or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › What Obama Really Believes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What Obama Really Believes - Page 5

post #161 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

No - government subsidies are the reason we produce ethanol, it is not a cost effective fuel without the government intervention.

It's not an efficient fuel anyway.

Quote:

And we need gas to go even higher in price if we want to survive as a species - the fact that you don't like paying so much to fill up your toyota is kind of a minor issue in comparison.

Don't be silly. Survive as a species? We have at least 100 years of oil without tapping into shale. We're not destroying the planet, either.


Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Right. Ya'll go with that. Black and liberals are the real racists,

No, but some are, and I've pointed many of them out. You by contrast ignore them.

Quote:
and when a candidate for President of the United States and his wife are portrayed in overtly racist terms, it's just good fun and clever rhyming.

First, they were not portrayed that way. Secondly, it wasn't clever nor funny. All I've claimed is that there's no evidence it was done with racist intent.

Quote:
Or possibly entirely innocent misuse of "urban slang" by national news networks taking a stab at being "cool" and "down with the kids."

This kind of inane rationalizing is the reason the right has a real problem on its hands. The SDWs and Trumptmen of the world have been preaching this gospel-- that blacks and liberals are racist,

No, that some are...and that the vast majority of conservatives are not...contrary to liberals' claims.

Quote:
that actual racism is benign,

Who in the fuck is claiming that?

Quote:

and if African Americans themselves use certain terms then they have "no right" to complain if such terms get used by whites-- until it becomes difficult if not impossible for the right to present a coherent response to race, when it becomes necessary to do so.

Well no...but it must be acknowledged that such "internal use" of certain terms cannot be helpful to race relations.

Quote:
Which it has. All of the above is just typical chaff, designed to confuse the discourse and rob the Democrats of a talking point. It was never designed to stand up to scrutiny, or to get down to cases.

Barack Obama is a case. Self-serving crap about how white men are the real oppressed minority don't mean shit when the "Obama looks like a monkey and his wife is a ho" crowd gets rolling.

First, no one is claiming white men are an oppressed minority. Secondly, the people that "get rolling" don't represent me, trumpt or any conservative I know. But in your world, they do.

Quote:


And, fellas, guess what? You invited them in. You told them that their odious shit wasn't that bad, that they, actually, kind of had a point, and, anyway, the real problem was Al Sharpton and his Democratic enablers, so what harm a few jigaboos among friends?

That's totally insane. "We" didn't invite anyone like that in. But that's your perception, because it's convenient for you to believe it. At the same time, you get to ignore the very REAL racists within your own party and ideology. good trick.

Quote:

And now they figure it's all good, and you're left with your fucking lame excuses and pathetic lists of how liberals are worse.

Those liberals are, yes.

Quote:

So, by all means, go for it. Don't denounce this stuff in no uncertain terms, go for it. Let the straight up racists know that, when it comes to the Republican Party, a minstrel show in defense of McCain is no vice.

Bring those chickens on home to roost, boys.

See, there you go. But you know what? It's not going to last forever, adda. The Democratic party and some of the racists within it cannot continue to take African Americans for granted, ignoring blatantly racist conduct within its ranks. The trick of portraying all Republicans and racist white devils who want to help the rich and screw the poor and rape the environment and kill and mame won't last forever either.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #162 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

First, no one is claiming white men are an oppressed minority. Secondly, the people that "get rolling" don't represent me, trumpt or any conservative I know. But in your world, they do.

I hate to break it to you, dude, but you're rolling. And the more you talk and don't say "Dear god, that was a completely deplorable thing for them to do and they should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing that to go on the air, whether or not they're so stupid that they didn't see that it had obvious racial connotations," the more you're rolling.

Quote:
The Democratic party and some of the racists within it cannot continue to take African Americans for granted, ignoring blatantly racist conduct within its ranks.

That is absolutely correct.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #163 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Those

Which ones?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

liberals

Ah, liberals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

are,

Currently?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

yes.

What do you mean by "yes?"

(I love playing SDW. )
post #164 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Which ones? Ah, liberals. Currently?

What do you mean by "yes?"

