Current Events

TOPICS:

10/23/08

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56

 ... 487

Next

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next

TOPIC CLOSED
skeptik

skeptik

New Orleans, LA
February 2004

OCT 25, 2008 09:59 AM

petepolly said:

Rusty_metal_ass said:
Just in case some of our more mentally challenged trolls can't quite wrap their tiny little brains around the complete and utter fallacy of replacing foreign oil with oil from drilling offshore of the US, maybe this pretty little picture will help you.

zoom image

Clear enough for you now?



And your source is?



Printed at the bottom of the graph. You should look it up.

Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

Vanier, ON
May 2005

OCT 25, 2008 10:00 AM

SergeantPsycho said:

Mythos_ said:

Katieesq said:

SergeantPsycho said:
What does "Change" mean to you?



Why do you ask?



Good question and I hope he answers.
I have 3 theories, let's see if one hits it:

SPOILERS! (Click to view)
1. A Republican who expected that the answer is: "OMG, I never thought about it, it's just an empty phrase!"
2. A Democrat who needs some more arguments to convince his friends.
-or maybe-
3. AN UNDECIDED VOTER. GO, GET HIM!!!! wink



I'm closest to #1. Personally, i'm not convinced America needs changing to be honest. A few tweaks here and there (I think an Islamic Fundementalist is more likely to blow up a bridge than drug dealer, for example), but if you compare the America of today with America of decades past, I'm sure every one can agree that things are mostly getting better. And things are a hell of a lot better here than say China or Zimbabwe, and I wouldn't hesitate to say they're better in the US than in Canada or England. Yeah, I know I might catch a lot of heat for that, but hey, that's how I feel.

But having said that, it's always interesting to hear what the other side has to say.



The only reason the US might be better than Canada is that you're about to get rid of your idiot and we just re-elected ours.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 25, 2008 10:02 AM

Rusty_metal_ass said:

petepolly said:

Rusty_metal_ass said:
Just in case some of our more mentally challenged trolls can't quite wrap their tiny little brains around the complete and utter fallacy of replacing foreign oil with oil from drilling offshore of the US, maybe this pretty little picture will help you.

zoom image

Clear enough for you now?



And your source is?



IT'S ON THE BOTTOM OF THE GRAPHIC!!!!!



OK look at this.

ONE RIG in the Gulf of Mexico will be producing ~60,000 BBL per day.

That is a new installation in an area that is and has been well developed and explored. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the 200,000BBL/day maxing out in 2030 over all of the east and west coast and the Gulf of Mexico east of the Florida-Alabama border is maybe just a tiny bit understated?

Do recall than their has been no serious exploration of any of that area.

FreakPirate

FreakPirate

Canada
November 2002

OCT 25, 2008 10:06 AM

Bill_the_Satan said:

The only reason the US might be better than Canada is that you're about to get rid of your idiot and we just re-elected ours.



As much as I hate our idiot... I would much rather have him than theirs. At least ours has people to keep him in check.

Accuser

Accuser

Scottsdale, AZ
October 2006

OCT 25, 2008 10:07 AM

petepolly said:
OK look at this.

ONE RIG in the Gulf of Mexico will be producing ~60,000 BBL per day.

That is a new installation in an area that is and has been well developed and explored. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the 200,000BBL/day maxing out in 2030 over all of the east and west coast and the Gulf of Mexico east of the Florida-Alabama border is maybe just a tiny bit understated?



So you're saying there will be more than 200,000 barrels a day? Do you have any legitimate estimates on how much it will actually be?

Do recall than their has been no serious exploration of any of that area.



What?

Varuka_Salt

Varuka_Salt

I'm lost
October 2006

OCT 25, 2008 10:08 AM

That link is from 8 years ago, so that well is probably pretty near tapped out, or past peek by now. Irrelevant, as usual.

silversoul7

silversoul7

Portland, OR
January 2008

OCT 25, 2008 10:09 AM

Ending the failed Bush economic policies

Getting serious about global warming and alternative energy

Restoring civil liberties

Restoring America's standing in the world

Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

Vanier, ON
May 2005

OCT 25, 2008 10:20 AM

FreakPirate said:

Bill_the_Satan said:

The only reason the US might be better than Canada is that you're about to get rid of your idiot and we just re-elected ours.



As much as I hate our idiot... I would much rather have him than theirs. At least ours has people to keep him in check.



