Page 1 of 1

Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 5:07 pm
by 3l
Hi folks:

The oil crisis is at an end.
Now that 70 dollar oil is the price in the market place,oil sands are now poised to take over the role of prime mover in the US Energy market. Alberta Canada has 2 trillion barrels of PROVEN reserves in their oil sand fields. It seems that the big secret in Chainey's hush hush meetings at the White House was to secure the lion's share for America. A balsy move considering that big oil put the Bush Chaney team in office. This new revelation has many effects so far.

#1 SUV makers are going out of business (Ford,GM,Chevy)

#2 Air polution will be high (No Keota Accords) takes 4 scoops of oil sands to make one scoop of oil.

#3 No one will ever drill for oil again in our lifetime.
Why? With the proven reserves sitting on the ground why gamble on a dry hole?

#4 Old timey oil companies will go broke as their working production dries up.

#5 The middle East Spicot will be slammed shut!
No more troops overseas to defend or procure oil .
Since we no longer need to lever Isreal against Saudi Arabia to control OPEC oil ...No more Aid.

#6 A more insular America due to local energy will dampen the global trade economy quite a bit. Why? We will no longer need to trade goods to get back petrodollars from the Saudi's bank account.

#7 Nuclear is going out yet again (too expensive)


Happy Fusoring!
Larry Leins
Fusor Tech




1

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Mon Jan 30, 2006 6:35 pm
by Retric
FYI: Oil Sands are not an energy source. You can’t run a power plant
off of Oil sand Oil as you spend more energy extracting the oil than
you get from burning it.

Coal is much cheaper than Oil and is the primary source for most
electric energy. Using that Coal energy to extract Oil Sands is an
inefficient process but at 70$ / barrel it’s economically feasible right
now. So while you can get long chain hydrocarbons, which let’s you
create highly portable energy it’s basically an extremely polluting and
inefficient battery and not a true energy source.

#1 SUV makers are going out of business (Ford,GM,Chevy)

The cost of fueling a 12MPG SUV at 3$/gallon vs. 2$/gallon is only an
extra 8,333$ / 100k miles which is not a particularly significant cost
deterrent when compared to their overall costs. The reduction in the
number of SUV’s purchased as more to do with style than any
economic incentive. Like buying a diamond ring the purchase of an
SUV over a minivan is simply a matter of style.

#2 Air polution will be high (No Keota Accords) takes 4 scoops of oil
sands to make one scoop of oil.

Basicly true.

“#3 No one will ever drill for oil again in our lifetime. “

Are you insane? Oil wells are a gold mines in comparison to oil sands
if you can extract oil at 1/2 the cost of oil sands the difference is
PURE PROFIT. Many people will spend ~10million on a 10% shot at
~200+million.


“#4 old timey oil companies will go broke as their working production
dries up.“

Who do you think is going to develop those Oil sands? OPEC might
control oil production but “Standard Oil’s” fragments are the people
doing the pumping. These people are going to spend billions ensuring
they have the rights to keep on drilling / mining.


“#5 The middle East Spicot will be slammed shut!“

See #3 as long as drilling will make people millions people will keep
on drilling. “Despite high and volatile prices, U.S. petroleum demand
in 2004 grew at its strongest rate in five years” and “The year’s crude
oil imports rose 4.0% to exceed 10 million barrels per day for the first
time”
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/01 ... and_g.html

“#6 A more insular America due to local energy will dampen the global
trade economy quite a bit. Why? We will no longer need to trade
goods to get back petrodollars from the Saudi's bank account. “

American agriculture provides 60% of the world's production.

Oil is a small fraction of the overall economy. Our largest trading
partners are already Canada ($441.5 billion 2003 / Canada provides
close to one-fifth of U.S. imports), followed by Mexico, Japan, and
finally China. Overall the European Union accounts for 20% of our
total trade leaving a small slice. Overall (“ imports of crude and
products rose about 5% to 12.9 million barrels per day.”) * 70$/ barrel
* 365 days = 329 billion which way over inflated as the average price
was well below 70$/barrel but even at that price it’s only 22% of our
total imports. And further reduced when you consider that much of
that money is simply profits returned to us by Exxon mobile (ect)
stock.

“#7 Nuclear is going out yet again (too expensive)”

Using Oil sands increases our need for electricity so it’s going to
increase our dependence on Coal and Nuclear power.

PS: I am at work so this is not vary well edited… Sorry.

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Wed Feb 01, 2006 2:54 pm
by Chris Trent
Ok, I'm going to stick with what I actually know here from first hand experience from working in the oil industry.


"#3 No one will ever drill for oil again in our lifetime. “

WOW, where to begin on this one. First, it's simply false. If nothing else, ANWR has tremendous reserves that WILL be tapped if there is any REAL energy crisis, environmentalists notwithstanding.

Fortunately we don't need to do that yet. There are still vast fields across Montana and North Dakota to be drilled. New wells are going down every day but it may take the next 20 years or more to fully develop that area alone. That's just what I have personally worked with, there are many other oil fields out there.


“#4 old timey oil companies will go broke as their working production
dries up.“

I'm sure that a few companies will, but that will be more from bad management than from no oil.

A few factors come into play here.
1. The price of oil. The more expensive oil is the more resources companies are willing to devote to it's retrieval.
2. Technology. Believe it or not the petroleum industry is quite high tech, and the technology is always advancing, constantly making it easier and cheaper to get at the remaining reserves in a field.
3. Time. Think of oil fields as hydrodynamics on a grand scale. Oil is pumped out of some parts of the field, then over time the field equalizes again, making more oil available. (though not making more oil)

These three things make possible the redevelopment of fields after they "Go Dry". In some cases making the fields far more productive and profitable than they were the first time around.