(I love playing SDW. )

Yes. He. Does. Like. To. Parse. An. Argument. Piece. By. Piece. In. That. Way. He. Attempts. To. Avoid. The. Totality. Of. The. Argument. Presented.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #165 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Yes. He. Does. Like. To. Parse. An. Argument. Piece. By. Piece. In. That. Way. He. Attempts. To. Avoid. The. Totality. Of. The. Argument. Presented.


It's kind of the way Captain Kirk used to talk.
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #166 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I believe it is the calling of racism that conjures into being, no? Nick?

No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Exactly! The KKK is not inherently racist, but imputing onto it racist motives reveals the racism of the imputer.

I'll give you a sympathy "B" for effort.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #167 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Don't be silly. Survive as a species? We have at least 100 years of oil without tapping into shale. We're not destroying the planet, either.

I know that you don't believe in CO2 greenhouse effects, and I have no interest in convincing you - but 100 years? Show me the math - I get 12 years (1 trillion barrels reserves/82 billion barrels per year), but we will never run out because it will get too expensive to use before we finish pumping all the oil out of the ground.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #168 of 202
Obama believes the same thing that McCain believes: Let's be fair to everyone. Let's give everyone a fair shake in life. They really are cut from the same cloth, folks.
post #169 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by lunocrat View Post

Obama believes the same thing that McCain believes: Let's be fair to everyone. Let's give everyone a fair shake in life. They really are cut from the same cloth, folks.

Ok. With that comment, I will leave PO until...guess...
post #170 of 202
I knew an art guy would agree with me!
post #171 of 202
[CENTER][/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #172 of 202
What Obama actually believes...

- Fucking white bitches cures your AIDS.

- Anybody rollin' on less than 22s be a mark-ass punk bitch.

- Nationalized planned economies operate for the overall good of the proletariat.

- McCain can't lift his arms because he's actually a robot from the 1920s.

- Air Force One has a secret room for hotboxing. (FYI - This is why he's running for president.)

- He can replace the President's Fitness Medal with the Choom Gang Bonghitter Award in our nation's elementary schools.

- If he swears into office on a Koran, he will only get blessings from the Ja Almighty if he hollows out that Koran and puts a CD copy of Peter Tosh's "Legalize It" in there.

- A system of healthcare that helps only the healthy and the wealthy does not live up to America's promise.

- BABA BOOEY BABA BOOEY HOWARD STERN'S PENIS BABA BOOEY BABA BOOEY
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #173 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I hate to break it to you, dude, but you're rolling. And the more you talk and don't say "Dear god, that was a completely deplorable thing for them to do and they should be ashamed of themselves for ever allowing that to go on the air, whether or not they're so stupid that they didn't see that it had obvious racial connotations," the more you're rolling.

So the more we disagree, more racist I am. Nice. Well we do disagree, and it doesn't make me racist in any sense. It wasn't deplorable. It was a fucking rhyme, mid. And I don't hear anyone outside of AI throwing a fit about it, so clearly it's not an issue for most people.

Quote:

That is absolutely correct.

Thanks.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #174 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So the more we disagree, more racist I am. Nice. Well we do disagree, and it doesn't make me racist in any sense.

*looks into camera; deviates from script*

"SDW HATE BLACK PEOPLES!"
post #175 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So the more we disagree, more racist I am. Nice. Well we do disagree, and it doesn't make me racist in any sense. It wasn't deplorable. It was a fucking rhyme, mid. And I don't hear anyone outside of AI throwing a fit about it, so clearly it's not an issue for most people.

Roll, SDW, roll! You carry that water!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #176 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

what Obama Actually Believes...

- Fucking White Bitches Cures Your Aids.

- Anybody Rollin' On Less Than 22s Be A Mark-ass Punk Bitch.

- Nationalized Planned Economies Operate For The Overall Good Of The Proletariat.

- Mccain Can't Lift His Arms Because He's Actually A robot From The 1920s.

- Air Force One Has A Secret Room For Hotboxing. (fyi - This Is Why He's Running For President.)

- He Can Replace The President's Fitness Medal With The Choom Gang Bonghitter Award In Our Nation's Elementary Schools.

