massive oil deposit found in the usa

Our only real issue as to oil supply is why won't our Government let it be developed?

The Oil Shale in the Greenriver Formation in the Grand Junction Colorado area is easily recoverable and the amount is staggering. Pilot Plants were built in the late 70's and early 80's, they were successful and viable and then they were shut down basically. The technology is proved, so why no production?

I personally worked on Oil Rigs from the Rock Springs, Wyoming area to the Overthrust Belt area where Idaho, Wyoming and Utah meet. Huge amounts of Natural Gas were found in Wyoming and most is still in the ground. Initially they said there might be as much as a 300 year supply. The problem? Only how to get it from point A to point B.

The crew who hit a gusher on the Overthrust Belt was in my living-room a few hours after the gusher came in. Men in helicopters who declined to show identification filled their pockets with hundred dollar bills and told them to go celebrate. Then they were told to not talk about what they found.

There is a bizarre provision that allows hiding a find for eight years. Eight years later I was reading that months Scientific American and on an interior page I found the tiny disclosure. It was estimated the pool was as large as the Saudi Pools. There has been minimal production from that area but nothing to speak of.

Here in Alaska where I live now we are being used like a political punching bag while you all are being lied to about ANWR. The techniques used here to produce oil DO NOT HARM THE ENVIRONMENT. The tapes and pictures you have been shown of the area to be drilled are a lie. Congress knew they were pictures of a different area when they viewed them, but have you ever heard one of them admit they knew they were lied too? A few years ago the Enviro-Liars even flew 100 Native Americans, not from Alaska to Nome and held a protest. The media never told you they were not Alaskans and again you were lied too. The money for this campaign all came from outside of Alaska. Groups like the Sierra Club form tax-exempt Non-Profits to hide the source of funds and then they flood them with money and put people in charge they control.

Right now we are under attack by a group trying to outlaw mining in Alaska. They want us to fail financially and leave so the Eco-Tourists who are actually Eco-Terrorists can have the place all to themselves. They keep showing commercials made by some Native Americans in Montana about a mine in Montana, but they never reveal that fact. Bottom line is these groups are lying, cheating pond-scum sucking jerks who want to control the world. They drive around in a Lexus, tear up the watershed on their mountain bikes, spread litter on our trails while criticizing us for harming the environment which is a BALD FACED LIE!

Do I seem emotional about this issue

Bottom line here is, we all know we have plenty of oil and that it can be produced with little or no environmental damage. So why are we at the mercy of Despot's in other countries for our energy needs? I'm currently of the opinion that our so-called Environmental Groups are in fact agents of those selling us oil and our enemies. I'd like to have a complete vetting of their funding sources and how they can continuosly flood money into areas they are trying to control without any oversight or accountability?

Originally posted by Chris McGee
The original article says 175 to 500 billion barrels of recoverable oil but the USGS report says 3 to 4.3 billion barrels of recoverable oil. That's a hell of a discrepancy, what's going on?

Ignore the USGS reports and go to the Industry predictions for real facts. That oil pool is huge. I believe Marathon is putting in 300 new wells. Believe me they would not do that based on a weak assessment of what it there. They know what is there. The expensive Directional Drilling methods they have to use is the only reason it was not drilled sooner. Now with the higher prices it is worth drilling.

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
BEEEEEEP!
Hate to rain on the parade here, but I have to call a BS ALERT on this article.

North Dakota and Montana have an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in an area known as the Bakken Formation.

www.usgs.gov...

That is NOWHERE NEAR the claimed amount of 175 to 500 billion barrels of recoverable oil.
That's just friggin' laughable..
That would mean this one field contains more Oil than the rest of the known Oil reserves in the world combined.

That's a little hard to swallow.
Considering the largest proven oil field in the world is Saudi Arabia's Ghawar with 71 billion barrels, 175 billion would surpass it by miles.

Somebody's crying wolf here.
Just thought I'd put things into perspective for a second since everyone seemed to be overlooking the scale of claim.
A field that big and America would not only never need to import oil, but it would start exporting it too and become the world's largest Oil Producer.

HA! The Republicans wish. Keep fishing in Iraq boys!

Godfather not to be a nitpick here (I usually agree with you on most things) But SA has to have more than the 71 billion. In Athabasca Oilsands deposit up here in Alberta alone we have 175 billion barrels at 10% recoverable, increase the recovery rate and that number shoots way up.

