U.S. HYPOCRISY IS BREATHTAKING TO BEHOLD

55 comments

Posted on 13th October 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , , ,

It is amazing to me that our government has the balls to act outraged at Iran’s use of cyberwarfare against Saudi Arabia and anyone else that is supporting America’s ongoing undeclared war against Iran. We are systematically destroying their economy. We have wiped out the savings of their middle class by causing hyperinflation with our economic sanctions. We have worked with Israel to murder Iranian scientists. WE released the stuxnet virus into Iranian computer systems, destroying hundreds of centrifuges at the Natanz nuclear facility.

The United States intitiated this war on Iran and now WE’RE outraged that they are fighting back. The hypocrisy of Panetta’s words is breathtaking to behold. Even sadder is the fact that 99.5% of Americans don’t even know we are at war with Iran. They will know when Iran is able to bring down our electrical grid or destroy one of our nuclear facilities. How dare they fight back. They’re supposed to cow down before the great American empire.

I’ve got news for the oligarchs running this show. Countries around the world are tiring of our bullying and bribery. We are an empire in decline. The rot is evident to anyone with a brain. The Chinese, Russians, Iranians and other countries around the world are not going to take it anymore. Our only hope would be withdrawing as the policeman of the world and adapting our economy to the new reality. There is no chance this will happen. The hubris of the ruling class will result in the inevitable fall of the empire.   

US warning reflects fears of Iranian cyberattack

By LOLITA C. BALDOR | Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s pointed warning that the U.S. will strike back against a cyberattack underscores the Obama administration’s growing concern that Iran could be the first country to unleash cyberterrorism on America.

Panetta’s unusually strong comments Thursday came as former U.S. government officials and cybersecurity experts said the U.S. believes Iranian-based hackers were responsible for cyberattacks that devastated computer systems of Persian Gulf oil and gas companies.

Unencumbered by diplomatic or economic ties that restrain other nations from direct conflict with the U.S., Iran is an unpredictable foe that national security experts contend is not only capable but willing to use a sophisticated computer-based attack.

Panetta made it clear that the military is ready to retaliate — though he didn’t say how — if it believes the nation is threatened by a cyberattack, and he made it evident that the U.S. would consider a preemptive strike.

“Iran is a country for whom terror has simply been another tool in their foreign policy toolbox, and they are a country that feels it has less and less to lose by breaking the norms of the rest of the world,” said Stewart Baker, former assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security and now in private law practice. “If anybody is going to release irresponsible unlimited attacks, you’d expect it to be Iran.”

National security experts have long complained that the administration needs to be much more open about what the military could and would do if the U.S. were to be the victim of cyberattacks. They argue that such deterrence worked in the Cold War with Russia and would help convince would-be attackers that an assault on America would have dire results.

Panetta took the first steps toward answering those critics in a speech analysts said was a thinly veiled warning to Iran, and the opening salvo in the campaign to convince Tehran that any cyberattack against America would trigger a swift and deadly response.

“Potential aggressors should be aware that the United States has the capacity to locate them and hold them accountable for actions that harm America or its interests,” Panetta said in a speech in New York City to the Business Executives for National Security.

And while he did not directly connect Iran to the Gulf cyberattacks, he warned that Iran’s abilities were growing.

Security analysts agree.

The presumed Iranian cyberattacks hit the Saudi Arabian state oil company Aramco and Qatari natural gas producer RasGas using a virus, known as Shamoon, which can spread through networked computers and ultimately wipes out files by overwriting them.

In his speech, Panetta said the Shamoon virus replaced crucial system files at Aramco with the image of a burning U.S. flag, and also overwrote all data, rendering more than 30,000 computers useless and forcing them to be replaced. He said the Qatar attack was similar.

“This one worries me,” said Richard Bejtlich, chief security officer for the Virginia-based cybersecurity firm Mandiant.  “I’m not an alarmist, but when I saw that 30,000 computers at Saudi Aramco got just deleted, that was a big deal. You don’t see the Chinese government, you don’t see the Russian government, or even their patriotic hackers go out and delete anything for the most part.”

