U.S. Awash In Oil - U.S. Has 60 Times More Than Obama Claims

When he was running for the Oval Office four years ago amid $4-a-gallon gasoline prices, then-Sen. Barack Obama dismissed the idea of expanded oil production as a way to relieve the pain at the pump.

"Even if you opened up every square inch of our land and our coasts to drilling," he said. "America still has only 3% of the world's oil reserves." Which meant, he said, that the U.S. couldn't affect global oil prices.

It's the same rhetoric President Obama is using now, as gas prices hit $4 again, except now he puts the figure at 2%.

"With only 2% of the world's oil reserves, we can't just drill our way to lower gas prices," he said. "Not when we consume 20% of the world's oil."

The claim makes it appear as though the U.S. is an oil-barren nation, perpetually dependent on foreign oil and high prices unless we can cut our own use and develop alternative energy sources like algae.

U.S. Awash In Oil

But the figure Obama uses — proved oil reserves — vastly undercounts how much oil the U.S. actually contains. In fact, far from being oil-poor, the country is awash in vast quantities — enough to meet all the country's oil needs for hundreds of years.

The U.S. has 22.3 billion barrels of proved reserves, a little less than 2% of the entire world's proved reserves, according to the Energy Information Administration. But as the EIA explains, proved reserves "are a small subset of recoverable resources," because they only count oil that companies are currently drilling for in existing fields.

When you look at the whole picture, it turns out that there are vast supplies of oil in the U.S., according to various government reports. Among them:

At least 86 billion barrels of oil in the Outer Continental Shelf yet to be discovered, according to the government's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.

About 24 billion barrels in shale deposits in the lower 48 states, according to EIA.

Up to 2 billion barrels of oil in shale deposits in Alaska's North Slope, says the U.S. Geological Survey.

Up to 12 billion barrels in ANWR, according to the USGS.

As much as 19 billion barrels in the Utah tar sands, according to the Bureau of Land Management.

Then, there's the massive Green River Formation in Wyoming, which according to the USGS contains a stunning 1.4 trillion barrels of oil shale — a type of oil released from sedimentary rock after it's heated.

A separate Rand Corp. study found that about 800 billion barrels of oil shale in Wyoming and neighboring states is "technically recoverable," which means it could be extracted using existing technology. That's more than triple the known reserves in Saudi Arabia.

All told, the U.S. has access to 400 billion barrels of crude that could be recovered using existing drilling technologies, according to a 2006 Energy Department report.

When you include oil shale, the U.S. has 1.4 trillion barrels of technically recoverable oil, according to the Institute for Energy Research, enough to meet all U.S. oil needs for about the next 200 years, without any imports.

And even this number could be low, since such estimates tend to go up over time.

Back in 1995, for example, the USGS figured there were 151 million barrels of oil in North Dakota's Bakken formation. In 2008, it upped that estimate to 3 billion barrels to 4.3 billion barrels — a 25-fold increase. Now, some oil analysts say there could be as much as 20 billion barrels there.

And USGS in 2002 quadrupled its oil estimate in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve.

To be sure, energy companies couldn't profitably recover all this oil — even at today's prices — and what they could wouldn't make it to market for years. But from the industry's perspective, the real problem with domestic oil is that the government has roped off most of these supplies.

The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980, for example, put a huge swatch of land off-limits to drilling. And in 1982, Congress blocked access to most of the oil in the Outer Continental Shelf. Much of the oil on federal lands is also off-limits.

Obama and others say the industry's claim about lack of access isn't true, since they aren't even using many of the offshore leases they already have. The industry counters that this is misleading, since a company needs the lease before it can determine if any oil exists there — a potentially time-consuming process.

In any case, any attempt to get at these vast new oil supplies is sure to face fierce opposition from environmental groups worried about oil production's direct impact on the environment, as well as global warming worries.

But given today's prices, most of the public is willing to expand drilling offshore, in ANWR, and in shale oil reserves, according to the latest IBD/TIPP poll.

"This is not a geological problem — it's a political problem," said Dan Kish, senior vice president for policy at the Institute for Energy Research. "We've embargoed our own supplies."

http://news.investors.com/article/604303/201203141303/oil-abundant-...

Views: 70

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Obama’s giveaway: Oil-rich islands to Russia
Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangel, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangel became American in 1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.

Northwest of Wrangel are the DeLong Islands, named for George Washington DeLong, the captain of USS Jeannette. Also in 1881, he discovered and claimed these three islands for the United States. He named them for the voyage co-sponsor, New York City newspaper publisher James Gordon Bennett. The ship’s crew received a hero’s welcome back in Washington, and Congress awarded them gold medals.

In the Bering Sea at the far west end of the Aleutian chain are Copper Island, Sea Lion Rock and Sea Otter Rock. They were ceded to the U.S. in Seward’s 1867 treaty with Russia.

