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

[HomerJS]

For all you drill baby drill choir members, if we could produce a significant amount of additional oil how do you propose preventing oil companies from sending that oil out to the world market?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Egads.

In terms of economically recoverable oil he seems to be correct.

OK, you have eleventy trillion bbls of oil to last a billion years. That's great!

Now suppose it costs $1000 a bbl to obtain. Where's the utility of that pool of oil? It might as well be in another universe.

Much of the oil is either too expensive or would poison ground water if obtained. Want to piss off westerners? Ruin their wells.

Context is important.

 

[CLite]

Egads.

In terms of economically recoverable oil he seems to be correct.

OK, you have eleventy trillion bbls of oil to last a billion years. That's great!

Now suppose it costs $1000 a bbl to obtain. Where's the utility of that pool of oil? It might as well be in another universe.

Much of the oil is either too expensive or would poison ground water if obtained. Want to piss off westerners? Ruin their wells.

Context is important.

You are entirely correct, the only restriction I know of currently is ANWR. Most of the unproven estimates we've been discussing and comparing are quite available for development by oil companies, if they thought the price point was there.

I do know permits are taking longer in the gulf, but as we progress in time this increased "delay" will simply be built into the time to produce and production will reach whatever levels are economically viable.

 

[ohnoes]

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*

/thread.

 

[cybrsage]

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.

You expect me to believe you that it includes off shore reserves when you quote from a report specifically about On Shore reserves while saying you cannot be bothered to support your own statement?

No, I do not blindly trust you.

 

[cybrsage]

Egads.

In terms of economically recoverable oil he seems to be correct.

OK, you have eleventy trillion bbls of oil to last a billion years. That's great!

Now suppose it costs $1000 a bbl to obtain. Where's the utility of that pool of oil? It might as well be in another universe.

Much of the oil is either too expensive or would poison ground water if obtained. Want to piss off westerners? Ruin their wells.

Context is important.

Yep, unfortunately for Obamites, Obama said "drilled every square inch". That is very specific and says he is ignoring things such as price and damages caused by drilling.

I find the Obamite mindset fascinating in that they can completely ignore what he actually says and pretend it never happened...even while it is repeatedly shown to them.

 

[NeoV]

even though you know absolutely nothing about the topic, you can only trust sources that support your world view - we get it...

 

[ohnoes]

Yep, unfortunately for Obamites, Obama said "drilled every square inch". That is very specific and says he is ignoring things such as price and damages caused by drilling.

I find the Obamite mindset fascinating in that they can completely ignore what he actually says and pretend it never happened...even while it is repeatedly shown to them.

You know you've lost the argument when you start playing parse the quote game.

 

[Matt1970]

Seeing as how we haven't done it, I do not see how everyone is such an expert on the results of more drilling. All you can do is speculate at this point. We have all seen the results of having more oil on the market but somehow it doesn't seem to matter when it's US oil on the market and a Liberal President opposed to drilling. Congratulations, you win the political debate. Your prize is $4/gallon gas. Enjoy.

 

[Ketchup]

I am seeing a lot of outdated information in this thread, trying to tie into a current debate. For example:

1. I don't see supply and demand having much of anything to do with the current price of oil. There is a graph in another thread showing that our demand for gasoline is much lower than used to be, and gas prices are through the roof. Supply and demand may have been an issue when gas was $1 a gallon, but frankly I think prices now are too high to notice.

2. We are exporting oil now, and making a profit. So I see no reason to think that we could never become independent with oil. But, why do so many of you think this is not going to work due to the fact that it would not make a night and day difference? Can we not drill now, stockpile, and then leave the market when we are ready? It would cost a good bit, but if Romney is actually able to, say, repeal government health care, couldn't the money "saved" (I am using that term loosely, BTW) cover the expense?

3. The price of oil is being inflated by many factors, such as OPEC and speculators. I see no light at the end of the tunnel. Is there any reason not to attempt to become independent of this charade? I mean, what is the point of electric cars (in that they lessen the amount of total oil we use), if they have zero affect on what we pay for gas?

