Over 1 Trillion barrels of Oil beneath Colorado

theHawk

Registered Conservative
Sep 20, 2005
52,246
53,021
3,605
Arizona
New technology is making it possible to drill for this vast oil reserve in our own backyard.

"The technical groundwork may be in place for a fundamental shift in oil shale economics," the Rand Corporation
recently declared. "Advances in thermally conductive in-situ conversion may enable shale-derived oil to be
competitive with crude oil at prices below $40 per barrel. If this becomes the case, oil shale development may soon
occupy a very prominent position in the national energy agenda."

Estimated U.S. oil shale reserves total an astonishing 1.5 trillion barrels of oil - or more than five times the
stated reserves of Saudi Arabia.
This energy bounty is simply too large to ignore any longer, assuming that the
reserves are economically viable. And yet, oil shale lies far from the radar screen of most investors.

http://www.dailyreckoning.com/rpt/OilShale.html
 
Well if this were true would these states act like California and be big enviro-babies or would they be allowed to drill while protecting the environment? If these numbers are correct it could give our nation a lot more power in the world market and give the cartel something to think about. See because if Al Quadea thinks were are after the oil only in the Middle East then guess what, screw them because we have our own!

PS envir-nut drive cars too....
 
Colorado has been knocking this idea around for decades. Enviros' kill it everytime.

I understand it’s also a very expensive process too extract oil from shale.. Not as simple as just pumping crude from the ground. The oil companies really don’t want to touch it yet. Why should they when they don’t need to?
 
Colorado has been knocking this idea around for decades. Enviros' kill it everytime.

I understand it’s also a very expensive process too extract oil from shale.. Not as simple as just pumping crude from the ground. The oil companies really don’t want to touch it yet. Why should they when they don’t need to?

which is why the "in situ" (in place) method is so exciting. It knocks the enviro and economic naysayers to the ground.
 
I understand it’s also a very expensive process too extract oil from shale.. Not as simple as just pumping crude from the ground. The oil companies really don’t want to touch it yet. Why should they when they don’t need to?


Very true Mr. P, but according to the article, the expense of getting the oil to market INCLUDES the process of extraction.

IF, they indeed, can do that, and be competitive @ $40 a barrel, screw the tree huggers.

Plus, and also, the fields under Bakersfield are just waiting for the cost of extraction to be effected by technology. There are millions upon millions of barrels of oil there.

After we use up everyone else's oil, that would make our's worth a lot more, hmmmmm.

I just love it when a plan starts to come together.
 
.....

After we use up everyone else's oil, that would make our's worth a lot more, hmmmmm.

......

I think you mentioned this to us before, a while back. The more I think about it the more it makes sense. This is "money in the bank", if (and its a big if) we don't come up with fusion technology first.

Do you think there is a conspiracy plan to use all the mid-east oil, then screw the arabs when they are dry?
 
I think you mentioned this to us before, a while back. The more I think about it the more it makes sense. This is "money in the bank", if (and its a big if) we don't come up with fusion technology first.

Do you think there is a conspiracy plan to use all the mid-east oil, then screw the arabs when they are dry?

Conspiracy, come on glockmail, I think we can leave the conspiracy theories to the "lefties", but I do subscribe to the ,"were a whole lot smarter than you give us credit for" theory.:eusa_whistle:

Throw in the mega oil fields they've discovered in the Gulf, and I think were sitting in the drivers seat.

This story will be unfolding for a time to come, or could be hastened along, if things REALLY go to hell in the Middle East.
 
Conspiracy, come on glockmail, I think we can leave the conspiracy theories to the "lefties", but I do subscribe to the ,"were a whole lot smarter than you give us credit for" theory.:eusa_whistle:

Throw in the mega oil fields they've discovered in the Gulf, and I think were sitting in the drivers seat.

This story will be unfolding for a time to come, or could be hastened along, if things REALLY go to hell in the Middle East.

i have always said that the US buys it's oli because it can .... and does not drill its reserves because it does not have to.....and then when the oil reserves around the world are gone......who will have all the oil and power then ....
 
Very true Mr. P, but according to the article, the expense of getting the oil to market INCLUDES the process of extraction.

IF, they indeed, can do that, and be competitive @ $40 a barrel, screw the tree huggers.

Plus, and also, the fields under Bakersfield are just waiting for the cost of extraction to be effected by technology. There are millions upon millions of barrels of oil there.

After we use up everyone else's oil, that would make our's worth a lot more, hmmmmm.

I just love it when a plan starts to come together.

I know, and it will happen when the time is right. Even tree huggers own cars.
 
I understand it’s also a very expensive process too extract oil from shale.. Not as simple as just pumping crude from the ground. The oil companies really don’t want to touch it yet. Why should they when they don’t need to?

Correct. It's all about price points for production and resale. I don't see the $40 per barrel happening for oil shale until some really spectacular advances in recovery are made. It's possible that there's been a breakthrough and I just haven't heard about it yet. But I'd say that around $80-$90 per barrel for oil would make oil shale a viable option.

But like I said, my information is well over a year old.
 

Forum List

Back
Top