Thank god for small blessings.

FearTheReaper

FearTheReaper

NEWSWIRE

I'm lost

OCT 25, 2008 10:25 AM

petepolly said:

Rusty_metal_ass said:

petepolly said:

Rusty_metal_ass said:
Just in case some of our more mentally challenged trolls can't quite wrap their tiny little brains around the complete and utter fallacy of replacing foreign oil with oil from drilling offshore of the US, maybe this pretty little picture will help you.

zoom image

Clear enough for you now?



And your source is?



IT'S ON THE BOTTOM OF THE GRAPHIC!!!!!



OK look at this.

ONE RIG in the Gulf of Mexico will be producing ~60,000 BBL per day.

That is a new installation in an area that is and has been well developed and explored. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the 200,000BBL/day maxing out in 2030 over all of the east and west coast and the Gulf of Mexico east of the Florida-Alabama border is maybe just a tiny bit understated?

Do recall than their has been no serious exploration of any of that area.



Stay out of this guys, it's between him and the graph.

FreakPirate

FreakPirate

Canada
November 2002

OCT 25, 2008 10:27 AM

FearTheReaper said:

Stay out of this guys, it's between him and the graph.



I've got $10 on the graph. It seems feisty.

Bill_the_Cat

Bill_the_Cat

Vanier, ON
May 2005

OCT 25, 2008 10:30 AM

Rusty_metal_ass said:
That link is from 8 years ago, so that well is probably pretty near tapped out, or past peek by now. Irrelevant, as usual.





The field reserves are in the range of 50-75 million barrels of oil equivalent.


The spar will be able to produce up to 60,000 barrels of oil per day.



Math:

50 to 75 mil/60,000=833 to 1250 or 2.3 to 3.4 years of production.


If it ever did produce at that rate then it would've been tapped out before Bush stole his second election.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 25, 2008 10:41 AM

Rusty_metal_ass said:
That link is from 8 years ago, so that well is probably pretty near tapped out, or past peek by now. Irrelevant, as usual.



No, the link is from offshore-technology dot com copyright 2008, the development of the field was first sanctioned in 2001, the production for that field started in may 2004 link

It is up and running in 2008 after being damaged by Hurricane Ivan, producing now about 28,000 BBL/day and more expected soon as a fourth well is drilled and brought online.

link

Again ONE field being served by ONE rig, is actually producing 14% of what your source claims is the maximum possible production of all offshore from Maine to Key West on the east coast, all of the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and all of the Pacific Coast of the USA from the Canadian border to the Mexican boarder.

surreal whatever

Accuser

Accuser

Scottsdale, AZ
October 2006

OCT 25, 2008 10:45 AM

Again, do you actually have any legitimate estimates of what would be produced, or are you just going to keep saying "That can't be right"?

skeptik

skeptik

New Orleans, LA
February 2004

OCT 25, 2008 10:47 AM

Rusty_metal_ass said:
That link is from 8 years ago, so that well is probably pretty near tapped out, or past peek by now. Irrelevant, as usual.



Possibly not. Construction was actually completed in November of 2003, with production beginning in mid- to late-2004. The relevent point is:

This field is already included in the light-grey section of the graph. It is currently in production, and not projected "new offshore drilling." But yeah, irrelevant, as usual.

skeptik

skeptik

New Orleans, LA
February 2004

OCT 25, 2008 10:50 AM

bald_eagle said:

Rusty_metal_ass said:
That link is from 8 years ago, so that well is probably pretty near tapped out, or past peek by now. Irrelevant, as usual.



The best info I could find was that it got up to 28,000 bbl/day. It's a lot easier to ask questions like "Do you think that ..." than find answers or actually do refutation of arguments.

If your mind is made up, facts are irrelevant.



Also, it should be noted that the 60,000 bpd number was maximum capacity and referred to the entire field, not just that one well. As does the 28,000 number here.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 25, 2008 10:55 AM

Accuser said:
Again, do you actually have any legitimate estimates of what would be produced, or are you just going to keep saying "That can't be right"?



It costs shitloads of money to explore for oil. Just driving a boat or ship over the area or using sonar is not going to tell you what is many thousands of feet under the sea floor. You have to spend a lot of money doing geology and seismic surveys and exploratory drilling.


FYI since the USA has made it illegal to drill for oil offshore of the east and west and Florida coast in the Gulf of Mexico, nobody has explored, why should they?

