Another oil crisis on the horizon?


tamarin
Conservative
#1
http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/170894

Great article by the Star's David Olive! It does make sense given the reference to Iran made by Bush this week in his speech bumping US troop levels in Iraq. And a carrier has to have a mission; this could be it.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#2
Quote:

CHOKE POINT | Should the U.S. bomb Iran, as some say it will, the Straits of Hormuz could be the focus of Iran's response, causing a huge spike in oil prices.

Perhaps someone should just bomb Junior. I'm f'n tired of fuel prices being f'd with unnecessarily like they were over christmas. Oil shortage, my a$$. There's enough proven oil in the planet to last for a long time yet. There's enough in Canada alone to last Canadians 1500 years at the present rate of consumption. Oil companies messing around with prices while they make astronomical profits and people dying in streets and not being able to afford healthcare. I'm all for capitalism, but that is getting f'n ludicrous.

There, rant over.
 
tamarin
Conservative
#3
Few topics inspire more rants than this one. We really are at the mercy of oil markets. With the Gulf controlling two thirds of the flow it's easy to see how things get out of hand so quickly. And speculators love a crisis. It's interesting to see how quickly Europe is developing plans to free itself of the Mid-Eastern quagmire and Russia's increasing strangehold on key supply. We're always told we can't afford decisive steps in a new energy direction. Maybe we'll be forced to consider the options sometime soon.
 
hermanntrude
#4
very similar to the diamond trade. not as rare as people think they are, so people keep them safe to keep the supply low when they want prices to rise.

control the supply, control the prices.

this is why anti-capitalism is a valid viewpoint. although to be fair there seems to be no viable alternative. certainly not with GWB around
 
Toro
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

very similar to the diamond trade. not as rare as people think they are, so people keep them safe to keep the supply low when they want prices to rise.

control the supply, control the prices.

this is why anti-capitalism is a valid viewpoint. although to be fair there seems to be no viable alternative. certainly not with GWB around

This is incorrect. Its all supply and demand right now. OPEC is neutered. After the last meeting where they all agreed to cut production, the only one who did was Kuwait. Now, Kuwait is saying they won't attend the next meeting because no one else cut like they said they would.

A cartel is an organization of liars. OPEC is no different.

Anti-capitalism may be a valid viewpoint but it certainly isn't a valid socio-economic structure.
 
hermanntrude
#6
and yet the prices rise and fall in the manner described above
 
Toro
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

and yet the prices rise and fall in the manner described above

Described how?

Prices rise when demand rises or supply falls, and prices fall when demand falls or supply rises.

Since OPEC has been running flat out the past few years, OPEC has jack to do with the current price of oil.

Simple economics.
 
hermanntrude
#8
OK i admit it. I know nothing.

But i guarantee it's not as simple as supply and demand. If there's a way they can get more money out of you they'll do it
 
BitWhys
#9
world consumption and reserves, sourced from the Energy Information Administration...

29,930,000,000 barrels per year (@82 million barrels per day - 2004 levels)
1,317,447,415,000 barrels in known reserve (2007)

44 years to go
 
hermanntrude
#10
is that accessible reserve? reserves that havent been found yet? how do we know what the consumption levels will be? why do i care anyway cos there's sod all i can do about it. If the oil companies raise the prices, i can't make them lower it, if it runs out, i can't do anything to stop that... basically i'll just adapt to whetever turns out to be the truth, which is probably that we'll all have a bad time with climate change but nowhere near as bad as some of the estimates we see quoted here, we'll all have to change somewhat, prices will rise for ever and ever and we'll all die one day anyway
 
BitWhys
#11
Proved reserves are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are recoverable under existing economic and operating conditions.

We know what consumption was in 2004. That's what I based it on.
 
Toro
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

world consumption and reserves, sourced from the Energy Information Administration...

29,930,000,000 barrels per year (@82 million barrels per day - 2004 levels)
1,317,447,415,000 barrels in known reserve (2007)

44 years to go

Its certainly higher than that.

http://www.brazzilmag.com/content/view/2340/54/

Its just a matter of getting at it.

I have read that most believe there are 3-3.5 trillion barrels of oil in the world that we know about. But much of it is trapped in unconventional sources such as heavy crude, tar sands, shale, etc. The Green River shale basin is estimated to have 800 million -1.5 trillion barrels alone.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#13
Research has shown conclusively that the best hydro-carbon exploration and expliotation equipment available today is the aircraft-carrier. Some would argue with this analysis, they are mistaken.
p.s: where's my goddamn beaver picture
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

world consumption and reserves, sourced from the Energy Information Administration...

29,930,000,000 barrels per year (@82 million barrels per day - 2004 levels)
1,317,447,415,000 barrels in known reserve (2007)

44 years to go

Quite right. That's assuming no-one turns into protectionists and all producers share.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

is that accessible reserve? reserves that havent been found yet? how do we know what the consumption levels will be? why do i care anyway cos there's sod all i can do about it.

I thought that for a short time. Then I sold my oil shares and bought into alternative energy groups. Also, cut back on consumption and rerouted a pretty good sized wheelbarrow fulla money so far, too.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#16
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872964.html

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

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html

http://www.globalfirepower.com/list_oil_proven.asp

http://www.radford.edu/~wkovarik/oil/

etc.
etc.
etc.
 
BitWhys
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro View Post

Its certainly higher than that.

http://www.brazzilmag.com/content/view/2340/54/

Its just a matter of getting at it.

I have read that most believe there are 3-3.5 trillion barrels of oil in the world that we know about. But much of it is trapped in unconventional sources such as heavy crude, tar sands, shale, etc. The Green River shale basin is estimated to have 800 million -1.5 trillion barrels alone.

please. I'm supposed to prefer the information from some trade rag that suits your purposes over that of the EIA?

forget it.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#18
To be fair though, BW, he did say most people believe the figures to be higher.
 
