No but they soon will when Bush realizes that his oil is now in CanadaAre Americans aware that Canada has the largest oil reserves next to Saudi Arabia?
Yes, I found it on www.congoo.comAre Americans aware that Canada has the largest oil reserves next to Saudi Arabia?
No idea. I do know that I'm not aware of it, but... I'm not an American.
so why, in the hell are we in the middle east? Bush sucks!!!
We will come and drain this country of yours in no time
Please, don't give them ideas
No not really Damn those canadians j/k
Yes we are and as soon as we get through with Iraq.....
Yes we are but it is mixed with sand and is to expensive to get right now . So we will wait until we need it. and did you know that the gulf of Mexico has just as much but it is easier to get.
INVADE CANADA!!! lol
salam
Monday, April 26, 2010
Are the Saudi oil reserves less than 1/2 now from when Aramco was booted out?
In 1979 their est. reserves were 106 billion barrels. Since then they have shipped around 50 billion barrels. They would not (or could not?) increase their output. Have they explored for more oil? Many do not think they have. They claim they now have 256 billion barrels?Are the Saudi oil reserves less than 1/2 now from when Aramco was booted out?
Saudi Arabia is a closed state, and they don't allow outsiders to check their claims -- and so we don't know. With technological improvements to harvesting and refining oil being developed all the time, it's entirely possible that the Saudis themselves don't know.
Whole-world access to Saudi oil is a matter almost entirely of politics, at this point in history. As you've noted, even *their own* numbers keep changing. Aaargh.
Powerful incentive for all of us to drill for oil *anywhere* outside of Saudi Arabia, yes?
Saudi Arabia is a closed state, and they don't allow outsiders to check their claims -- and so we don't know. With technological improvements to harvesting and refining oil being developed all the time, it's entirely possible that the Saudis themselves don't know.
Whole-world access to Saudi oil is a matter almost entirely of politics, at this point in history. As you've noted, even *their own* numbers keep changing. Aaargh.
Powerful incentive for all of us to drill for oil *anywhere* outside of Saudi Arabia, yes?
With oil reserves in Alaska, Canada, Mexico and mainland US - why do we import oil for energy?
Since alternative energy sources are growing and will eventually replace oil as the source of energy in the US - why are we politically damaging the world by importing oil now - why not work with western hemisphere countries who are democratic and have enough reserves to last long into the future by which oil will be replaced by alternative energy sources. Oil will forever be needed for material production - but not so for energy.With oil reserves in Alaska, Canada, Mexico and mainland US - why do we import oil for energy?
I believe those are our real reserves.With oil reserves in Alaska, Canada, Mexico and mainland US - why do we import oil for energy?
All the oil in Alaska would not last the U.S. one full year.
The oil in Canada needs special (extra) refining.
Mexico wants to use their oil as much as we do.
All our elected officals are screwing us and then promoting themselves as doing something good for when all they have really done is ';pimp'; the problems with no real solutions for anything anywhere! Fuel-less, pollution free, cheap, overabundant electric power has been all over our government and they just thumbed their nose at it because big oil, big power, big coal, and Nuclear power ';PAY'; them to screw us and not to allow any alternative energy to come to the market!
www.uspto.gov enter patent # 5,430,333
www.earthrights.net/docs/oilrent that鈥檚 oilrent
www.pfd.state.ak.us
Because liberals won't let us drill for it because it supposedly ruins the environment. It's the liberals fault that we're paying through the nose for oil.
That is why I am going to vote for Rudy Giuliani... the major platform he is running on is his Apollo like program for energy independence. Energy independence is a national security issue and when we are energy independent the islamic middle east and russia will go bankrupt!
That is an excellent question. Unfortunately, the environmental lobbyists have had undue influence over our elected officials.
Yes its sounds stupid but its all about economics and trade which boils down to us selling off our oil cause the economic machine is world wide and doesnt recognize countries just profit.
an overwhelming majority of our oil does come from western and nato countries
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petro鈥?/a>
Because oil is a global commodity. Multinational companies have worldwide contracts to extract and refine petroleum.