- If He Swears Into Office On A Koran, He Will Only Get Blessings From The Ja Almighty If He Hollows Out That Koran And Puts A Cd Copy Of Peter Tosh's "legalize It" In There.

- A System Of Healthcare That Helps Only The Healthy And The Wealthy Does Not Live Up To America's Promise.

- Baba Booey Baba Booey Howard Stern's Penis Baba Booey Baba Booey

This Is All True Although He Denies It Now He Is A Liar
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #177 of 202
OK, what is this weird shit where all caps comes out with just the first letter of everY word capitalized, and quoting someone also makes the first letter of every word capitalized?

GROVERAT MAYBE YOU HAVE SOME INSIGHT INTO THIS.

Oh great, now it decides to stick with all caps, in the post I try to ask about it.

Edit: I wonder if it only does that if you quote someone, so both the quote and the post get the first letter cap treatment...
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #178 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

ok, What Is This Weird Shit Where All Caps Comes Out With Just The First Letter Of Ever Work Capitalized, And Quoting Someone Also Makes The First Letter Of Every Word Capitalized?

Groverat Maybe You Have Some Insight Into This.

Oh Great, Now It Decides To Stick With All Caps, In The Post I Try To Ask About It.

Edit: I Wonder If It Only Does That If You Quote Someone, So Both The Quote And The Post Get The First Letter Cap Treatment...

Is That The Case? Aha.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #179 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

This Is All True Although He Denies It Now He Is A Liar

he only said it because he was away from the teleprompter, with its insidious suggestion that he is being controlled by other, unseen, forces.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #180 of 202
it's if your only content is in caps.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #181 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

he only said it because he was away from the teleprompter, with its insidious suggestion that he is being controlled by other, unseen, forces.

My Google research suggests that Louis Farrakhan owns a controlling interest in Bean Pie Media, a major supplier of teleprompters to Manchurian Solutions, LTD, the largest US provide of turnkey studio systems-- as used by Dan Rather.

Naturally, they've done everything possible to cover their tracks, but they never counted on me and my basement and my copy of Photoshop, the internet and 40 cases of Cheetohs and Dr. Pibb.

I should have something up on my blog by midnight-- hang onto your tinfoil hats people, this is going to get hot.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #182 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

it's if your only content is in caps.

So, I CAN DROP OUT A SINGLE LETTER AND HAS CAPZ?

Excellent.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #183 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

I know that you don't believe in CO2 greenhouse effects, and I have no interest in convincing you - but 100 years? Show me the math - I get 12 years (1 trillion barrels reserves/82 billion barrels per year), but we will never run out because it will get too expensive to use before we finish pumping all the oil out of the ground.

Frank: We have 12 years of oil left.

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #184 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Frank: We have 12 years of oil left.

Address enumbers post with some actual data TYVM.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #185 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Address enumbers post with some actual data TYVM.

More optimistic numbers - 2400 billion barrels reserve

http://environment.newscientist.com/...-reserves.html

I kind of doubt that this is true, since when OPEC was formed all the OPEC countries started lying and inflating their reserve numbers to get a bigger piece of the pie.

Al-Husseini thinks that the real number is more like 900 billion barrels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

But lets use the 2400 billion barrel number, because it is the most optimistic one I have found.

I was wrong about the consumption figure - the anticipated oil consumption over the next few decades is more like 50 billion barrels/year, not 83.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/oil.html

So even with the most optimistic numbers, we have 48 years of supply - not 100, and we probably have more like 18 with more realistic reserve numbers. I can't get 100 years no matter what - of course the price will skyrocket over that time period, and we will still have oil in the ground 100 years from now because people will stop using oil (either from dying or moving to alternatives).
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #186 of 202
Do those numbers take into account the exponential rise in China's oil consumption?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #187 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

More optimistic numbers - 2400 billion barrels reserve

http://environment.newscientist.com/...-reserves.html

I kind of doubt that this is true, since when OPEC was formed all the OPEC countries started lying and inflating their reserve numbers to get a bigger piece of the pie.

Al-Husseini thinks that the real number is more like 900 billion barrels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

But lets use the 2400 billion barrel number, because it is the most optimistic one I have found.

