Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Obama: getting his "facts" wrong again

During his speech last night, one thing he said that struck me was this statement:
"We consume more than 20% of the world's oil, but have less than 2% of the world's oil reserve. And that's part of the reason oil companies are drilling a mile beneath the surface of the ocean -- because we're running out of places to drill on land and in shallow water."
Nancy Pelosi said that same thing in 2008, but it was not true then, and is not true now.

Two things here: The United States has much, much more than 2 percent of the world's reserves. It is estimated we have over 2 trillion barrels sitting idle, enough to keep us going for 300 years. But we can't touch it, thanks to left-wing environmental nutjobs.

That's why oil companies have to drill 40 miles out to sea in mile-deep water, which just increases the risk and chances of accidents. If they could drill in safer places, we wouldn't be in the bad position we are in today.

Even our own government has admitted that there is more oil under North American than previously thought. See the U.S. Geological Survey report from 2008.

But just try to convince your liberal friends of that. It is hard to have a discussion with any clarity of thought when facts are twisted or ignored to fit one's political agenda.


Anonymous said...

And just where is this oil that you refer to? And don't count oil shale, which is not viable.

Steve said...

Not viable? In what way?

I direct you to the Colorado Energy Research Institute's 28th Symposium on Shale Oil, held in 2008 (a 29th was held last year.)

Also, I found this statement: The Colorado School of Mines is pleased to announce formation of the Center for Oil Shale Technology and Research (COSTAR) to conduct research in support of development of this resource. This was formally created at the 28th Oil Shale Symposium in October, 2008.

If that ain't enough, try googling "Shale Oil Not Viable."

Now of course, not all of the potential and/or proven reserves are in shale...

And let's not debate "potential" vs. "proven" reserves. Obama or Pelosi did not make that distinction...The bottom line is that we have a lot of energy resources that are untapped.

Anonymous said...

My son and son in law are both School of Mines graduates, and we are all very well aware of oil shale, as Colorado is the main source of it. For TWO reasons it is not viable. First, it takes more energy to release than it produces. Second, it takes HUGE amounts of water that we don't have,not to mention the pollution. Hence, NOT viable. Again, you twist facts to support your unsupportable statements.

Anonymous said...

To further clarify. I prefer to take the opinion of Geophysicist w/a Master's Degree from the CO School of Mines,who works in the oil industry and has actually been involved in the process, on the Roan Plateau, to some half-baked spouter of right wing propaganda, who overlooks the facts, so he can say liberal environmentalists are the enemy. Nothing new there, though.

Steve said...

So I guess your answer is to just give up, cancel all the research, because it's too hard? What? I don't understand you jumping all over me because I suggest that we have a source of oil we haven't been either able or willing to exploit.

The fact that current technology may not be capable of producing oil in a commercially or environmentally viable (there's that word again) way, doesn't mean to say it won't be sometime in the near future.

The Barnett Shale deposit in North Texas was discovered in the 1950s to contain huge amounts of natural gas. But the technology to extract it in a viable way didn't exist until the 1980s and serious drilling began in the first decade of this century. Now it is one of the largest producing gas reservours in the U.S. Current production is now at 1.5 billion cubic feet a day, and may double in a few year.

If folks in the 1950s through today had the same attitude about Barnett gas as many do over oil shale, we would never have tapped into this energy source.

This is not some half-back right-wing propaganda, or a twisting the facts as you are so quick to point out.

Anonymous said...

The 'oil' is locked in hard rock deposits, that require fractal distillation, that requires HUGE amounts of energy to melt the oil out of the rock, and HUGE amounts of water to make it work, and HUGE pollution, BUT, you goofballs just say the tree-hugging liberals won't let us take the oil out of the ground. Total bullshit, but totally typical crap, from your ilk, cuz it fits yout agenda. The work/investment has been done, and is NOT viable, or it would be a profit making venture. Doesn't stop your BS posts, though.