My point is that the 200,000 BBL/day estimate is political fiction. That is based on the fact that people exploring off of Brazil, or Africa, or the US Gulf of Mexico, or Asia, find oil if they look hard enough. The idea that only what has already been found (which is all they are counting) is all that will be found is absurd.

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 25, 2008 10:57 AM

skeptik said:

bald_eagle said:

Rusty_metal_ass said:
That link is from 8 years ago, so that well is probably pretty near tapped out, or past peek by now. Irrelevant, as usual.



The best info I could find was that it got up to 28,000 bbl/day. It's a lot easier to ask questions like "Do you think that ..." than find answers or actually do refutation of arguments.

If your mind is made up, facts are irrelevant.



Also, it should be noted that the 60,000 bpd number was maximum capacity and referred to the entire field, not just that one well. As does the 28,000 number here.



The field is operated from one rig.

Having multiple wells being drilled and operated from one rig is SOP offshore.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

OCT 25, 2008 11:23 AM

a return to the three-branch system of government.

AceT

AceT

Portland, OR
April 2004

OCT 25, 2008 11:38 AM

petepolly said:
OK look at this.

ONE RIG in the Gulf of Mexico will be producing ~60,000 BBL per day.

That is a new installation in an area that is and has been well developed and explored. Do you think that maybe, just maybe, the 200,000BBL/day maxing out in 2030 over all of the east and west coast and the Gulf of Mexico east of the Florida-Alabama border is maybe just a tiny bit understated?

Do recall than their has been no serious exploration of any of that area.


Wow. Just...wow. Your level of delusion has reached new levels. Are you trying to tell us now that the number the Bush administration gave us about how much oil offshore drilling would give us is too low, just because you think it is?

The fucking Energy Information Administration has people that do this for a living. Experts. Professionals. They have graphs, reports, researched numbers. You can't refute that with "hmm, that sounds a little low."

surreal

Also, it doesn't change the irrefutable fact that creating the infrastructure to drill offshore won't produce any results for 10-20 years. If we instead invest that time, money, and energy to developing an alternative energy infrastructure, we'd be building something with unlimited potential, instead of mining a finite resource. It's called progress.

Varuka_Salt

Varuka_Salt

I'm lost
October 2006

OCT 25, 2008 11:40 AM

contrarian
Pronunciation [kuhn-trair-ee-uhn]
noun
a person who takes an opposing view, esp. one who rejects the majority any opinion, as in economic all matters.

AceT

AceT

Portland, OR
April 2004

OCT 25, 2008 11:50 AM

Again, from the EIA.

The projections in the OCS access case indicate that access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017. Total domestic production of crude oil from 2012 through 2030 in the OCS access case is projected to be 1.6 percent higher than in the reference case, and 3 percent higher in 2030 alone, at 5.6 million barrels per day. For the lower 48 OCS, annual crude oil production in 2030 is projected to be 7 percent higher -- 2.4 million barrels per day in the OCS access case compared with 2.2 million barrels per day in the reference case (Figure 20). Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.



Although a significant volume of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and natural gas resources is added in the OCS access case, conversion of those resources to production would require both time and money. In addition, the average field size in the Pacific and Atlantic regions tends to be smaller than the average in the Gulf of Mexico, implying that a significant portion of the additional resource would not be economically attractive to develop at the reference case prices.



If you have beef with these numbers, take it up with Phyllis Martin.

Contact: Phyllis Martin
Phone: 202-586-9592
E-mail: phyllis.martin@eia.doe.gov

AceT

AceT

Portland, OR
April 2004

OCT 25, 2008 11:59 AM

petepolly said:
FYI since the USA has made it illegal to drill for oil offshore of the east and west and Florida coast in the Gulf of Mexico, nobody has explored, why should they?


Nobody has explored? Really?

petepolly

petepolly

Antarctica
August 2008

OCT 25, 2008 12:43 PM

AceT said:

petepolly said:
FYI since the USA has made it illegal to drill for oil offshore of the east and west and Florida coast in the Gulf of Mexico, nobody has explored, why should they?


Nobody has explored? Really?



That is not US waters, and they found a lot of oil and gas.

lil_tuffy

lil_tuffy

MODERATOR

San Francisco, CA

OCT 25, 2008 12:46 PM

This thread has been irrevocably side-tracked.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3

Next