I was wrong about the consumption figure - the anticipated oil consumption over the next few decades is more like 50 billion barrels/year, not 83.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/oil.html

So even with the most optimistic numbers, we have 48 years of supply - not 100, and we probably have more like 18 with more realistic reserve numbers. I can't get 100 years no matter what - of course the price will skyrocket over that time period, and we will still have oil in the ground 100 years from now because people will stop using oil (either from dying or moving to alternatives).

... current (and likely) higher future prices. More oil will be recoverable as long as there is demand and the price remains at current levels (but I expect prices to continue to rise).

What I would contest is the current (and likely) future consumption;



Both these figures show world consumption already exceeds 80 MBPD, with current high prices we know that what is in the ground and profitable at $2.00/gallon, is less than what is in the ground and profitable at $4.00/gallon, is less than what is in the ground and profitable at $8.00/gallon, is less than what is in the ground and profitable at $16.00/gallon, ... So at 100 MBPD that's 36.5 BBPY, your number suggests 137 MBPD to get to 50 BBPY.

And no, I don't think oil reserves are 1:1 proportional to crude oil pricing, I think the ratio is significantly less than 1:1.

One thing odd about the EIA is their 2008 Annual Energy Outlook 2008 (Revised Early Release) (full report available June 25, 2008) Next Release Date: December 2008

Go to their Year-by-Year Reference Case Tables and open up their Excel spreadsheet.

The highest $/barrel (imported crude oil) in Table 1 is $72.77/barrel (2008, this year), followed by $68.32/barrel (in 2009, next year), the average price for imported crude oil between 2008 and 2030 is $56.50/barrel (all prices in 2006 dollars).

Now, I don't know about you, but oil has been in the $130 to $140 per barrel price range lately, I think that when the EIA releases their revised 2008 outlook (later this week), it might not look like anything currently on that webpage.

EDIT:

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #188 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

Do those numbers take into account the exponential rise in China's oil consumption?

Well, once the price rises high enough it won't be exponential anymore. That is the tricky bit - supply and demand set the price, but...

supply is uncertain (most people don't believe that the stated reserves are 100% real oil, and also as franskagent said more oil becomes exploitable as the price rises)

and demand is only inelastic until you have to start making choices (like "buy oil or buy food?").

China has a history of doing whatever it can to use its inexpensive labor pool to replace expensive components. When you look at a Chinese made tube amp you can tell right away it was made in China - if they can save 25 cents in parts by adding an hour labor they do it. Look at this - made by hand via an amazing level of skill, and it sells for $16. The thing should be in a museum or something it is so good - I envy the dexterity of whoever made it.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Stepped-Attenuat...QQcmdZViewItem

So they are exponentially using oil, and will soon have to cut back - but they will just pile on extra human labor to compensate. The Chinese totally kick ass.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #189 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

The Chinese totally kick ass.

Indeed. World Cement Production (and China is Certainly Using It)



Annual production of cement by country in billions of metric tons. Click to expand. Source: USGS 2006 report (PDF) and the USGS 2008 report (PDF).

Former brother-in-law works for a local cement contractor and about two years ago his company couldn't get concrete for large projects. I believe it's subsided, but China is a good example of progress gone wild. Now just wait until India catches up.
post #190 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Indeed. World Cement Production (and China is Certainly Using It)



Annual production of cement by country in billions of metric tons. Click to expand. Source: USGS 2006 report (PDF) and the USGS 2008 report (PDF).

Former brother-in-law works for a local cement contractor and about two years ago his company couldn't get concrete for large projects. I believe it's subsided, but China is a good example of progress gone wild. Now just wait until India catches up.

When you mentioned cement, I immediately thought of reinforced concrete. Which requites steel rebar. Of course there is also steel framed buildings, ship building, etceteras.

Sure enough China leads the pack in Iron and Steel and Iron Ore production.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #191 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

More optimistic numbers - 2400 billion barrels reserve

http://environment.newscientist.com/...-reserves.html

I kind of doubt that this is true, since when OPEC was formed all the OPEC countries started lying and inflating their reserve numbers to get a bigger piece of the pie.

Prove that. I think it's the exact opposite. Their interest is to understate their reserves, because it keeps the perception of tighter supply.