 

[Sunburn74]

Yep, unfortunately for Obamites, Obama said "drilled every square inch". That is very specific and says he is ignoring things such as price and damages caused by drilling.

I find the Obamite mindset fascinating in that they can completely ignore what he actually says and pretend it never happened...even while it is repeatedly shown to them.

Honestly, I'd rather someone overemphasize the energy issues this country will be facing rather than have someone sugar coat them. Overall I view obama in a positive light, but even his energy policy is flawed. I disagree with his position on thorium reactors. Oddly enough even George W Bush was smart enough to see them as clean renewable energy.

 

[Carmen813]

Seeing as how we haven't done it, I do not see how everyone is such an expert on the results of more drilling. All you can do is speculate at this point. We have all seen the results of having more oil on the market but somehow it doesn't seem to matter when it's US oil on the market and a Liberal President opposed to drilling. Congratulations, you win the political debate. Your prize is $4/gallon gas. Enjoy.

The President doesn't control oil prices, and our current problems have less to do with demand than they do speculation. We had $4 gas a few years ago too.

You can invest billions trying to get our limited remaining accessibly oil, or you can use those same resources to create alternative and renewable fuels. Frankly, I'm perfectly fine with higher gas prices if it gets people to recognize how much energy our country wastes. Hell, we'd do a lot more for our oil supplies if we simply updated the powergrid in the Northeast!

 

[Matt1970]

3. The price of oil is being inflated by many factors, such as OPEC and speculators. I see no light at the end of the tunnel. Is there any reason not to attempt to become independent of this charade? I mean, what is the point of electric cars (in that they lessen the amount of total oil we use), if they have zero affect on what we pay for gas?

OPEC changes prices by changing supply. Speculators are speculating on what they think the price will be due to future demand. So if only 1/2 the price of oil is due to supply and demand, then lets work on cutting that 1/2 of the price.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
I'm sorry but the USA is a minor player in the grand-scheme of world-wide pricing.

We are the #3 producer in the world.

People freak about a single country like Iran or Iraq or Libya not producing and forecast dire price increases.

Yet we produce far more than one these countries.

Fern

 

[Fern]

-snip-
1. I don't see supply and demand having much of anything to do with the current price of oil. There is a graph in another thread showing that our demand for gasoline is much lower than used to be, and gas prices are through the roof. Supply and demand may have been an issue when gas was $1 a gallon, but frankly I think prices now are too high to notice.

It's not just current demand/supply, but also expectations about future demand/supply.

And here we have a problem.

We are the 3rd largest oil producer in the world. People want to freak about price if productions drops in Iran, Iraq etc. We produce far more than any of them.

The problem: Our producing wells are winding down. I.e., production from them will be dropping. I.e., less supply.

And we've done little or nothing to bring more online.

Prices are going to rise as long as future production is forecast to diminish and supply doesn't. We can ameliorate that by signaling we're going to produce more. Approve some of the damn exploration permits etc. The longer that is drawn out and delayed, and I believe it's done so purposefully for political ideology, the higher the price will rise, all else being equal.

Fern

 

[woolfe9999]

It's not just current demand/supply, but also expectations about future demand/supply.

And here we have a problem.

We are the 3rd largest oil producer in the world. People want to freak about price if productions drops in Iran, Iraq etc. We produce far more than any of them.

The problem: Our producing wells are winding down. I.e., production from them will be dropping. I.e., less supply.

And we've done little or nothing to bring more online.

Prices are going to rise as long as future production is forecast to diminish and supply doesn't. We can ameliorate that by signaling we're going to produce more. Approve some of the damn exploration permits etc. The longer that is drawn out and delayed, and I believe it's done so purposefully for political ideology, the higher the price will rise, all else being equal.

Fern

What is your evidence that we are not currently approving permits at a reasonable pace? Surely it isn't the same year old Forbes article that is addressing the slowing of permits in the year following the oil spill, and noting that permitting was starting to pick back up at the time? Nor the multiple sources from the same time frame cited by politifact saying similar things:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...e-bachmann-claims-there-has-been-just-one-ne/

Please provide some current information on what is going on with permits now that we are 2 years out from the spill.

