Think this oil guy knows what he is talking about?

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
I posted this in the gm hummer thread but was wondering if it is true?

Watch the first 2 minutes and it will piss you off

Anybody seen this / done any background investigatiing?

If this is true we are getting reamed.

The Truth?

-fish
 

Analog

Lifer
Jan 7, 2002
12,755
3
0
The Energy Non-Crisis by Lindsey Williams

Lindsay Williams


About the Author

Lindsey Williams, who has been an ordained Baptist minister for 28 years, went to Alaska in 1971 as a missionary. The Transalaska oil pipeline began its construction phase in 1974, and because of Mr. Williams' love for his country and concern for the spiritual welfare of the "pipeliners," he volunteered to serve as Chaplain on the pipeline, with the subsequent full support of the Alyeska Pipeline Company.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.
 

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.


So what's the holdup?

Why ain't we blazing another pipeline across Alaska?

With all the construction workers who ain't got jobs in this country we could probably find a few people wanting to work.



 

Injury

Lifer
Jul 19, 2004
13,066
2
81
Creating a new pipeline across Alaska would be the beginning of the Polar Bear uprising and is not advised. Sending in construction workers would be like sending war machines to the Russians during the cold war.


Don't cross the Polar Bears. Don't feed the bears.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.


So what's the holdup?

Why ain't we blazing another pipeline across Alaska?

With all the construction workers who ain't got jobs in this country we could probably find a few people wanting to work.
Sigh, if only everything was such a simple matter. It's not that easy, there are many factors to consider, including the environment. Even then, it's only a short term answer instead of pushing to get away from oil as much as possible altogether, which is the long term answer.

 

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.


So what's the holdup?

Why ain't we blazing another pipeline across Alaska?

With all the construction workers who ain't got jobs in this country we could probably find a few people wanting to work.
Sigh, if only everything was such a simple matter. It's not that easy, there are many factors to consider, including the environment. Even then, it's only a short term answer instead of pushing to get away from oil as much as possible altogether, which is the long term answer.


yeah 200 years is pretty short.........

why not mine the oil and put the 200 year clock running as the end date for oil dependancy. Just seems like a better alternative than crushing the economy with overpriced fuel while we wait on battery technology to come around.......

Also I am sure everybody on here is extremely educated about the amount of oil in Alaska but I know a lot of people that have no clue that there is that much oil in that region.
I've always heard that there was oil there but was kinda shocked to find out just how much it was.

So my thoughts were why are we buying oil on the open market from OPEC and other turd world nations when we have so much here?





 
Dec 26, 2007
11,782
2
76
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.


So what's the holdup?

Why ain't we blazing another pipeline across Alaska?

With all the construction workers who ain't got jobs in this country we could probably find a few people wanting to work.
Sigh, if only everything was such a simple matter. It's not that easy, there are many factors to consider, including the environment. Even then, it's only a short term answer instead of pushing to get away from oil as much as possible altogether, which is the long term answer.

yeah 200 years is pretty short.........

why not mine the oil and put the 200 year clock running as the end date for oil dependancy. Just seems like a better alternative than crushing the economy with overpriced fuel while we wait on battery technology to come around.......

Also I am sure everybody on here is extremely educated about the amount of oil in Alaska but I know a lot of people that have no clue that there is that much oil in that region.
I've always heard that there was oil there but was kinda shocked to find out just how much it was.

So my thoughts were why are we buying oil on the open market from OPEC and other turd world nations when we have so much here?

To put it simply, it's the enviornmentalists that are blocking drilling in ANWR and other places in Alaska.

So do you really think that if we said today "okay we are drilling in Alaska", it would lower gas prices in time to actually benefit our economic downturn? The amount of time it would take to get everything up and running and gas flowing, most likely we will be out of the economic issues currently happening in this country. In addition to that, do you really think that oil companies would reduce the price of gas to $1.50? They might drop it back down to $3/gal, but I wouldn't be counting on it going down to $1.50/gal.
 

fisheerman

Senior member
Oct 25, 2006
733
0
0
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.


So what's the holdup?

Why ain't we blazing another pipeline across Alaska?

