Is the United States' dependence on foreign oil completely unnecessary?

[Random Variable]

I was thinking as I drove home from class today that most of the continental United States has not been explored for oil deposits.

 

[tontod]

Whichever way you look at it, oil is a limited resource, in 50-60 years we'll be starting to run out of it or pretty low. The best solution is to look for alternatives now, like solar, fuel cell, etc. so by then even if oil runs out, we'll be fine and we'll finally be able to stop our dependence on the Middle East.

 

[ElFenix]

they told us 20 years ago we'd run out of oil in 50 years. today they tell us 50 years. i wonder when that number will start going down?

yeah, we could probably do it. we'd need alternative energy conversion sources, the largest of which is nuclear though thats not politcally palatable. wind generation has limited areas it can be installed. using wave energy is promising, a town in scotland is running off it i saw.

 

[b0mbrman]

Alaska has lots of oil. People in Alaska would love to drill for oil...the US government would love to drill for oil.

 

[Random Variable]

<< Alaska has lots of oil. People in Alaska would love to drill for oil...the US government would love to drill for oil. >>


But what about Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, etc.?



<< The best solution is to look for alternatives now, like solar, fuel cell, etc. so by then even if oil runs out, we'll be fine and we'll finally be able to stop our dependence on the Middle East. >>


I read recently that we import only 11-percent of our oil from the Middle East.

 

[Lucky]

Its 13 percent, but you are correct, we are not really dependent on them. Its other countries that are dependent on them that cause our prices to go up.

 

[Random Variable]

<< Its 13 percent, but you are correct, we are not really dependent on them. Its other countries that are dependent on them that cause our prices to go up. >>


I was close.

I think we import most of our oil from Mexico, Venezuela, Russia, and maybe even Nigeria.

 

[DaveSimmons]

<< Alaska has lots of oil. People in Alaska would love to drill for oil...the US government would love to drill for oil. >>

Yeah, and destroying ANWR would get us oil in 10 years. Pushing conservation in all areas would reduce oil consumption in less than 1 year.

Besides, since oil is a finite resource, why not keep ours for the next generation and use up the Middle East's supply instead?

 

[rahvin]

On the contrary the US is the most oil explored region in the world. They know of many many fields of oil in the US but most cannot be utilized at the current cost per barrel. For example, there is oil in utah that contains wax, to pump it you have to inject steam into the well to liquify the deposit and remove the contaminents during refinement, per barrel prices have to be $40+ to even make it economical. Nothing beats middle east oil, stuff is easy to pump and a light weight oil with good properties and few contaminents.

The solution to our oil dependence is to simply stop using it. There are alternates, if we spend the $$ to develop them they will become cost effective against oil.

 

[Ns1]

<< Besides, since oil is a finite resource, why not keep ours for the next generation and use up the Middle East's supply instead? >>



lmao that's a great idea

 

[Random Variable]

<< Yeah, and destroying ANWR would get us oil in 10 years. Pushing conservation in all areas would reduce oil consumption in less than 1 year.

Besides, since oil is a finite resource, why not keep ours for the next generation and use up the Middle East's supply instead? >>


If the Clinton administation had started drilling in the mid-1990's, we would have had the petroleum now.

 

[BlueApple]

I think we just need to wean ourselves off of middle-eastern oil, so we don't have to pretend buddy up to (some) of those countries just to get our black gold. Of course we need to also get alternatives to oil (I was read Popular Science today, they said fuel cells will be in limited use by the end of net year), and practice conservation.

 

[Amused]

<<

<< Alaska has lots of oil. People in Alaska would love to drill for oil...the US government would love to drill for oil. >>

Yeah, and destroying ANWR would get us oil in 10 years. Pushing conservation in all areas would reduce oil consumption in less than 1 year.

Besides, since oil is a finite resource, why not keep ours for the next generation and use up the Middle East's supply instead? >>



1. The oil operations will take up a few small acres in a huge tract of land that rivals Texas. They'd be hard pressed to "destroy" it even if they TRIED.

2. The vast, Vast, VAST majority of tree hugging sheep bleeting about "ANWR" have never been there, will never go there, and have no earthly reason to care about it other than they've been told to.

