posted May 13, 2012 03:10 PM            

We, right here in America, are walking over, boating over and flying over the largest energy reserves on earth...bar none!

And who is it...exactly who will not permit that energy to be produced and refined?

If you say Barack Husseing O'Bomber and his band of nitwit Socialist ninnies, give yourself a gold star on your forehead!

The Green River Formation, a largely vacant area of mostly federal land that covers the territory where Colorado, Utah and Wyoming come together, contains about as much recoverable oil as all the rest the world's proven reserves combined, an auditor from the Government Accountability Office told Congress on Thursday"......

"The Rand Corporation, a nonprofit research organization, estimates that 30 to 60 percent of the oil shale in the Green River Formation can be recovered," Mittal told the subcommittee. "At the midpoint of this estimate, almost half of the 3 trillion barrels of oil would be recoverable. This is an amount about equal to the entire world's proven oil reserves."
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/05/g ao_recoverable_shale_oil_in_us_about_equal_to_entire_worlds_proven_oil_reserves.html

And all this is found in only one oil field in the US. There are others besides this one...lots of others.

posted May 13, 2012 06:16 PM            

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted May 13, 2012 07:03 PM            

Wherever have you been?
oh and,
Fracking is poisonous, and that is where the trend is going.

New studies show that the time line for the fracking water waste- it reaches the surface in 5 years.

posted May 13, 2012 07:38 PM            

Face it Node, the US isn't going back to a 19th century existence to please radical leftist environmentalist whackos.

posted May 14, 2012 12:25 AM            

reserves are one thing. there are millions of stars in the sky too, but try mining one.

posted May 14, 2012 07:49 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
So you say Node but scientific evidence puts the lie to leftists claims of contaminating the underground water supply during fracking operations.

Face it Node, the US isn't going back to a 19th century existence to please radical leftist environmentalist whackos.

No way!

---

posted May 14, 2012 11:45 PM            

I don't dispute that, the conditions are there. But, I wouldn't say its the largest Alberta is still large.

There is whats called the Wyoming Craton, a craton is where a continent normal originally starts and expands from thus is the oldest part of a continent. You'll find lots of resources where cratons are because of the age and time.

For factually reasons the North American craton started in Northern Canada, its a lot older in Canada.

Lots of decaying organism still have oxygen after they die, think of it as almost reverse photosynthesis and that is what the energy is in the oil.

Since the area described is a natural environment you'll get lots of decaying organisms combined with the age of the location, makes sense there would be oil.

But, either way I doubt the area will be extracted anyway.

Why spend the money to extract resources when the infrastructure is already in place in Alberta and there is a safe, continuous, and large supply that will be good for at least another 100+ yrs.

Alberta is already exceeding Saudi Arabia as Americas biggest supplier.

Combined with an over zelious Canadian Prime minster willing to sell the oil and who is pro-American.

Once Alberta runs out in 100+ yrs it may happen, otherwise I don't see it happening. If anything build more refineries.

Assuming the keystone pipeline was built, the US would have benefited more so than Canada and there whouldn't be a strong reason to extract oil from the area described.

posted May 15, 2012 10:55 AM            

Rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline to carry oil from Canada to US refineries was one of the most stupid moves our energy nitwit prez has made...but, by no means the only stupidity coming out of the O'Bomber administration.

Just to refresh everyone's memory...as to which nation on earth actually has the largest fossil reserves; there's this chart.

There's also this congressional report compiled by the Congressional Research Service:

Government Report: America's Combined Energy Resources Largest on Earth

Far larger than those of Saudi Arabia, China, and Canada combined
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minori ty.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=e94a67da-802a-23ad-4ac9-807e78062077

posted May 15, 2012 12:19 PM            

not everyone who sees the other side of the coin is by definition evil, jwhop, and money though important is not the only measure of prosperity.

the tar sands oil is not coming to america for our consumption. it is hoping to PASS THROUGH america on its way to tankers in the gulf and refineries who will then sell the oil worldwide.

yes, it might create some jobs, but not nearly as many as the republicans would like you to believe, and the possible losses projected down the years in terms of food and water are greater than any short term gain hoped for.

posted May 15, 2012 12:27 PM            

Ever been to Texas Katatonic? Ever been to Oklahoma katatonic? Ever hear of slant drilling katatonic?

posted May 17, 2012 12:16 PM            

quote:

---

I think you would benefit from a mind wipe so you could start all over...and possibly get something right for a change.

---

posted May 17, 2012 02:29 PM            

i don't believe it is any of your business whether i need to start over or not. your idea of right and mine are obviously different. as far as i have heard there is no law against disagreeing with jwhop.

however your continued suggestion that people who DO DARE to disagree with you, or poke holes in your bombast and stubborness, need ALTERING of some kind, come ever closer to full blown nazism.

posted May 18, 2012 01:57 PM            

Your utter ignorance of fact, in most cases willful ignorance of fact, going all the way back to your 1st appearance on this forum make you a prime candidate.

posted May 18, 2012 03:39 PM            

If you were ever even sometimes right, you'd have a far easier time in life.