Exxon/Mobil - US Based
BP/Amaco - UK Based
Shell - Dutch
Get it.
I believe those are our real reserves.With oil reserves in Alaska, Canada, Mexico and mainland US - why do we import oil for energy?
All the oil in Alaska would not last the U.S. one full year.
The oil in Canada needs special (extra) refining.
Mexico wants to use their oil as much as we do.
All our elected officals are screwing us and then promoting themselves as doing something good for when all they have really done is ';pimp'; the problems with no real solutions for anything anywhere! Fuel-less, pollution free, cheap, overabundant electric power has been all over our government and they just thumbed their nose at it because big oil, big power, big coal, and Nuclear power ';PAY'; them to screw us and not to allow any alternative energy to come to the market!
www.uspto.gov enter patent # 5,430,333
www.earthrights.net/docs/oilrent that鈥檚 oilrent
www.pfd.state.ak.us
Because liberals won't let us drill for it because it supposedly ruins the environment. It's the liberals fault that we're paying through the nose for oil.
That is why I am going to vote for Rudy Giuliani... the major platform he is running on is his Apollo like program for energy independence. Energy independence is a national security issue and when we are energy independent the islamic middle east and russia will go bankrupt!
That is an excellent question. Unfortunately, the environmental lobbyists have had undue influence over our elected officials.
Yes its sounds stupid but its all about economics and trade which boils down to us selling off our oil cause the economic machine is world wide and doesnt recognize countries just profit.
an overwhelming majority of our oil does come from western and nato countries
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petro鈥?/a>
Because oil is a global commodity. Multinational companies have worldwide contracts to extract and refine petroleum.
Exxon/Mobil - US Based
BP/Amaco - UK Based
Shell - Dutch
Get it.
Does it anger you that the democrats fight developing our own oil reserves?
we have it, but they are so set on making mr. bush look bad, they will risk putting our economy in danger of collapse. mr. bush has his faults, but he is trying to do something about energy prices, thats more than the democrats are doing.Does it anger you that the democrats fight developing our own oil reserves?
Dems don't need to ';make'; Bush look bad...he does that all by himself. What is Bush trying to do about energy prices? Begging OPEC to increase production, and they laughed at him!
Increase production of ethanol? It takes 120 barrels of fossil fuels to make 100 barrels of ethanol. That saves energy, how?
The amount of oil in Alaska won't save us from ourselves, and when that's gone, then what do we do?
ANWR is not the answer to our problems. Get over it.Does it anger you that the democrats fight developing our own oil reserves?
Get real; Republicans had absolute power for 6 years鈥攅nough power to invade and sustain an occupation of a country that posed no threat to anyone and was not connected, in any way, to any terrorist organization.
The truth is that the oil companies do not want to develop those resources because they profit more by not developing them. There is more oil in the Gulf of Mexico than in Alaska, and we just granted Mexico rights to explore an additional 15,000 square miles of it.
Why doesn鈥檛 it make you angry that republicans and the Bush administration have put their personal wealth and power above the welfare of America and its people?
Democrats will not sign off on domestic drilling till there is a democrat president. They can't have Bush lesson the burden of gas prices and get credit for doing something good, that would be against their character.
They'll wait till their party controls the white house then turn loose the reserves, there-by solidifying the democrat view that only they can do right for the country.
Democrats have been blocking every attempt Bush has made to help you and me, all the while democrat representatives go on TV and complaining that he's not doing anything to help you and me...
P.S. while we had a republican controlled congress gas prices were less than $2 a gallon, quite reasonable compared to today. I would imagine that he didn't push for drilling harder then because there wasn't the need that there is now.
Oh you mean the oil reserves that The Republicans, when they had a majority of members in Congress AND the Senate, voted against drilling into?
You whackjobs act like a bunch of liberals, the way you constantly shift blame for everything onto the other party. Don't forget, you douchebags had ALL THREE BRANCHES of the gov't (plus the press) in your pockets from 2001-2007.