From the Iranians’ point of view, however, attacks against the U.S. may be justified because American sanctions leveled on the country for refusing to cooperate with international norms on its nuclear program have hit Iran hard. Tehran also believes that the U.S. and Israel were behind the Stuxnet cyberattack that forced the temporary shutdown of thousands of centrifuges at a nuclear facility there in 2010.

As a result, said Bejtlich, Iran already believes it is at war with the U.S.

Frank Cilluffo, , a former special assistant for homeland security to President George W. Bush, said U.S. authorities have suspected Iran of trying to plot cyberattacks against American targets, including nuclear plants. And he said that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps appears to now be trying to bring some of the patriotic hacker groups under its control, so it can draw on their abilities.

“Iran has been doing a lot of cyber saber-rattling,” said Cilluffo, now director of George Washington University’s Homeland Security Policy Institute. “What they lack in capabilities, they more than make up for in intent.”

Tehran has not made any public comment on Panetta’s comments, but the Iranians routinely report the discovery of viruses and other malicious programs in government, nuclear, oil and industrial networks, blaming Israel and the United States.

While Panetta’s warnings received high marks from security experts, those people also were quick to say that much more needs to be done.

The U.S., said former Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, must lay out the rules of the road and figure out what kind of proof authorities would need before taking action.

“We still have work to do,” said Chertoff, who is now chairman of the Chertoff Group, a global security firm. “Will we take action to preempt something rather than simply retaliate, and how early and how much warning will we need before we take that action?”

He noted that most conflicts arise over misunderstandings, when one side doesn’t realize what the other will do if provoked.

The administration has repeatedly warned of the cybersecurity threats, particularly against critical infrastructure such as financial networks, transportation systems and utility companies. More recently, the White House has been considering using the president’s executive power to encourage critical industries to better protect their networks because legislation to do so stalled in Congress.

“While the message has been sent over and over again it doesn’t seem to have acquired urgency across the board,” said Chertoff. “We need to make it clear that this is not just background noise you have to deal with, but that it really strikes at the fundamentals of our national security.”

HIGHEST IN HISTORY

15 comments

Posted on 6th August 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

Average gas prices in the U.S. are up 6% in the last month. In Philly they are up 9%. You don’t hear the MSM cackling about the falling prices anymore. I’ve pointed out before that the most important factor to people who live in the real world and have to fill up their tanks every week is the average price over time. Has anyone in the MSM mentioned that gas prices over the first half of 2012 were the HIGHEST in the history of our country? Remember 2008 when gas prices spiked and sent the country into recession? Gas prices in 2012 have been 7% higher than 2008 over the first six months, and prices continued to rise in July. The three highest priced years in history are as follows:

2012 – $3.69

2011 – $3.54

2008 – $3.43

If you don’t believe me, examine the data for yourself:

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost

I’m sure glad Ben Bernanke isn’t worried about inflation. He must be chaufeured in a hybrid limo. Now for the critical thinkers out there. Gasoline demand has plunged in the U.S. and Europe since 2008 as we’ve both been in recession for most of this time. The Saudis are pumping as much oil as they possibly can. The miracle of Shale Oil in North Dakota will make us energy independent according to the pundits and shyters. How can all this be true and oil is still $91 per barrel and we are paying the highest price for gas in history? Is it those evil oil companies and energy speculators? Or is it peak oil manifesting itself over our lives?

IT ONLY TOOK A GLOBAL DEPRESSION TO REDUCE GAS PRICES BY 40 CENTS

71 comments

Posted on 10th June 2012 by Administrator in Economy

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You can’t watch the mainstream media propaganda channels for more than ten minutes without a talking head breathlessly announcing that gas prices have dropped for the 24th day in a row and are now back to $3.55 a gallon. Wall Street oil analysts, who are paid hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to tell us why prices rose or fell after the fact, are paraded on CNBC to proclaim the huge consumer windfall from the drop in price. This is just another episode of a never ending reality show, designed to keep the average American sedated so they’ll continue to spend money they don’t have buying crap they don’t need. The brainless twits that pass for journalists in the corporate mainstream media never give the viewer or reader any historical context to judge the true impact of the price increase or decrease. The government agencies promoting the storyline of those in power extrapolate the current trend and ignore the basic facts of supply, demand, price and peak oil. The EIA is now predicting further drops in prices. Two months ago they predicted steadily rising prices through the summer. What would we do without these government drones guiding us?