I don't dispute that the U.S. has energy available. I do, however, dispute your overly-simplistic understanding of the possibility of making it work for us as well as your assessment of the President's energy policy. On these things you continue to be wrong. I do remember the last time you brought up our energy reserves, and as I recall I pointed out to you where you should start reading the document you posted as it delineated the difficulty in accessing and processing the oil.* Now you're back with a different site that doesn't address the issues with accessing our storehouse of energy. How convenient (that's not lying at all). It doesn't get much more egregious than that. You know it's not a quick or easy or necessarily environmentally friendly prospect, and you intentionally try to make it out as a failing of the President's that more isn't being done. You're talking with authority, and it's false as usual. The truth that America has energy reserves does not create a "truth" that a different policy would have resulted in different results at this point in history. Your blowing smoke.

*Excerpts from your old report:

After coal, shale oil represents the most abundant fossil fuel in the United States. However, despite government programs in the 1970s and early 1980s to stimulate development of the resource, production of shale oil is not yet commercially viable.
Page 14 of the pdf.

No systematic assessment of undiscovered technically recoverable shale gas resources has been conducted for the United States, though industry and academic experts estimate that the technically recoverable volumes of natural gas from these shale deposits are very large. Recently, the Potential Gas Committee estimated that the United States has 616 tcf of “potential natural gas resources” occurring as shale gas.21 The proportion of that resource that will actually be produced will depend on further development of exploration and production technology, the price of natural gas, and the ways in which states deal with potential environmental issues.
Page 15 of the pdf.

Another form of fossil fuel with potentially vast resources is natural gas in the form of methane hydrate. Methane hydrate (sometimes called natural gas hydrate, or just gas hydrates) is being investigated as an energy source by both DOE22 and USGS.23
Page 16 of the pdf http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&Fil eStore_id=04212e22-c1b3-41f2-b0ba-0da5eaead952

posted May 22, 2012 07:01 PM            

Fracking is getting safer and should present no major environmental problems in New York when the state allows drilling to commence—that’s the headline from a university-funded study released today by the Shale Resources and Society Institute at the University of Buffalo.

A team of researchers from UB, University of Wyoming and Penn State University examined violations at almost 4,000 natural gas wells in Pennsylvania between January 2008 and August 2011. The peer-reviewed study found approximately two-thirds of the 3,000 violations were administrative, 38 percent were environmental, and only 25 were deemed “major,” defined as site restoration failures, serious contamination of water supplies, major land spills, blowouts and venting and gas migration.

The majority were “due to operator error, negligence, or a failure to follow proper procedures when drilling,” according to the report. “This suggests that the industry has room for improvement, and the frequency of environmental events can be reduced,” the authors wrote.

The safety profile of hydraulic fracturing has improved dramatically in Pennsylvania since 2008. (Since Obama took office incidentally) Environmental violations as a percentage of wells drilled dropped by more than half over the course of the years examined. The study—the first based on comprehensive data rather than on anecdotal claims or selective reports—contradicts claims by anti-fracking groups that shale gas extraction is poorly regulated in Pennsylvania and that the environmental dangers are increasing.

“This study presents a compelling case that state oversight of oil and gas regulation has been effective,” said University of Wyoming economics professor Timothy Considine, who was the lead author. “Regulatory learning and technological progress has been considerable over the past four years.” (Once again, Obama's tenure)

“While prior research has anecdotally reviewed state regulations, now we have comprehensive data that demonstrates, without ambiguity, that state regulation coupled with improvements in industry practices results in a low risk of an environmental event occurring in shale development, and the risks continue to diminish year after year,” Considine added.

Horizontal hydraulic drilling uses water mixed with minute quantities of chemicals to crack shale and release gas. High-volume fracking is a hot issue in New York, which currently bans the process. Regulations proposed last year in preliminary form by the Department of Environmental Conservation are still under review.

John Martin, co-author of the report and director of the newly founded shale gas institute, said the incidents could have been avoided or lessened under New York’s proposed regulatory framework.

“New York’s current regulations would prevent or mitigate each of the identified major environmental events that occurred in Pennsylvania,” Martin said. “It’s important that states continue to learn from the regulatory experience—both strengths and weaknesses—of others.”
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/05/15/fracking-safety-improves-dramatically-says-independent-study/

But still there's this: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/US-May-Hold-Large-Reserves-of-Shale-Oil-but-is-it-Economically-Out-of-Reach.html

posted May 23, 2012 09:47 AM            

I noted that 2/3 of the violations were administrative...reporting. Of the rest, I doubt ANY were of any consequence.

Further, in the quest for US energy independence one source which is almost never mentioned is Methane Hydrate.

This was written during the term of Bill Clinton. More in now known about Methane Hydrate.

Methane hydrates, a promising natural gas resource, are believed to reside throughout the globe in sea-floor sediments and permafrost.

“Estimates on how much energy is stored in methane hydrates range from 350 years’ supply to 3500 years’ supply based on current energy consumption. That reflects both the potential as a resource and how little we really know about the resource,” Langley says."
http://ornl.gov/info/reporter/no16/methane.htm