With current technology about 10% of these deposits, or about 170 billion barrels (27×109 m3) are considered to be economically recoverable

I do have the enitre site and I will link it. It is Wikipedia, but this one is actually pretty good, they are accurate and can be independantly verified.

Athabasca Oilsands

Supposedly, the oil being tapped in Alaska is sold to Japan. We seem to out source our stuff, yet buy from other for us to use. Weird.

Originally posted by screamo


And why don't we tap into Alaska's supposed oil depoit i keep hearing about?

Because liberals say we can't.

Thats the only reason.

So the US has a massive oil pit of their own...

when do we get to start bombing the local populace there?
That is how you get oil isn't it? Start bombing the cities nearby?

Because liberals say we can't.

Thats the only reason.

Actually, the wish to preserve natural resources for future use isn't technically a liberal viewpoint, it's a conservative one.

... but you don't have a liberal party, or a conservative party. So you wouldn't understand.

You have Republicans and Democrats.


Call them by their designation please.
You're giving parties of other countries bad names, lol.

Originally posted by Essan
there's still the problem of insufficent refining capacity. Doesn't matter how much raw material you have available if you can't produce the finished product any quicker.

The current refineries are capable of quickly increasing their capacity. They would simply stop refining oil from other sources and start refining oil produced here. The difference is the money would benefit us and not OPEC. Our citizens would get high paying jobs and as a nation we would be far more secure.

The only explanation I can see is that we really are trying to use up everyone else's oil first as part of a secret long term plan.

We also have another major issue looming. We need more power-generation plants that will take decades to build. Let's see how the Far Left reacts when the brown-outs start on the Left-Coast. When the air-conditioning can no longer be used, watch them squirm. It's coming sooner rather than later.

Here's a guy in Idiana taking a chance and investing in an oil rig in his backyard. It pumps about three barrels a day and he plans to put more rigs in later. This video shows that the US is full of oil and just waiting for us to tap into. I wish I had a hundred grand to put an oil rig inmy back yard.

To avoid the pain at the pump, Gregg Losh decided to build his own. Now he says the well in his suburban Indiana backyard is producing up to three barrels per day.

Backyard Oil Rig In Indiana

reply to post by WhatTheory

Well, do you think it is OK for one country to produce 50% of the worldwide pollution ? Shall we carry on until all the forms of life are extinct? I guess US should still push with the studies on clean energy .The only one to win on long term are the Oil corp. as the price will only drop if you provide enough on the market.

reply to post by johnsky





The problem is on both sides of the aisle. The Ninth Circuit Court has to be brought out from under the control of the Environmental Lobby and the American Public has to wake up. When enough people demand domestic production Congress will come around. The problem is that most people are asleep at the wheel and easy targets for the Eco-Terrorists who are trying to destroy our country.

I wish people my age, who were told we would run completely out of oil by now, would wake up and take our country back from the liars controlling us now. We need to understand that those holding us back don't give a crap about the environment and only want to control us. Environmental Groups are under the thumbs of Megalomaniacs who could give a crap less about the environment while they fly around in their private jets and burn energy in their mansions.

Originally posted by Blaine91555

Originally posted by Essan
there's still the problem of insufficent refining capacity. Doesn't matter how much raw material you have available if you can't produce the finished product any quicker.

The only explanation I can see is that we really are trying to use up everyone else's oil first as part of a secret long term plan.

I remember learning this from High School History Class back in the 80's. Not much of a secret back then, probably don't here about it as much now a days, and actually this i sthe first it's been brought up in conversation in I don't really know how long.

I think it's time to start using our own reserves but our government has other priorities I'm sure.

Originally posted by SIRR1
You must understand the plan!

First we will suck the world dry of oil, OPEC, Europe, Asia.

We will then tap into our massive reserves off of our coasts, in the Great Plains and Alaska and then hold the world over a barrel.

Hahahahahahahahaha

God I love this Country!

Exacto-mundo. We shall rise up, use all of theres first, and resort to plan Enron. It's a most viable win-win strategic option for the weak dollar. I used to play that on my sister when we drank milk shakes. I first would say, lets see who can drink theres first, than lift my cup to a toast and watch her slurp hers down. Than, becuse I am greedy, would casualy drink mine with great delight as she looked on.