Inflation Adjusted Gasoline Prices (Monthly)

As you can see from the chart, gas prices tend to be volatile and unpredictable in the short term. You can also see that since 1998 the trend has been relentlessly higher. The average inflation adjusted price of gasoline in 1998 was $1.41 per gallon, versus $3.55 today, a 152% increase in fourteen years. Over this same time frame the BLS manipulated CPI was up only 44%. If we are swimming in oil, as the MSM pundits claim, why the tremendous surge in price? It must be those evil oil companies. It couldn’t possibly be the impact of peak oil. To acknowledge the fact that worldwide oil production has reached its peak would be to concede that our suburban sprawl, just in time world is drawing to an excruciating end. So the politicians spout their assigned storylines, supported by their paid off “experts” (aka Daniel Yergin), and unquestioningly reported as fact by their designated corporate media outlet. Those of a liberal bent assail oil companies and speculators; refuse to acknowledge the law of supply and demand, while touting green energy as the solution to all our energy needs. Those of a conservative bent believe in attacking foreign countries to secure “our” oil, refuse to acknowledge the law of supply and demand, and spout “drill, drill, drill” slogans because dealing with facts is inconvenient. The willfully ignorant public believes whichever storyline matches their preconceived beliefs. All is well – no one is required to think critically. Thinking is hard.

There are numerous factors that affect the price of oil on a daily basis, but at the end of the day supply and demand determine price. The chart below documents the key external events that have had a major impact on oil prices since 1970. The vital fact that you won’t hear on CNBC is that every recession since 1970 has been immediately preceded by an oil price spike. Anyone living in the real world (this excludes Cramer, Liesman, Bartiromo, & Kudlow) knows we have entered part two of the Greater Depression. The surge in oil prices in the last two years has precipitated this renewed downturn.

The MSM blathering baboons of bullshit dutifully report the price of gas on a given day. People who live in the real world fill up their gas tanks every week, so the average price over a period of time is what matters. The average price of a gallon of gasoline in 2008 was $3.39. The average price in 2011 was $3.48. The average price in 2012 has been $3.62 thus far. This data paints an entirely different picture than the one painted by the politicians, experts and the clueless captured media. Gas prices are higher than they were prior to the last economic implosion. Cause and effect is a concept beyond the intellectual capabilities of MSM journalists and the millions of government educated zombies they mesmerize with misinformation. The lack of intellectual curiosity and critical thinking skills plays directly into the hands of those with a storyline to sell or truth to obscure.

Swimming in Oil

The recent storyline proliferated by the MSM at the behest of Washington DC politicians and the corporate interests that control them, is that the U.S. is on the verge of energy independence, with hundreds of years of plentiful oil right under our feet. The chart below made the rounds last week on Bloomberg, defender and mouthpiece of billionaires everywhere. This chart surely proves that peak oil is bullshit. Right?

Besides the false representation of oil production and the misleading conclusion that we have more oil than we need, the chart and Bloomberg screed does not provide the true context of why worldwide demand is tumbling. The chart is NOT showing global crude oil production. It is showing global oil and other liquids supply, which includes crude and condensate, natural gas plant liquids, other liquids (mostly ethanol), and processing gains (increase in volume from refining heavy oil). The MSM would rather mislead the public than provide the true picture of the supposed oil production boom. The question is whether the MSM is misleading the public due to their own journalistic incompetence or are they carrying out their assigned mission on behalf of the corporate oligarchs running the kingdom.

