• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Republicans say new study belies Obama claim US has 2 percent of world oil

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Obamites are claiming that we will not find all the unfound oil reserves if we drilled every square inch of the US. :D

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds! Amazing lengths you would go to in order to defend your messiah! Wow.


So you guys either are pretending Obama did not say "Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil" or you are pretending if we drilled every square inch of the US we still would not find the oil in the US.

So which one are you guys pretending?
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/04/19/republicans-say-new-study-belies-obama-claim-us-has-2-percent-world-oil/#ixzz1sXGnqCQO

So we use 20% of the world's oil and we have 26% of the world's supply. I have an idea, lets drill our OWN oil and stop sending money to nations which hate us.
Why the fuck is this meaningless article comparing USGS survey of the whole world to a Energy Information Administration survey of the USA.

How about we compared the USGS survey of the world to a USGS survey of the USA

USGS Survey of world, conventional oil = http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3042/fs2012-3042.pdf = 565 Billion barrels

USGS Survey of USA, conventional oil = 27 BBO as shown below



Ratio = 27 / 565 = 4.8% so Obama is still wrong, but the number is not as retarded as presented by this worthless rag of an article.

Please keep in mind this is all for conventional oil, as indicated on the world and USA surveys. Unconventional oil estimates would be correspondingly much larger for both the world and the USA.
 
Last edited:

Pens1566

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2005
7,557
671
126
Obamites are claiming that we will not find all the unfound oil reserves if we drilled every square inch of the US. :D

Your intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds! Amazing lengths you would go to in order to defend your messiah! Wow.


So you guys either are pretending Obama did not say "Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil" or you are pretending if we drilled every square inch of the US we still would not find the oil in the US.

So which one are you guys pretending?
Either your reading comprehension is astoundingly poor, or you're just a huge fan of strawman arguments.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Either your reading comprehension is astoundingly poor, or you're just a huge fan of strawman arguments.
Are you saying Obama never said "Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil"?

Or are you saying we would not find all the oil if we drileld every square inch of this country?

Which is it?
 

ccbadd

Senior member
Jan 19, 2004
458
0
76
That's like saying a meth addict cooking his own meth has meth independence.
Are you kidding? What about a farmer who produces his own food, is he like a meth attic too??? What a stupid remark! And yes, a meth attic that cooks his own meth would not have to pay a drug dealer, therefore being meth independent.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
Are you saying Obama never said "Even if we drilled every square inch of this country right now, we'd still have to rely disproportionately on other countries for their oil"?

Or are you saying we would not find all the oil if we drileld every square inch of this country?

Which is it?
Obama's statement is factually correct, we have 4.8% of the undiscovered conventional oil reserves of the world. Even fracking leads to mostly Natural gas production as compared to heavy crude production.

If we drilled every square inch we would meet our own demand for a short period of time, but then quickly exhaust reserves and return to depending disproportionately on other countries for oil.
 

ccbadd

Senior member
Jan 19, 2004
458
0
76
Everyone who is at least semi intelligent knows that doesn't work. Oil is a global market. Price is set by global supply and demand. Oil companies aren't going to sell it to you any cheaper just because it's from the US and not Canada. So what you'll have is more privatized profits for oil companies, and socialized losses for the environment and public lands. Privatizing profits and socializing losses is what GOP is all about.
Actually, NOBODY pays the spot rate for oil outside of speculators. Take a closer look and you will see that West Texas crude is not $117.00/brl. All regional prices are different.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
The bottom line is that drill, drill, drill in the USA would have no impact on world oil prices and would only serve to consume our own resources faster. I'm more than happy to let the Saudi's blow through their sweet crude, while we advance alternative technologies - investigating shale rock, fracking, building nukes, renewables, increasing energy efficiency, etc. All the while we will still have a nice pocket of conventional oil that we can eventually use for things like the chemical industry, plastics, etc.

The only thing drill, drill, drill would realistically do is slightly bump the revenue of whatever oil company wins the leases.

I personally work extensively in the process and power industry, from a mechanical engineering side of things. While I support the industry and I think certain regulations from the government are out of line, I know that drill, drill, drill is a strawman that would have absolutely no effect on world oil prices, national oil prices, and I guess what most people care about gasoline prices.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Obama's statement is factually correct, we have 4.8% of the undiscovered conventional oil reserves of the world. Even fracking leads to mostly Natural gas production as compared to heavy crude production.

If we drilled every square inch we would meet our own demand for a short period of time, but then quickly exhaust reserves and return to depending disproportionately on other countries for oil.
Ya, why even bother. That would only drive the price down to $1.75/Gal and improve the economy. The hell with that.
 

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
Why the fuck is this meaningless article comparing USGS survey of the whole world to a Energy Information Administration survey of the USA.

