|
|
 |
 |
Reply To Peak Oilby edA-qa mort-ora-y on Thursday May 15 2008 @ 19:24:40 (10/-1886 Points) in reply to Peak Oil |
| Economy ↪Society ⌦ Reply ✔ Stick It ✗ Ditch It | |
|
There are a few important factors which must be considered
The OPEC nations have nothing but positives by having a high oil price, so all things considered, it is not in their interest to increase production -- though it isn't clear if they good. In a strange way this cartel has slowed oil consumption and thus been more a benefit to the world than a hindrance. Perhaps with such comments I should post as the clown... |
|
The points you bring up are minor in the grand scheme of things. I doubt even the unbelievable growth in Canadian oil sands production will be enough to sustain global oil production increases for much longer, if at all. As for the possibilities of additional synthetic from shale and coal, that's a more significant question. There are potentially trillons of barrells of oil that could *perhaps* be generated from the shale in the US alone.
by Vlad on Friday May 16 2008 @ 16:42:19
I don't think it is irrelevant, the original estimates of the Venezuala find where comparable to the reserves of the middle east. The size of the Brazilian find is not known (from what I know).
Tar sands also have lots of oil in them, and in the book Peak Oil (Hubbert?) he argues that they would only be economical to develop if oil were to exceed a cost of $70 per barrel. He also estimated decades of supplies of oil from those tar sands.
Not to mention that the Bush scientific advisor reassures us that oil wells simply refill themselves in time...
by edA-qa mort-ora-y on Tuesday May 20 2008 @ 06:32:28
© 2008 edA-qa mort-ora-y
Using Persephone and TestPlan