The chart below reveals a truer picture of the worldwide energy situation. Conventional oil production hit its peak/plateau around 74 million barrels per day at the end of 2004, and has barely budged from that level over the last eight years. Despite all the rhetoric about the North American oil boom, conventional oil production is at virtually the same level today as it was in 2004. The U.S.(shale oil) and Canadian (tar sands) gains in production have been matched by the collapse in Mexican production. The Middle East countries produced 23.3 million barrels in September 2004. The average price of a barrel of oil in 2004 was $38. They are now only producing 23.9 million barrels when prices are 120% higher.

World Oil and Other Liquids Supply

Global oil demand in 2004 was around 84 million barrels per day. To increase liquid fuel supply to meet the 90 million barrels per day demand we had to turn to unconventional fuels like tar sands, tight oil, and biofuels, all of which have far higher production costs and far less energy content than sweet crude. As the easy to access, cheap to produce ($20 per barrel in Saudi Arabia), close to the surface sweet crude has been depleted, it has been replaced by heavy crude, tar sands, deep-water oil, and shale oil, with production costs in excess of $80 per barrel. Anyone anticipating a long-term decline in fuel prices must be smoking tar sands in their bong. The liquids that have “replaced” conventional crude have a few slight drawbacks. Natural gas liquids provide about 70% as much energy per barrel as crude oil, so a barrel of NGL is not equivalent to a barrel of crude. Have you filled up your SUV lately with some NGL? Ethanol provides only 60% as much energy per barrel as crude oil and its EROEI is pitifully low. The energy returned on energy invested for these non-conventional sources of energy approaches the minimum limits unless prices rise dramatically. The Obama green army does not want this chart making its way into the public discourse. Their fantasyland of renewable energy solutions is proven to be a fool’s errand.

Catch-22 Energy Edition

The price of a barrel of West Texas crude is currently $86 per barrel, down from $109 per barrel in February. Obama supporters will proclaim that his threat to crack down on speculators had the desired effect. He must have scared those nasty speculators with his gravitas. The price rise surely didn’t have anything to do with the U.S. led attack on Libya, the act of war economic sanctions on Iran, the beating of Israel/U.S. war drums, Japan demand due to the shutdown of their nuclear power industry, or the relentlessly higher demand from China and India. And now the MSM is trying to spin a yarn that prices have dropped by 21% because worldwide supply is surging. That is so much more palatable than telling the truth and admitting that we’ve entered the 2nd phase of the Greater Depression.

It took $140 a barrel in oil in 2008 to tip the world into recession. Worldwide economies were much stronger then. The U.S. National Debt has risen by $6.5 trillion, or 70% since 2008. Real GDP has risen by $200 billion since 2008, or a 1.5% increase. Debt to GDP has risen from 64% to 102%. Consumer debt at $2.55 trillion is exactly the same as the 2008 level even after Wall Street banks have written off over $1 trillion, subsidized by the American taxpayer. The consumer deleveraging storyline is completely false. In 2008 there were 234 million working age Americans and 145 million of them were employed. Today there are 243 million working age Americans and 142 million of them are employed. In 2008 there were 28 million Americans in the food stamp program. Today there are 46 million Americans collecting food stamps. The economic situation in Europe has deteriorated at a far greater rate. Therefore, it is not surprising that it only took $109 a barrel oil to push the world back into recession.

The main reason prices are dropping is the collapse in demand from Europe and the United States. The bumpy plateau of peak oil is in full force. Prices rise to the point where they push economies into recession, demand crashes due to the recession, and prices decline. The double whammy of oil prices reaching $111 a barrel in 2011 and $109 a barrel in 2012 have sapped the life out of the American consumer. This is reflected in the plunge in gasoline and petroleum usage since 2008, with a temporary leveling off in 2010, followed by a further nosedive since 2011. As this recession deepens over the next six months, prices will likely fall further. But this is where the Catch-22 kicks in.

Once prices drop below $80 a barrel it sets in motion a reduction in capital investment, as new production projects are not economically feasible below $80 per barrel. Oil analyst Chris Nedler explains the Catch-22 aspect of oil prices in a recent article:

Research by veteran petroleum economist Chris Skrebowski, along with analysts Steven Kopits and Robert Hirsch, details the new costs: $40 – $80 a barrel for a new barrel of production capacity in some OPEC countries; $70 – $90 a barrel for the Canadian tar sands and heavy oil from Venezuela’s Orinoco belt; and $70 – $80 a barrel for deep-water oil. Various sources suggest that a price of at least $80 is needed to sustain U.S. tight oil production.