Another post with map-

Report: Obama Administration Is Giving Away 7 Strategic Islands to Russia


May 1881 US explorers approached Jeannette Island and Henrietta Island and claimed them for the United States. According to some US individuals, including the group State Department Watch, eight Arctic islands currently controlled by Russia, including Wrangel Island, are claimed by the United States. However, according to the United States Department of State no such claim exists. The USSR/USA Maritime Boundary Treaty, which has yet to be approved by the Russian Duma, does not address the status of these islands nor the maritime boundaries associated with them.

The Obama Administration is reportedly giving away Wrangell, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta islands in Alaska to Russia. The federal government drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side
Former senatorial candidate Joe Miller broke this story at World Net Daily:

The Obama administration, despite the nation’s economic woes, effectively killed the job-producing Keystone Pipeline last month. The Arab Spring is turning the oil production of Libya and other Arab nations over to the Muslim Brotherhood. Iraq is distancing itself from the U.S. And everyone recognizes that Iran, whose crude supplies are critical to the European economy, will do anything it can to frustrate America’s strategic interests. In the face of all of this, Obama insists on cutting back U.S. oil potential with outrageous restrictions.

Part of Obama’s apparent war against U.S. energy independence includes a foreign-aid program that directly threatens my state’s sovereign territory. Obama’s State Department is giving away seven strategic, resource-laden Alaskan islands to the Russians. Yes, to the Putin regime in the Kremlin.

The seven endangered islands in the Arctic Ocean and Bering Sea include one the size of Rhode Island and Delaware combined. The Russians are also to get the tens of thousands of square miles of oil-rich seabeds surrounding the islands. The Department of Interior estimates billions of barrels of oil are at stake.

The State Department has undertaken the giveaway in the guise of a maritime boundary agreement between Alaska and Siberia. Astoundingly, our federal government itself drew the line to put these seven Alaskan islands on the Russian side. But as an executive agreement, it could be reversed with the stroke of a pen by President Obama or Secretary Clinton.

The agreement was negotiated in total secrecy. The state of Alaska was not allowed to participate in the negotiations, nor was the public given any opportunity for comment. This is despite the fact the Alaska Legislature has passed resolutions of opposition – but the State Department doesn’t seem to care.

The imperiled Arctic Ocean islands include Wrangell, Bennett, Jeannette and Henrietta. Wrangell became American in 1881 with the landing of the U.S. Revenue Marine ship Thomas Corwin. The landing party included the famed naturalist John Muir. It is 3,000 square miles in size.

For the love of Pete! Obama and the Progressives have to go!

Let's start a petition to do the same maritime boundary business with Cuba!  This time we will give away Washington DC!

Democrats LIE: Sitting on 67 Million Acres of Oil Reserves

Once again, Democrats are “blowing smoke” up your derrière. It’s time to call their bluff.

I wish that the Democrats were forced to feel the pain of the American working public. If you want to see a totally out of touch bunch of people, look no farther than your Democratic Party in Congress. The constant tirade that oil companies are simply sitting on 67 million acres of undeveloped oil leases is nothing more than political lies that all too often too many people believe as truth.

Apparently Democrats in Congress believe in those “good ‘ol days” of wildcat oil drilling. You took a risk, erected an oil derrick, drilled as deep as your money would let you and hoped for that illusive gusher of oil. Most went bankrupt trying this as a few handful of people actually made fortunes. Times have changed. More and more the science of oil exploration and the location of geological areas that contain greater possibilities of discovery of oil has become the method of exploration. That science has changed the odds to a 90% success rate of hitting oil producing wells.

So what have we as a nation received from the Democratically controlled congress? Pretty much a dog and pony show when they hauled the CEO’s of “big oil” to Capital Hill and gave them a verbal spanking for high oil prices. Yet, when Congress was told that until domestic production became possible, oil prices would continue to rise. This didn’t fit into the Democrats scheme of things, so the researchers began to dig up this lie of “67 million acres of undeveloped oil leases” and have pawned it off as “truth”. Those leases remain as “undeveloped” until such time that oil is being produced, no matter the state of exploration.

Here is the truth, directly from the President and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute. In a recent Op/Ed in the Wall Street Journal, Mr. Red Cavaney had this to say:

A company bids for and buys a lease because it believes there is a possibility that it may yield enough oil or natural gas to make the cost of the lease, and the costs of exploration and production, commercially viable. The U.S. government received $3.7 billion from company bids in a single lease sale in March 2008.

However, until the actual exploration is complete, a company does not know whether the lease will be productive. If, through exploration, it finds there is no oil or natural gas underneath a lease – or that there is not enough to justify the tremendous investment required to bring it to the surface – the company cuts its losses by moving on to more promising leases. Yet it continues to pay rent on the lease, atop a leasing bonus fee.

Oil and gas exploration is an expensive proposition. Getting the first barrel out of the ground can cost an oil company upwards of a billion dollars on one lease and even more with a highly productive area or in an area offshore or in the Arctic circle. Yet, those Democrats in Congress still envision the days of wildcatters sticking a wooden derrick in the air, adding a drilling machine, and boom, there is a gusher of oil.