USGS Survey of world, conventional oil = http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3042/fs2012-3042.pdf = 565 Billion barrels

USGS Survey of USA, conventional oil = 27 BBO as shown below
You are correct about the world, 565 BB
You are incorrect about the US, 88.5 BB onshore (Page 114 http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/energy/00.Par.9252.File.dat/EPCA2008HIsec3.pdf)
Offshore also needs to be included,low estimate is 66.5 BB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States)
Total US reserve estimate, 155 BB

155 / 565 = 0.27 27%

The USGS does not deal with oil which is offshore, which is why you cannot find the info on their site. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) controls that part. You have to add the two together to get the total.

Don't feel bad about it, it is not a well known thing.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
Ya, why even bother. That would only drive the price down to $1.75/Gal and improve the economy. The hell with that.
What? I don't even know how to start to respond to your post.

There is a whole lot of shit to consider, lead time on construction equipment, the ability to extract these "undiscovered" reserves/etc. Technically if known resources were opened up it would have zero effect on any prices, let alone bringing gas to $1.75.

If a all-out no-holds-bar approach was taken (which would require subsidy and support from the government) I guess we may be able to double our production in the next 5 years, but it would have zero effect on any prices. The USA production doubling would have a laughable world-wide effect, but if OPEC was actually concerned they would just reign in their production and prices would be stabilized. The only thing that would change is us blowing through our reserves as opposed to using the Saudi's.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Ya, why even bother. That would only drive the price down to $1.75/Gal and improve the economy. The hell with that.
Nonsense. Oil is an international commodity. It's price is influenced by many factors, most of them driven beyond our borders (which is why there is so little our government can do to manage gas prices.) I saw a study a few weeks ago comparing domestic oil production with gasoline prices. There was essentially no correlation. In other words, our gasoline prices have historically shown no connection to the amount of oil we pump domestically.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
You are correct about the world, 565 BB
You are incorrect about the US, 88.5 BB onshore (Page 114 http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/energy/00.Par.9252.File.dat/EPCA2008HIsec3.pdf)
Offshore also needs to be included,low estimate is 66.5 BB (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States)
Total US reserve estimate, 155 BB

155 / 565 = 0.27 27%

The USGS does not deal with oil which is offshore, which is why you cannot find the info on their site. The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) controls that part. You have to add the two together to get the total.

Don't feel bad about it, it is not a well known thing.
First of all, USGS includes off-shore wells within state-waters. As to the amount of resources found on the U.S. Outer Continental shelf, there is about an additional 81 BBO. Secondly, I have no idea what your BLM link gets it's info from, but proven US reserves are 19 BBO (from OPEC report below), with USGS estimating an additional undiscovered at 27 BBO as I have previously shown. For conventional oil, perhaps BLM is trying to include shale conversion but I can't be bothered to look into it in much more detail.

Finally, I think I have to teach you even more about this survey that you don't seem to understand. You're trying to link a BLM study which doesn't even seem to match other official estimates, that includes BOTH known and unproven reserves, and then ratio to a USGS of UNKNOWN world-wide reserves.

Total known world-wide reserves is:
http://www.opec.org/opec_web/static_files_project/media/downloads/publications/ASB2010_2011.pdf

World proven oil reserves is 1.2 Trillion (page 22 of the above report). The USGS is estimating an additional 565 billion barrels of oil exist world wide.

If we talk about proven reserves we are at approximately 19/1,200 = 1.58%
If we talk about combined proven & unproven we are at about (19+27 + 81) / (1,200 + 565 + 27) = 7.1%.

Don't feel bad, reading comprehension is not a wide-spread trait.

*edit* correct math to include USA estimate in denominator*
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Wow, you guys need to stop playing politics and support putting more oil on the market. If any one of the OPEC nations can decide to choke production and the price rises (which has happened quite often) than putting more oil on the market will surely bring the price down.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
Wow, you guys need to stop playing politics and support putting more oil on the market. If any one of the OPEC nations can decide to choke production and the price rises (which has happened quite often) than putting more oil on the market will surely bring the price down.
This has nothing to do with politics, I support the keystone pipeline and I support properly supervised drilling pretty much anywhere. The fact is that the USA can't produce enough oil to realistically effect the global market. OPEC has enormous power to ramp up and ramp down production which can dwarf any concerted efforts by the USA to ramp up it's own production.

This is not to say we should just lie over and die. I think the USA can do a lot of things to secure our energy independence, I'm obviously a fan of nuclear power so I think that's option #1. In the rank of options that lead to us having secured energy independence I'd say drill drill drill probably ranks 8 or so. This is because we are blowing through our reserves one way or another. For now I see no reason not to take advantage of cheap Saudi sweet crude while they are giving it away.
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Nonsense. Oil is an international commodity. It's price is influenced by many factors, most of them driven beyond our borders (which is why there is so little our government can do to manage gas prices.) I saw a study a few weeks ago comparing domestic oil production with gasoline prices. There was essentially no correlation. In other words, our gasoline prices have historically shown no connection to the amount of oil we pump domestically.
BS. Our production has barely fluctuated over the years so that is hardly a factor. We need to drill for more oil. All these years of "Drilling isn't the answer" MAY not be the answer yet what we have been doing absolutely is NOT the answer.