With all the construction workers who ain't got jobs in this country we could probably find a few people wanting to work.
Sigh, if only everything was such a simple matter. It's not that easy, there are many factors to consider, including the environment. Even then, it's only a short term answer instead of pushing to get away from oil as much as possible altogether, which is the long term answer.

yeah 200 years is pretty short.........

why not mine the oil and put the 200 year clock running as the end date for oil dependancy. Just seems like a better alternative than crushing the economy with overpriced fuel while we wait on battery technology to come around.......

Also I am sure everybody on here is extremely educated about the amount of oil in Alaska but I know a lot of people that have no clue that there is that much oil in that region.
I've always heard that there was oil there but was kinda shocked to find out just how much it was.

So my thoughts were why are we buying oil on the open market from OPEC and other turd world nations when we have so much here?

To put it simply, it's the enviornmentalists that are blocking drilling in ANWR and other places in Alaska.

So do you really think that if we said today "okay we are drilling in Alaska", it would lower gas prices in time to actually benefit our economic downturn? The amount of time it would take to get everything up and running and gas flowing, most likely we will be out of the economic issues currently happening in this country. In addition to that, do you really think that oil companies would reduce the price of gas to $1.50? They might drop it back down to $3/gal, but I wouldn't be counting on it going down to $1.50/gal.

Actually I think it might. I believe that most of the increases in the price of oil is just pure speculation in the markets not low supplies. OPEC thanks that as well with there snub of Bushs request to increase production. If it were announced that a new supply of oil was coming online and the American demand on the open market was going to diminish. I would think as an investor in oil futures that it is headed lower would probably be looking for the exits

We actually could see a sharp reduction in price?

 

MegaVovaN

Diamond Member
May 20, 2005
4,131
0
0
Didn't watch the vid, but if you're talking about ANWR, it's been debated since WW2.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANWR

Bush approved drilling there but they failed to get majority in the houses.

Earlier they got majority but President vetoed it & they could not override it.

I just read this in my govt 2301 book...
 
Aug 23, 2000
15,509
1
81
Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Originally posted by: fisheerman
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Holy crap, there is oil in Alaska? That's the first I've heard of it.

--

You realize this has been debated for YEARS, right? I listened to 2:07. Everyone knows there's oil in Alaska and a lot of it. Lowering gas to $1.50 within a year, how? We all also know that to get the infrastructure in place to drill this oil takes years, too. This guy is not shattering anything in 2:07, at which point I turned it off.


So what's the holdup?

Why ain't we blazing another pipeline across Alaska?

With all the construction workers who ain't got jobs in this country we could probably find a few people wanting to work.
Sigh, if only everything was such a simple matter. It's not that easy, there are many factors to consider, including the environment. Even then, it's only a short term answer instead of pushing to get away from oil as much as possible altogether, which is the long term answer.

yeah 200 years is pretty short.........

why not mine the oil and put the 200 year clock running as the end date for oil dependancy. Just seems like a better alternative than crushing the economy with overpriced fuel while we wait on battery technology to come around.......

Also I am sure everybody on here is extremely educated about the amount of oil in Alaska but I know a lot of people that have no clue that there is that much oil in that region.
I've always heard that there was oil there but was kinda shocked to find out just how much it was.

So my thoughts were why are we buying oil on the open market from OPEC and other turd world nations when we have so much here?

To put it simply, it's the enviornmentalists that are blocking drilling in ANWR and other places in Alaska.

So do you really think that if we said today "okay we are drilling in Alaska", it would lower gas prices in time to actually benefit our economic downturn? The amount of time it would take to get everything up and running and gas flowing, most likely we will be out of the economic issues currently happening in this country. In addition to that, do you really think that oil companies would reduce the price of gas to $1.50? They might drop it back down to $3/gal, but I wouldn't be counting on it going down to $1.50/gal.

As soon as they say we are drilling in Alaska, oil prices will sky rocket. The problem now is not supply and demand, it's unregulated energy commodities. A select few are artificially driving the price of oil up to pad their pockets.

 

Linflas

Lifer
Jan 30, 2001
15,395
78
91
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
why use our own oil when we can suck other countries dry?

Because they are wiseing up to the scam and telling us that we just might want to start tapping our own resources if we really want anyone to think we are serious about lowering oil prices?
 

moparacer

Golden Member
Dec 10, 2003
1,336
0
76
I like how in this last run when oil hit 135 a barrel prices moved up daily. Now its headed the other way and all these "experts" say it will be awhile before we see if the price drops will have any effect on gas prices. It has to "work" through the system you know.

