more on Oil Independence?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jim Thompson <jim () netgate com>
Date: September 12, 2005 8:39:08 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] Oil Independence?


http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/usa.html says:
---
The US consumed an average of 20.4 million bbl/d in 2004 .  Of this,  
motor gasoline consumption was 9.0 million bbl/d (or 44% of the  
total), distillate fuel oil consumption was 4.1 million bbl/d (20%),  
jet fuel consumption was 1.6 million bbl/d (8%), and residual fuel  
oil consumption was 0.8 million bbl/d (4%)l. Total 2005 petroleum  
demand is projected to grow by just 1.4% (280,000 bbl/d), to an  
average 20.7 million bbl/d, in response to the combined effects of  
somewhat slower economic growth and relatively high crude oil and  
product prices. All the major products (except residual fuel oil) are  
expected to contribute to this growth. Motor gasoline demand is  
projected to increase 1.8%, to 9.22 million bbl/d.

The United States averaged total net oil (crude and products) imports  
of an estimated 11.8 million bbl/d during January-October 2004,  
representing around 58% of total U.S. oil demand.
---


> > Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square  
> > mile. And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most  
> > of which is in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles  
> > - the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world.

IIRC, 640 acres per square mile, but lets use the "billion barrels  
per mile^2" figure.   Assuming that consumption hasn't climbed since  
October of last year, the US imports 4.3 billion barrels per year, so  
we will consume this 'new field' (if it yields as well as the article  
says) in 232 years.

However, domestic oil production is falling, fast.  (US production  
peak happened back in the 1970s.)  In order to completely supply US  
consumption, with no change in consumption habits, we would chew  
through over 20 acres per day to completely supply domestic needs,  
and the entire field would last a mere 50 years.  US oil production  
hasn't stopped, but its falling fast, so lets say this field allows  
us to remain energy independent for as much as another 100 years.

One downside of this would be the results of another 100 years of the  
current carbon load going into the environment.  The US is  
responsible for 24% of the world's human-caused carbon output now,  
and without decreasing our dependence on carbon-based forms of energy  
(coal, oil, etc), will continue to push nearly 6 billion metric tons  
of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

For any number of reasons, conservation would seem a better path.    
Good luck getting people out of their SUVs (the smallest of "first  
steps".)

jim


On Sep 12, 2005, at 2:01 PM, David Farber wrote:


> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: "Robert C. Atkinson" <rca53 () columbia edu>
> Date: September 12, 2005 6:40:44 PM EDT
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: Oil Independence?
>
>
> This is a promising development. Excerpts below, full link:
> http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/ 
> 0,1299,DRMN_86_4051709,00.html
> What do IP skeptics say?
>
>
>
> > Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity  
> > itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution. Terry  
> > O'Connor, a vice president for external and regulatory affairs at  
> > Shell Exploration and Production, explained how it's done (and  
> > they have done it, in several test projects):
> >
> > Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the  
> > shaft. Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest  
> > and most desirable first. Collect them.
> >
> > Please note, you don't have to go looking for oil fields when  
> > you're brewing your own.
> .
>
>
>
>
> > Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square  
> > mile. And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most  
> > of which is in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles  
> > - the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world.
> >
> > Wow.
> >
> > They don't need subsidies; the process should be commercially  
> > feasible with world oil prices at $30 a barrel. The energy balance  
> > is favorable; under a conservative life-cycle analysis, it should  
> > yield 3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production. The  
> > process recovers about 10 times as much oil as mining the rock and  
> > crushing and cooking it at the surface, and it's a more desirable  
> > grade. Reclamation is easier because the only thing that comes to  
> > the surface is the oil you want.
>
>
> --
> ***************************************
> Robert C. Atkinson
> Director of Policy Research
> Columbia Institute for Tele-Information (CITI)
> 1A Uris Hall, Columbia Business School
> 3022 Broadway
> New York, NY 10027-6902
>
> 212-854-7576
> cell: 908-447-4201
> ***************************************
>
> -------------------------------------
> You are subscribed as jim () netgate com
> To manage your subscription, go to
>  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
>
> Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- 
> people/



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/