source of oil then we will rule or maybe be fighting a war for it.   ::)Do not worry when oil is hard to find they will drill where they want to.

Of course this maybe be a mute point if someone invents a better fuel source before then but then we will have a better looking counrty too.

Farmerdoug

[DouginUtah]

 Twice now I have posted a message and looked for it and it is nowhere to be found.

I replied to Bruce, hit post, and of course did not save it, so I will have to start over again. I hate doing that!


Bruce,

Re EIA: They are almost always optimistically wrong.  http://www.energybulletin.net/33661.html

I don't think this was my source but it says the same thing--2003 peak: http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/1462

Proven reserve set a new record at 211 Trillion cubic feet. 

8)


From http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/nat_gas.html : "27.6 trillion cubic feet of natural gas consumed in North America in 2004." Whoopee! Enough reserves for 7.6 more years, without any increase in consumption.   :( How any new power plants are going to be using NG instead of coal?

IMNSHO, the supply of natural gas is not looking very good. 

[beenthere]

Twice now I have posted a message and looked for it and it is nowhere to be found.
...........................

Maybe that is the early stages of the ... shortage... 8)

[Warbird]

Twice now I have posted a message and looked for it and it is nowhere to be found.
...........................

Maybe that is the early stages of the ... shortage... 8)

:D :D :D