Those are just the production costs, however. In order to pacify its population during the Arab Spring and pay for significant new infrastructure projects, Saudi Arabia has made enormous financial commitments in the past several years. The kingdom really needs $90 – $100 a barrel now to balance its budget. Other major exporters like Venezuela and Russia have similar budget-driven incentives to keep prices high.

Globally, Skrebowski estimates that it costs $80 – $110 to bring a new barrel of production capacity online. Research from IEA and others shows that the more marginal liquids like Arctic oil, gas-to-liquids, coal-to-liquids, and biofuels are toward the top end of that range.

My own research suggests that $85 is really the comfortable global minimum. That’s the price now needed to break even in the Canadian tar sands, and it also seems to be roughly the level at which banks and major exploration companies are willing to commit the billions of dollars it takes to develop new projects.

Oil prices may temporarily drop below $80, but prices below that level for a prolonged period will lead to supply being constricted, which will ultimately lead to higher prices. The storyline of hundreds of years of Bakken shale oil that will make the U.S. energy independent is the latest fiction to be peddled by the oligarchs as a way to sedate and confuse the masses.

What the Frack

U.S. oil production in 2007 averaged 8.5 million barrels per day. Today, the U.S. is producing 10.7 million barrels per day. We must have hit the jackpot. Not quite. Actual crude oil production has increased by 1 million barrels per day, a 20% increase. The other 1.2 million barrels have been from liquefied natural gas (up 34%) and government subsidized ethanol (up 100%).

The U.S. crude oil production is at the same level it was in 1998, but somehow we are on the verge of becoming energy independent. The recent increase is solely due to the horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing of shale deposits in Texas and North Dakota. You don’t hear much about Alaskan production declining for the ninth year in a row and California production declining to the lowest level in three decades. The paid shills predicting Bakken production of 3 million barrels per day are purposely lying or just plain delusional.

North Dakota oil production has reached 550,000 barrels per day versus 187,000 barrels per day in 2009. Simpletons in the MSM will just extrapolate this growth to 3 million barrels by 2020. No need to examine the facts. Oil market expert Tom Whipple reveals the dirty secrets behind the Bakken shale oil miracle:

It took the production from 6,617 wells to produce North Dakota’s 546,000 b/d in January. Divide the daily production by the number of wells and you get an astoundingly low 82 b/d from each well. I say “astounding” because a good new offshore well can do 50,000 b/d. BP’s Macondo well which exploded in the Gulf a couple of years ago was pumping out an estimated 53,000 b/d before it was capped.

Now a North Dakota shale oil well is not in the cost class of a deep-water offshore platform which can run into the billions, but they do cost about three times as much as a classic onshore oil well as they first must be drilled down 11,000 feet and then 10,000 horizontally through the oil bearing layer before the fracturing of the rock can take place. The “fracking” involves at least 15 massive pumps that inject water and other chemicals into the well. Take a Google Earth flight over northwestern North Dakota. The fracked wells are hard to miss as there are now about 9,000 of them and they are each the size of a football field.

There is still more — fracked wells don’t keep producing very long. Although a few newly fracked wells may start out producing in the vicinity of 1,000 barrels a day, this rate usually falls by 65 percent the first year; 35 percent the second; and another 15 percent the third. Within a few years most wells are producing in the vicinity of 100 b/d or less which is why the state average for January is only 82 b/d despite the addition of 1300 new wells in 2011.

The rapid depletion of these wells, enormous expense to drill new wells, oil prices barely above cost of production, low EROEI, swiftly falling Alaskan and shallow water production, and the snail’s pace of deep water production are not a recipe for energy independence. Shale oil production will never exceed 1 million barrels per day. And if you believe Saudi Arabia’s promises to fulfill any shortfalls, I’ve got some delightful beachfront property in Afghanistan to sell you. Saudi conventional crude oil production is at the same level it was in 2005.