Yes we have it, and we have capped many well heads in this country, we have also shut down many refineries. Open those existing wellheads, and bring BACK those refineries that have been taken off line. Can you do that? Because this is one old fart that will fight you tooth (even it they are store bought teeth) %26amp; nail before I will give in to running the risk of destroying pristine wilderness in Alaska that ';I'; will never see. I will even give you my blessings to do more in the Gulf of Mexico as well as along the Atlantic Ocean. How's that? and ';I'; live in Floridah.
I think it is important to work on alternate source of energy instead of just continuing our current ways. Without the pain of high gas prices people will just go on doing what they have been doing all along and nothing will change. We have known this was coming for a long time. It is time to find alternatives to oil. There is more to the economic problems we are having than the price of oil. Irresponsible lending and debt is a much bigger problem in regard to the economy.
Our own oil reserves where!? Alaska? One of the biggest misconceptions is that the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve has tons and tons of oil.
In reality, at our current rate of consumption, we would use all of the oil in Alaska in 20 days.
It would be much better to try and utilize the tar sands in Canada, which contain 4 times as much oil as Saudi Arabia.
It angers me that we are so dumb we outsource our jobs. A government that allows dangerous products into the U.S. from china to save a few pennies. Then tax our people to the hilt to pay for oil from the dangerous killers of 9/11 ';Saudis'; to control how much we pay for gas. To have a corrupt white house that is out of control and nothing being done. We should be in the streets demanding a stop to this madness. And your ';Mr Bush'; is going to go down as the most incompetent president ever to occupy the white house.
Yes and no. I see both sides of the story - but not as black and white that you do.
I don't think that Democrats are fighting development here to make President Bush look bad. We don't need to aid him in anyway - he has done that all on his own. There are some Dems that are fighting it for environmental reasons, and not all of them are bad.
no, investing in fossil fuel at this point is a waste of money. the source is finite so anything you spend is a short term investment. Now if these Dems would grow a spine and offer to end the hemp prohibition so we can freely grow a high cellulose yielding crop to make ethanol from (instead of corn that's only about 9% as efficient) then they would have a real plan for the future. But then again, the repubs plan is to get the last drop of oil at all costs.
The dems will fight Bush every step of the way. We have oil in North Dakota and Montana, as well as Alaska, and should have done something years ago about oil. Maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now. In the 70's we went through gas rationing, maybe we'll get there again. I sure hope not, once was enough. We know something has to be done.
It won't happen while Bush is President. The Democrats will do everything in their power to ensure Bush doesn't get credit for anything economically positive. They would rather see the country go into a depression than do that.
No it angers me when simple minded folks believe Dubya about drilling and dont bother to read, does it hurt? ANWAR would not produce any useable oil for decades and is just another excuse to rape another natural resource.
Drilling all possible oil reserves in USA is a National Security
imperative...for the children...FACT!!!
God Bless America!!!
...CHG...
well then why didn't he do something about the rising energy prices when he had a republican controlled congress for 6 yrs?
Between our failure to expand drilling and the fact that congress has basically prevented building any new oil refinery since 1973 -- we have what we have.
Yes it does! Very much, I think its totally selfish to take other countries oil when we have own! Its Demo Congress and Al Gore to blame for high gas prices! Not Bush!
Dems don't need to ';make'; Bush look bad...he does that all by himself. What is Bush trying to do about energy prices? Begging OPEC to increase production, and they laughed at him!
Increase production of ethanol? It takes 120 barrels of fossil fuels to make 100 barrels of ethanol. That saves energy, how?
The amount of oil in Alaska won't save us from ourselves, and when that's gone, then what do we do?
ANWR is not the answer to our problems. Get over it.Does it anger you that the democrats fight developing our own oil reserves?
Get real; Republicans had absolute power for 6 years鈥攅nough power to invade and sustain an occupation of a country that posed no threat to anyone and was not connected, in any way, to any terrorist organization.
The truth is that the oil companies do not want to develop those resources because they profit more by not developing them. There is more oil in the Gulf of Mexico than in Alaska, and we just granted Mexico rights to explore an additional 15,000 square miles of it.
Why doesn鈥檛 it make you angry that republicans and the Bush administration have put their personal wealth and power above the welfare of America and its people?
Democrats will not sign off on domestic drilling till there is a democrat president. They can't have Bush lesson the burden of gas prices and get credit for doing something good, that would be against their character.
They'll wait till their party controls the white house then turn loose the reserves, there-by solidifying the democrat view that only they can do right for the country.
Democrats have been blocking every attempt Bush has made to help you and me, all the while democrat representatives go on TV and complaining that he's not doing anything to help you and me...
P.S. while we had a republican controlled congress gas prices were less than $2 a gallon, quite reasonable compared to today. I would imagine that he didn't push for drilling harder then because there wasn't the need that there is now.
Oh you mean the oil reserves that The Republicans, when they had a majority of members in Congress AND the Senate, voted against drilling into?
You whackjobs act like a bunch of liberals, the way you constantly shift blame for everything onto the other party. Don't forget, you douchebags had ALL THREE BRANCHES of the gov't (plus the press) in your pockets from 2001-2007.
Yes we have it, and we have capped many well heads in this country, we have also shut down many refineries. Open those existing wellheads, and bring BACK those refineries that have been taken off line. Can you do that? Because this is one old fart that will fight you tooth (even it they are store bought teeth) %26amp; nail before I will give in to running the risk of destroying pristine wilderness in Alaska that ';I'; will never see. I will even give you my blessings to do more in the Gulf of Mexico as well as along the Atlantic Ocean. How's that? and ';I'; live in Floridah.
I think it is important to work on alternate source of energy instead of just continuing our current ways. Without the pain of high gas prices people will just go on doing what they have been doing all along and nothing will change. We have known this was coming for a long time. It is time to find alternatives to oil. There is more to the economic problems we are having than the price of oil. Irresponsible lending and debt is a much bigger problem in regard to the economy.
Our own oil reserves where!? Alaska? One of the biggest misconceptions is that the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve has tons and tons of oil.
In reality, at our current rate of consumption, we would use all of the oil in Alaska in 20 days.
It would be much better to try and utilize the tar sands in Canada, which contain 4 times as much oil as Saudi Arabia.
It angers me that we are so dumb we outsource our jobs. A government that allows dangerous products into the U.S. from china to save a few pennies. Then tax our people to the hilt to pay for oil from the dangerous killers of 9/11 ';Saudis'; to control how much we pay for gas. To have a corrupt white house that is out of control and nothing being done. We should be in the streets demanding a stop to this madness. And your ';Mr Bush'; is going to go down as the most incompetent president ever to occupy the white house.
Yes and no. I see both sides of the story - but not as black and white that you do.
I don't think that Democrats are fighting development here to make President Bush look bad. We don't need to aid him in anyway - he has done that all on his own. There are some Dems that are fighting it for environmental reasons, and not all of them are bad.
no, investing in fossil fuel at this point is a waste of money. the source is finite so anything you spend is a short term investment. Now if these Dems would grow a spine and offer to end the hemp prohibition so we can freely grow a high cellulose yielding crop to make ethanol from (instead of corn that's only about 9% as efficient) then they would have a real plan for the future. But then again, the repubs plan is to get the last drop of oil at all costs.
The dems will fight Bush every step of the way. We have oil in North Dakota and Montana, as well as Alaska, and should have done something years ago about oil. Maybe we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now. In the 70's we went through gas rationing, maybe we'll get there again. I sure hope not, once was enough. We know something has to be done.
It won't happen while Bush is President. The Democrats will do everything in their power to ensure Bush doesn't get credit for anything economically positive. They would rather see the country go into a depression than do that.
No it angers me when simple minded folks believe Dubya about drilling and dont bother to read, does it hurt? ANWAR would not produce any useable oil for decades and is just another excuse to rape another natural resource.
Drilling all possible oil reserves in USA is a National Security
imperative...for the children...FACT!!!
God Bless America!!!
...CHG...
well then why didn't he do something about the rising energy prices when he had a republican controlled congress for 6 yrs?
Between our failure to expand drilling and the fact that congress has basically prevented building any new oil refinery since 1973 -- we have what we have.
Yes it does! Very much, I think its totally selfish to take other countries oil when we have own! Its Demo Congress and Al Gore to blame for high gas prices! Not Bush!
Does Mexico has a lot of Oil Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico?
The Mexican- Gulf of Mexico - Is one of the most challenging environments in the world for oil and gas exploration, is benefiting from cable gland technology from Hawke International. Major oil and gas companies are leading the exploration of these huge reserves working in partnership with specialist contractors and suppliers in complex multi-national engineering teams.
Mustang Engineering in Houston (a Wood Group Company) was involved in topside design for all four installations. Additional design work was undertaken at other locations in Texas and Louisiana, where various contractors fabricated topside structures and modules for the production plant. Some heavy fabrications have come from as far as Korea and Norway.
Hawke offices in Houston, the UK and Singapore, together with agents throughout the world have worked closely with the many designers and sub contractors involved.
PEMEX- Petroleos Mexicanos - Mexico, the third-largest supplier of oil to the U.S., will resume full production from wells in the Gulf of Mexico
-Mexico pumps about 3.1 million barrels a day, and 82 percent of it comes from offshore reserves in the Gulf of Mexico. Pemex exported about 2,7 million barrels a day in the third quarter of 2007, with 81 percent going to the U.S.Does Mexico has a lot of Oil Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico?
A lot of oil.
Specially:
Campeche
Tabasco
Veracruz
and Chiapas, in this order.Does Mexico has a lot of Oil Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico?
Yes, the biggest and most important in continental America.
Helix Energy Solutions (NYSE:HLX) is an oilfield services company that builds, maintains and maximizes the output from offshore oil and gas reservoirs. It has two business segments, Contracting Services and Oil and Gas Operations, of which the former accounted for $1,182.8 million in revenues or 67% of the the company's total revenues in 2007.[1]
The company operates primarily in the Gulf of Mexico. Helix announces another deepwater Gulf of Mexico discovery.
BP, the biggest oil producer in the U.S. and biggest leaseholder in the Gulf of Mexico, has a 62 percent working interest in the block, while Brazilian state-controlled Petrobras owns 20 percent and U.S. oil major ConocoPhillips owns 18 percent.
YES!
Mustang Engineering in Houston (a Wood Group Company) was involved in topside design for all four installations. Additional design work was undertaken at other locations in Texas and Louisiana, where various contractors fabricated topside structures and modules for the production plant. Some heavy fabrications have come from as far as Korea and Norway.
Hawke offices in Houston, the UK and Singapore, together with agents throughout the world have worked closely with the many designers and sub contractors involved.
PEMEX- Petroleos Mexicanos - Mexico, the third-largest supplier of oil to the U.S., will resume full production from wells in the Gulf of Mexico
-Mexico pumps about 3.1 million barrels a day, and 82 percent of it comes from offshore reserves in the Gulf of Mexico. Pemex exported about 2,7 million barrels a day in the third quarter of 2007, with 81 percent going to the U.S.Does Mexico has a lot of Oil Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico?
A lot of oil.
Specially:
Campeche
Tabasco
Veracruz
and Chiapas, in this order.Does Mexico has a lot of Oil Reserves in the Gulf of Mexico?
Yes, the biggest and most important in continental America.
Helix Energy Solutions (NYSE:HLX) is an oilfield services company that builds, maintains and maximizes the output from offshore oil and gas reservoirs. It has two business segments, Contracting Services and Oil and Gas Operations, of which the former accounted for $1,182.8 million in revenues or 67% of the the company's total revenues in 2007.[1]
The company operates primarily in the Gulf of Mexico. Helix announces another deepwater Gulf of Mexico discovery.
BP, the biggest oil producer in the U.S. and biggest leaseholder in the Gulf of Mexico, has a 62 percent working interest in the block, while Brazilian state-controlled Petrobras owns 20 percent and U.S. oil major ConocoPhillips owns 18 percent.
YES!
Should the Democrats allow the oil reserves in Alaska to be drilled?
With gas prices going over $4.00 per gallon!Should the Democrats allow the oil reserves in Alaska to be drilled?
We should drill everywhere within our territories that there is oil. Oil rights should be put out to bid with the contingency that refinery capacity must be expanded as well. The thing that perhaps makes me most furious is that the liberals and moderates who are now saying that getting the oil will take too long to effect our current market situation ARE THE SAME TRAITORS TO THIS COUNTRY WHO HAVE BEEN BLOCKING DOMESTIC OIL EXPLORATION FOR YEARS!!! They should be drawn and quartered for betraying this country.Should the Democrats allow the oil reserves in Alaska to be drilled?
Yes, they should allow it, but that has nothing to do with gas prices.
-The people in the area could use the work and improved transportation structure necessary for the operation.
-The areas so picturesquely-captured by environmentalists as propoganda are not the bleak landscapes that would be drilled.
-There is little tourism in the area to be affected.
-As the Arctic Ocean continues to open, the U.S. will likely benefit strategically from a naval base in the region. A close supply of oil could prove advantageous over long-distance transport.
-Any incoming supply of oil reduces our reliance on foreign sources, thus preserving our economic autonomy.
The fact is, the gas prices would not drop at all (the incoming supply would be far lower than the rate of increase in demand). But the other benefits are each sufficient in and of themselves to allow this drilling.
The idea behind this is this oil would not be used in the USA! We would sell it to foreign nations to increase world supply causing prices to go down. If we were to use it for ourselves it would raise gas prices because of simple wage issues. 2 cents a day vs. 20 dollars an hour.
Of course the theory that it would lower gas prices well. I don't know have to wait and see. I have a strong feeling it won't help to much imo.
Sure. The prices will still be high when Bush leaves office so he can take the blame. Maybe we should wait to make sure Obama is elected so he can take credit when prices drop.
They have a better chance than Hillary of getting drilled
It's not just the Democrats that are against it.
yes, and we should expand the refineries as well. we shouuld not let these eco-terrorist interfere anymore.
It certainly feels like a good time.
''ABSO-FRIGGIN-LUTELY'' DOING NOTHING ONLY MAKES OUR ENEMY'S STRONGER.
Last time I looked, Democrats in this country had to go to work too. So yeah...they should.
yea and they should have YEARS ago when it was first discovered so we wouldn't be in this position to begin with.
Lol! That oil will be shipped to China and sold. Not a drop will come to the USA.
And even if it did, it would be a drop in the bucket and we wouldn't feel the effects for about a decade.
Besides, didn't Bush have a plan on using Iraqi oil---you know, to pay for the war and all?
WHAT A LOSER---and NO I didn't write 'LOOSER'---I know how to spell the word correctly.
I am against it. We have off shore drilling available that would be more feasible to send to refineries here in the states. Alaska should be last resort.sunscreen
We should drill everywhere within our territories that there is oil. Oil rights should be put out to bid with the contingency that refinery capacity must be expanded as well. The thing that perhaps makes me most furious is that the liberals and moderates who are now saying that getting the oil will take too long to effect our current market situation ARE THE SAME TRAITORS TO THIS COUNTRY WHO HAVE BEEN BLOCKING DOMESTIC OIL EXPLORATION FOR YEARS!!! They should be drawn and quartered for betraying this country.Should the Democrats allow the oil reserves in Alaska to be drilled?
Yes, they should allow it, but that has nothing to do with gas prices.
-The people in the area could use the work and improved transportation structure necessary for the operation.
-The areas so picturesquely-captured by environmentalists as propoganda are not the bleak landscapes that would be drilled.
-There is little tourism in the area to be affected.
-As the Arctic Ocean continues to open, the U.S. will likely benefit strategically from a naval base in the region. A close supply of oil could prove advantageous over long-distance transport.
-Any incoming supply of oil reduces our reliance on foreign sources, thus preserving our economic autonomy.
The fact is, the gas prices would not drop at all (the incoming supply would be far lower than the rate of increase in demand). But the other benefits are each sufficient in and of themselves to allow this drilling.
The idea behind this is this oil would not be used in the USA! We would sell it to foreign nations to increase world supply causing prices to go down. If we were to use it for ourselves it would raise gas prices because of simple wage issues. 2 cents a day vs. 20 dollars an hour.
Of course the theory that it would lower gas prices well. I don't know have to wait and see. I have a strong feeling it won't help to much imo.
Sure. The prices will still be high when Bush leaves office so he can take the blame. Maybe we should wait to make sure Obama is elected so he can take credit when prices drop.
They have a better chance than Hillary of getting drilled
It's not just the Democrats that are against it.
yes, and we should expand the refineries as well. we shouuld not let these eco-terrorist interfere anymore.
It certainly feels like a good time.
''ABSO-FRIGGIN-LUTELY'' DOING NOTHING ONLY MAKES OUR ENEMY'S STRONGER.
Last time I looked, Democrats in this country had to go to work too. So yeah...they should.
yea and they should have YEARS ago when it was first discovered so we wouldn't be in this position to begin with.
Lol! That oil will be shipped to China and sold. Not a drop will come to the USA.
And even if it did, it would be a drop in the bucket and we wouldn't feel the effects for about a decade.
Besides, didn't Bush have a plan on using Iraqi oil---you know, to pay for the war and all?
WHAT A LOSER---and NO I didn't write 'LOOSER'---I know how to spell the word correctly.
I am against it. We have off shore drilling available that would be more feasible to send to refineries here in the states. Alaska should be last resort.
How much OIL reserves does the United States own in Alaska, California, New Mexico, and Texas ?
Not enough!
We want, We need, and We must have PEMEX!
Merida Initiative conveniently departs from the myth that organized crime, corruption, drug supply and drug demand end at the US-Mexico border.How much OIL reserves does the United States own in Alaska, California, New Mexico, and Texas ?
The Strategic Oil Reserve is not attainable oil. It's stored oil, and is currently at about 700 million barrels stored in the SPR's salt caverns off Louisiana and Texas.
Last year there was a US government lease auction in the Gulf of Mexico for sites with a potential for about 400 million barrels--enough for 20 days of oil for the US.
If ANWR in Alaska was opened for drilling, it could possibly have a peak of 876,000 barrels a day by 2025. That means the US would still have to import about two-thirds of its oil.
If offshore drilling were opened in California, it could yield about 10 billion barrels--enough for about 17 months of the US need.How much OIL reserves does the United States own in Alaska, California, New Mexico, and Texas ?
That depends on what kind of oil you're referring to,,,,shale oil and coal, an abundance, vast quantities. But shale oil is very expensive to convert into gasoline.
Easy to reach pools of oil, very little, about ten years worth.
Enough to where we could be using it instead of buying it frmo foreign dictators and terrorists.
But the leftist environmental-cases won't let us.
We want, We need, and We must have PEMEX!
Merida Initiative conveniently departs from the myth that organized crime, corruption, drug supply and drug demand end at the US-Mexico border.How much OIL reserves does the United States own in Alaska, California, New Mexico, and Texas ?
The Strategic Oil Reserve is not attainable oil. It's stored oil, and is currently at about 700 million barrels stored in the SPR's salt caverns off Louisiana and Texas.
Last year there was a US government lease auction in the Gulf of Mexico for sites with a potential for about 400 million barrels--enough for 20 days of oil for the US.
If ANWR in Alaska was opened for drilling, it could possibly have a peak of 876,000 barrels a day by 2025. That means the US would still have to import about two-thirds of its oil.
If offshore drilling were opened in California, it could yield about 10 billion barrels--enough for about 17 months of the US need.How much OIL reserves does the United States own in Alaska, California, New Mexico, and Texas ?
That depends on what kind of oil you're referring to,,,,shale oil and coal, an abundance, vast quantities. But shale oil is very expensive to convert into gasoline.
Easy to reach pools of oil, very little, about ten years worth.
Enough to where we could be using it instead of buying it frmo foreign dictators and terrorists.
But the leftist environmental-cases won't let us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)