Internet The world oh ! meters

The oil we have in the U.S. is enough to last us centuries! Gas prices would be soooooooooooo much lower than what the Arabian countries are seeling us right now :dry:.

Citation needed.
 
Don't care -you said that there was enough to last centuries. Prove that please.
 
There is estimated to be between 500 billion and 1.1 trillion barrels (80 and 175 km³) of potentially recoverable oil in the basin.

I'm no oil expert, but how long will that amount last for?

Also, don't completely trust wikipedia...
 
The oil we have in the U.S. is enough to last us centuries! Gas prices would be soooooooooooo much lower than what the Arabian countries are seeling us right now :dry:.

Prove it. The best estimate I've seen is 105 years IF we learn how to produce oil from shales. Other wise any benefit we get from domestic oil will just be a minor stop-loss. Also the reason oil producing states have lower gas prices is usually in the supply chain- it takes more energy and cost to transport petrol further from the source of production. Lastly, you should be thankful that we don't pay what most of the western world pays for fuel.

We have no direct control over the price of a barrel of oil because it is a so called fungible resource (that is its production is so global that producers have little say in how much the cost is because it is largely decided by people who trade futures. This is also why OPEC has power because they conglomerated a massive amount of oil production and are able to use that power to scare the traders).

On Edit:
What math? The conclusion of that paper speaks volumes btw
 
We have no direct control over the price of a barrel of oil because it is a so called fungible resource (that is its production is so global that producers have little say in how much the cost is because it is largely decided by people who trade futures. This is also why OPEC has power because they conglomerated a massive amount of oil production and are able to use that power to scare the traders).

On Edit:
What math? The conclusion of that paper speaks volumes btw

Exactly why we should drill here in the U.S. What's the point of having all that oil if we're not going to use it? Also, I wouldn't go by conclusions because they are just mere predictoins of the future. Who knows what may come of oil within the next 5-10 years?

Edit: And don't get me wrong, I'm all for hybrids, electric cars, and other eco-friendly products as much as the next guy.
 
Last edited:
Exactly why we should drill here in the U.S. What's the point of having all that oil if we're not going to use it? Also, I wouldn't go by conclusions because they are just mere predictoins of the future. Who knows what may come of oil within the next 5-10 years?

Edit: And don't get me wrong, I'm all for hybrids, electric cars, and other eco-friendly products as much as the next guy.

That did not prove your point. You failed to explain how drilling here would be a 'good' investment. Remember most of our oil potential is shale which we currently cannot refine and any oil we do drill is at-best delaying and worsening the problem of peak oil. Also, 'mere predictions' of the future is what scientists do. I'd rather take the predictions of an academic than your unjustified conclusions.
 
The oil we have in the U.S. is enough to last us centuries! Gas prices would be soooooooooooo much lower than what the Arabian countries are seeling us right now :dry:.
The part highlighted in red is what I'm interested in addressing. We need the Arabian countries to run out of oil very soon. Most of them are, frankly, dangerous to the secular world. The only reason these theocrats have any form of power is because of oil. When the oil is gone, so is a major antagonist to world safety.

Some countries, such as Kuwait and the UAE, are relatively secular with diversified economies built primarily on the tourist industry. These countries will do fine.
 
So we're supposed to take your own perdiction over the prediction of someone else? Why exactly?

Where have I made a prediction?

That did not prove your point. You failed to explain how drilling here would be a 'good' investment. Remember most of our oil potential is shale which we currently cannot refine and any oil we do drill is at-best delaying and worsening the problem of peak oil. Also, 'mere predictions' of the future is what scientists do. I'd rather take the predictions of an academic than your unjustified conclusions.

I never said anything about an investment. I was presenting the other side of an arguement by pointing out that Obama has not made any use of oil we have here in the U.S. Also, I would like you to justify why I was unjustified.
 
The part highlighted in red is what I'm interested in addressing. We need the Arabian countries to run out of oil very soon. Most of them are, frankly, dangerous to the secular world. The only reason these theocrats have any form of power is because of oil. When the oil is gone, so is a major antagonist to world safety.

You're right, but what you say is EXACTLY the same for the US.
 
Where have I made a prediction?



I never said anything about an investment. I was presenting the other side of an arguement by pointing out that Obama has not made any use of oil we have here in the U.S. Also, I would like you to justify why I was unjustified.

Okay! First, however, I must remind you: Obama does not make laws, Congress does. I know this may seem like nit-picking, but it is not. You are projecting resentment at the wrong branch of government there. Also, no Congress has really tried drilling there because most of what we'd drill we cannot refine.

Your conclusions were unjustified because you had no real facts to back them up. You claimed we could sustain our need for oil for centuries by drilling, I explained why your assertion was incorrect and then offered reasons why it made no long-term sense. You cited a paper (that agreed with my view) and then attempted to discredit the projections of the paper's authors. So we're back to square one with you making a claim with no evidence to support it. Ergo your position remains unjustified, it is mere speculation without solid evidence to support it.
 
Fine. You win. But out of curiosity, where do you get your info?
 
Last edited:
Fine. You win. But out of curiosity, where do you get your info?

Here is a great article about Shale Oil. I went and found an article that was supportive of expanding our infrastructure for you, but it is still quite clear that our current technology makes shale seem silly:
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.sum.pdf

Honestly, I actually didn't do any research in particular for this thread because I've written about and researched the subject a lot (this stuff is quite relevant to the stuff I study). That said, I could provide links to good research for any claim I made. Just ask and I will cite.
 
ok, now to do some maths, each person in the states uses about 40 Imp gallons of petroleum spirit per 1700 miles (at 40MPG). 40 Imp gallons is equal to one barrel. if everyone in the states has one car, AND went 100 miles a month... about 1e3 years. or one century.

for the love of :probe: ! This is MADNESS!
 
Back
Top