I'd be a great politician since I trained in the dark ways of manipulation & greed. Bwaaahahahahahaaa

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by Solarskye
But what about the wildlife in North Dakota and the people living there? What about the air and the fifth the oil would bring to the state? What about living green and keeping our beautiful country beautiful? What about that

The eco-weenies always complain about accidents and spills when it comes to drilling, etc.

The problem is that they are basing it all on older refineries, etc from the past. Nowadays, they would have better equipment that would do a cleaner job.

Too bad that they still would worry abou the three toed newt or something. I love how something like that takes priority over everyone else in the US.

>>There hasn't been a new oil refinery built in the US since 1976, www.msnbc.msn.com...

It annoys me to here about "ecoNazis" -- some people might be a bit over the top with their desire to protect the environment. It might be a matter of debate, about how clean is green. But, at heart, folks who push against Anwar drilling and the like, care about their kids breathing, and being able to see animals and unspoiled land.

The Anwar drilling, would provide less than 1% of our yearly oil needs -- if it were actually low-sulfur oil. At best it is an export that would take more than 10 years to develop.

Drilling for oil and digging coal out of the ground are not without impact. I've heard too much of the mountain tops blasted off and the black sludge that is allowed to flow into the streams. It is really hard for me to explain how there are people who think this process is "clean." Half of gasoline is crap that does not aide in combustion like Benzene, and it's cheaper to have us put it in our gas tank rather than pay to remove this toxic waste. You and I don't know how much healthier we could be without all these pollutants. What is the cost that they save, versus our expense in health and medical bills by passing this cost onto us? The problem with pollution isn't that there are "Enviro-nazis" who want us all to live in grass huts (I haven't met any), but that this is a cost-shifting onto the public for the sake of one business cutting corners.

Apparently, it is much cheaper to pay jerks like Rush Limbaugh, to make people hate Green Peace, than it is to clean up an inefficient and corrupt oil Oil Industry. This isn't anti-business, it is anti-corrupt-business. There is a difference in my mind. And companies can make money, pay a decent wage, and not pollute -- ONLY if other companies are forced to do the same. Government can interfere with business with bad regulation, or just raise the bar on standards and promote FAIR competition. If there are no standards -- then the PUBLIC loses.

Or maybe, Rush just consults all the think-tanks that are paid to create BS;
Jan 3, 2007 ... Oil Company Spent Nearly $16 Million to Fund Skeptic Groups, ... the Union of Concerned Scientists' Director of Strategy & Policy; www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/ ExxonMobil-GlobalWarming-tobacco.html

This "new" oil source will be drilled as soon as the price per barrel makes it economical. That means -- it won't lower the price of fuel, just stabilize it at a new high. This same process affects Gold and other precious metals. There are lots of known deposits, but the amount of processing to get it has varying degrees of expense. So, as the price of gold goes up, mines that were closed now become profitable again, and this restricts the top ceiling for gold.

Likely, oil companies will not drill in this "new" field because, alternative energy may replace oil by then. Why invest 10 years and lots of money on refineries if you see the writing on the wall? As a society, there isn't much benefit in exporting our money to import a polluting form of energy. Even if it costs more, producing energy locally benefits our economy. I'm sure that many would argue with that, because they've been trained by "global competitiveness" spinmeisters.

Just take a look at Iceland, which was once the 24th economy in Europe and now is #4 -- based mostly on having a NO IMPORT energy policy. You can be environmental based solely on Economic reasons, or patriotism, or even a selfish "ecoNazi" who wants to breathe clean air and not kill off animals.

Originally posted by VitriolAndAngst

#1 The Anwar drilling, would provide less than 1% of our yearly oil needs -- if it were actually low-sulfur oil. At best it is an export that would take more than 10 years to develop.

#2 This isn't anti-business, it is anti-corrupt-business. There is a difference in my mind. And companies can make money, pay a decent wage, and not pollute -- ONLY if other companies are forced to do the same. Government can interfere with business with bad regulation, or just raise the bar on standards and promote FAIR competition. If there are no standards -- then the PUBLIC loses.

#3 This "new" oil source will be drilled as soon as the price per barrel makes it economical. That means -- it won't lower the price of fuel, just stabilize it at a new high.

#4 This same process affects Gold and other precious metals. There are lots of known deposits, but the amount of processing to get it has varying degrees of expense. So, as the price of gold goes up, mines that were closed now become profitable again, and this restricts the top ceiling for gold.

#5 Likely, oil companies will not drill in this "new" field because, alternative energy may replace oil by then. Why invest 10 years and lots of money on refineries if you see the writing on the wall?