Quote:

Al-Husseini thinks that the real number is more like 900 billion barrels.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil

But lets use the 2400 billion barrel number, because it is the most optimistic one I have found.

I was wrong about the consumption figure - the anticipated oil consumption over the next few decades is more like 50 billion barrels/year, not 83.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/oil.html

So even with the most optimistic numbers, we have 48 years of supply - not 100, and we probably have more like 18 with more realistic reserve numbers. I can't get 100 years no matter what - of course the price will skyrocket over that time period, and we will still have oil in the ground 100 years from now because people will stop using oil (either from dying or moving to alternatives).

That's 48 years of production using currently proven resources. There are many resources that are categorized as "unproven" for various reasons. The point is that we don't have "12 years of oil left." Jesus.

But guess what Frank will do? He'll now claim that 48 years is the real number, and that I was 100% off in my estimate. He'll then ignore that his estimate was 400% off. Just watch.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #192 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Prove that. I think it's the exact opposite. Their interest is to understate their reserves, because it keeps the perception of tighter supply.

Prove it? That's the point, that no one except those sitting on top of that oil can prove it. The conventional wisdom is that the Middle East oil producing nations publicly overstate their proven oil reserves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

That's 48 years of production using currently proven resources. There are many resources that are categorized as "unproven" for various reasons. The point is that we don't have "12 years of oil left." Jesus.

But guess what Frank will do? He'll now claim that 48 years is the real number, and that I was 100% off in my estimate. He'll then ignore that his estimate was 400% off. Just watch.

Wrong. Estimated reserves in order Proven reserves are 1,136.7 BBL, and I doubt this proven estimate is 400% too low! \

But for the sake of argument let's assume it's a low estimate by 300%, that means oil taken from the ground will be 3X "proven " reserves, or 3,400 BBL, so at a rate of 36.5 BBPY (~100 MBPD) that's a 93 year supply. Divide 93 years by three and we currently have a 31 year supply at 100 MBPD of "proven" reserves. In other words, we probably have less than a 50 year supply of "easy" or relatively "cheap" oil.

But how difficult will it be to extract all this oil and what type of oil will this be? We're not talking about light sweet crude oil or West Texas Intermediate (WTI). It will be much more expensive to extract and refine than the majority of oil extracted to date or proven in the ground. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that we are extracting the most easily obtainable oil and the least costly to refine.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #193 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Prove it? That's the point, that no one except those sitting on top of that oil can prove it. The conventional wisdom is that the Middle East oil producing nations publicly overstate their proven oil reserves.



Wrong. Estimated reserves in order Proven reserves are 1,136.7 BBL, and I doubt this proven estimate is 400% too low! \

But for the sake of argument let's assume it's a low estimate by 300%, that means oil taken from the ground will be 3X "proven " reserves, or 3,400 BBL, so at a rate of 36.5 BBPY (~100 MBPD) that's a 93 year supply. Divide 93 years by three and we currently have a 31 year supply at 100 MBPD of "proven" reserves. In other words, we probably have less than a 50 year supply of "easy" or relatively "cheap" oil.

But how difficult will it be to extract all this oil and what type of oil will this be? We're not talking about light sweet crude oil or West Texas Intermediate (WTI). It will be much more expensive to extract and refine than the majority of oil extracted to date or proven in the ground. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that we are extracting the most easily obtainable oil and the least costly to refine.

Perhaps you'd like to explain your prior statement then...that we have 12 years of oil left. Are you changing your opinion now?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #194 of 202
No that I want to wade into this, but by "X years of oil," haven't Frank and e#s simply meant "X years of oil we can get at through current cheap methods"?
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #195 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Perhaps you'd like to explain your prior statement then...that we have 12 years of oil left. Are you changing your opinion now?

The USofA has ~12 years of "proven" reserves or ~21 BBL at the current rate of extraction of 5+ MBPD, now I've also posted the current USGS estimate of ~48.5 BBL, which doesn't include "proven" oil reserves (at least that's my interpretation until shown otherwise).