Oil should be no more then $60-70...
 

jjones

Lifer
Oct 9, 2001
15,424
2
0
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
why use our own oil when we can suck other countries dry?
Exactly. I don't see any point not to leave it in reserve. We'll drill it eventually, you can bet on that, but why do it now?

Besides, in total, it's only about a year's worth of oil based on current consumption rates.

 

KK

Lifer
Jan 2, 2001
15,903
4
81
Originally posted by: jjones
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
why use our own oil when we can suck other countries dry?
Exactly. I don't see any point not to leave it in reserve. We'll drill it eventually, you can bet on that, but why do it now?

Besides, in total, it's only about a year's worth of oil based on current consumption rates.

well from what the dude said, it's 200 years worth.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: KK
Originally posted by: jjones
Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot
why use our own oil when we can suck other countries dry?
Exactly. I don't see any point not to leave it in reserve. We'll drill it eventually, you can bet on that, but why do it now?

Besides, in total, it's only about a year's worth of oil based on current consumption rates.

well from what the dude said, it's 200 years worth.

There isn't one study that has shown that there is 200 years of US 100% use there. If that were true it'd be hundreds of billions of barrels, not 16bn according to most estimates.
 

PlasmaBomb

Lifer
Nov 19, 2004
11,636
2
81
Originally posted by: Injury
Creating a new pipeline across Alaska would be the beginning of the Polar Bear uprising and is not advised. Sending in construction workers would be like sending war machines to the Russians during the cold war.


Don't cross the Polar Bears. Don't feed the bears.

Oh noes... and i thought that all we had to worry about was normal bears NSFW

Originally posted by: Injury
well from what the dude said, it's 200 years worth.

Never mind legendkiller got there...

How many billion barrels does the US use per year? Is the figure from google anywhere near accurate? 20.73 million bbl/day (2004)?

Have they been actively looking for further reserves in the ANWR?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,374
8,499
126
Originally posted by: LegendKiller

There isn't one study that has shown that there is 200 years of US 100% use there. If that were true it'd be hundreds of billions of barrels, not 16bn according to most estimates.

maybe 200 years at a rate of production that maximizes the amount of oil produced. if you try to produce the oil too fast you'll kill whatever driving mechanism there may be and trap oil.
 

jjones

Lifer
Oct 9, 2001
15,424
2
0
Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
Originally posted by: Injury
Creating a new pipeline across Alaska would be the beginning of the Polar Bear uprising and is not advised. Sending in construction workers would be like sending war machines to the Russians during the cold war.


Don't cross the Polar Bears. Don't feed the bears.

Oh noes... and i thought that all we had to worry about was normal bears NSFW

Originally posted by: Injury
well from what the dude said, it's 200 years worth.

Never mind legendkiller got there...

How many billion barrels does the US use per year? Is the figure from google anywhere near accurate? 20.73 million bbl/day (2004)?

Have they been actively looking for further reserves in the ANWR?

According to everything I can find, the US uses something over 20 million barrels a day. That's about 7.5 billion barrels annually. High side estimates for ANWR are about 16 billion, realistic is probably closer to 10 or 11 billion. But even if you use high side estimates, that's still just 2 years worth of consumption.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Originally posted by: jjones
Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
Originally posted by: Injury
Creating a new pipeline across Alaska would be the beginning of the Polar Bear uprising and is not advised. Sending in construction workers would be like sending war machines to the Russians during the cold war.


Don't cross the Polar Bears. Don't feed the bears.

Oh noes... and i thought that all we had to worry about was normal bears NSFW

Originally posted by: Injury
well from what the dude said, it's 200 years worth.

Never mind legendkiller got there...

How many billion barrels does the US use per year? Is the figure from google anywhere near accurate? 20.73 million bbl/day (2004)?

Have they been actively looking for further reserves in the ANWR?

According to everything I can find, the US uses something over 20 million barrels a day. That's about 7.5 billion barrels annually. High side estimates for ANWR are about 16 billion, realistic is probably closer to 10 or 11 billion. But even if you use high side estimates, that's still just 2 years worth of consumption.

So if we just simply say that our consumption stays the same for the next 200 years (highly unlikely), then we'd need 1.5 TRILLION barrels hidden under ANWR to last us. Let's say that over that period our usage doubles (likely) overall. That means 3 TRILLION barrels to last 200 years.

Yeah, ok, can we just label this guy as a fucking moron and move on?