Saudi Arabia Oil Production

The seven year Saudi plateau is just a precursor to what is going to happen over the next decade. Saudi Arabia began pumping oil in 1945. It will all be gone by 2045. You can’t extract an infinite amount of oil from a finite world. Pretending this isn’t true won’t make it so. Oil has been the lifeblood of our nation since the late 1800s. The depletion of this essential ingredient of the modern world will not lead to a sudden death for our way of life but a slow downward spiral of waning supply, escalating prices, and economic decay.

The sustained high and rising oil prices will be economically destructive as our debt saturated, suburban sprawl, mall centric, SUV crazed, cheap oil dependent society methodically and agonizingly implodes. Chris Skrebowski describes our future succinctly:

“Unless and until adaptive responses are large and fast enough to constrain the upward trend of oil prices, the primary adaptive response will be periodic economic crashes of a magnitude that depresses oil consumption and oil prices.”

We’ve entered one of these periodic economic crashes. They are coming faster and faster. So enjoy that 40 cent drop in gas prices as you drive down to sign up for food stamps. The Saudis have a saying that acknowledges their luck in being born on top of billions of barrels of oil and the inevitability of its depletion:

“My father rode a camel, I drive a car, my son flies a jet plane, his son will ride a camel.”   

Delusional Americans believe they have a right to cheap plentiful oil forever. They refuse to acknowledge that luck has played the major part in their rise to economic power. The American saying will be:

My great grandfather rode a horse, my grandfather drove a Model T, my father drove a Buick, I leased a Cadillac Escalade, my son died in the Middle East fighting for my oil, his son will never be born.  

order non hybrid seeds

U.S. HAS AS MUCH OIL AS SAUDI ARABIA

20 comments

Posted on 12th April 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

The next time you hear a douchebag say we have as much oil as Saudi Arabia, remember the FACTS from the article below. If it requires tremendous amounts of heat and water to extract the oil, then it isn’t really viable. At $200 to $300 a barrel, it might be viable. EROEI is a foreign concept to idiot politicians promising $2.50 a gallon gasoline if elected. I can’t tell whether these people are stupid or lying.

Does the U.S. Really Have More Oil than Saudi Arabia?

Posted by Robert Rapier on April 4, 2012 – 11:16am
Topic: Supply/Production

The Difference Between Oil Shale and Oil-Bearing Shale

People are often confused about the overall extent of U.S. oil reserves. Some claim that the U.S. has hundreds of billions or even trillions of barrels of oil waiting to be produced if bureaucrats will simply stop blocking development. In fact, in a recent debate between Republican candidates contending for Gabrielle Giffords’ recently vacated House seat, one candidate declared “We have more oil in this country than in Saudi Arabia.” So, I thought it might be a good idea to elaborate a bit on U.S. oil resources.

Oil production has been increasing in the U.S. for the past few years, primarily driven by expanding production from the Bakken Shale Formation in North Dakota and the Eagle Ford Shale in Texas. The oil that is being produced from these shale formations is sometimes improperly referred to as shale oil. But when some people speak of hundreds of billions or trillions of barrels of U.S. oil, they are most likely talking about the oil shale in the Green River Formation in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Since the shale in North Dakota and Texas is producing oil, some have assumed that the Green River Formation and its roughly 2 trillion barrels of oil resources will be developed next because they think it is a similar type of resource. But it is not.

Although the oil in the Bakken and Eagle Ford is being extracted from shale formations, the term shale oil has been used for over 100 years to describe a very different resource. This has led some to confusion over the differences between current production in North Dakota and potential production in Colorado. The oil in the Bakken and Eagle Ford formations actually exists as oil, but the shale does not allow the oil to flow very well. This oil is properly called “tight oil“, and advances in hydraulic fracturing (fracking) technology have allowed some of this oil to be economically produced. (For more details, I discuss resources, reserves, fracking, shale gas, and oil shale in some detail in my new book Power Plays: Energy Options in the Age of Peak Oil).