So let's say the USofA has 48.5 + 21.5 = 70 BBL of recoverable oil at $75/barrel, and that we increase domestic production from 5 MBPD (or 1.825 BBPY) to 10 MBPD (or 3.65 BBPY) in 10 years, then uniformly ramp down to zero. That means that 70 BBL will last ~33 years.

Or at the current production rate of 5 MBPD that's a 38 year supply, if it ramps down uniformly to zero double that number to a 77 year supply of ever decreasing production (-5/75 MBPDPY).

So ramping to 10 MBPD reduces domestic supply by ~ 5 years (from 38 to 33 years). Or reduces supply by 44 years (from 77 years to 33 years).

So in that scenario were still importing 50+% of our total consumption of ~21 MBPD, at let's say $100/barrel.

But maybe the imports are at $200/barrel. and domestic is at $100/barrel, who knows?

The basic point is that the USofA doesn't have a whole lot of oil reserves at current USofA consumption rates, no matter how you do the math.

So here's what I find amazing, does one make a liberal assumption as to USofA recoverable oil, or does one make a conservative assumption as to USofA recoverable oil?

Any engineer worth their salt will always make the conservative assumption(s).

So, in essence, I'm the conservative in this argument, based on sound numbers, and you are the liberal in this argument, based on unsound (sic pie in the sky) numbers.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #196 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

No that I want to wade into this, but by "X years of oil," haven't Frank and e#s simply meant "X years of oil we can get at through current cheap methods"?

But I will say this, we should at least be drilling pilot wells (or using the current state-of-the-art (SOTA) in remote sensing technologies) in areas currently banned to better assess our own offshore oil reserves, I'd have to dig through the MMS website to determine potential offshore reserves given today's technologies.

But my suspicions are that currently, the private sector has more advanced remote sensing techniques than does our own government. But I could be very wrong on that one, so don't quote me on that one. I say this because you would think our government would seek the best leasing prices, thus it is in the public's best interest that we the public understand what's beneath our own feet, before we go about "giving it away" to the private sector.

The premise is that the oil industry already knows where the cheapest offshore oil might be, and that these areas are largely in currently banned locations. Thus the "special interests" have their MO for going after these potential sites, while the various state's and federal government are in a NIMBY state of mind, using tourism as a conventional "excuse." Doesn't "tourism" require consumables? Oh no, I'm experiencing a severe case of cognitive dissonance right now.

My understanding is that the most desirable oil is low sulfur and has enough over pressure, such that, for example, in offshore drilling you don't need to stick the "pump" at the bottom of 6,000 ft of ocean, and/or possibly have to have intermediate stages below the ocean surface.

See Oil Classification and Extraction of petroleum.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #197 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Perhaps you'd like to explain your prior statement then...that we have 12 years of oil left. Are you changing your opinion now?

It was my prior statement, and I miscalculated - the real number was 18 years as I posted in a correction earlier. And it absolutely is in the OPEC countries interest to overestimate their reserve numbers (well, it WAS in their interest - now that we have passed peak oil OPEC is worthless to them because they will be pumping at 100% from now on).

http://www.oilempire.us/quota-war.html
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #198 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by e1618978 View Post

It was my prior statement, and I miscalculated - the real number was 18 years as I posted in a correction earlier. And it absolutely is in the OPEC countries interest to overestimate their reserve numbers (well, it WAS in their interest - now that we have passed peak oil OPEC is worthless to them because they will be pumping at 100% from now on).

http://www.oilempire.us/quota-war.html

e#'s SDW is bickering with the numbers that I'm using, see A moment of cognitive dissonance or a reality check? post in the New Republican coordinated plan to blame Democrats for high oil prices thread.

12 years at the current production rate of 5+ MBPD is the time remaining for current proven reserves of ~21.5 BBO.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #199 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

e#'s SDW is bickering with the numbers that I'm using, see A moment of cognitive dissonance or a reality check? post in the New Republican coordinated plan to blame Democrats for high oil prices thread.

12 years at the current production rate of 5+ MBPD is the time remaining for current proven reserves of ~21.5 BBO.

Now you're linking to your own posts, federal employee.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #200 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Now you're linking to your own posts, federal employee.

[CENTER]
Where in this picture is SDW? Hint he's full of cracks.[/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › What Obama Really Believes