#6 Just take a look at Iceland, which was once the 24th economy in Europe and now is #4 -- based mostly on having a NO IMPORT energy policy.

If I may, on #1 Your statistics are one of two things, correct or incorect. I suspect they are incorrect. Not because I have any special insight into the geology of the region. I base my suspicion on anecdotal evidence to the contrary. You probably choose some industry-based report to base your assertion on. However I have heard from people I chose to believe as disinclined to lie, that the amount of oil in the ANWR greatly exceeds the amounts you indicate.

I only mention this because we may BOTH be wrong, but if you can accept an industry produced report (an industry which has MANY reasons to deceive) then I can assume the same privilege, and cite a source that claims there is enough oil there to supply the entire national infrastructure with oil for the next 200 years (probably more if you consider our understandable drive to increase efficiency and decrease pollutant exhausts.)

Revelations of Big Oil Chaplain Lindsey Williams...You Pay National Debt at the Pump

Revelations of Big Oil Chaplain Lindsey Williams

I find such assertions suspect only because I sense your ecological zeal may expose you to 'convenient' propaganda which seems to permeate many (not all) 'green' advocacy efforts. Don't get me wrong though, I know you have as little reason to accept the above speakers presentation as I do the one from Green Peace! However, he made some unusually accurate forecasts about oil prices, and other Alaskan natives have personally led me to believe there is quite a bit of truth to his assertions.

Insofar as #2 "This isn't anti-business, it is anti-corrupt-business" I actually concur here, but think you've missed a large part of the target. They DON'T want us to know (or better yet, believe) that we can or should access this oil EXPRESSLY for the purpose of keeping prices high. Pollution is a non-issue to this industry - it only matters as a PR element, nothing more.

I disagree that (#3) This "new" oil source will be drilled as soon as the price per barrel makes it economical. I think we are extremely unlikely under the current industry-created energy policy that we will EVER see this oil in the US. This oil is meant for export - which is where the money is - especially for the controlling interest of the IMF/World Bank which profits from every barrel exported.

In regards to #4 (Gold). Haven't you noticed that as the price of oil rises so does the price of gold? They fluctuate with near mathematical precision. The 'profitability' aspect is in my opinion a business illusion invoked to control production; reducing supply to artificially increase value on demand - just as it is with oil to a lesser degree.

#5 There is little investment necessary. In most cases this fantasy of the 'outrageous' expense to pump oil is a crock! It cost less than $5 a barrel to pump oil from the ground. Whatever they 'charge' for refining and transport is arbitrary to them as the facilities were bought and paid for loooong ago! Upkeep is practically negligible in comparison to the triple digit profit they are making now.

#6 - I agree no-energy import is a great policy! But as long as we consider stabilizing our energy consumption and needs to be a 'negotiable' business like process we can't win - why? because we have middlemen in the mix who demand (as if by royal decree) profit and ownership of the resources present in our land. These people will cry out 'eminent domain' and seize land to make a highway through our country, but heaven forbid we, the American People, call out for eminent domain and take the oil thats under their property.

This isn't about pollution. This is about not being raped at the pump! Americans are paying off the entire third-world debt by oil taxation, we will not stop consuming oil because our infrastructure is based on it. Get it locally and maybe we can save the funds to actually develop cold fusion or whatever. Right now, that will never happen because the profit in OILis way too high.

Originally posted by ironman433

Originally posted by Bunch
The issue with drilling in this area and the oil shale of Colorado is that is not cost effective.

Like other people have said this has only come back to life because oil prices are soaring and its only now that is becoming a viable option. Any kind of annoucement to star drilling in these two areas combined with declining demand and people changin their habits would certainly lower the prices of oil to the range in which these two projects would become once again not cost effective, and you should probably add to that that OPEC would make sure that they saturate the market with oil just to make sure this would not happen.

Oil is the past, get rid of it.

thank god we have a winner .

finally someone who doesn't have their head stuck up their

. oil IS the past and we need to move on guys . this is a roller coaster ride that we've seen already . how many times do you need to get bent over and have it busted off in you before you take a different path .we need to move on to an energy that we can't keep being hijacked by other country's over . and basically our politicians are no longer our team and they fall under the same category as the saudi's and the Venezuelans " another country ".when it comes to the all mighty dollar they " our politicians " are only here to rape us of every penny they can get out of us AND ALL of our rights . so if you think that they or the oil companies want to help you and your family's plight your kidding yourself . all that is being done is to try and quite the uprising attitude of the people here in the us before we rebel and they don't get to keep our hard earned money any more.

wow. 2 very helpful posts to solving the country's energy problems...NOT!