When you add the reality of enormous burdens placed on oil producers that include environmental impact studies, permits that are virtually impossible to get, countless lawsuits to overcome, and even more opposition from local and state governments, you have a situation where any other industry would throw up their hands and walk away. Yet, we have those who still believe that it is all a worthwhile endeavor and with a little bit of luck, a profit can be made. Congressional Democrats are not making the task any easier.

An overwhelming majority of Americans desire domestic oil production to begin immediately. Not only that, they desire the production to begin in previously off-limit areas in the Gulf of Mexico, offshore on both coasts, in the oil shale in the western states, and the oil sand reserves in the mid-west. Basically, where there is a chance for success and in areas where known oil reserves exist, we want the production to begin. And we also desire the building of more oil refineries to process that oil into usable fuels.

It’s time to call these oppositional Congressional members and let them know that their jobs are on the line. We need to tell them that unless they pass the necessary legislation to allow oil production anyplace there is oil, then we are going to elect new representation that WILL open up the areas where oil can be produced. You can sit on your hands, and you can whine until you are blue in the face, yet none of that is going to move any member of Congress off their position. The lie has been exposed about the 67 million acres, now its time to let them know that YOU know it’s a lie and you will settle for nothing less than truth.

There is a link on the upper right side of this web page. It says, Drill Here, Drill Now, Reduce Prices. Click it. Sign the Petition, and then sit down and write your Senator and Representative an email and tell them how you feel. Unless you do, the energy issue in this nation will never be resolved. Common sense tells you that you should, so don’t let your time excuse stop you from doing so.

http://thecommonconservative.com/?p=51

It's not just the Obama administration or Obama that has to go it's every tree hugging hippie that ever reproduced they've got to go as well. However people frown on genocide. Yes the environment needs to be protected and let's face it there are a lot of people who couldn't wipe their own ass with the instructions wrote on the toilet paper, they have no regard for animal life plant life or any other life. But it should be up to the states, states in this day and age are capable of protecting their own environments but we don't need environmental protection to the extent that is happening today.

Lets confine them all to a couple of states they can hug all the trees they want--and freeze!

Those granola crunchers sure do create more problems than they solve, don't they?  You're right George, the states have the ability to protect their own environment.  There is a difference between being a good steward of God's good earth, and being a rabid environmentalist bent on relegating humans to substandard living as they worship the altar of environazis.

(rant over) and thanks for the post, and the brief chat! 

God bless,

JG

RSS

Attention:

 

 

Please view our mission, policy, and legal disclaimer to learn about us by visiting the main menu.  Thank you.

PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION!

BRING BACK #HUAC

http://bit.ly/2mqIVmH 

CONTACT CONGRESS!

Let your voice be counted!

House:  http://1.usa.gov/mHZjgo

Senate:  http://1.usa.gov/3UAs

 

 

PLEASE PRAY FOR OUR NATION.

 

 

national debt

Founders' Corner

Latest Activity

Watchman replied to Jerseygal's discussion Republicans, Remember 1998
"A couple of thoughts... One of the reasons why there was such a red wave in Florida, and one that…"
Nov 28, 2022
Jerseygal replied to Jerseygal's discussion Republicans, Remember 1998
"This is bit of a history lesson.  It’s worth noting that Trump was not the…"
Nov 9, 2022
Jerseygal posted a discussion
Nov 9, 2022
Jodi180 replied to Jodi180's discussion Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument
"No doubt!  Why weren't Republicans telling us about this?? "
Nov 8, 2022
kwicgov55 replied to Jodi180's discussion Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument
"Very good article Jodi. I did not know the control dems had over republicans when it came to voter…"
Nov 8, 2022
kwicgov55 liked Jodi180's discussion Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument
Nov 8, 2022
Jerseygal replied to Jodi180's discussion Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument
"Excellent piece, Jodi!  There was a lot of info in there I didn’t know. It’s a…"
Nov 7, 2022
Jerseygal liked Jodi180's discussion Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument
Nov 7, 2022
NativeCollector liked Jodi180's discussion Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument
Nov 7, 2022
Jodi180 posted a discussion

Why we lost in 2020...the most comprehensive and compelling argument

I read this article today by Mollie Hemingway at The Federalist.And after reading it, I…See More
Nov 4, 2022
NativeCollector liked Duke's discussion To all Californians, check this out.
Oct 1, 2022
Duke posted a discussion
Sep 23, 2022
Jerseygal replied to Duke's discussion Hitler reincarnated
"I agree, Duke!  That’s a disgusting speech!!!!  We ALL need to vote Republicans and…"
Sep 4, 2022
NativeCollector liked Duke's discussion Hitler reincarnated
Sep 3, 2022
Jerseygal liked Duke's discussion Hitler reincarnated
Sep 3, 2022
Jerseygal liked Jodi180's discussion Somebody Be In The Way!
Sep 3, 2022

© 2023   Fundamental Refounding.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service