Toro
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

please. I'm supposed to prefer the information from some trade rag that suits your purposes over that of the EIA?

forget it.

Suits my purposes.

Grow up BitWhys. You're the one with the political chip on your shoulder.

I couldn't care less. I'll make money on it one way or another.
 
BitWhys
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro View Post

Its certainly higher than that...

squeezing rocks for oil is a level of desparation no doubt many are looking forward to, but it certainly doesn't represent supplies that are "recoverable under existing economic and operating conditions".
 
Toro
#21
From Cambridge Energy Research Associates

http://www.cera.com/aspx/cda/public1....aspx?CID=8444
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro View Post

Suits my purposes.

Grow up BitWhys. You're the one with the political chip on your shoulder.

I couldn't care less. I'll make money on it one way or another.

I quit making money on oil and am now making money on alternatives. Did that after my consumption of fuel wasn't being paid for by my investments in oil companies.
 
Toro
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

I quit making money on oil and am now making money on alternatives. Did that after my consumption of fuel wasn't being paid for by my investments in oil companies.

Good for you.

There are a lot of opportunities to make money in alternative energy sources.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#24
Yup. I have a creek running down my property and so far the alternative jobbies have paid for the microhydro.
 
BitWhys
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro View Post

Suits my purposes.

Grow up BitWhys. You're the one with the political chip on your shoulder.

...

right

you link to an article that confirms Saudi Arabia is only good for 50 years on known reserves like it proves something to the contrary and I'm the one that's supposed to grow up.
 
Toro
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

right

you link to an article that confirms Saudi Arabia is only good for 50 years on known reserves like it proves something to the contrary and I'm the one that's supposed to grow up.

No, you're acting immature because you are ascribing hidden political motives rather than engaging in honest debate.

Here is the original article.

http://english.people.com.cn/200609/...14_302869.html

It is the Saudi energy saying that Saudi Arabia has 140 years of oil. Its not working at the moment, so I found that one and posted it.

FFS BitWhys, not everything is political. I read and try to understand both sides of this debate. I am also fortunate to have access to some of the best minds and in-the-know people in energy in the world, and this is their opinion. But if you want to see everything through a narrow political prism, be my guest. Your loss, not mine.
 
BitWhys
#27
what part of " Proved reserves are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are recoverable under existing economic and operating conditions." do you not understand?

Saudi Arabia 264 billion barrels proved reserves. best estimate

what's so political about pointing out that you're cherry-picking?
 
Toro
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

what part of " Proved reserves are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are recoverable under existing economic and operating conditions." do you not understand?

Do you?

Quote:

Alberta Government calculates that about 28 billion cubic metres (174 billion barrels) of crude bitumen are economically recoverable from the three Alberta oil sands areas at current prices using current technology. This is equivalent to about 10% of the estimated 1,700 and 2,500 billion barrels of bitumen in place.

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

That is exactly the point. At current prices and current technology these are the reserves. And based on the current conditions , only 10% of the tar sands are recoverable. But is that feasible?

Quote:

“This is the fifth time that the world is said to be running out of oil,” says CERA Chairman Daniel Yergin. “Each time -- whether it was the ‘gasoline famine’ at the end of WWI or the ‘permanent shortage’ of the 1970s -- technology and the opening of new frontier areas has banished the specter of decline. There’s no reason to think that technology is finished this time.”

http://www.cera.com/aspx/cda/public1....aspx?CID=8444

If you think the world will run out of oil in 2051, then the price of oil will rise far above the $40 or so that the government approximates the world's reserves at. And thus, the amount of "proven reserves" will subsequently increase because they will become more economic. That is how the calculation of proven reservese work. The higher the price and the greater the technology, the more feasible the extraction of oil from a specific field becomes.

Now look at the data from the EIA web site you posted

reserves, billions of barrels

Canada 179.210
Venezuela 80.012
United States 21.757

Do you think that these are accurate? A year ago, on the EIA website, the DOE wrote that reserves may be as high as 330 billion barrels of oil in Canada.

In Venezuela

Quote:

estimated that the Orinoco Belt has 236 billion barrels of heavy crude, which would make it the largest petroleum reserve in the world.

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

The United States

Quote:

The largest known oil shale deposits in the world are in the Green River Formation, which covers portions of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming...For potentially recoverable oil shale resources, we roughly derive an upper bound of 1.1 trillion barrels of oil and a lower bound of about 500 billion barrels...the midpoint in our estimate range, 800 billion barrels, is more than triple the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Present U.S. demand for petroleum products is about 20 million barrels per day.

http://rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf

We may be a few decades away from exploiting shale deposits in the US, but it is entirely dependent on technology.

Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

what's so political about pointing out that you're cherry-picking?

Quote: Originally Posted by BitWhys View Post

please. I'm supposed to prefer the information from some trade rag that suits your purposes over that of the EIA?

What, pray tell, are my "purposes"?
 
Numure
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by hermanntrude View Post

OK i admit it. I know nothing.

But i guarantee it's not as simple as supply and demand. If there's a way they can get more money out of you they'll do it

It has everything to do with supply and demand. If they want the price to jack, they will lower supply. Cutting production.
 
BitWhys
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by Toro View Post

...What, pray tell, are my "purposes"?

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that right now it would be to prove that you know better than BP, Penwell and Gulf combined. Either that or simply putting a lot of effort into missing the point.

Penwell clocked the 174 in oilsands, btw.
 

Similar Threads

56
More War on the Horizon
by JBeee | Sep 12th, 2007
8
New Political Magazine On The Horizon...
by plainswalker | Jul 5th, 2005