 

[senseamp]

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.

It's like an obese farmer producing and eating his own food to become even more obese. We need to control our oil addiction first, before we feed it with more cheap oil.

 

[Paul98]

Yep, unfortunately for Obamites, Obama said "drilled every square inch". That is very specific and says he is ignoring things such as price and damages caused by drilling.

I find the Obamite mindset fascinating in that they can completely ignore what he actually says and pretend it never happened...even while it is repeatedly shown to them.

Why can't you ever have a rational discussion about anything?

 

[senseamp]

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.

This is an excellent point, but Obama is not wrong with respect to proven reserves though, unless you count the fact that he said 2%, when actually it's 1.3% as being wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_proven_oil_reserves

 

[Ausm]

Republicans are less than honest when calling Obama "less than honest?" Shocking
Undiscovered oil is not proven oil reserves, dummies.

+1

Fake outrage detected....

 

[CLite]

You expect me to believe you that it includes off shore reserves when you quote from a report specifically about On Shore reserves while saying you cannot be bothered to support your own statement?

No, I do not blindly trust you.

http://www.usgs.gov/blogs/features/usgs_top_story/worlds-oil-and-gas-endowment/

Resources in the United States

This assessment does not include undiscovered, conventional resources in the United States, which the USGS currently estimates holds 27 bbo and 388 tcf of natural gas onshore and in State waters. Additionally, there are an estimated 81 bbo and 398 tcf of natural gas in the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS), according to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

I included the 81 BBO from OCS in the combined unproven/proven reserves which leads to the 7.1% ratio that USA has.

We are the 3rd largest oil producer in the world. People want to freak about price if productions drops in Iran, Iraq etc. We produce far more than any of them.

A fair point, the USA does produce 10% of the world's oil. We are certainly producing a lot compared to our relatively small amount of proven reserves, as the President points out-2%.

I guess my point still goes back to all the supposed undiscovered reserves and even proven reserves are open with the exception of ANWR. I previously linked a study for ANWR which shows the effect of opening it has on the price per barrel of oil. It shows quite a small effect.

 

[dmcowen674]

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.

Comprehension FAIL

Wow, either you can't read and learn or won't.

There already is no room for all the oil all over the place.

 

[Jhhnn]

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

You keep making that false attribution wrt Bush announcing more permits & the crash of oil prices in 2008. Obama announced more permits, too, but the price went up. Correlation is not causation, no matter how badly you want it to be.

I already linked the pertinent graph & analysis, but you just go back to what you want to believe, because it's what you want to believe, because it helps maintain your belief system.

http://economicpopulist.org/content/why-are-gas-prices-skyrocketing

And this, as well-

http://www.declineoftheempire.com/2012/02/understanding-the-current-oil-market.html

Oil futures aren't about what might be happening years from today, but about what might be happening much more short term, and the time from permit to drilling to actual production is a matter of years.

 

[Ketchup]

I think Obama's quote is based on misinformation. He is not being provided the same information we are looking at here today, he is being provided information by people who have an agenda (may very well be his agenda, but nevertheless). Plus, the USGS survery was released, according to their website, the day after this infamous speech.

Don't get me wrong, I think Obama is on a mission to destroy our country, but making stupid statements like the one in the OP doesn't seem to be a good way to do it.

 

[Ketchup]

Heck, we could even get a deal going quicker with just Canada and Mexico and be in much better shape than we are now.

Because of declining production and increasing demand, Net US imports of oil and petroleum products increased by 400% from 3.16 million barrels per day (502×103 m3/d) in 1970 to 12.04 million barrels per day (1.914×106 m3/d) in 2007. Its largest net suppliers of petroleum products in 2007 were Canada and Mexico, which supplied 2.2 and 1.3 Mbbl/d (350×103 and 210×103 m3/d), respectively.[6]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_the_United_States