3. There is absolutely no reason not to take advantage of our natural resources.

4. The old line that there's not enough oil to last has been mindlessly bleeted for the last 50 odd years. They keep postponing the "end," because the end keeps coming and the oil keeps flowing. They are no different than the end of the world religious freaks. Take this into account when these same kinds of people try to tell you there's not enough oil in Alaska to bother drilling. Obviously there is, or oil companies wouldn't spend the literally billions of dollars to invest in it.

 

[Bleep]

<< If the Clinton administation had started drilling in the mid-1990's, we would have had the petroleum now. >>



Another mindless attack by someone that knows nothing.. How about some facts instead of just blowing off at the mouth. All the oil that would come from the new drilling in Alaska would be sold to Japan.

As to the origonal post, many years ago I worked for a large oil co. I was part of a team that did sizemographic looks at the earth searching for oil. When I quit they had done 31 states with readings every 5 miles. We found lot of oil in small puddles really deep and almost impossible to get at. There a lot of oil wells in Colorado by the way. Also in Nebraska.
Almost all wells in Colorado have a lot of natural gas which is just burnt off to keep the price of natural gas UP. One field that I know of looks like a city at night with the stacks burning off the Natural gas, This is companies doing this not any political administration, it is horray for me hell with you attitude of the energy companies in the U.S.

Bleep

 

[DaveSimmons]

<<

<<

<< Alaska has lots of oil. People in Alaska would love to drill for oil...the US government would love to drill for oil. >>

Yeah, and destroying ANWR would get us oil in 10 years. Pushing conservation in all areas would reduce oil consumption in less than 1 year.

Besides, since oil is a finite resource, why not keep ours for the next generation and use up the Middle East's supply instead? >>



1. The oil operations will take up a few small acres in a huge tract of land that rivals Texas. They'd be hard pressed to "destroy" it even if they TRIED.

2. The vast, Vast, VAST majority of tree hugging sheep bleeting about "ANWR" have never been there, will never go there, and have no earthly reason to care about it other than they've been told to. >>



So "out of sight out of mind" is your motto? Some people are able to look beyond their neighborhood and pay attention to the rest of the world. It's not "bleeting" (sic) or tree-hugging to want fresh air, clean water, and a few unspolied places left on the globe.

Corporations care about profits not wildlife, and will only protect the environment at the minimum they can get away with -- the superfund is almost out of money after spending tens of billions to clean up toxic land and water created by the Exxons of the world.



<< 3. There is absolutely no reason not to take advantage of our natural resources. >>



Except that our oil supply is a one-time gift -- oil does not regrow like trees will.



<< 4. The old line that there's not enough oil to last has been mindlessly bleeted for the last 50 odd years. They keep postponing the "end," because the end keeps coming and the oil keeps flowing. They are no different than the end of the world religious freaks. Take this into account when these same kinds of people try to tell you there's not enough oil in Alaska to bother drilling. Obviously there is, or oil companies wouldn't spend the literally billions of dollars to invest in it. >>



I said a"finite" resource, and I hope you aren't saying it isn't.

My point, which only Dick Cheney and you find difficult to grasp, is that we can increase our (relative) supply of oil right now through conservation as opposed to going to ANWR and getting oil in 10 years. Additional benefits are the preservation of ANWR, reduced pollution, and keeping ANWR's oil as a legacy for future generations if we ever really need it. The only losers are Dick Cheney & GW's oil company buddies.

 

[Random Variable]

<< Another mindless attack by someone that knows nothing.. How about some facts instead of just blowing off at the mouth. All the oil that would come from the new drilling in Alaska would be sold to Japan. >>



How is the truth mindless? There was discussion about drilling in the Anwar in 1995. Heck, even Jimmy Carter recognized the importance of the ANWR for potential future drilling.

EDIT: But this thread wasn't even supposed to be about the ANWR. :frown:

 

[Slacker]

Well, I beleive that the U.S. has billions of barrells of oil in reserve and untapped resources, seems logical to burn up foreign oil now and have the upper hand in the future

 

[XMan]

But what about Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, etc.?

There's tons of oil. A lot of it is in oil shale, which is expensive to extract. But Chevron is doing some field research right now to see if there are cost effective ways of extracting.

Also, I believe the second-largest untapped oil field in the world is in the Gulf of Mexico. The biggest is in Canada, IIRC.