Lets just keep doing what we KNOW doesn't work because the alternative MIGHT not work?
 

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,321
2
0
Fine, if I am wrong than all we did wa drill more oil, but if I am right then I can stop shelling out nearly 20% of my check in gas a week.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
BS. Our production has barely fluctuated over the years so that is hardly a factor. We need to drill for more oil. All these years of "Drilling isn't the answer" MAY not be the answer yet what we have been doing absolutely is NOT the answer.

Lets just keep doing what we KNOW doesn't work because the alternative MIGHT not work?
The only benefit from drilling at home compared to elsewhere is the lease revenue. Companies are by no means compelled to sell to the local market at a reduced price.

In-fact if/when/hopefully the keystone pipeline is constructed crude prices are going to rise in northern USA/southern Canada because right now those prices are artificially lowered by the abundance of crude. Once this crude can reach the gulf coast it will hit the international market and the local glut will disappear.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
Fine, if I am wrong than all we did wa drill more oil, but if I am right then I can stop shelling out nearly 20% of my check in gas a week.
I'm sorry but it's simply a myth perpetuated to drive partisanship. We will get some increased lease revenue, and whatever oil company wins the contract will be happy. Beyond those two factors there will be absolutely no local effect, except what happens with the global markets.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
BS. Our production has barely fluctuated over the years so that is hardly a factor. We need to drill for more oil. All these years of "Drilling isn't the answer" MAY not be the answer yet what we have been doing absolutely is NOT the answer.

Lets just keep doing what we KNOW doesn't work because the alternative MIGHT not work?
I'm sorry the actual price/production DATA doesn't match your RNC-fueled emotional beliefs. Nonetheless, the facts are what they are.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 30, 2003
26,916
172
106
Jeebus. It's more than clear supply affects prices. People saying that if we increase production it won't affect prices are crazy.

Even the Obama admin knows supply affect demand. Biden etc were telling the Saudi's to produce more when the price started rising.

The price of oil has proven to be remarkably sensitive to even small changes in supply or demand. Go back and look at mid 2008 (IIRC). Two things happened, Bush announced more drilling and the economy started to go bad. The price plunged dramatically. However, if you look at a chart of demand it only moved fractionally lower. That demonstrates the price is remarkably sensitive to even minor changes in demand and, also, the, markets' expectations regarding future changes in demand or supply.

Fern
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
Jeebus. It's more than clear supply affects prices. People saying that if we increase production it won't affect prices are crazy.

Even the Obama admin knows supply affect demand. Biden etc were telling the Saudi's to produce more when the price started rising.

The price of oil has proven to be remarkably sensitive to even small changes in supply or demand. Go back and look at mid 2008 (IIRC). Two things happened, Bush announced more drilling and the economy started to go bad. The price plunged dramatically. However, if you look at a chart of demand it only moved fractionally lower. That demonstrates the price is remarkably sensitive to even minor changes in demand and, also, the, markets' expectations regarding future changes in demand or supply.

Fern
Fern,

If we increase production and it has an effect on the price of oil, which I acknowledge is possible in today's speculative market, OPEC can very easily wind-down production at exactly the same amount that we increase it by.

I'm sorry but the USA is a minor player in the grand-scheme of world-wide pricing. The majority of the proven and unproven reserves are readily accessible by current leasing methods, but the pricing points don't work out. Drilling in the gulf of Mexico has returned to pre-spill levels, gulf drilling.

API said:
Andy Radford, a senior policy adviser with the American Petroleum Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based trade group, said that the recommendations are "in line with what industry and the government have already been doing" based on previous investigations
About the only place we could "drill baby drill" that we can't already would be the ANWR, which the Energy Information Administration estimated in a 2008 report would have the following effect

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/pdf/sroiaf(2008)03.pdf

paper said:
Additional oil production resulting from the opening of ANWR would be only a small portion of total world oil production, and would likely be offset in part by somewhat lower production outside the United Sates. The opening of ANWR is projected to have its largest oil price reduction impacts as follows: a reduction in low-sulfur, light crude oil prices of $0.41 per barrel (2006 dollars) in 2026 for the low oil resource case, $0.75 per barrel in 2025 for the mean oil resource case, and $1.44 per barrel in 2027 for the high oil resource case, relative to the reference case
I'm fine with debating ANWR but please don't paint it as the secret success to $2/gal gasoline. It's a fantasy that is used to fuel partisan politics.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY