brenthutch 383 #1 November 21, 2016 https://www.yahoo.com/news/largest-oil-deposit-ever-discovered-210920731.html A trillion dollars of recoverable oil and gas, at today's prices. "The best thing about the earth is if you poke holes in it, oil and gas come out" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #2 November 21, 2016 Somehow this will be seen as a negative to some people. As America becomes less dependent on other countries for oil isn't that a good thing? I know fracking is a dirty word to some people....but even here....at dz.com has the left really agreed that it's not good?Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,122 #3 November 21, 2016 Well, as a liberal, married to a liberal retired petroleum geologist, I don't think it's bad. I also don't think it's the be-all and end-all of energy management. Kind of like thinking youve solved all your financial problems because you hit the lottery, without actually planning on how you'll make it last. After all, people have won the lottery more than once. My idea of the ideal result would be to have safe, reasonable alternative energy available before we desperately need it, so that technology or equipment that can't reasonably evolve can continue to be used until it can be replaced. Kind of like how cars that use leader has weren't immediately outlawed; statins continued to sell it for awhile, and it took 23 years for it to be actually outlawed for on-road use. By then, heaps were largely rusting hulks, and classics had had a chance to figure out how to convert. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #4 November 21, 2016 QuoteI know fracking is a dirty word to some people....but even here....at dz.com has the left really agreed that it's not good? I'd say the people of Oklahoma aren't exactly thrilled about it. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/09/07/usgs-upgrading-oklahoma-earthquake-to-5-8-magnitude.html“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Phil1111 911 #5 November 21, 2016 There is a current $30 bbl spread between current WTI and Wolfcamp production costs. It will be a couple years if not a decade before new Gulfstream jets are ordered. Investors have still not digested the heartburn of the last two years losses and the mention of shale is like coke in a good bourbon. "The Permian Basin in west Texas has long been a major source of oil, and the Wolfcamp Shale formation has been known of many years. The recent announcement expands the area included in this formation. But what does this announcement mean in practical terms? Although estimates of $900,000,000 in value have been published, this is based on a $45 per barrel price for West Texas Intermediate crude and doesn’t include the expense of drilling, completion, and infrastructure. The cost of exploiting this field far outstrips today’s spot price for WTI of $44.87. So, what does this discovery mean to you? Apache Oil (a Houston based company) has been successfully exploiting the area north of Alpine and west northwest of Fort Stockton, an area known as the Alpine High (not to be confused with what students at Sul Ross University might be doing) since early this year. However, a source in the oil and gas business (who asked to remain anonymous) who is familiar with the situation cautions readers that “when you see people in the oil and gas business seeking investors outside the core oil and gas business funding sources, don’t walk away, run.” He says that this announcement, while encouraging for an oil-driven economy, will have more impact with higher prices." http://texashillcountry.com/largest-oil-deposit-hype-hope/2/ "Results from the Wolfcamp play are mixed with an average break-even price of $75 per BOE for the top 5 operators but $61 per BOE excluding one operator with poorer well performance." http://oilpro.com/post/25299/permian-basin-break-even-price-61-best-bad-lot Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,123 #6 November 21, 2016 Yes, but those costs are all because of regulation and Trump is going to get rid of that. So once again, Trump is delivering on jobs and economy and stuff. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #7 November 21, 2016 Trump did say he would eliminate the executive orders that Obama has signed, one of which was the overtime rules change. Eliminating some overtime will save tons of money. /s Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,123 #8 November 21, 2016 normissTrump did say he would eliminate the executive orders that Obama has signed, one of which was the overtime rules change. Eliminating some overtime will save tons of money. /s Last number I saw has about 20,000,000 people who voted for him affected by this. They'll find out how their votes affect them. Elections have consequences. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #9 November 21, 2016 >Last number I saw has about 20,000,000 people who voted for him affected by >this. They'll find out how their votes affect them. More likely they will find a way to blame Obama. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #10 November 21, 2016 That puts an effective ceiling of $75 a barrel for the next several decades. Stable energy prices are a boon to industry and jobs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #11 November 21, 2016 Quote My idea of the ideal result would be to have safe, reasonable alternative energy.. It's called nuclear energy.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #12 November 22, 2016 Reactor 3 just went down in Fukishima. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #13 November 22, 2016 normissReactor 3 just went down in Fukishima. Killing thousands. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #14 November 22, 2016 Quote Killing thousands. Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster casualties Quote The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster (福島第一原子力発電所事故 Fukushima Dai-ichi (About this sound pronunciation) genshiryoku hatsudensho jiko?) was a series of equipment failures, nuclear meltdowns, and releases of radioactive materials at the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, following the Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami on 11 March 2011.[6][7] Although it was the largest nuclear disaster since the Chernobyl disaster of 1986,[8] and the radiation released exceeded official safety guidelines, there were no casualties caused by radiation exposure. You should really double check things before you post them.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #15 November 22, 2016 Quote "The best thing about the earth is if you poke holes in it, oil and gas come out" I expect the US will be energy independent in Trump's term.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #16 November 22, 2016 My tongue was planted firmly in my cheek. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #17 November 22, 2016 Quote My tongue was planted firmly in my cheek. Ohh.. We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #18 November 22, 2016 Quote Reactor 3 just went down in Fukishima. Nuclear Power in France Quote France derives about 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy,... If the French can successfully use nuclear energy, so can we.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #19 November 22, 2016 StreetScoobyQuote "The best thing about the earth is if you poke holes in it, oil and gas come out" I expect the US will be energy independent in Trump's term. At a $75 a barrel price point, we will be an energy exporter! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
headoverheels 291 #20 November 22, 2016 StreetScooby If the French can successfully use nuclear energy, so can we. The US produces nearly twice as much electricity from nuclear as France. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #21 November 22, 2016 >The US produces nearly twice as much electricity from nuclear as France. Details, details. What's important is it doesn't FEEL like we do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #22 November 22, 2016 headoverheels*** If the French can successfully use nuclear energy, so can we. The US produces nearly twice as much electricity from nuclear as France. In this instance, per capita may be a more useful metric; or perhaps as a percentage of total energy usage. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 197 #23 November 22, 2016 billvon>The US produces nearly twice as much electricity from nuclear as France. Details, details. What's important is it doesn't FEEL like we do. Not bad considering France is slightly less than the size of Texas.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gowlerk 1,913 #24 November 22, 2016 Not exactly a new story. Of course it's good. We still need oil and this will keep the price down. Meaning less power for Middle East despot regimes and the Russians. Canada will live with it, we are more diversified. Shale formation oil from fracking is a little expensive, but cheaper than tar sands oil.Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brenthutch 383 #25 November 22, 2016 normissReactor 3 just went down in Fukishima. Back on line 90 minutes later, taken offline as a precaution. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