The estimated amount of oil in place (the resource) varies widely, with some suggesting that there could be 400 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken. Because of advances in fracking technology, some of the resource has now been classified as reserves (the amount that can be technically and economically produced). However, the reserve is a very low fraction of the resource at 2 to 4 billion barrels (although some industry estimates put the recoverable amount as high as 20 billion barrels or so). For reference, the U.S. consumes a billion barrels of oil in about 52 days, and the world consumes a billion barrels in about 11 days.

Like the Bakken, the Eagle Ford formation in Texas consists of oil (and natural gas) in tight formations that is being accessed via fracking. The amount of technically recoverable oil in the Eagle Ford is estimated by the U.S. Department of Energy to be 3.35 billion barrels of oil.

Without a doubt, these two formations are a major factor in the current resurgence of U.S. oil production. But the Green River formation is the source of talk of those enormous oil resources — larger than those of Saudi Arabia — and it is a very different prospect than the tight oil being produced in North Dakota and Texas. The oil shale in the Green River looks like rock. Unlike the hydrocarbons in the tight oil formations, the oil shale (kerogen) consists of very heavy hydrocarbons that are solid. In that way, oil shale more resembles coal than oil. Oil shale is essentially oil that Mother Nature did not finish cooking, and thus to convert it into oil, heat has to be added. The energy requirements — plus the fact that oil shale production requires a lot of water in a very dry environment — have kept oil shale commercialization out of reach for over 100 years.

Thus, while the U.S. might indeed have greater oil resources than Saudi Arabia, U.S. oil reserves (per the BP Statistical Review of World Energy) are only about 1/10th those of Saudi Arabia. The distinction is important.

Summarizing the Definitions

To summarize, let’s review the definitions for the important terms discussed here:

Oil resource — the total amount of oil in place, most of which typically can’t be recovered

Oil reserve — the amount of oil that can be recovered economically with existing technology

Oil shale — sedimentary rock that contains solid hydrocarbons called kerogen (e.g., Green River Formation)

Shale oil — the oil that can be obtained by cooking kerogen

Tight oil — liquid hydrocarbons that are obtained by hydraulic fracturing of shale formations (e.g., Bakken Formation and Eagle Ford Formation)

Conclusion: Resources are not Reserves, and Tight Oil isn’t Shale Oil

It is pretty clear that at current oil prices, developments in the tight oil formations will continue. It is not at all clear that even at $100 oil the shale in the Green River formation will be commercialized to produce oil, although a number of companies are working on it and will continue to do so. Oil shale is commercially produced in some countries like Estonia, but it is primarily just burned for power.

In order to commercially convert the oil shale into oil, a more energy efficient method of producing it must be found (or, one would have to have extremely cheap energy and abundant water supplies to drive the process). I have heard from multiple industry sources that the energy return for producing oil from oil shale is around 4 to 1 (lower than for oil sands production), and that is before refining the oil to finished products. At this sort of energy return, oil sands will continue to be a more economical heavy oil option.

Thus, my prediction is that despite having an oil shale resource that may indeed be far greater than the oil resources of Saudi Arabia (I don’t think I have seen an estimate of Saudi’s total oil resources), the reserve will continue to be close to zero for the foreseeable future because there are still many technical hurdles to overcome to realize a scalable, commercially viable process.

Finally, I would say that if a commercially viable process for shale oil production from the Green River formation is developed, the environmental blowback will be enormous. The production of shale oil is more energy intensive (i.e., has higher carbon emissions) than for the oil sands, it has a high water requirement in a dry climate, and it is potentially a huge new source of carbon dioxide emissions.  The environmental protests that would arise in response to a growing commercial shale oil operation would make the Keystone XL pipeline protests pale in comparison.

DOTH PROTESTETH TOO MUCHETH

6 comments

Posted on 29th March 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , ,

Below is an Op-Ed from the petroleum minister of Saudi Arabia. This guy is in the press every other day declaring that Saudi Arabia has plenty of spare capacity and can fill any shortfall of oil on the world markets.  The Saudis sure are good at talking, they just aren’t big on delivering. I take one look at this chart and can unequivocally declare that this camel jockey is full of shit. These sand fleas have been declaring for a decade they can ramp production up to 12.5 million barrels per day. They have never topped 9.8 million barrels per day. Ghanwar provides 50% of their production and is in terminal decline. They haven’t discovered shit in decades. They are consuming more of their own production.  