I suppose neither of you can suggest something that WILL work for the whole country within 5 years, and will either be free and available for all, or it will be of such 'plenty' that all profitting from it will be removed...

well, we're waiting?

I will stand on my soap box here and state that:

Of course they can do something to fix the problem within the next YEAR! The only problem is they can't get richer doing it - so it won't happen because - the rich corporations have rights we don't!

Our government can and should compel business to 'cooperate' with addressing the national interest instead of making their business success our national interest. But that's not gonna happen either because big business controls everything from the political parties to the media.

reply to post by WhatTheory



What do you mean, $12 in 5 years? In Europe the truckers are already paying $12 right now. CNN just showed a special called "Out of Gas" and they say the prices in US will be $9 per gallon by 2009, $12 for deisel. They also said expect periods where there is no gas at all, it being reserved for emergency vehicles, truckers, etc. Things are easy right now compared to what is down the road. People should start stockpiling canned foods, while they are still cheap. If kept in right environment they are good for years. Also, medicines, basic needs items. Plenty of firewood, candles.

Originally posted by LiquidMirage

Originally posted by screamo


And why don't we tap into Alaska's supposed oil depoit i keep hearing about?

Because liberals say we can't.

Thats the only reason.

It isn't the "liberals". The Rockefellers funded the environmentalist movement. Why? So that they would have an excuse for not building new refineries. Do that, and you can create an artificial bottleneck, and drive prices up due to limited supply.

These people aren't stupid. They funded environmentalists because it benefited them in a way that was not obvious to the casual observer.

You are correct about the eco-nazis.
It should be ok to drill anywhere within the U.S. and it's waters.

Then how about in your back yard? Some here don't consider the earth to be a disposal diaper like many of you do. Go find your own planet to lay waste to and leave mine healthy thank you.

[edit on 29-5-2008 by whatsup]

I think that one of the myth's that need to be dispelled is that those of us who are pragmatic are somehow against a clean environment. We ALL want a clean environment. We just don't believe it is necessary to destroy our country and economy to do it. The weekend Eco-Tourists and militants who pretend to care about the environment, have zero sollutions. They are all talk and never put forth a reasonable plan to accomplish their goals. Then they bow at the alter of the new Al Gore religion while he and people like him rake in the dough.

The real answer is to realize that the new technologies available are environmentally safe. Part of the problem is that this new technology can not be implemented thanks to those who falsely claim they are protecting the environment. The fact is that their blocking of the building of new refineries and power generation plants is actually harming the environment, because we have to rely on aging technology already in place.

People need to realize the Environmental Lobby is using scare tactics to hide the truth of what they are doing. It's working. What they really want is some imaginary Socialistic Utopian Society that only exists in fiction. They think that technology is the enemy and Democracy and Capitalism are evil. They are not. Only the people in power are evil. I often wonder at the total lack of logic used by these people. Do they really think that sending us back to the dark ages will help the environment?

That 50% of the polluting is pure crap. All you need to do is look at satellite images of the Third World, evolving into the Second World Nations to see where the future problems lie. We are cutting back on pollution constantly and in fact use the same amount of energy now as we did 30 years ago as a result. The real environmental Bogey Man is China, India and others as their coal fired, last century technology comes on line. 50% Yeah sure There is a permanent brown cloud right now over South Asia from the millions of wood fires. One Volcanic Eruption can put more CFC's in the atmosphere than Industrialized Man has in our entire history. Both facts ignored by the phoney Environmentalists.

China is an environmental horror story about to happen and what do activists do; they attack those who are constantly improving and give China a pass and wonder why no sensible person takes them seriously.

I'm an Animal of the Human Species and I have as much right to exist as any endangered fly. The far left needs to abandon their Guru's, stop flooding them with cash to fuel their jets and wake up to reality. You are being used and your causes are based on pure fiction to control you. In the end you may do more damage to this Earth and the Human Race than Industry ever could. Industry is constantly improving while the Environmental Movements goals would take us the opposite direction. We don't live in a fantasy world were buying carbon credits can do anything other than go directly into one of your leaders bank accounts.