I will concede a couple of points that were not made however.

First, New oil discoveries have been declining for some time. This is to be expected, our world is finite and we will eventually find all of the oil.

Second, For about the last 30 years, declining oil production has been offset by new technology and discoveries. This will probably be the case for the forseeable future. However since we are already at the point of relying on advancing technology to provide us with oil, then what's the harm of looking to advancing technology to provide us wuth an alternative.

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:47 pm
by 3l
Hi folks:




You are looking at the oil sands through the oil industries lens.
The investment bankers call the shots in this world (sorry bean counters rule!) and the buzz is just what I've relayed to you.

BTW the Alberta Field has zero ,zip, nada Forein investment outside North America.

Happy Fusoring!
Larry Leins
Fusor Tech

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Sun Feb 05, 2006 5:16 am
by AnGuy
Hi Larry

>"Canada has 2 trillion barrels of PROVEN reserves in their oil sand fields."

I believe the field has 2 Trillion barrels but only about 300 Billion are recoverable. The production is expected to max out at about 5 Million bbl per day somewhere between 2015 and 2020. The US currently consumes about 20 Million bbl per day, and Canada also consumes a fair amount. Currenly we import about 10 Million a day, but that is rising everyday since the US is well behind the curve. The amount of Oil extracted from Alberta will never meet the declines caused by failling global production. I also read that the current production is dependant on Natural Gas, which is already has supply issues. I believe the primary contractor for the Alberta sands, had hedged a supply of natural gas before all the supply issues came to light. Its possible that thier supplier may not be able to fulfill the contract in the next 3 to 5 years.

Also don't forget the EROI for tar sands oil. It takes far more energy and oil to produce distillation products like diesel and gasoline than light sweet crude.

Recently there have been some new projects up in the artic. One producer built a barge GTL refinery for a gas field up by greenland.

>It seems that the big secret in Chainey's hush hush meetings at the White House was to secure the lion's share for America.

I believe the big hush is that Peak Oil production is near, and there is no plan B! The reason I believe Bush and Cheney have been silent is they're afraid of the ramifications if they announce to the world that Peak Oil is near. What would likely occur is that the majority (if not all) Oil exporting nations dramatically cut or completely stop exporting oil. If you were the leader of oil exporter would you continue to export after global Peak oil is reached?

For the last year or two, the Bush Administration has attempted to jump start a plan to address the problem under the idea of "energy independance for national security". During last weeks State of Union Speech, Bush spoke about the need to make "american energy independant" with clean coal, nuclear, ethanol and wind. Unfortunately, our Middle East oil exporters didn't like that idea very much.

In case you haven't already read it:
"Kuwait oil reserves only half official estimate-PIW"
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsa ... geid=&cap=

>old timey oil companies will go broke as their working production dries up.

Well as long as the oil wells haven't been containmated with water or air (water injection, etc), even depleted wells can produce oils for hundreds of years, although at a dramatically lower extraction rate (10's of bbls per day instead of thousands of bbls per day). The higher the price of Oil, the better these depleted wells become. Of course the fields where water injection has been used (mostly in the offshore and in the middle east) there will be no stripper production.

>Air polution will be high (No Keota Accords) takes 4 scoops of oil sands to make one scoop of oil.

Don't forget about the Coal-to-Liquid processes and 10's of millions of buildings that will be heated with coal, wood, or whatever else peope find that will burn.

>Nuclear is going out yet again (too expensive)

I don't think electricity will be the issue. It really comes down to an infrastructure that was built for Oil not electricity. There is plenty of ways to always generate some electricity, Coal, Nuclear, Hydro, Wind, Geothermal, etc. The problem is that electricity is only a small peace of the pie that provides our standard of living.


If your looking for some good news sites about this, try:

http://www.theOilDrum.com
http://www.EnergyBulletin.net

Thanks.

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 5:04 pm
by 3l
Hi AG:

Wow Good news on oil need to check my meds LOL!

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Mon Feb 13, 2006 5:41 pm
by Hayabusa
Have you seen the Documentary "End of Suburbia" ?

According to the Documentary, we are at, or past the global peak production, and that the slope down will be excellerated do to increases in world population, and the demand for a higher standards of living amongst those countries which have long endoured a much lower standard then what we have in North America/Europe (i.e. China).

Has anyone seen the documentary "China Rises"? According to the documentary China is soon to have a middle class population greater then the population of Canada and the USA combined. They will want Cars, SUVs as well.

Very scary this stuff, and all the more reason alternative energy generation needs to be found, and quick!

Perhaps its already too late, and thoughs in power have no faith that an answer can be found.

Re: Fusion's greatest rival Oil sands.

Posted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:44 am
by AnGuy
Another frightening report released this week, is that Canada only has about 7 or 8 years of Natural gas. Canada is now working on building LNG ports. Since the oil sands are dependant on Natural Gas, I don't see how it will be economical once the NG needs to be imported. I suppose coal could be used as a substitue, but I don't think there are any coal fields near the tar sands. They'll have to bring it in by rail. I suspect that the rail system and coal will be in high demand when North America NG supplies dry up. Perhaps the only realistic long term solution to keep oil flowing from the tar sands is nuclear.