Here is my message for Ali:

Shut the fuck up and just do it already.

Saudi Arabia will act to lower soaring oil prices

By Ali Naimi

Ali Al-Naimi,

High international oil prices are bad news. Bad for Europe, bad for the US, bad for emerging economies and bad for the world’s poorest nations. A period of prolonged high prices is bad for all oil producing nations, including Saudi Arabia, and they are bad news for the energy industry more widely.

It is clear that sustained high prices are starting to take their toll on European economic growth targets. They are contributing to trade balance deficits and feeding inflationary pressures. It is an unsatisfactory situation and one Saudi Arabia is keen to help address. In an interconnected world, European economic growth is in our national interest. No one benefits from a stagnating European economy and we want to do what we can to help encourage growth.

Needless to say, Saudi Arabia does not control the price; it sells its crude oil according to international prices. But it remains the world’s largest producer, and the country with the greatest proven reserves, so it has a responsibility to do what it can to mitigate prices.

The bottom line is that Saudi Arabia would like to see a lower price. It would like to see a fair and reasonable price that will not hurt the global economic recovery, especially in emerging and developing countries, that will generate a good return for producing nations, and that will attract greater investment in the oil industry.

It is clear that geopolitical tensions in the region, and concerns over supply, are helping to keep prices high.

Yet fundamentally the market remains balanced. It is the perceived potential shortage of oil keeping prices high – not the reality on the ground. There is no lack of supply. There is no demand which cannot be met. Total commercial stocks for OECD nations are within target, and there is at least 57 days forward cover, enough to handle almost any eventuality.

So what can Saudi Arabia actually do?

We want to correct the myth that there is, or could be, a shortage. It is an irrational fear, a fear without basis. Saudi Arabia’s current capacity is 12.5m barrels per day, way beyond current levels demanded, and a reliable buffer against any temporary loss of production. Saudi Arabia has invested a great deal to sustain its capacity, and it will use spare production capacity to supply the oil market with any additional required volumes.

This is not empty rhetoric. We have proved to be a reliable supplier many times in the past. We increased production following the invasion of Iraq. We increased production following a workers’ strike in Venezuela in 2002. We stepped in following a surge in demand from emerging economies, specifically China, in 2004. We increased supplies to the US in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. And when a popular uprising swept through Libya in early 2011, we stepped up production to offset any losses.

We have done it many times before, we will do it again.

The other, sometimes overlooked, fact is that Saudi Arabia’s crude oil is suitable, and acceptable, for most global refineries. We are also uniquely capable of supplying volume when and where it is needed thanks to multiple delivery points, our strong marketing capabilities and ample storage – inside the Kingdom and in other parts of the world, especially the Mediterranean, northern Europe and Asia.

For the record, as things stand today, our inventories in Saudi Arabia and around the world are full. Our Rotterdam inventory is full, our Sidi Kerir facility is full, our Okinawa facility is full – 100 per cent full.

It should also be noted how other Opec members, such as Libya, Iraq and Angola, have also taken positive strides forward in increasing output and they are well poised for further advances. If you look towards Canada and the US, these nations are increasing oil production this year and beyond, and further supplies are being contributed from Russia, South America, Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan.

So the story is one of plenty. Supply is not the problem, and it has not been a problem in the recent past. There is no rational reason why oil prices are continuing to remain at these high levels.

I hope by speaking out on the issue that our intentions – and capabilities – are clear. We want to see stronger European growth and realise that reasonable crude oil prices are key to this.

Over the past 200 years, oil has powered incredible, and unprecedented, economic and social progress in Europe and the wider world. It has transformed our lives and will continue to power the global economy for many decades to come. It will only do so if prices reach a more reasonable level – so it is in all our interests to do what we can to achieve this aim.

Ali Naimi is minister of petroleum and mineral resources in Saudi Arabia